Independence Award
- First Rank - Second Rank - Third Rank
Labour Award
- First Rank - Second Rank -Third Rank
National Award
- Study on food stuff for animal(2005)
- Study on rice breeding for export and domestic consumption(2005)
VIFOTEC Award
- Hybrid Maize by Single Cross V2002 (2003)
- Tomato Grafting to Manage Ralstonia Disease(2005)
- Cassava variety KM140(2010)
Curently online : 12 | |
Total visitors : 8198841 | |
Decline in carbon emission intensity of global agriculture has stagnated recently
Wednesday, 2024/08/28 | 08:16:57
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Zhaohai Bai, Nannan Zhang, Wilfried Winiwarter, Jiafa Luo, Jinfeng Chang, Pete Smith, Stewart Ledgard, Yan Wu, Chaopeng Hong, Giulia Conchedda, and Lin Ma
PNAS; August 12, 2024; 121 (34) e2317725121
Figure 1: Categorization of countries and territories into four main groups. Note: Countries and territories have been categorized based on two indictors, i.e., net protein trade and intensity of livestock production. If animal protein production per capita in a country was larger than global average from 1961 to 2019, this country was identified as a high-intensity livestock production country (i.e., High intensity noted in the figure). If not, the country was identified as a low intensity livestock production country (i.e., Low intensity noted in the figure). If a country was a net importer of protein embodied in agricultural products for more than 70% of the selected years (from 1961 to 2019), the country was classified as an importing country. If not, the country was classified as an exporting country. “Export & High livestock” refers to net protein exporting countries with high-intensity livestock production, which includes 18 countries. “Export & Low intensity” refers to net protein exporting countries with low intensity livestock production, which includes 21 countries. “Import & High intensity” refers to net protein-importing countries with high-intensity livestock production, which includes 33 countries. “Import & Low intensity” refers to net protein-importing countries with low intensity livestock production, which includes 85 countries. SignificanceThe agrifood system is responsible for 1/3 of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Yet, to fulfill the global demand for food in 2050, it needs to expand by 50%. This requires a sharp decrease in the agrifood system’s GHG emission intensity (GHGi). There was a two-thirds reduction in the GHGi from 1961 to 2019; however, in more recent years, we have observed stagnation or even an increase in emission intensity in some countries. This change in trend suggests that incremental improvements alone are insufficient to continue reducing the sector’s GHG emissions. Instead, concerted efforts and innovative strategies are required to address these challenges and ensure a more sustainable trajectory for the agrifood system’s contribution to food production and GHG emissions. AbstractUsing global data for around 180 countries and territories and 170 food/feed types primarily derived from FAOSTAT, we have systematically analyzed the changes in greenhouse gas (GHG) emission intensity (GHGi) (kg CO2eq per kg protein production) over the past six decades. We found that, with large spatial heterogeneity, emission intensity decreased by nearly two-thirds from 1961 to 2019, predominantly in the earlier years due to agronomic improvement in productivity. However, in the most recent decade, emission intensity has become stagnant, and in a few countries even showed an increase, due to the rapid increase in livestock production and land use changes. The trade of final produced protein between countries has potentially reduced the global GHGi, especially for countries that are net importers with high GHGi, such as many in Africa and South Asia. Overall, a continuous decline of emission intensity in the future relies on countries with higher emission intensity to increase agricultural productivity and minimize land use changes. Countries with lower emission intensity should reduce livestock production and increase the free trade of agricultural products and improve the trade optimality.
See https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2317725121
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Back Print View: 190 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[ Other News ]___________________________________________________
|