 The new climate economy report was launched at the UN in September and of course It's not limited to land use, but that is the part that I was involved with and that's what I'll be addressing today but You could say that the the new climate economy took a deep dive in three sectors primarily energy cities and land use and Land use even more than energy in cities brings in a lot of complications It it is really the interface if you like of climate change with the poor macroeconomic modeling really across the board Shows quite clearly at the ones that really have skin in the game So to speak our poor rural people in the tropics Those are the ones who really will be hurt in the first instance by climate change both through their livelihood their entitlements the ability to grow things raise things and also through what they have to pay for subsistence and One of the other aspects of land use that I think was surprising to my non land use colleagues in NCE and I'll try to build this case is that you can get fairly fast immediate progress in Climate mitigation through land use by actually doing what you need to do for resilience and for productivity and You can in fact get a third of the way. I'll try to build this case Realistically by 2030 a third of the way of where you'd have to be to get to a two-degree pathway For global warming. So that's that's what I'm going to try to do and we'll see if it works Let me go Straight to the inconvenient facts as Tom says just to set the stage and then then get as quickly as possible to what we might do One of the inconvenient facts is that agriculture is one of the big perpetrators in greenhouse gas emissions really the the motor of climate change and I have to tell you I'm actually a livestock guy from Arizona originally. So I have to tell you a third, you know, you've Agriculture is more important to greenhouse gas emissions even than cutting down forests and environmentalists typically have always worried about Rainforest and the tropics as they should But agriculture on a global scale is actually accounts for an even higher share a share Maybe about 13% agriculture alone of greenhouse gas emissions from all sources, which is on a par with transport So and of agriculture really a lot of that comes I mean 30% of all agriculture and land use emissions at least 30% comes from from Livestock and four-fifths of that are ruminant related and we'll come back to that So as one of the great ruminant producers and exporters of the world Actually a very efficient producer in terms of greenhouse gas emissions per kilo of beef There's Ireland knows a lot about how you could have a huge impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions Simply through technological change in other countries That Sort of gets the figures out there again. I don't want to dwell on them, but I'll come back to that oops, sorry one of one of the things that you know, I moved from the World Bank to an environmental Institute where I proceeded to Really raise the mean age when I joined and also the mean body weight and one thing I found about my environmental colleagues who've been very very welcoming is that Everyone not only is focused on forests being cut down, but they're not terribly focused on why they're being cut down and You know if you want to do something about something you have to know why Wood removals are projected to triple by the World Wildlife Fund Which is one of the few organizations actually sponsored modeling, you know in-depth database modeling of this and Although that's a contested figure. It's in an upper bound By volume terms. That's six times the projected rate of growth of cereals production Consumption I should say by 2050. That's a huge increase in the OECD Demand for wood products and pulp is going down. Everyone's using their iPad. They're not reading newspapers But in places like China where they're packing that iPad in a box and where newspapers are going up in India and so forth They're soaring demand for all the bricks all the emerging developing countries huge growth in demand for wood and That's not going away. This is one of the things that we have to understand the why to know what to do Now I come from an agricultural background So I've always bridled at the fact that everyone is sure that those Aggies are behind it In fact, this is a very reputable study by Gabrielle Kissinger and her friends Looking at the drivers of deforestation Now one thing that the lay audience I didn't know before I got into this but deforestation Literally doesn't mean cutting trees. It means changing land use land that was forest become something else and In fact agriculture both subsistence but primarily commercial Depending which part of the world you're in is the primary driver of change and land use which means That trees were there. They were cut and then something else started happening there We will see though that doesn't really get to the carbon loss and explaining the drivers of carbon loss There's something else going on Removal of trees removal of biomass. However, these are the same authors again Africa Latin America The primary reason the trees are cut down is to get logs and pulp except in Africa where the primary driver is still fuel wood fuel wood or charcoal and The issue is if you don't want people to cut trees down You've got to address What are you gonna do instead? For for the use of those products I'm not arguing