1、A G R I C U LT U R E A N D F O O D S E R I E SRECIPE FOR A LIVABLE PLANETAchieving Net Zero Emissions in the Agrifood SystemC O N F E R E N C E E D I T I O N William R.Sutton,Alexander Lotsch,and Ashesh Prasann UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRECIPE FOR A LIVABLE

2、PLANETConference EditionUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONAGRICULTURE AND FOOD SERIESA strong food and agriculture system is fundamental to economic growth,poverty reduction,environ-mental sustainability,and human health.The Agriculture and Food Series is intended to prompt public discussion and inf

3、orm policies that will deliver higher incomes,reduce hunger,improve sustainability,and generate better health and nutrition from the food we grow and eat.It expands on the former Agriculture and Rural Development series by considering issues from farm to fork,in both rural and urban settings.Titles

4、in this series undergo internal and external review under the management of the World Banks Agriculture and Food Global Practice.Titles in this seriesRecipe for a Livable Planet:Achieving Net Zero Emissions in the Agrifood System(2024)by William R.Sutton,Alexander Lotsch,and Ashesh PrasannInsect and

5、 Hydroponic Farming in Africa:The New Circular Food Economy(2021)by Dorte Verner,Nanna Roos,Afton Halloran,Glenn Surabian,Edinaldo Tebaldi,Maximillian Ashwill,Saleema Vellani,and Yasuo KonishiWhats Cooking:Digital Transformation of the Agrifood System(2021)by Kateryna Schroeder,JulianLampietti,and G

6、hada ElabedThe Safe Food Imperative:Accelerating Progress in Low-and Middle-Income Countries(2019)by Steven Jaffee,Spencer Henson,Laurian Unnevehr,Delia Grace,and Emilie CassouThe Land Governance Assessment Framework:Identifying and Monitoring Good Practice in the Land Sector(2012)byKlaus Deininger

7、and Harris Selod Agricultural Innovation Systems:An Investment Sourcebook(2012),by World BankRising Global Interest in Farmland:Can It Yield Sustainable and Equitable Benefits?(2011)by Klaus Deininger,Jonathan Lindsay,Andrew Norton,and Harris Selod Gender and Governance in Rural Services:Insights fr

8、om India,Ghana,and Ethiopia(2010)by World BankBuilding Competitiveness in Africas Agriculture:A Guide to Value Chain Concepts and Applications(2010)by C.Martin Webber and Patrick Labaste Bioenergy Development:Issues and Impacts for Poverty and Natural Resource Management(2010)byElizabeth Cushion,Adr

9、ian Whiteman,and Gerhard Dieterle The Sunken Billions:The Economic Justification for Fisheries Reform(2009)by World Bank and the Food and Agriculture OrganizationAgribusiness and Innovation Systems in Africa(2009)by Kurt Larsen and Florian Theus Gender in Agriculture Sourcebook(2008)by World Bank an

10、d Food and Agriculture OrganizationAgricultural Land Redistribution:Toward Greater Consensus(2009)by Hans P.Binswanger-Mkhize,CamilleBourguignon,and Rogier van den Brink(eds.)Organization and Performance of Cotton Sectors in Africa:Learning from Reform Experience(2009)byDavid Tschirley,Colin Poulton

11、,and Patrick Labaste Forests Sourcebook:Practical Guidance for Sustaining Forests in Development Cooperation(2008)by World BankSustainable Land Management Sourcebook(2008)by World BankChanging the Face of the Waters:The Promise and Challenge of Sustainable Aquaculture(2007)by World BankReforming Agr

12、icultural Trade for Developing Countries,Volume 2:Quantifying the Impact of Multilateral Trade Reform(2006)by Alex F.McCalla and John NashEnhancing Agricultural Innovation:How to Go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems(2006)byWorld BankReforming Agricultural Trade for Developing Countries,Vo

13、lume 1:Key Issues for a Pro-Development Outcome of the Doha Round(2006)by Alex F.McCalla and John Nash Sustainable Land Management:Challenges,Opportunities,and Trade-offs(2006)by World BankAgriculture Investment Sourcebook(2005)by World BankShaping the Future of Water for Agriculture:A Sourcebook fo

14、r Investment in Agricultural Water Management(2005)by World Bank All books in the Agriculture and Food series are available free athttps:/ PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRECIPE FOR A LIVABLE PLANETAchieving Net Zero Emissions in the Agrifood SystemWilliam R.Sutton,Alexander Lotsch,and Ashesh PrasannAGRICULTU

15、RE AND FOOD SERIESConference EditionUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONThe text of this conference edition is a work in progress for the forthcoming book,Recipe for a Livable Planet:Achieving Net Zero Emissions in the Agrifood System(doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-2093-9).A PDF of the final book,once publish

16、ed,will be available at https:/openknowledge.worldbank.org/and http:/documents.worldbank.org/,and print copies can be ordered at .Please use the final version of the book for citation,reproduction,and adaptation purposes.2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank1818 H

17、 Street NW,Washington,DC 20433Telephone:202-473-1000;Internet:www.worldbank.orgSome rights reservedThis work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions.The findings,interpretations,and con-clusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World

18、Bank,its Board of Executive Directors,or the governments they represent.The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy,completeness,or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors,omissions,or discrepancies in the informa-tion,or liability with respect

19、 to the use of or failure to use the information,methods,processes,or conclusions set forth.The boundaries,colors,denominations,links/footnotes,and other information shown in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorse

20、ment or acceptance of such boundaries.The citation of works authored by others does not mean the World Bank endorses the views expressed by those authors or the content of their works.Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges an

21、d immunities of The World Bank,all of which are specifically reserved.Rights and PermissionsThis work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license(CC BY 3.0 IGO)http:/creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo.Under the Creative Commons Attribution license,you are free to copy,di

22、stribute,transmit,and adapt this work,including for commercial purposes,under the following conditions:AttributionPlease cite the work as follows:Sutton,William R.,Alexander Lotsch,and Ashesh Prasann.2024.Recipe for a Livable Planet:Achieving Net Zero Emissions in the Agrifood System.Agriculture and

23、 Food Series.Conference Edition.World Bank,Washington,DC.License:Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGOTranslationsIf you create a translation of this work,please add the following disclaimer along with the attribution:This translation was not created by The World Bank and should not be consider

24、ed an official World Bank translation.The World Bank shall not be liable for any content or error in this translation.AdaptationsIf you create an adaptation of this work,please add the following disclaimer along with the attribution:This is an adaptation of an original work by The World Bank.Views a

25、nd opinions expressed in the adaptation are the sole responsibility of the author or authors of the adaptation and are not endorsed by The World Bank.Third-party contentThe World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the content contained within the work.The World Bank therefore does not w

26、arrant that the use of any third-party-owned individual component or part contained in the work will not infringe on the rights of those third parties.The risk of claims resulting from such infringement rests solely with you.If you wish to re-use a component of the work,it is your responsibility to

27、deter-mine whether permission is needed for that re-use and to obtain permission from the copyright owner.Examples of components can include,but are not limited to,tables,figures,or images.All queries on rights and licenses should be addressed to World Bank Publications,The World Bank Group,1818 H S

28、treet NW,Washington,DC 20433,USA;e-mail:pubrightsworldbank.org.Cover and interior design:Owen Design Co.Front and back cover images:Peapod,wood grafvision/Envato.Used with permission of grafvision/Envato.Further permission required for reuse.Earth PixelSquid360/Envato.Used with permission of PixelSq

29、uid360/Envato.Further permission required for reuse.Farmland enhanced with agrivoltaics Joe P./Adobe Stock.Used with permission of Joe P./Adobe Stock.Further permission required for reuse.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONvCONTENTSForeword xvAcknowledgments xviiAbout the Authors xixMain Messages xxi

30、Overview xxvAbbreviations lvii1.A Call to Action 1Justification.1Purpose.4Methodology.6Conceptual Framing and Definition of Key Concepts.6A Call to Action.10Notes.11References.122.The Agrifood System Has a Big Climate Problem 15Introduction.15The Global Food System Is a Major,and Underappreciated,Co

31、ntributor to Climate Change.16There Is a Major Financing Shortfall for Agrifood System Mitigation.31UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetviThere Are Potential Short-Term Social and Economic Trade-Offs in Converting to a Low-Emissions Agrifood System.38The Costs of Inaction Ar

32、e Even Higher Than the Potential Trade-Offs.42The Conditions Are in Place to Start the Agrifood Systems Transformation to Net Zero.51Notes.55References.563.Every Country Can Harness Priority Opportunities to Achieve Net Zero Agrifood Emissions While Advancing Development 67There Are Cost-Effective M

33、itigation Opportunities for All Countries,but These Opportunities Depend On Each Countrys Relative Circumstances.68High-Income Countries Greatest Opportunities for Reducing Agrifood System Emissions Are from Curbing Energy Emissions,Aiding Developing Nations in Their Shift to Low-Emission Pathways,a

34、nd Promoting Low-Emission Foods.78The Global Agrifood Systems Energy Demands Are Highest in HICs and on the Rise Globally,but Alternative Low-Emission Energy Sources Provide a Counterbalance .79HICs Are Positioned to Transfer Financial and Technical Support to LICs and MICs.84HICs Can Decrease Consu

35、mer Demand for Emissions-Intensive Foods by Fully Pricing Animal-Source Foods through Repurposed Subsidies and Promoting Sustainable Food Options.85Middle-Income Countries Have the Opportunity to Curb Up to Two-Thirds of Global Agrifood Emissions through Sustainable Land Use,Low-Emissions Farming Pr

