4.7 Article

Global food self-sufficiency in the 21st century under sustainable intensification of agriculture

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
卷 15, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

IOP Publishing Ltd
DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ab9388

关键词

climate change; food security; global environmental change; hydrology; sustainability; yield gaps

资金

  1. NSF InFEWS Fellowship [DGE-1633740]
  2. Ermenegildo Zegna Founder's Scholarship
  3. USDA Hatch Multistate project [W4190]
  4. AGU Horton Hydrology Research grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Meeting the increasing global demand for agricultural products without depleting the limited resources of the planet is a major challenge that humanity is facing. Most studies on global food security do not make projections past the year 2050, just as climate change and increasing demand for food are expected to intensify. Moreover, past studies do not account for the water sustainability limits of irrigation expansion to presently rainfed areas. Here we perform an integrated assessment that considers a range of factors affecting future food production and demand throughout the 21st century. We evaluate the self-sufficiency of 165 countries under sustainability, middle-of-the-road, and business-as-usual scenarios considering changes in diet, population, agricultural intensification, and climate. We find that under both the middle-of-the-road and business-as-usual trajectories global food self-sufficiency is likely to decline despite increased food production through sustainable agricultural intensification since projected food demand exceeds potential production. Contrarily, under a sustainability scenario, we estimate that there will be enough food production to feed the global population. However, most countries in Africa and the Middle East will continue to be heavily reliant on imports throughout the 21st century under all scenarios. These results highlight future hotspots of crop production deficits, reliance on food imports, and vulnerability to food supply shocks.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据