Cost-Effective Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Agriculture of Aragon, Spain.

Safa Baccour, Jose Albiac, Taher Kahil
Author Information
  1. Safa Baccour: Department of Agricultural Economics, CITA-IA2, 50059 Saragossa, Spain. ORCID
  2. Jose Albiac: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria. ORCID
  3. Taher Kahil: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria. ORCID

Abstract

Climate change represents a serious threat to life in earth. Agriculture releases significant emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), but also offers low-cost opportunities to mitigate GHG emissions. This paper assesses agricultural GHG emissions in Aragon, one important and representative region for agriculture in Spain. The Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) approach is used to analyze the abatement potential and cost-efficiency of mitigation measures under several scenarios, with and without taking into account the interaction among measures and their transaction costs. The assessment identifies the environmental and economic outcomes of different combinations of measures, including crop, livestock and forest measures. Some of these measures are win-win, with pollution abatement at negative costs to farmers. Moreover, we develop future mitigation scenarios for agriculture toward the year 2050. Results highlight the trade-offs and synergies between the economic and environmental outcomes of mitigation measures. The biophysical processes underlying mitigation efforts are assessed taking into account the significant effects of interactions between measures. Interactions reduce the abatement potential and worsen the cost-efficiency of measures. The inclusion of transaction costs provides a better ranking of measures and a more accurate estimation of implementation costs. The scenario analysis shows how the combinations of measures could reduce emissions by up to 75% and promote sustainable agriculture in the future.

Keywords

References

  1. Nature. 2018 Mar 15;555(7696):363-366 [PMID: 29513654]
  2. Sci Total Environ. 2017 Aug 15;592:495-502 [PMID: 28325593]
  3. J Environ Manage. 2020 Jun 15;264:110254 [PMID: 32364955]
  4. J Exp Bot. 2016 Sep;67(17):4935-49 [PMID: 27489235]
  5. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 Jun 5;367(1595):1589-97 [PMID: 22527402]
  6. Animal. 2010 Mar;4(3):351-65 [PMID: 22443940]
  7. J Environ Manage. 2016 Apr 1;170:37-49 [PMID: 26789201]
  8. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jun 29;107(26):12052-7 [PMID: 20551223]
  9. Science. 2020 Nov 6;370(6517):705-708 [PMID: 33154139]
  10. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Nov 16;107(46):19667-72 [PMID: 20823225]

MeSH Term

Agriculture
Animals
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Greenhouse Effect
Greenhouse Gases
Spain

Chemicals

Greenhouse Gases

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0measurescostsmitigationemissionsabatementGHGagriculturecost-efficiencyscenariostransactionchangeAgriculturesignificantAragonSpainpotentialtakingaccountenvironmentaleconomicoutcomescombinationsfuturebiophysicalprocessesreduceClimaterepresentsseriousthreatlifeearthreleasesgreenhousegasesalsoofferslow-costopportunitiesmitigatepaperassessesagriculturaloneimportantrepresentativeregionMarginalAbatementCostCurveMACCapproachusedanalyzeseveralwithoutinteractionamongassessmentidentifiesdifferentincludingcroplivestockforestwin-winpollutionnegativefarmersMoreoverdeveloptowardyear2050Resultshighlighttrade-offssynergiesunderlyingeffortsassessedeffectsinteractionsInteractionsworseninclusionprovidesbetterrankingaccurateestimationimplementationscenarioanalysisshows75%promotesustainableCost-EffectiveMitigationGreenhouseGasEmissionsclimatepolicy

Similar Articles

Cited By