36、actices,and Cleaner Pre-and Post-Production Processes.94Low-Income Countries Can Bypass a High-Emissions Development Path,Seizing Climate-Smart Opportunities for Greener,More Competitive Economies.119Notes.131References.1324.The World Must Strengthen the Enabling Environment for the Agrifood System

37、Transformation to Net Zero Emissions through Global and Country-Level Actions 159Investments:Governments and Businesses Can Remove Barriers to Agrifood Sector Climate Investments through Improved Targeting,De-risking,Accountability,and Carbon Markets.160Incentives:Policy Measures Are Emerging That C

38、ould Accelerate the Transformation to a Net Zero Agrifood System.168Information:Improving GHG Monitoring Can Unlock Climate Finance.178UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONContentsviiInnovation:Innovative Practices for Reducing Agrifood Emissions Are Expanding and Becoming Cost-Effective,While More Res

39、earch and Development Can Continue This Trend.183Institutions:Climate Institutions Need to Rapidly Shift Focus to Mitigation through the Agrifood System.190Inclusion:Governments and Civil Society Must Work Together to Ensure the Agrifood System Transformation Is Equitable,Inclusive,and Just.197Notes

40、.205References.2075.The Recipe Is Doable 227Guiding Country Action.228Building the Enabling Environment.236Moving Forward.239Note.240References.240Appendix A High-,Middle-,and Low-Income Countries and Economies 243Appendix B Co-benefits of Mitigation Measures and Low-Cost Mitigation Options for Sele

41、cted Countries 251Boxes1.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Metrics and Units.51.2 Definition of Key Terms.112.1 Agrifood Emissions in Depth:The United States.253.1 Agrifood Emissions In-Depth:India .933.2 Agrifood Emissions In-Depth:Brazil .1023.3 Agrifood Emissions In-Depth:China .1173.4 Climate Change Im

42、pacts in the Horn of Africa in 2022 .1213.5 Agrifood Emissions In-Depth:The Democratic Republic of Congo .1254.1 Agrifood Emissions In-Depth:Ethiopia.204FiguresO.1 Positive Feedback Loops between Agrifood Activities and the Climate Have Created a Vicious Circle that Precludes Adaptation Alone as a S

43、olution to the Crisis.xxivO.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Agrifood System Are Significantly Higher Than Previously Thought.xxviO.3 Upper-Middle-Income Countries Generate the Highest Agrifood Emissions,Both Today and 30 Years Ago.xxviiUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Plane

44、tviiiO.4 Seven of the Top 10 Agrifood System Emitters Are Middle-Income Countries,and One Is a Low-Income Country.xxviiiO.5 Finance for Mitigation in the Agrifood System Is Strikingly Low Relative to Its Importance.xxixO.6 Environmental Pressures Are Surpassing Many Planetary Boundaries.xxxiO.7 The

45、Most Cost-Effective Mitigation Potential Is in Middle-Income Countries.xxxiiO.8 Countries Have Specific Pathways to Reducing Their Agrifood SystemEmissions.xxxiiiO.9 Emissions from Converting Forests to Agriculture Have Increased Since2001.xxxviO.10 Agrifood Systems Have Become a Stronger Component

46、of Nationally Determined Contributions.xliO.11 Governments,Businesses,Civil Society Groups,and International Organizations All Have Roles to Play in Scaling Climate Action.xliiiO.12 By 2050,Cost-Effective Mitigation Action in the Agrifood System Transformation Can Reduce Greenhouse Gases by Over 16

47、Gigatons a Year,Achieving Net Zero Emissions.xlvO.13 The Recipe for Creating an Enabling Environment Allows Countries in All Income Groups to Contribute to Transforming Agrifood Systems to Achieve Net Zero Emissions.xlvi1.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Agrifood System Are Significantly Higher t

48、han Previously Thought.21.2 Positive Feedback Loops between Agrifood Activities and the Climate have Created a Vicious Circle that Precludes Adaptation Alone as a Solution to the Crisis.31.3 The Global Agrifood System is Closely Intertwined with the Global Climate,Environment,Society,and Economy.81.

49、4 Translating the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Categories of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change into the Food and Agriculture Organization and World Banks Agrifood Systems Approach.92.1 Limiting Warming to 1.5C Requires Rapid Reductions in Greenhouse Gas Emissions .172.2 Greenhouse

50、Gas Emissions from the Agrifood System Are Significantly Higher Than Previously Thought.182.3 The Agrifood System Generates Three Major Greenhouse GasesCarbon Dioxide,Methane,and Nitrous OxideWhich Come from All Country Income Groups and Parts of the System.202.4 Middle-Income Countries Generate Two

51、-Thirds of Agrifood System Emissions .21UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONContentsix2.5 Upper Middle-Income Countries Generate the Highest Agrifood Emissions,Both Today and 30 Years Ago.232.6 Seven of the Top 10 Agrifood System Emitters Are Middle-Income Countries and One Is a Low-Income Country.24B

52、2.1.1 US Agrifood System Emissions,199092 and 201820.252.7 High-Income Countries Have the Highest Per Capita Agrifood System Emissions,with Low-Income Countries Catching Up Quickly.272.8 Regional Agrifood System Emissions Are Driven by Diverse Factors.282.9 Agrifood System Emissions Are Growing Fast

53、est in Low-and Middle-Income Countries.302.10 Paris Agreement Targets Can Be Reached Only with Significant Reductions in Agrifood System Emissions.312.11 Finance for Mitigation in the Agrifood System Is Strikingly Low Relative to ItsImportance.322.12 A Large Share of Agrifood Climate Finance Goes to

54、 Middle-Income Countries .332.13 Agrifood System Mitigation Finance by Subsector Is Not Commensurate with Emissions.342.14 Estimated Investment Cost of Agrifood System Mitigation.352.15 Food Prices Could Increase with Mitigation Action in the Medium Term Before Declining to Beneath the Historical Tr

55、end in the Longer Term .392.16 The Number of Agrifood System Jobs Associated with GHG Emissions Is Highest in LICs,Meaning Mitigation Could Have the Greatest Impact on Employment in These Countries.402.17 The World Successfully Overcame Food Production Shortfalls in the 1960s.422.18 Production of An

56、imal Products and Staple Crops Creates the Greatest Environmental Pressures in Agriculture.452.19 Climate Change Is Projected to Increasingly Undercut Agricultural Production Globally and in Almost Every Region.472.20 Climate Change Could Increase the Number of Hungry People by Tens of Millions,Part

57、icularly in Africa and Asia.472.21 Environmental Pressures Are Surpassing Many Planetary Boundaries.502.22 The Total Factor Productivity Growth Driving Global Agricultural Production Growth Slowed Dramatically over the Past Decade.512.23 Total Factor Productivity Growth in Agriculture Has Slowed the

58、 Most in Low-Income Countries,Where Land Expansion and Input Intensification Drive Agricultural Output Growth.522.24 More Efficient Land Use Will Allow the World to Sequester Significantly More Carbon Dioxide While Still Feeding More People.54UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Pl

59、anetx2.25 Low-and Middle-Income Countries Have Opportunities to Improve Rural Incomes without Sacrificing Natural Capital.543.1 Sixty-Two Percent of the Global Cost-Effective Potential to Reduce Emissions from Demand-Side Measures and from Agriculture,Forestry,and Land Use Is Concentrated in 15 Coun

60、tries.713.2 Cost-Effective Mitigation Potential Is the Low-Hanging Fruit for Different Regions and Country Income Groups .723.3 Countries Have Different Pathways to Fulfilling Their Cost-Effective Mitigation Potential.743.4 In China,the Marginal Abatement Cost Curve(MACC)Indicates That the Most Cost

61、-Effective Mitigation Options for Livestock and Crop Production Include Better Livestock Feeding and Breeding,Fertilizer Management,and Water Management in RicePaddies .753.5 In India,the Marginal Abatement Cost Curve(MACC)Indicates That 80Percent of the Technical Mitigation Potential for Agricultur

62、e Could Be Achieved by Adopting Cost-Saving Measures Alone.763.6 In Bangladesh,the Marginal Abatement Cost Curve(MACC)Indicates That 7075 Percent of the Technical Mitigation Potential for Agriculture Could Be Achieved by Adopting Cost-Saving Measures Alone .773.7 High-Income Countries Are Major Cont

63、ributors to Annual Agrifood System Emissions .783.8 Wind and Solar Energy Are Reducing Dependence on Fossil Fuels .833.9 China Leads the World in Renewable Electricity Generation .843.10 Animal-Source Food Intake and Meat Consumption Are Unevenly Distributed Across Global Regions,with Richer Countri

64、es Consuming More Than PoorerOnes.863.11 Beef Is the Most Emissions-Intensive Food .883.12 Changes in Diets Can Significantly Reduce Foods Carbon Footprint .893.13 Diets Are Influenced by Many Factors .91B3.1.1 Indias Agrifood System Emissions,199092 and 201820.943.14 Middle-Income Countries Are the

65、 Largest Source of Agrifood System Emissions,with High Levels Across All Emission Categories.953.15 Emissions from Converting Forests to Agriculture Have Increased Since2001 and Account for More Than Half of the Permanent Loss of Forests Globally .963.16 A Few Middle-Income Countries Are Driving the