for the use of paper. I'm just saying it's gonna happen paper happens. It does happen I've got a hair trigger here so In the realm of inconvenient facts before we get to solutions Let's look at reality. We're looking at 9.6 billion people or their bouts by 2050 according to the UN we have we have Potential demand for calories will go up faster than demand for cereals because you have diet change and when you go over two dollars a day in 2005 purchasing power Dollars you start diversifying your diet, which is a good thing at that for most people You have so that means two times as much meat and dairy three times as much Log and pulp demand you've got you've got a lot of new pressures on resources And we don't have these resources. That is the problem We always have some resources at the margin, but on the whole things are getting tighter Food loss and waste. I mean that's huge in the developed world Particularly and at the retail side and the developing world more at the farm side and the early storage side But a quarter of the food we produce actually is never eaten At least a quarter maybe as much as a third This is a sorry picture from the stopping toms and my old stopping grounds but in the Sahel According to the FAO a quarter of the world's farmland is severely degraded to the point that you can't use it and maybe another 8% is on its way and moderately degraded and Independent estimates of this in a number of countries really estimate the cost of this It's you know, it's significant cost like up to 7% of world production at least Every year and the cost the cost this cost is much greater than the cost of remediating it by several orders of magnitude So this this is one of the greatest human tragedies that we can deal with and So when we go to countries that look like this and we say we're here about climate change mitigation They say get a heck out of here, you know But this is this is the reality we're dealing with So now now we'll get away from from hopefully not from facts, but at least inconvenient ones and let's talk about What can I this is a slide by the way from Ethiopia where you've got some forest restoration? Going on and if you notice those cattle don't look half bad I can't imagine for my days traipsing around northern Ethiopia seeing anything that looked like that, so rural resilience to the poor is really the issue for the poor for climate change if You know that that is as I say the issue of the day If you're going to have climate change and if you're the one that really is affected by it Your ability to be to have your livelihoods the livelihoods of poor rural people in places like Burkina Faso and Niger are shown there and one of the earlier slides of degraded land is absolutely key and Really the literature is very clear To get resilience you have to sequester carbon in the soil because most of these degraded soil When a forester says lands degraded means the biomass has been cut when an Aggie says lands degraded It means the soil has really lost the ability lost fertility and typically it means it's lost organic matter it's leached out or it's acidified and Poor countries know this but climate change in the whole domain of climate finance for a variety of complicated reasons adaptation as always the poor cousin and Climate adaptation for agriculture is really pitiful. I mean we're talking about disbursements of something the order of 50 million dollars a year if all told and It's not that funds haven't been set up It's just that we haven't we just don't have the the pipelines set up to really handle this And that means that we're there's we're just so far behind the curve It's really needs a total rethink and a total recommitment And I certainly for one hope that understanding of this comes along through Paris and that we get the kind of consultation we got for dealing with the food crises after 2008 and get some forward movement To really move forward in developing countries with whether whether you're you want to save forests whether you want to protect the livelihoods of the poor it all comes down to Really establishing the productive landscape and supporting it There are all these competing demand and supply issues. There's all this poverty. There's all these Other concerns, but at the end of the day you keep on coming back to the three aspects of climate smart agriculture or climate smart forestry basically productivity resilience and Sort of a byproduct of most mitigation those three go together and One of the problems of land use compared to the other sectors is there's tremendous skepticism by the main stakeholders that in fact The three go together people think yes productivity. We want it Resilience clearly, but you know mitigation that someone else's someone else caused the problem. Why are we going to get involved in that? in fact the three go together and For productivity the game has changed now Compared to the Green Revolution era where you were basically Picking the low-hanging fruit so to speak by taking dwarfing varieties of the main cereals So that they wouldn't lodge in the tropics and so they could use fertilizer better and water better Nowadays, it's much more about traits and including traits climate change adds the need for drought resistance other kinds of traits pest resistance You have to use all the tools in your box to speed things up including marker-assisted selection, which is not transgenic It's