 Now we will talk, we have seen sub-Saharan, we will go more globally and talk about land and one question is, are we running out of land or how is actually land used all over the world? I welcome Professor Tom Hurtl, distinguished professor of agriculture economics and executive director at the Center for Global Trade Analysis Purdue University. Thank you Sharon. I want to talk about a topic that's very near and dear to my heart and that's global land use and I want to relate it to global public goods, public goods that are important for everyone in the world and the public goods that we've heard about earlier on in the context of carbon sequestration will be one aspect of that. So here's a brief outline of my talk. I want to start out by, if we want to look forward in time, I think we should first look back. So we'll look back 300 years, 300 years of land use change in the world and then we'll look forward another 100 years. And we'll think about these different environmental, these different public goods associated with land use and a number of them very intimately interwoven with climate change. This is a schematic that just highlights the transformation that the world's land resources go through over the course of history. At any point in time, you can find some piece of land around the world that lies somewhere along this spectrum. The movement is typically from left to right, from undisturbed lands and natural ecosystems to a more structured environment such as we would see in Sweden or Europe more generally. Through that process, there's frontier clearing of land, moving into subsistence of agriculture, small scale farming, and eventually reaching this mature state, which as I say, Europe exhibits presently where most of the agriculture is intensive agriculture. There's not that much land left in natural ecosystems, but there's a lot of protected land. And that's a unique feature. You don't see much of that in the poorest countries. Where will they be in 100 years with regard to protected lands? Will there be land left to protect for them? That's a big question. And of course, built up urban areas become more and more important over time. So let's do the movie. This is a movie of 300 years and we're watching as cropland intensifies around the world. So we're up to 1780, 1790. Of course, very intensive cropland use from the beginning in these areas. But over this period, really, the big action is in the eastern United States, from the settlement in the colonies to more intensive agriculture in the Midwest of the US. But really, by 1900, still very low cropping intensity in South America, remarkably low. It's different from what we see now. 100 years can bring many changes. So when we look ahead, we need to think about this and we're surely going to be wrong, but we need to be thinking about where the big changes will come. Africa also, Southern Africa, Central Africa, very low cropping intensity as well. Let's look over the period from 1900 to 1950 and focus on Southern Africa and Latin America. You begin to see increased cropping intensity in some of those regions. So in North America, the big irrigation projects allowed expansion of cropping intensity in there. We're in 1950 and we're looking ahead, say, it's kind of like being in the year 2000 and looking to 2050. 50 years, look at where Brazil was in 1950 and look at how Brazil evolves now up to the year 2000. And if we took this forward to 2010, despite notwithstanding the slowdown that's been referred to, there was a lot of additional cropping intensity here. So a lot can change over 50 years and we need to keep that in mind as we look forward. So let's think about the next four decades. I would argue that the next four decades are critical with regard to global land use for the following reasons. Population growth will add another 2 billion people. The growth rate is slower and after 2050, population will be growing according to projections at a much slower rate. So I think it'll be much more manageable after that. But in the meantime, we're adding people, but we're especially adding income. And it's a good thing. We've got incomes in Africa growing rapidly now. People as a result are consuming more food and other things related to land. That's a great thing from the point of view of human welfare, but it places additional pressure on land. So I'm predicting that over the next between now and 2050, there's going to be a lot of additional pressure on land from the demand side. At the same time, we're trying to set aside land through red and other policies for carbon sequestration. That's an important source of competition with agriculture. We've got biofuels on top of that, the fate of which are going to depend heavily on energy prices in the long run. And what about the middle income countries going the way of Sweden and setting aside more of their land for environmental purposes? That also is another source of competition for land in the long run. So a lot of pressure in the next four decades. Here is just one possible projection that we put together, one of many possibilities, but it highlights a few of these points. These are projections from 2000 to 2100. So 100 years again. Who knows what will happen exactly? One thing we see in here though, this is cropland, the blue, and you can see that it's peaking out in mid-century. After that, population is no longer growing so fast. Any continual improvements in technology will actually allow supply to outrun demand and you can reduce the cropland requirements