66、 Growth in Global Emissions from Commodity-Linked Deforestation.973.17 Nearly 80 Percent of Global Livestock Emissions Are from Enteric Fermentation and Feed Production,and Middle-Income Countries Contribute Nearly Three-Quarters of Those Emissions to the Global Total.99UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CIT

67、ATIONContentsxi3.18 Livestock Production in Low-and Middle-Income Countries Is Inefficient,Especially for Ruminants .100B3.2.1 Brazils Agrifood System Emissions,199092 and 201820.1023.19 Most Rice Emissions Are from Larger Countries with the Most Rice ProductionThat Is,Asian Middle-Income Countries

68、Such as China,India,and Indonesiabut Emissions Intensity Varies Widely Among Them.1043.20 Many Measures Can Be Used to Increase Soil Carbon Sequestration .1083.21 Sustainable Soil Management Generates Multiple Benefits in Addition to Increased Carbon Sequestration.1093.22 Lower-Middle-Income Countri

69、es Generate the Most Food Waste .1123.23 Per Capita Energy Use Arising from Household Food Consumption Grew Rapidly in Middle-Income Countries from 2000 to 2020.116B3.3.1 Chinas Agrifood System Emissions,199092 and 201820.1173.24 Low-Income Countries Contribute the Least to Global Agrifood System Em

70、issions,Although Most of These Emissions Are from Deforestation .1203.25 Low-Income Countries Contribute Nearly Half of the Global Emissions from Shifting Agriculture .1233.26 Increasing Tree Cover on Agricultural Lands Would Increase Carbon Uptake Significantly.124B3.5.1 Democratic Republic of Cong

71、os Agrifood System Emissions,199092 and 201820.1253.27 On-Farm Energy Emissions Have Declined in High-Income Countries,but Have Increased in Middle-Income Countries and Remain Marginal in Low-Income Countries.1273.28 Low-Income Countries Are Not Yet Locked into an Energy-Intensive Agrifood System Mo

72、del,Lagging Far Behind Middle-and High-Income Countries in On-Farm Energy Use .1284.1 Voluntary Carbon Markets Have Been Growing in Both Value and Volume of Traded Carbon Credits .1664.2 Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Policies in the Agrifood Sector Have Evolved Over the Last Two Decades and Will Continu

73、e to Evolve.1684.3 Agrifood Systems Have Become a Stronger Component of Nationally Determined Contributions.1704.4 Agrifood System Mitigation Practices Are Being More Frequently Promoted in Nationally Determined Contributions .1714.5 Emissions Reduction Targets of Low-and Middle-Income Countries Rel

74、ated to Their Agrifood Systems Are Conditional on International Support .1714.6 Repurposing Domestic Support for Sectors Can Reduce Agrifood Emissions and Increase Agricultural Production .173UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Planetxii4.7 Repurposing Agrifood Policies Requires T

75、ransitioning from Policies with High Impacts on Climate to Those with Low Impacts on Climate .1744.8 An Expanded Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism Will Lead to Dramatic Losses in GDP in Countries with High-Emitting Export Sectors .1764.9 Agrifood Products Become the Most Emissions-Intensive Export

76、Sectors When Mitigation Policy Takes into Account Not Just Carbon Dioxide,but Also Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions .1774.10 Most Countries Grain Exports Would Become Much Less Competitive if Greenhouse Gas Emissions Were Properly Priced,but Sub-Saharan Africas Low-Emission Grain Industry Would B

77、enefit.1784.11 The Biggest Exporters Do Not Have the Smallest Carbon Footprints .1794.12 Cradle-to-Processing Greenhouse Gas Footprints per 100 Grams of Protein .1844.13 Innovation in Mitigation Technologies Targeting Enteric Fermentation Will Have a Large Impact on Reductions in Agrifood Emissions.

78、1894.14 Governments,Businesses,Civil Society Groups,and International Organizations All Have Roles to Play in Scaling Climate Action.1914.15 Both Climate and Mitigation Finance Have Grown Steadily in the World Banks Agriculture and Food Portfolio,FY1323 .1954.16 Most Employment in the Agrifood Secto

79、r Is in Middle-Income Countries,and Both Low-and Middle-Income Countries Have Large Shares of Workers Working on Farms.2004.17 Employment Is Moving Out of Agriculture with or without Climate Change and Mitigation Policies .201B4.1.1 Ethiopias Agrifood System Emissions,199092 and 201820.2045.1 By 205

80、0,Cost-Effective Mitigation Action in the Agrifood System Transformation Can Reduce Greenhouse Gases by Over 16 Gigatons a Year,Achieving Net Zero Emissions.2335.2 The Recipe for Creating an Enabling Environment Allows Countries in All Income Groups to Contribute to Transforming Agrifood Systems to

81、Achieve Net Zero Emissions.237Maps2.1 Countries with the Highest Per Capita Agrifood System Emissions Differ from Those with the Highest Total Agrifood System Emissions.292.2 Countries with High Climate Vulnerability and High Food Insecurity Also Rely Heavily on Imported Food.483.1 Virtually Every C

82、ountry Contributes to Livestock Emissions,but the Spatial Distribution Is Uneven .993.2 Sustainable Soil Management Practices Have the Potential to Restore the Worlds Soil Organic Carbon .106UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONxiiiTablesB1.1.1 Global Warming Potential of Greenhouse Gases.52.1 Average

83、share of Food System Emissions for World Regions,201820.182.2 The Top Agrifood System-Emitting Countries and Regions Are Very Different from the Top Per Capita-Emitting Countries and Regions.302.3 Implementing an Array of Agrifood System Climate Change Mitigation Actions Would Cost$260 Billion Per Y

84、ear by 2030 and Put the World on a Pathway to Net Zero.362.4 The Agrifood System Generates Costly Externalities:Annual Costs Imposed on Society by the Global Agrifood System in Gross World Product.452.5 Agrifood System Policies Often Incentivize Maximizing Profits over Protecting the Environment.463

85、.1 Many Agrifood Mitigation Options Are Cost-Effective and Provide Adaptation Co-benefits.704.1 Potential Roles of Concessionary Finance Providers in Blended Finance Transactions.1635.1 The Recipe for Reducing Agrifood Sector GHGs to Net Zero by 2050 through Concerted but Differentiated Efforts acro

86、ss Countries.234A.1 Average Annual Agrifood Emissions,Share of Total Emissions,and PerCapita Emissions in High-Income Countries and Economies,201820.243A.2 Average Annual Agrifood Emissions,Share of Total Emissions,and Per Capita Emissions in Middle-Income Countries and Economies,201820.246A.3 Avera

87、ge Annual Agrifood Emissions,Share of Total Emissions,and PerCapita Emissions In Low-Income Countries and Economies,201820.249B.1 Co-benefits of AFOLU and Demand-Side Mitigation Measures .251B.2 Cost-Saving and Low-Cost Mitigation Options in Selected MICs and LICs,bySector.253UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT F

88、OR CITATIONUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONxvWe are faced with a startling and largely misunderstood reality:the system that feeds us is also feeding the planets climate crisis.The worlds agrifood system emits about 16 gigatons of greenhouse gasses per year,about a third of all global emissions,an

89、d is projected to keep growing.At this rate,the Paris Agreements goal of limiting global heating to 1.5C by 2050 becomes impossible.The narrative is clear:to protect our planet,we need to transform the way we produce and consume food.The good news?The ingredients that comprise the Recipe for a Livab

90、le Planet are already in the pantry.This report lays out a recipe for transforming the agrifood system from an adversary to an ally in the fight against climate change.The authors show that there are affordable and practical measures currently available to get agrifood system emissions to net zero.E

91、very country possesses unique opportunities to reduce agrifood emissions tailored to its economy and natural environment.High-income countries can help the developing world reduce agrifood emissions through technology and climate finance and reflect environmental costs in the price of domestically p

92、roduced,high-emitting foods to drive demand toward sustainable alternatives.Middle-income countries,where most of the cost-effective mitigation opportunities are to be found,can slow down the conversion of forests to pasture and take steps to cut methane in livestock and rice.Meanwhile,low-emitting

93、developing countries have the chance to go straight to green technologies,leading the way toward a new development model and healthier planet.Governments need to create the legal and economic conditions to facilitate this transformation.The mobilization of finance is essential,both through increased

94、 investment and the repurposing of subsidies that encourage environmentally harmful practices.This unified action must be inclusive,safeguarding the most vulnerable people on the frontlines of climate change and food insecurity.FOREWORDUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Planetxvi

95、The report underscores the necessity for innovation,bolstered by rigorous research and development,to unlock new methods of sustainable production.This comprehensive recipe is both possible and pragmaticit promises an agrifood system that is secure and resilient to climate pressures while improving

96、livelihoods and generating sources of employment.By uniting around this strategic and humane approach,we can cultivate an agrifood system that nourishes the planet and its people,ensuring the well-being of current and future generations.Axel van TrotsenburgSenior Managing Director for Development Po

97、licy and PartnershipsWorld BankUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONxviiThis report was prepared by a World Bank Agriculture and Food Global Practice team led by William R.Sutton,Alexander Lotsch,and Ashesh Prasann under the strategic guidance and general direction of Juergen Voegele,Martien Van Nieuwk

98、oop,Renaud Seligmann,and Julian Lampietti.Core World Bank team members from the Climate-Smart Agriculture Team include(in alphabetical order)Malte Paul Plewa,Fatma Rekik,and Ioannis Vasileiou.Additional World Bank contributors include(in alphabetical order)Margaret Arnold,Cecilia Borgia,Cristina Eli