conventional breeding, but it just makes it happen a lot faster and That is happening now It's particularly happening for rice, which is still what feeds almost all of Asia is fed by rice I can go into this for any skeptics later in the question period if they want but That's my belief Ruminant and related emissions are more than 6% of global greenhouse gases and they can be cut by about half According to FAO estimates and we know how to do it We know the kinds of pasture improvements to do it grazing now if any farmers here Are there any farmers here a farmer would say? Okay, but who's gonna pay me to do that if I've got to spend money I'm not getting any premium for doing it your way or the other way or whatever and that's that's a reason That's actually not entirely true because if you're being more productive Some of some of this according to FAO estimates will pay for itself But by and large if you're talking about Indian dairy or so forth, you know, that's a valid question and You know, we spend 600 more than 600 billion a year in fossil fuel subsidies primarily in developing countries That's a lot of money and As the fossil fuel prices are happen to be low right now There should be a discussion of if you're going to subsidize stuff what you're subsidizing what you're trying to achieve with that kind of fiscal incentive For the livestock guys, these are the FAO figures the figures you see are the kilos of greenhouse gas and CO2 equivalents Per kilo of beef produced by region Ireland's one of the one of the stars here low low amount of emissions per kilo because you're very efficient beef producers And you have very good pastures and so forth but there's a tremendous amount and if you if you could apply even even Marginal changes in the rest of the world where the livestock industry is rapidly shifting you would have tremendous savings of greenhouse gas and and Where the the good producers have an awful lot to offer to the less good producers and particularly Although Ireland is a great exporter Believe me livestock industries are going to be growing elsewhere Particularly dairy will be growing elsewhere and there's there's a tremendous benefit for Ireland being more involved in that process Governance intent. We're in a new world of technology Brazil has really done marvels at stopping Deforestation on larger plots simply because starting in 2004 Brazilian government decided that the advantages of stopping illegal logging in the Amazon were much better than the than just not doing it and with the Satellite overhead pictures being freely available the Brazilians set up a shed with a hundred and fifty analysts in it and they got the The monthly satellite overpass things from the from the US and they examined them by 150 analysts every month and they could see where Deforestation was occurring it went to the police police and out helicopters. They stopped it and in Brazil there was a tremendous Decrease about three quarters in deforestation at least on larger plots at least it's Maybe it's shifting to smaller plots the satellites couldn't see But now the satellites can see down to six hectares Resolution in fact they can see down to a meter if you're talking about military satellites, but the commonly available ones Six hectares and if you go and this is a plug for my own Institute which houses a thing called global forest watch a Global forest watch org anybody can sign up for an alert in In in every 16 days for deforestation on any plot of six hectares or smaller So that means that Wilmar which handles 40% of the trade world trade in palm oil Can actually check up on its suppliers and it means that if civil society wants to hold Companies responsible they can do it and the companies can make commitments because they can enforce them and that's what they're doing That's what you know liver is doing. It's what Wilmar is doing others. They can actually they can actually make sure they don't get embarrassed so technology the technology of transparency is going up and That gives a lot of hope for dealing with the governance issues in land use that we're producing Things like illegal deforestation. Why are you going to do things sustainably if you can do them for free on public land and do It unsustainably one of the one of the key solutions That we can commit to is to restore 150 million hectares of degraded agricultural landscapes. That's a big area There are basically two ways to do it the way that we used to do it in the World Bank when I was there Which is big capital and skill intensive projects. Jürgen Vogelay who spoke to you is probably one of the world's experts in this He did it. He he was the young TTL who started something called the China's Los Plateau project in his day and At the very most you could get a million hectares a year from this. So it's capital intensive skill intensive Or you can go a different route, which I'll talk farmer managed natural regeneration, which I'll talk about in a moment This is the Los Plateau in 1990 and now more or less now you see it can be done It's absolutely amazing. You get the triple wins. They're measured There's there's really One of the things people don't know about this by the way is that it was a livestock project And that's where you get real gains in this business is where you associate There's something in it for the farmer These people here had goats which produced that But they couldn't they couldn't make