skip to main content

Title: Why Do Global Long-term Scenarios for Agriculture Differ? An overview of the AgMIP Global Economic Model Intercomparison

Recent studies assessing plausible futures for agricultural markets and global food security have had contradictory outcomes. Ten global economic models that produce long-term scenarios were asked to compare a reference scenario with alternate socio-economic, climate change and bioenergy scenarios using a common set of key drivers. Results suggest that, once general assumptions are harmonized, the variability in general trends across models declines, and that several common conclusions are possible. Nonetheless, differences in basic model parameters, sometimes hidden in the way market behavior is modeled, result in significant differences in the details. This holds for both the common reference scenario and for the various shocks applied. We conclude that agro-economic modelers aiming to inform the agricultural and development policy debate require better data and analysis on both economic behavior and biophysical drivers. More interdisciplinary modeling efforts are required to cross-fertilize analyses at different scales.
 [1] ;  [2] ;  [3] ;  [4] ;  [4] ;  [5] ;  [6] ;  [6] ;  [7] ;  [3] ;  [5] ;  [8] ;  [9] ;  [10] ;  [11] ;  [8] ;  [12] ;  [7] ;  [13] ;  [12]
  1. Organization for Ecomonic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (France)
  2. Univ. of Sussex, Brighton (United Kingdom)
  3. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra (Australia)
  4. Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT), Cambridge, MA (United States)
  5. Pacific Northwest National Lab. (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
  6. National Inst. for Environmental Studies (NIES), Tsukuba (Japan)
  7. International Inst. for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) (Austria)
  8. Postdam Inst. for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Potsdam (Germany)
  9. International Food Policy Research Inst., WA (United States)
  10. International Food Policy Research Inst., WA (United States); Univ. of Illinois, Champaign, IL (United States)
  11. Economic Research Service (ERS), Washington, DC (United States)
  12. Wageningen Univ. and Research Center (Netherlands)
  13. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nationas (FAO), Roma (Italy)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
Report Number(s):
Journal ID: ISSN 0169-5150; KP1703030
DOE Contract Number:
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Agricultural Economics, 45(1):3-20; Journal Volume: 45; Journal Issue: 1
Research Org:
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)
Sponsoring Org:
Country of Publication:
United States
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY computable general equilibrium; partial equilibrium; meta-analysis; socioeconomic pathway; climate change; bioenergy; land use; model intercomparison; C63; C68; Q11; Q16; Q24; Q42; Q54