99、zabeth Coirolo,Timila Dhakhwa,Santiago Escobar,Nafiseh Jafarzadeh,Pierre Jean Gerber,Joshua Gill,Kayenat Kabir,Chaerin Lim,Ghazala Mansuri,Anil Markandya,Ana Maria Rojas Mendez,Roy Parizat,Joseph Pryor,Parmesh Shah,Ahmed Slaibi,Amal Talbi,Janna Dakini Tenzing,Ailin Tomio,Renos Vakis,Mitik Zegeye,Ale

100、mayehu Zeleke,and Nkulumo Zinyengere.Ilyun Koh and Michael Norton provided data analytics and visualizations.Background inputs to the report were provided by a team from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations(FAO)that included(in alphabetical order)Nancy Aburto,Astrid Agostini,L

101、orenzo Giovanni Bell,Martial Bernoux,Hugo Bourhis,Ronnie Brathwaite,Mohamed Eida,Patrizia Fracassi,Fatima Hachem,Jim Hancock,Yenory Hernandez,Israel Klug,Ana Kojakovic,Irini Maltsoglou,Cecilia Nardi,Giulia Palma,Isabel Parras,Manas Puri,Luis Rincon,Nuno Santos,Laure-Sophie Schiettecatte,Jacopo Monzi

102、ni Taccone di Sitizano,Pedro Morais de Sousa,Francesco Tubiello,Dietmar Ueberbacher,Melissa Vargas,Tancrde Voituriez,and Thomas Zandanel.Loraine Ronchi contributed on behalf of the Consortium of International Agriculture Research Centres(CGIAR).The following provided additional data,data analysis,or

103、 advice on data:from the World Bank,Luc Christiaensen,Gianluigi Nico,Euijin Jung,and Maryla Maliszewska;externally,Christopher Marcius,Tek Sapkota,and Lou Verchot(CGIAR);Daniela Chiriac and Harsha Vishnumolakala(Climate Policy Initiative);Caterina Ruggeri Laderchi(Systemiq);ACKNOWLEDGMENTSUNCORRECTE

104、D PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxviiiMatthew Jones(University of East Anglia);Alessandro Flammini,Kevin Karl,and Francesco Tubiello(FAOSTAT);Krystal Crumpler(FAO Agrifood Economics and Policy Division);Philip Thornton(Clim-Eat);Monica Crippa and Efisio Solazzo(European Union Joint

105、 Research Centre);Stefan Frank and Petr Havlik(International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis);Francesco Brusaporco and Lorenzo Marelli(World Farmers Organization);Stefanie Roe(World Wildlife Foundation);Nancy Harris(World Resources Institute);and Keith Fuglie(USDepartment of Agriculture,Econo

106、mic Research Service).Invaluable feedback and advice were received from the following peer reviewers:Richard Damania,Stephane Hallegatte,Andy Jarvis(Bezos Earth Fund),and Dina Umali-Deininger.Additional helpful advice or feedback was provided by World Bank colleagues Alan David Lee,Jason Daniel Russ

107、,Samuel Fargher,and Francisna Christmarine Fernando.Maximillian Ashwill was the reports primary editor.Alexander A.Ferguson helped draft the Main Messages.Communications and outreach support were provided by Nicolas Douillet,Clare Murphy-McGreevey,and Nugroho Sunjoyo.Venkatakrishnan Ramachandran pro

108、vided administrative support.This work was made possible by the generous financial support of Food Systems 2030,an umbrella multi-donor trust fund that helps countries build better food systems by 2030,progressing toward development and climate goals.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONxixAlexander Lo

109、tsch is a senior climate finance specialist with the World Banks Agriculture and Food Global Practice,where he shapes strategic engagement on climate finance,climate analytics,and food system transformation.Previously,he led work on nature-based solu-tions,forests,and land use for the World Banks Cl

110、imate Change Group andwhile based in Hanoi,Viet Namhe led the World Bank Environment,Natural Resources and Blue Economy Global Practices engagement on innovative jurisdiction-wide programs to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.His earlier work for the World Bank focused on th

111、e economics of adaptation,climate risk management,agricultural weather insurance,and decision-making under climate uncertainty.Prior to joining the World Bank in 2004,he worked at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration(United States)and the Environmental Systems Research Institute.He hold

112、s a PhD in earth system science and an MA in geography from Boston University,and undergraduate degrees in physical geography from Free University Berlin and in agricultural sciences from Humboldt University Berlin.Ashesh Prasann is a senior agriculture economist in the World Banks Office of Global

113、Director for the Agriculture and Food Global Practice.He is currently working on climate mitigation through the agrifood system and repurposing of agriculture support policies and programs.Previously,he has authored major analytical pieces,including the World Banks flagship reports Future of Food:Sh

114、aping the Food System to Deliver Jobs and Scaling Up Disruptive Agricultural Technologies in Africa.He has also led World Bank investment and advisory projects in Latin America and the Caribbean and Sub-Saharan Africa.He holds a PhD in agricultural,food,and resource economics from Michigan State Uni

115、versity,an MPP from the University of Chicago,and undergraduate degrees in economics and international studies from Trinity College,Hartford,Conn.ABOUT THE AUTHORSUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxxWilliam R.Sutton is the global lead for the World Banks Climate-Smart Agri

116、culture pro-gram and lead agricultural economist in the Agriculture and Food Global Practice.He has worked for more than 25 years to promote sustainable development by integrating across disciplinesincluding agriculture,the environment,and climate changeand leading investment and analytical projects

117、 in East Asia and the Pacific,Europe and Central Asia,the Middle East and North Africa,and Sub-Saharan Africa.Previously,he coordinated the World Banks climate-smart and sustainable agriculture program in China,includ-ing preparing the innovative Hubei Smart and Sustainable Agriculture Project.He ha

118、s authored and coauthored dozens of journal articles,reports,and books,including the pio-neering World Bank report Looking Beyond the Horizon:How Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Responses Will Reshape Agriculture in Eastern Europe and Central Asia,and received the World Bank Green Award in 201

119、1 in recognition of his innovative work on climate change and agriculture.He holds a PhD and MS in agricultural and resource eco-nomics from the University of California,Davis.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONxxiMAIN MESSAGESIntroductionRecipe for a Livable Planet is the first comprehensive global

120、strategic framework for miti-gating the agrifood systems contributions to climate change.It shows how the system that produces the worlds food can cut greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions while continuing to feed the world.The reports main messages are The global agrifood system presents a huge opportunity

121、to cut almost a one-third of the worlds GHG emissions through affordable and readily available actions.These actions will also have three key benefits:they will make food supplies more secure,help our food system better withstand climate change,and ensure that vulner-able people are not harmed by th

122、is transition.The ChallengesAgrifood is a bigger contributor to climate change than many think.It generates almost a third of GHG emissions,averaging around 16 gigatons annually.This is about one-sixth more than all of the worlds heat and electricity emissions.Three-quarters of agrifood emissions co

123、me from developing countries,including two-thirds from middle-income countries.Mitigation action has to happen in these countries as well as in high-income countries to make a difference.It is also necessary to take a food systems approach,including emissions from relevant value chains and land use

124、change as well as those from the farm,because more than half of agrifood emissions come from those sources.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxxiiEmissions from agrifood must be cut to net zero by 2050.This is needed for the world to achieve its goal of keeping global avera

125、ge temperatures from rising above 1.5C from pre-industrial levels.Emissions from agrifood alone are so high that they could by themselves make the world miss this target.Too little money is invested in cutting agrifood emissions,and agrifood lags other sec-tors in financing for climate action.Financ

126、e for reducing or removing emissions in the agrifood system is anemic at 2.4 percent of total mitigation finance.Agrifood emissions must be cut carefully to avoid job losses and food supply disrup-tions.The risks of inaction,though,are even greater.Not only would inaction bring job losses and disrup

127、t food supplies.It would also make our planet unlivable.The Big OpportunitiesThe agrifood system is a huge,untapped source of low-cost climate change action.Unlike other sectors,it can have an outsize impact on climate change by drawing carbon from the atmosphere through ecosystems and soils.The pay

128、offs for investing in cutting agrifood emissions are estimated to be much bigger than the costs.Annual investments will need to increase by an estimated 18 times,to$260billion a year,to halve current agrifood emissions by 2030 and put the world on track for net zero emissions by 2050.Previous estima

129、tes show that the benefits in health,economic,and environmental terms could be as much as$4.3 trillion in 2030,a 16-to-1 return on investment costs.Some of the cost can be paid for by shifting money away from wasteful subsidies,but substantial additional resources are needed to cover the rest.The co

130、sts are estimated at less than half the amount the world spends every year on agricultural subsidies,many of them wasteful and harmful for the environment.Mitigation action in agrifood brings with it many other benefits for people and the planet.Among the benefits are increased food security and res

131、ilience,better nutrition for consumers,improved access to finance for farmers,and conservation of biodiversity.Mitigation in the agrifood system can contribute in many ways to a just transition.This could secure jobs,good health,livelihoods,and food security for vulnerable groups and smallholder far

132、mers.The Opportunities for Action in Countries and GloballyWith their access to resources and technological know-how,high-income countries can play a central role in helping the world cut emissions in agrifood.Energy demands by agrifood are the highest in high-income countries,so such coun-tries sho