any money really and they could barely survive They're gonna have to leave the land all together Now what they they don't have goats anymore because they're prohibited They had to be confined, but they have confined dairy and they have Confined cashmere sheep and they're in the wool business and they're doing quite well and their incomes went up economic rates Return were quite high for this project even with all the capital intensity So it shows that when you get your act together everybody can be better off In Latin America you had silver pastoral systems Which in Central America I should say which again, it's raising cattle in forests. It's actually a very capital-intensive Venture from the farmer's standpoint. It's not something that just happens by itself But as once once the system is put in place again, there's something in it You've you've internalized the value of ecosystem services from that forest And you're getting a good chunk of that back in the farmers pocket And so people comply and it actually works and everyone's better off This is Niger 1980s. That's the same the same landscape in 2013 That has and it's that's not a before the rainy season after the rainy season picture Which is the usual way of doing this but it is it is really it is Amazing what happened there. There was a change in the forest code that that meant that instead of farmers Sneaking out at night and cutting down state trees to the root They actually had some advantage in letting them grow keeping them there and that re-greening got the cereals yields up by a hundred kilos Hector and it had a lot of other advantages now You need to put a lot of acreage under that to get any real impact At scale for climate mitigation, but you can do this on hundreds of millions of hectares and The total investment in this from the fiscal point of view was 20 US dollars a year over about a 30-year period It was not a huge amount So this is this is the way of doing it on the cheap But you can do it on very large areas You have to take all the themes that you have really Another solution now getting back to forests where you get the big biomass the immediate big impact You have the New York Declaration on forests that came out in the summit in September and The whole the whole issue with forest policies the opportunity cost of land land is not free You know one of the problems with a lot of the stuff that we put out on the sort of environmental Advocacy stuff we always assume that that land resources are free. They're not they they have value to people particularly poor people and Many of the benefits that come from taking land that's not for us now and restoring it is in fact Ecosystem services that are a benefit to a much broader group than the local community To make something like the New York Declaration work It has to really be a mix of agroforestry a mix of mosaic That is you reforest the degraded upper slopes that you have water better water retention for low-down and it has to be There is a component of full forest It can be done Oops I'm ending up now. I want to this is what I wanted to to really get across this this I'm getting the negative influence of McKinsey you see in my slides It's sort of beginning to creep in but really the the three things on the left is where you get you get the big impact This is the 2030 those are gigatons of co2e that is a measure if you like a greenhouse gas mitigation and You have lots of things from agriculture from food waste prevention and things that make a difference but those that's those are feasible ranges from cutting down on on Illegal logging forest restoration Agricultural land restoration these are things we know how to do they can do we just have to do them and they pay for Themself mostly and though here's from the NCE main report These are that's the same information in inside the red circle. You saw detailed in the previous slide You'll see how land use stacks up relative to all the other things you can do in this globe To go from the 68 gigatons Baseline which is projected what you will have it's not what we have now But what we'll have under business as usual by 2030 to get it down to what you need the red line That's what is projected for a two-degree pathway by 2030 and you see that land use really has to be part of the solution Land use interventions are between 15 and 35 percent of the mitigation you need There's no way to just sort of say well, we're gonna talk about something else or we'll kick the can down the road You simply cannot reach a two-degree path now without a greater push on land use you may still not reach it but but there's no way to reach it if you don't have a big push on land use and If you've got the develop you've got most of the land in the world in developing countries that say it's not our problem for our Agriculture, why should we why should we sacrifice productivity and resilience to worry about your problem here a climate change? you've got a problem because and Really the only way around that problem is to do things in the way that they have to do them anyway and help them do them to really have productive landscape Restoration which is what they need for survival anyway the details You see new climate economy report this if you leave off the upslash part You don't have to look at just land use but you can find the entire report or If you have any problems send me an email. I'll send you a link. Thank you