there. It's really this period now, this is the critical time to be thinking about global land use, not in 40 years. This land here, this increased allocation of land set aside explicitly for biodiversity, for parks and so on. We're projecting a much greater increase in this demand for this type of land in the low income countries. But will there be land to set aside at that point or will it all be in some other use? That's an important question to think about. Okay, let's talk about global public goods. Public goods are goods that everyone benefits from, but no one has perhaps the incentive to supply them without government intervention. So very important for us to be thinking about those in the context of an aid agenda. Some of the key public goods, of course, are these parks set aside of environmentally sensitive lands. Will be a very important aspect of that, carbon sequestration. We've heard an excellent discussion of that. Another public good. Why? Everyone benefits from reducing emissions, but who wants to do that? Where's the incentive to do that? We need these financial mechanisms in place to do that. I want to talk a little about climate adaptation. I want to talk about it because climate is changing as we know. The momentum in the economic system, the momentum in the atmosphere, the momentum is already in place for significant climate change to occur. It's a question of how extreme that's going to be. Adaptation is essential. I believe that scientists are likely understating the adverse impacts of climate change on agriculture and the tropics. Why? Because the models they're using were developed in the temperate region. The models they're using weren't developed for looking at extreme temperatures at high levels. So while we're understating the impacts, we're likely overstating, in many cases, the adaptation. These models, again, assume perfect adaptation. They assume that fertilizer is available, the nutrients are available, the credits available to invest in new technologies. If this is not the case, then we're facing significant problems in the low income countries. Investment around adaptation is needed. What kinds of investment? New technologies, heat and drought resistant crop varieties, improved infrastructure. If Ryan's comment, notwithstanding, improved infrastructure does allow you to move products in and out of affected regions. If there is a drought in one region, being able to move in product to feed the people is very important. Because of the likelihood of regions being differentially affected, trade becomes more important, not less. Information. Information to allow producers to make more informed planting decisions. In Tanzania, when we were looking at publicly available weather data over the last 30 years, we found about six weather stations in that huge country, only six reporting over 30 years consistent weather data. How can you make forecasts on that basis? In Sweden, there were probably a thousand times as many weather stations reporting over that period. So information is critical. In addition, climate change is destroying information. It's destroying the traditional knowledge that people have of the climate that's been there for the last thousand years. They've planned on that. No longer will that be available. That information will be destroyed. They need to replace that. So information will become more important in these countries. This is a very important public good that aid agencies need to think about providing. So you need accurate history. You need to know how much irrigated land there is. You believe in India, South Asia, a region that's experiencing the most severe water shortages, we don't know how much area is actually being irrigated. Here are two estimates from very reputable organizations, the FAO and the International Water Management Research Institute. Look at that difference, a factor of two. We need better information. If we want to know the impact of climate change on agriculture, on future water scarcity, we need to understand this. Where should the red funds be directed? I was talking to Arnold earlier on and he was saying we don't have enough money to pay for all of the sequestration we need in Brazil. You need to target it. You need to target it in Indonesia. How do you do that? You need data and information. Land tenure data is extremely weak, especially in Africa. You have this incident where many thousands of hectares were leased for perspective biofuel development in Mozambique. It turned out that much of the land was communally held. They didn't realize how the land was being used, who was on the land. Fundamental information is needed. How much should Tanzania charge foreign investors for this large scale irrigation project that's being planned? Well, that depends on the potential yields in the area. How do we know the potential yields if they aren't irrigating there now? How can you predict that? Information analysis tools are fundamental public good for land-based decision-making in developing countries. It was very nice to see that Channing just shared with me, Channing Art shared with me last night the latest, the report, executive summary of the UN Eminent Persons Panel on global development after 2015. They highlight the importance of the coming data revolution, the importance of providing this information. I think we really need to underscore that. We've been under-investing in this area. It's a global public good that benefits everyone and we need more investment in that area. Thank you.