133、uld do more to promote renewable energy.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONMain Messagesxxiii High-income countries should give more financial and technical support to low-and middle-income countries to help them adopt low-emission agrifood practices and build their capacity to effectively use new te

134、chnologies.High-income countries should decrease their own consumer demand for emissions-intensive,animal-source foods.They can influence consumption by ensuring that the environmental and health costs borne by society are fully included in food prices.These countries can also shift subsidies for re

135、d meat and dairy toward lower-emission foods,such as poultry or fruits and vegetables.Middle-income countries have great opportunities to cut their agrifood emissions.These countries are where three-quarters of the opportunities exist for emissions to be cut in a cost-effective way.Fifteen large,mos

136、tly middle-income countries account for almost two-thirds of the worlds cost-effective mitigation potential.One-third of the worlds opportunities to reduce agrifood emissions in a cost-effective way relate to land use in middle-income countries.Reducing the conversion of for-ests to croplands or pas

137、tures and promoting reforestation or agroforestry can bring big emissions cuts and store carbon in biomass and soils.Other opportunities exist in cutting methane in livestock and rice paddies,as well as using sustainable soil management to store carbon and boost agricultural yields and climate resil

138、ience.Middle-income countries easily emit the most pre-and post-food production emis-sions,particularly from fertilizer production,food loss and waste,and household food consumption.However,there are cost-effective options for emissions cuts in each of these areas.Low-income countries should focus o

139、n green and competitive growth and avoid build-ing the high-emissions infrastructure that high-income countries must now replace.More than half of the agrifood emissions in low-income countries come from convert-ing forests to croplands or pastures;thus,preserving and restoring forests can be a cost

140、-effective way to reduce emissions and promote sustainable economic development.Carbon credits and emissions trading can put a value on forests standing that preserves them as carbon sinks,a refuge for animals and plants,and a source of sustainable jobs for Indigenous peoples and others.Improved agr

141、icultural practices such as agroforestry,which integrates trees in crop-lands,could not only store carbon but also make the land more productive,offer job opportunities,and provide more diversified diets.Likewise,climate-smart agriculture techniques could lower emissions while offering economic gain

142、s and more resilience to climate change.Actions at the country and global levels can create more favorable conditions for reduc-ing agrifood emissions.Governments,businesses,farmers,consumers,and international organizations must work together to:Make private investments in agrifood mitigation less r

143、isky and more possible,while repurposing wasteful subsidies and introducing public policies to encourage low emis-sions and productivity-enhancing technologies;UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Planetxxiv Capitalize on emerging digital technologies to improve information for mea

144、surement,reporting,and verification of GHG emissions reductions,while investing in innovation to drive the agrifood system transformation into the future;and Leverage institutions at the international,national,and subnational levels to facilitate these opportunities while ensuring a just transition

145、through the inclusion of stakehold-ers like smallholder farmers,women,and Indigenous groups,who are at the front lines of climate change.ConclusionThe food system must be fixed because it is making the planet ill and is a big slice of the climate change pie.There is action that can be taken now to m

146、ake agrifood a bigger con-tributor to overcoming climate change and healing the planet.These actions are readily available and affordable.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONxxvIntroductionThe global agrifood systems top priority is ensuring food and nutrition security for everyone,but it also has an

147、increasingly large role to play in protecting the planet.The Paris Agreement on climate change explicitly states that“the fundamental priority”of the agrifood system is“safeguarding food security and ending hunger”and to“foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions.”Society also relies

148、 on the agrifood system to provide jobs and development while protecting the environment and promoting human health(Willett etal.2019).However,conventional agriculture and food production often degrade soils and natural ecosystems and contribute to deforestation,biodiversity loss,ocean acidification

149、,and air and water pollution(IPCC 2022c;UNCCD 2022).Likewise,common diets can undermine nutrition and human development.It has also become increasingly clear that the agrifood system is one of the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions and the worlds worsening climate crisis.These cond

150、itions are set to deteriorate even further as the world attempts to feed a global population that will grow by 2 billion by 2050.More food means accelerating food production,land use changes,and related emissions,which exacerbate global heating.In turn,global heating will affect future agricultural

151、yields and food security(Bajelj and Richards 2014).To compensate,food producers will intensify activities even further,causing even higher GHG emissions in a vicious circle(figure O.1).All dollar amounts are US dollars unless otherwise indicated.OverviewUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a

152、 Livable PlanetxxviMost of the worlds action to limit GHG emissions has not targeted the agrifood system,but this must change to achieve net zero emissions and limit global heating.Until now,efforts to reduce GHG emissions have focused elsewhereon sectors like energy,transport,and manufacturing,wher

153、e scaling up a few key technologies has made an important difference in reducing emissions.However,these low-hanging fruits have mostly been harvested,and emissions levels are still far from where they need to be to avert climate catastrophe.The world has avoided confronting agrifood system emission

154、s for as long as it could because of the scope and complexity of the task,instead focusing on helping people and businesses adapt to the problem.But,according to scientists,“we cannot adapt our way out of the climate crisis”(Harvey 2022),and now is the time to put agriculture and food at the top of

155、the mitigation agenda.If not,the world will be unable to ensure a livable planet for future generations(IPCC 2023,2122).This report,Recipe for a Livable Planet:Achieving Net Zero Emissions in the Agrifood System,is the first comprehensive global strategic framework for mitigating the agrifood system

156、s contributions to climate change.It identifies solutions that cost-effectively limit agrifood GHG emissions to net zero while maintaining global food security,building climate resilience,and ensuring a just transition for vulnerable groups.It identifies mitigation areas with the greatest FIGURE O.1

157、 Positive Feedback Loops between Agrifood Activities and the Climate Have Created a Vicious Circle that Precludes Adaptation Alone as a Solution to the CrisisSource:Original figure for this publication.Note:GHG=greenhouse gas.The viciouscircle of climatechange in theagrifoodsystemAgrifoodactivitiesi

158、ncrease1GHGemissionsincrease2Globalheatingincreases3Yieldsdecrease4UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxxviipotential for reducing agrifood system emissions for each World Bank country income category(high-,middle-,and low-income).The logic is that by focusing on the biggest emissions sources

159、and the most cost-effective mitigation options,countries will be able to most quickly and cheaply diminish or prevent agrifood GHGs from reaching the atmosphere.This is not to say that these solutions are mutually exclusive:ideally,all countries would apply all cost-effective mitigation options imme

160、diately and concurrently.It is simply recognizing that countries have different opportunities to combat climate change through the agrifood system.The report also illuminates a path for strengthening the enabling environment for transforming the agrifood system to a net zero model through six Is:inv

161、estments,incentives,information,innovation,institutions,and inclusion.Collaborative efforts among governments,businesses,citizens,and international organizations and frameworks to bolster this environment will give the world its best chance to meet the Paris Agreements emissions targets.This report

162、is timely for several reasons.First,there is much more knowledge today about the global agrifood system and its growing climate footprint than there was even a few years ago.Second,it has become clear that virtually all pathways to limiting global heating to 1.5C by 2050 will require net zero emissi

163、ons from the agrifood system.Third,now is the time to drastically reorient the agrifood system,as its current form is pushing the planet beyond its operating limits.Fourth,despite the urgency,the agriculture negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC)have sta

164、lled,with a particular divide between countries from the global north and south over the issue of mitigation(Puko 2023).Fifth,the World Bank,under the leadership of its new president,has announced a new vision that puts climate change mitigation and other global public goods at the center of everyth

165、ing it does,with a mandate to create a world free from poverty“on a livable planet”(World Bank 2023).The Agrifood System Has a Big Climate ProblemGHG emissions from the agrifood system are significantly higher than previously thought.Previous calculations estimated that agriculture,forestry,and othe

166、r land use(AFOLU)have generated about one-fifth of global GHGs(IPCC 2022b).However,more recent and holistic measurements that include pre-and post-production emissions show that the global agrifood system is responsible for significantly higher GHG emissions than previously thought:on average,16 bil

167、lion metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent(CO2eq)per year,or about 31 percent of the worlds total GHG emissions(figure O.2)(Crippa etal.2021;Tubiello etal.2022).To put that into perspective,that is 2.24 billion tons,or 14percent,more than all of the worlds heat and electricity emissions.1 However

168、,reducing GHG emissions from the global agrifood system has received scant attention.For example,only about half of the Paris Agreement countries originally included agriculture-related GHG targets in their Nationally Determined Contributions(NDCs)(Fransen etal.2022).The biggest contributions to agr

169、ifood system emissions come from eight key emissions sources:(1)livestock-related emissions,25.9 percent;(2)net forest conversion,18.4 percent;(3)food system waste,7.9 percent;(4)household food consumption patterns,7.3 percent;(5)fertilizer production and use,6.9 percent;(6)soil-related emissions,5.

170、7 percent;(7)on-farm energy use and supply,5.4 percent;and(8)rice productionrelated emissions,4.3 percent.These categories represent the supply side of emissions,or the sources from which GHGs are emitted.It is worth noting that an examination of agrifood emissions from the demand side would paint a

171、 different picture.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxxviiiMiddle-income countries(MICs)are the biggest contributors to cumulative agrifood system emissions,while high-income countries(HICs)have the highest per capita emissions.This report analyzes agrifood system emission

172、s by World Bankdefined country income levelsspecifically,HICs,MICs,and LICs.It reveals widely diverse emissions profiles,with MICs generating most agrifood emissions both today and historically,HICs having the highest per capita emissions,and low-income countries(LICs)having the highest rates of emi

173、ssions increases.Today,MICs contribute 68 percent of global agrifood emissions,compared with 21 percent from HICs and 11 percent from LICs(Tubiello etal.2022).Note that the MIC category has the most countries,108 worldwide,compared with 77 HICs and just 28 LICs.In that sense,it should be no surprise

174、 that MICs and their larger populations emit the most.2 However,splitting the MIC group into lower-middle-income countries(LMICs)and upper-middle-income countries(UMICs)results in 55 LMICs and 53 UMICs but does not change the result,with agrifood emissions from each MIC sub-group far outstripping em

175、issions from HICs and LICs(figure O.3).HICs high per capita emissions are driven largely by the heavy consumption of meat and dairy and the increase in food transport,processing,packaging,and waste(FAO 2018).That said,HICs share of agrifood emissions has declined as their population growth has decel

176、erated,their economies have shifted from agriculture to manufacturing and services,they have outsourced food production to MICs and LICs,and they have invested in food sector productivity and renewable energy(Crippa etal.2021).LICs produce the fewest overall GHG emissions from the agrifood system bu

177、t FIGURE O.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from the Agrifood System Are Significantly Higher Than Previously ThoughtSource:World Bank analysis based on data from FAOSTAT 2023a.Note:Left:Mean annual global greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions from the agrifood system as a share of total GHG emissions,201820.Right

178、:Emissions broken down by the three main subcategories and their individual components.GtCO2eq=gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent.Enteric fermentation:17.6%Rice cultivation:4.3%Synthetic fertilizers:3.8%On-farm energy use:2.9%Crop residues:2.8%Net forest conversion:18.4%Fires:2.4%Agrifood systemw

179、aste disposal:7.9%Food,householdconsumption:7.3%Food,retail:4.2%Food processing:4%Food transport:3.1%Input manufacturing:3.1%Energy generation for farms:2.5%Food packaging:1.8%Nonfoodemissions:35.9 GtCO2eq,69.2%Agrifoodemissions:16 GtCO2eq,30.8%Manure:8.3%Farm gate:45.4%Land usechange:20.8%Pre-andpo

180、st-production:33.8%Drainedorganic soils:5.7%UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxxixLow-incomeLower-middle-incomeUpper-middle-incomeHigh-income00000231456Emissions(GtCO2eq)FiresNet forest conversionLand use changeEnteric fermentationManureDrained org

181、anic soilsRice cultivationSynthetic fertilizersOn-farm energy useCrop residuesFarm-gate emissionsPre-and post-productionAgrifood systems waste disposalFood,household consumptionFood,retailFood processingFood transportInput manufacturingEnergy generation for farmsFood packagingFIGURE O.3 Upper-Middle

182、-Income Countries Generate the Highest Agrifood Emissions,Both Today and 30 Years AgoSources:World Bank analysis based on data from World Bank 2024 and FAOSTAT 2023a.Note:Panel shows mean annual agrifood emissions for 199092 and 201820 by source category and country income group.Categories are group

183、ed to reduce those with small values.“Manure”consists of manure left on pasture,manure management,and manure applied to soils.“Crop residues”consists of savanna fires,crop residues,and burning crop residues.“Fires”consists of fires in organic soils and fires in humid tropical forests.“Input manufact

184、uring”consists of fertilizer manufacturing and pesticide manufacturing.“On-farm energy use”consists of on-farm heat use and on-farm electricity use.GtCO2eq=gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent;HICs=high-income countries;LICs=low-income countries;LMICs=lower-middle-income countries;UMICs=upper-middl

185、e-income countries.have had the highest rate of increase since the early 1990s:a 53 percent increase,compared with a 12.3 percent increase for MICs and a 3 percent increase for HICs.Digging deeper into these profiles shows that the bulk of agrifood emissions are concentrated in a handful of countrie

186、s,mostly MICs(figure O.4).This trend is likely to continue because MICs are largely following the same emissions-heavy development path that HICs(Jones etal.2023)historically followed but with much larger and growing populations.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxxxThe wor

187、ld cannot achieve the Paris Agreement targets without achieving net zero emissions in the agrifood system.The temperature targets enshrined in the Paris Agreement reflect the scientific consensus that warming above 1.5C from preindustrial levels threatens the most exposed countries and that warming

188、above 2C would lead to wide-ranging andcatastrophic impacts,such as food shortages and more-destructive storms(IPCC 2018).To meet the 1.5C target,the world would effectively need to reduce global GHG emissions from 52 gigatons per year to zero annually by 2050,with any unavoidable emissions offset b

189、y GHG-capturing activities.However,current projections,with policies in place as of 2020 and no additional action,or“business as usual,”suggest that global warming would reach 3.2C by 2100(IPCC 2023).Moreover,recent research finds that even if all fossil fuel emissions are eliminated from every othe

190、r sector,the emissions from the agrifood system alone would be enough to drive the planet past the 1.5C threshold and even put the 2.0C goal at serious risk(Clark etal.2020).Therefore,the world would need to reduce net agrifood JapanFranceEthiopiaNigeriaThailandGermanyColombiaAustraliaMyanmarMexicoT

191、op 10ArgentinaPakistanCanadaRussian FederationCongo,Dem.Rep.IndonesiaUnited StatesIndiaBrazilChina00.51.01.52.02.5Emissions(GtCO2eq)High-incomeMiddle-incomeLow-incomeSources:World Bank analysis based on data from World Bank 2024 and FAOSTAT 2023a.Note:Figure shows average annual agrifood system emis

192、sions for 201820.GtCO2eq=gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent.FIGURE O.4 Seven of the Top 10 Agrifood System Emitters Are Middle-Income Countries,and One Is a Low-Income CountryUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxxxiGHG emissions from 16 gigatons annually to zero by 2050 to have any hope of

193、meeting the 1.5C Paris Agreement target.There is a major financing shortfall for agrifood system mitigation.Overall,climate finance has almost doubled over the past decade(Naran etal.2022),but project-level climate financing for the agrifood system stands at only 4.3 percent,or$28.5 billion,of globa

194、l climate finance for mitigation and adaptation in all sectors(figureO.5).Mitigationfinance for the agrifood sector was even more anemic,reaching only$14.4billion in 201920,or 2.2 percent of total climate finance and 2.4 percent of total mitigation finance(CPI 2023;Naran etal.2022).Instead,most clim

195、ate finance is dedicated to other sectors,such as renewable energy,which receives 51 percent of financing,or low-carbon transportation,which receives 26 percent of financing(Naran etal.2022).This report estimates that annual investments in reducing agrifood emissions will need to increase by 18 time

196、s,to$260 billion,to reduce current food system emissions by half by 2030.If not done carefully,there could be short-term social and economic trade-offs in converting to a low-emission agrifood system.Some studies predict that agrifood system reforms,if not designed carefully,could lead to less agric

197、ultural production and higher food prices(Hasegawaetal.2021).For example,reducing fertilizer or adopting organic farming would reduce emissions by 15 percent but could also reduce agricultural production by FIGURE O.5 Finance for Mitigation in the Agrifood System Is Strikingly Low Relative to Its Im

198、portanceSources:World Bank analysis based on data from CPI 2023 and Naran etal.2022.Note:Figure shows for 2019/20 global tracked project-level climate finance($,billions)for adaptation,mitigation,and dual-purpose action economywide and for the agrifood system.Total mitigationfnancing:$588 billionTot

199、al agrifood systemclimate fnancing:$28 billionAgrifood system mitigationfnancing:$14 billionTotal climatefnancing:$660 billionUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Planetxxxii5 percent,increase world food prices by 13 percent,and raise the cost of healthy diets by 10 percent(Europea

200、n Commission 2020).Other studies have been even gloomier,projecting that afforestation measures could put 40 million people at risk of food insecurity by 2050(Fujimori etal.2022).Likewise,emissions pricing schemes would inherently increase prices for high-emitting foods,disproportionately affecting

201、low-income families.Other studies predict that lowering agrifood emissions could lead to competition over land,water,and energy resources and affect jobs in LICs,where the agrifood sector accounts for 64 percent of total employment,compared with 39 percent in MICs and 11 percent in HICs.Because of t

202、hese potential trade-offs,the transition to a net zero agrifood system is likely to encounter political and cultural obstacles.The costs of inaction are even higher than the potential trade-offs.The worlds food system has successfully fed a growing population but has fallen short of promoting optima

203、l health and nutrition goals.Starting in 2014,human health outcomes began to decline because the agrifood systems simple focus on increasing calorie availability meant that there was less attention to producing healthier foods(Ambikapathi etal.2022).Partly as a result,adult and child obesity keeps r

204、ising(FAO etal.2021),and 6 of the top 10 risk factors for death and disease in both men and women are diet related(Abbafati et al.2020).However,by 2020,healthy diets were unaffordable for 3 billion people,an increase of 119 million from 2019.Likewise,the global agrifood system disproportionately and

205、 detrimentally affects poor communities and smallholder farmers who cannot compete with industrial agriculture,thereby exacerbating rural poverty and increasing landlessness(Clapp,Newell,and Brent 2017).In addition,the globalized nature of the agrifood system entails food price volatility.For exampl

206、e,over 122 million more people faced hunger since 2019 because of supply chain disruptions caused by COVID-19(coronavirus)and repeated weather shocks and conflicts,including the Russian Federations invasion of Ukraine(FAO etal.2023).Besides these human costs,todays food system also causes trillions

207、of dollars worth of negative externalities every year.Externalities,in this case,refers to indirect costs that arise from the agrifood system that are felt not by the actor that creates the cost but by society.These global food system externalities are estimated to cause around$20 trillion in costs

208、per year,or nearly 20 percent of gross world product(Hendriks etal.2021).These externalities are already pushing the planet beyond its operational boundaries(figure O.6)(Roson 2017).Transformation of the agrifood system can deliver multiple benefits without any of these trade-offs if coupled with re

209、silience building.Investing in low-emission agriculture and transforming food and land use could generate health,economic,and environmental benefits totaling$4.3 trillion in 2030,3 a 16-to-1 return on investment costs.Likewise,new research(Damania,Polasky,etal.2023)shows that climate-smart practices

210、 that combine adaptation and mitigation measures could increase cropland,livestock,and forestry incomes by approximately$329 billion annually while at the same time increasing global food production by enough to feed the world until 2050,without losses in biodiversity or carbon storage levels.Accord

211、ing to one study,more-efficient land use could sequester an additional 85 gigatons of carbon dioxideequivalent to over a year and a half of total global GHG emissionswith no adverse economic impacts(Damania,Polasky,etal.2023).In addition,better production strategies and smarter spatial planning can

212、improve crop yields and reduce agricultures land footprint while limiting its GHG footprint and increasing global calorie production by more than 150 percent.This translates to an 82 percent increase in net value from the worlds current crop,livestock,and timber production.Over the long term(2080210

213、0),the benefits are much clearer.Early mitigation action is projected to lower UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxxxiiiFIGURE O.6 Environmental Pressures Are Surpassing Many Planetary BoundariesSource:Azote for Stockholm Resilience Centre,Stockholm University.Based on Richardson et al.2023,S

214、teffen et al.2015,and Rockstrm et al.2009.Note:BII=Biodiversity Intactness Index;CO2=carbon dioxide;E/MSY=extinctions per million species-years;N=nitrogen;P=phosphorus.UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxxxivFIGURE O.7 The Most Cost-Effective Mitigation Potential Is in Midd

215、le-Income CountriesSources:World Bank analysis based on data from Roe et al.2021 and World Bank 2024.Note:Figure shows for 202050 the average annual cost-effective mitigation potential by country income group and measure.GtCO2eq/yr=gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.Low-income0Cost-effec

216、tive mitigation potential(GtCO2eq/yr)2.55.07.510.012.5Middle-incomeHigh-income2.5610.61.25Forest and other ecosystemsprotectForest and other ecosystemsmanageForest and other ecosystemsrestoreAgriculturereduce emissionsAgriculturesequester carbonDemand sidelong-term food prices by 4.2 percent,hunger

217、risk for 4.8million people,and water demand for irrigation by 7.2 cubic kilometers(km3)per year(Hasegawa etal.2021).Country Mitigation Potential:Every Country Can Harness Priority Opportunities to Achieve Net Zero Agrifood Emissions While Advancing DevelopmentThere are cost-effective mitigation oppo

218、rtunities for all countries,but they depend on each countrys relative circumstances.Fifteen large countries account for 62 percent of the worlds cost-effective mitigation potential(figure O.7).Eleven of these countries are MICs.Cost-effective mitigation potential is the technical mitigation potentia

219、l that is available and costs less than$100 per ton of CO2 equivalent reductions.4 Among country categories,73 percent of cost-effective AFOLU mitigation opportunities are in MICs,18 percent are in HICs,and 9 percent are in LICs.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control(IPCC)estimates that 39 p

220、ercent(5.3 gigatons of CO2eq GtCO2eq)of the cost-effective mitigation potential is achievable at costs below$50 per ton of CO2eq,including 28 percent UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxxxv(3.8 GtCO2eq)at less than$20 per ton of CO2eq(Nabuurs etal.2022).Moreover,some countries have mitigation

221、 options with negative costs(less than$0 per ton of CO2eq),suggesting that these options can both reduce emissions and increase farm profitability.For example,40 percent of current methane emissions could be avoided at no net cost when co-benefits are accounted for(IEA 2023b).Such cost-saving mitiga

222、tion options account for more than a third of technical mitigation potential in Chinas agriculture sector,half in Indias,and three-quarters in Bangladeshs.A countrys pathway to cost-effective emissions reductions is shaped by its natural endowments and other factors.For example,Brazil is a large,hea

223、vily forested,meat-producing and-consuming MIC that has the highest cost-effective mitigation potential in Latin America and the Caribbean.This is because many cost-effective measures are available for the country to take to reduce food system emissions,from protecting and restoring forests to shift

224、ing to healthy and sustainable diets and sequestering carbon in agriculture(figure O.8)(Roe etal.2021).5 In contrast,the pathway to cost-effective decarbonization is much narrower for the Democratic Republic of Congo,which is also heavily forested but has significantly less income per capita and les

225、s meat production and consumption.FIGURE O.8 Countries Have Specific Pathways to Reducing Their Agrifood System EmissionsSource:World Bank analysis based on data from Roe et al.2021.Note:Figure shows for top 16 countries and the European Union the total cost-effective mitigation potential by mitigat

226、ion category and measure.GtCO2eq/yr=gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.KazakhstanMyanmarPeruBoliviaColombiaMexicoAustraliaArgentinaCongo,Dem.Rep.CanadaRussian FederationEuropean UnionIndiaUnited StatesIndonesiaChinaBrazil00.51.01.52.0Cost-effective mitigation potential(GtCO2eq/yr)Forest

227、and other ecosystemsprotectForest and other ecosystemsmanageForest and other ecosystemsrestoreAgriculturereduce emissionsAgriculturesequester carbonDemand sideUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxxxviHICs Greatest Opportunities for Reducing Agrifood System Emissions Are From

228、 Curbing Energy Emissions,Aiding Developing Nations in Their Shift to Low-Emissions Pathways,and Fully Pricing High-Emissions FoodsThe global agrifood systems energy demands are highest in HICs and are on the rise globally,but alternative low-emission energy sources provide a counterbalance.Today,en

229、ergy use accounts for a third of all agrifood system emissions(Crippa etal.2021),with most of these energy needs being met by fossil fuelbased energy.The doubling of energy-intensive pre-and post-production emissions,especially in HICs(Tubiello etal.2022),led to a 17 percent increase of agrifood sys

230、tems emissions between 1990 and 2015(Crippa etal.2021).Indeed,46 percent of agrifood system emissions in HICs come from pre-and post-production processes.For comparison,35 percent of agrifood system emissions in MICs and only 6 percent in LICs come from these processes.In fact,the food industry has

231、the slowest progress in energy efficiency among economic sectors(IEA 2022).Partly as a result,the world is off track to meet the sustainable development goal of doubling the global energy efficiency rate by 2030.6 Renewable energy production is helping to change this situation.In 2022 alone,renewabl

232、e energygenerated electricity avoided 600 million tons of CO2 emissions(IEA 2022)compared to if that electricity had come from fossil fuels(Wiatros-Motyka 2023).This has impacts on the agrifood system as well.For instance,replacing one-quarter of Indias 8.8 million diesel irrigation pumps with solar

233、 ones would reduce emissions by 11.5 million tons per year.This amount is more than twice as much as the 5 million tons in global emissions that electric vehicles and solar panels prevented in 2020.7 Deploying renewables leads to other positive outcomes,such as increased employment and reduced pollu

234、tion(IRENA and ILO 2022).Fortunately,the adoption of renewable energy sources is growing,with renewables accounting for 83 percent of all new electricity capacity(IRENA 2023).Most importantly,renewable energy is a cost-effective mitigation strategy,with abatement costs of only$20 to$50 per ton of ca

235、rbon dioxide(Elshurafa etal.2021).HICs are positioned to transfer financial and technical support to LICs and MICs for agrifood system mitigation.This financial support could be in the form of grants,concessional loans,or climate finance.Such financial support is in everyones interest,because climat

236、e change mitigation is the ultimate global public good.Moreover,many HICs are at the forefront of technological advancements.As such,they can leverage their expertise to transfer advanced technologies to LICs and MICs,empowering them to adopt low-emission agrifood system practices.However,merely tra

237、nsferring technology is not enough.HICs and their international partners could also lead comprehensive capacity-building initiatives to ensure that LICs and MICs can effectively utilize these technologies.That said,MICs must continue to recognize their own agrifood system contributions to GHG emissi

238、ons by continuing to invest in and implement policies for climate action.HICs can decrease consumer demand for emissions-intensive,animal-source foods by fully pricing environmental and health externalities,repurposing subsidies,and promoting sustainable food options.As global populations become wea

239、lthier,they consume more emissions-intensive foods,like meat and dairy(Ranganathan etal.2016).HICs have the highest per capita incomes,so demand for and consumption of high-emitting,animal-source foods are greatest in those countries(Vranken etal.2014).For example,in North America,the average citize

240、n consumes 36 kilograms(kg)of bovine meat per year,whereas the global UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxxxviiaverage is 9 kg per person per year(FAO 2023a;FAOSTAT 2023b).This trend of increased meat consumption is also occurring in MICs and LICs as their populations graduate out of poverty(

241、Clark and Tilman 2017;Clark etal.2020).For example,as poverty declined from 1990 to 2020,cattle meat production grew from 53 to 68 million tons,a 30 percent increase,and added close to 0.25 GtCO2eq to the atmosphere.Currently,the demand for animal-source diets accounts for almost 60 percent of total

242、 agrifood emissions across all emissions categories(Xu etal.2021).Thus,the cost-effective mitigation potential from shifting diets away from meat is about twice as high as that from reducing enteric fermentation and other livestock production mitigation methods.Full-cost pricing of animal-source foo

243、d to reflect its true planetary costs would make low-emission food options more competitive.Globally,one-third of agricultural subsidies were directed toward meat and milk products in 2016(Springmann and Freund 2022).Indeed,studies have shown that meat prices would need to increase by 2060 percent,d

244、epending on meat type,to reflect the true health,climate,and environmental costs of meat(Funke etal.2022).As a result,repurposing red meat and dairy subsidies toward low-emission foods,like poultry or fruits and vegetables,could lead to significant changes in consumption patterns and large emissions

245、 reductions.Likewise,governments,businesses,and citizens can expand low-emission food options through(1)financial measures,(2)choice architecture strategies,(3)food labeling,and(4)education and communication campaigns.Consumer changes to healthy,low-emission diets would reduce diet-related emissions

246、 by up to 80 percent and reduce land and water use by 50 percent(Aleksandrowicz etal.2016).MICs Have the Opportunity to Curb Up to Two-Thirds of Global Agrifood Emissions through Sustainable Land Use,Low-Emission Farming Practices,and Cleaner Pre-and Post-production ProcessesA shift to more sustaina

247、ble land use in MICs could reduce a third of global agrifood emissions cost-effectively.Cropland expansion and deforestation leave a massive carbon footprint in MIC economies.Globally,deforestation contributes 11 percent of total CO2eq emissions(IPCC 2022c),with 90 percent of that caused by expandin

248、g croplands and livestock pastures(FAO 2020).Since 2001,a few MICs with extensive forests have caused over 80 percent of commodity-driven deforestation emissions(WRI 2023).A quarter to a third of permanent forest loss is linked to the production of seven agricultural commodities:cattle,palm oil,soy,

249、cocoa,rubber,coffee,and plantation wood fiber.A similar amount of forest loss is driven by shifting agriculture(figure O.9)(Goldman etal.2020).The largest share of global cost-effective agrifood mitigation options comes from the conservation,improved management,and restoration of forests and other e

250、cosystems,with reduced deforestation in tropical regions being particularly effective(IPCC 2022b).Cost-effective land use mitigation measures could avoid 5 GtCO2eq emissions per year in MICs alone(6.5 GtCO2eq globally).By some estimates,the cost of protecting 30 percent of the worlds forests and man

251、groves would require an annual investment of just$140 billion(Waldron etal.2020),which is equal to only about one-quarter of global annual government support for agriculture.In response,a growing number of commodity producers in these countries have introduced programs to reduce their deforestation

252、footprint,but results are limited.There is still a lack of transparency about where many commodities come from and whether they contribute to deforestation(zu Ermgassen etal.2022).UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable PlanetxxxviiiMore than a quarter of MICs agrifood system emission

253、s are in the livestock sector.As of 2019,MICs caused 67 percent of GHG direct emissions from livestock,including 34 percent for LMICs and 33 percent for UMICs(FAOSTAT 2023a).By comparison,LICs contributed only 11 percent of livestock emissions in 2019.Moreover,MIC livestock emissions are on the rise

254、.Between 2010 and 2019,MIC livestock emissions grew by 6 percent,compared with a decrease of 2 percent for HICs and an astounding 64 percent increase for LICs,although from a much lower level of initial emissions(Delgado etal.1999).MICs also have high emissions intensity in livestock production.For

255、example,producing 1 kg of livestock protein in MICs generated 121 kg of CO2eq,compared with only 79 kg of CO2eq per kg of proteins in HICs(FAO 2023d).That said,this high-emission intensity also means that livestock mitigation potential is greatest in MICs.Therefore,supply-side solutions such as redu

256、cing animal-source food loss and waste,increasing livestock productivity,limiting pasture expansion,and adopting innovative technical solutions could go a long way toward reducing agrifood system emissions to zero.However,as previously stated,demand-side measures to curb meat demand are much more co

257、st-effective than these supply-side measures.There are multiple avenues for mitigating emissions,particularly methane,in rice production in Asian MICs.Rice supplies around 20 percent of the worlds calories(Fukagawa and Ziska 2019),but the warm,waterlogged soil of flooded rice paddies provides ideal

258、conditions for bacterial processes that produce methanemost of which is released into the atmosphere(Schimel 2000).As a result,paddy rice production is responsible,on average,for 16 percent of agricultural methane emissions,or 1.5 percent of total anthropogenic GHG FIGURE O.9 Emissions from Converti

259、ng Forests to Agriculture Have Increased Since 2001Source:World Bank analysis based on data from Harris etal.2021.Note:Figure shows for 200121 the annual global greenhouse gas emissions by driver.Emissionscarbon dioxide(CO2),nitrous oxide(N2O),and methane(CH4)from the gross forest loss globally are

260、disaggregated by drivers.Forest clearing for agricultural commodities such as oil palm or cattle and shifting cultivation make up more than half of deforestation emissions.GtCO2eq=gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent.1015502000Emissions(GtCO2eq)200520025Agricultural commoditiesForestrySh

261、ifting agricultureWildfresUrbanizationUNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxxxixemissions(Searchinger etal.2021).The high methane content of rice emissions means that rices yield-scaled global warming potential is about four times higher than that of wheat or maize(Linquist etal.2012).Notably,v

262、irtually all rice-related GHG emissions,which also include carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide,originate in MICs,and the vast majority originate in Asiancountries.Thatsaid,intermittent water application and aerobic rice production methods have great potential for reducing rice-related GHG emissions whi

263、le saving water.Indeed,70 percent of the technical mitigation potential of improved rice cultivation can be achieved cost-effectively.Therefore,governments must apply policy and financing incentives and share technical knowledge with rice farmers to accelerate their adoption of these low-emission pr

264、actices.Soils could sequester about 1 billion tons of solid carbon,or 3.8 billion tons of CO2eq,per year cost-effectively.Terrestrial ecosystems(such as forests,grasslands,deserts,and others)absorb around 30 percent of total anthropogenic CO2 emissions(Terrer,Phillips,and Hungate 2021).The top meter

265、 of soil stores approximately 2,500 billion tons of carbon,which is almost three times the amount of carbon found in the atmosphere(Lal etal.2021)and 80 percent of all terrestrial carbon(Ontl and Schulte 2012).This easily makes soils the biggest terrestrial carbon sink.Moreover,12 of the 15 countrie

266、s with the greatest organic carbon sequestration potential in the top 30 centimeters of soils are MICs.However,unsustainable land management practices associated with conventional agriculture have released large amounts of soil carbon into the atmosphere(Lal 2011).For example,soil organic carbon sto

267、cks in croplands and grazed grasslands are 2575 percent lower than they are in undisturbed soil ecosystems(Lal 1999).Today,52 percent of the worlds agricultural soils are considered carbon depleted(UNCCD2022).This issue provides an opportunity to reduce GHG emissions by restoring and sustainably man

268、aging soils.According to the IPCC,around half of the soil organic carbon sequestration potential would cost less than$100 per ton of CO2eq(IPCC 2022b),and about a quarter would cost less than$10 per ton of CO2eq(Bossio etal.2020).Our estimates show that soil sequestration can store 3.8 GtCO2eq annua

269、lly for less than$100 per ton of CO2eq,equal to just over 1 gigaton of solid carbon.Pre-and post-production processes are a significant and growing source of agrifood system emissions in MICs.Globally,pre-and post-production emissions account for a third of all agrifood systemrelated emissions and i

270、ncrease as countries become wealthier.In HICs,pre-and post-production emissions make up 46 percent of agrifood system emissions;in MICs,they make up 35 percent;and in LICs,they make up only 6 percent(FAOSTAT 2023a).That said,when excluding emissions from the processing-to-consumption stages of the a

271、grifood system,which are mostly HIC energy emissions,MICs easily generate the most pre-and post-production emissions,particularly from fertilizer production and use,food loss and waste,and household food consumption.Overall,80 percent of the worlds fertilizer is consumed in MICs(International Fertil

272、izer Association 2022).Moreover,fertilizer application in these countries is often wasteful:on average,MICs apply 168 kg of fertilizer per hectare,compared to 141 kg for HICs and 12kg for LICs(FAOSTAT 2023c).Overall,fertilizer production and use cause 6.4 percent of total agrifood emissions.Fortunat

273、ely,research shows that a combination of interventions could reduce emissions from nitrogen fertilizer production and use by up to 84 percent(Gao and Cabrera Serrenho 2023).Another major emissions source of pre-and post-production stages is food loss and waste,which equals 30 percent of the worlds f

274、ood supply(WorldBank2020).In fact,28 percent of the worlds agricultural area is used to produce food that is wasted(FAO 2013;World Bank 2020).Waste reduction,especially of rice and meats,is highly cost-effective and can reduce UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Planetxlmethane at

275、 a negative cost(UNEP and Climate and Clean Air Coalition 2021).Estimates indicate that cost-effective measures to reduce food waste could reduce emissions by about nearly a half a gigaton of CO2eq per year by 2030(Thornton etal.2023).Household food consumption,for its part,is the largest emissions

276、category within pre-and post-production processes.It makes up 7.3 percent of all agrifood emissions,including 8.2 percent of MIC emissions and 7.8 percent of HIC emissions but only a fraction of a percent of LIC emissions.Most of the emissions in this category come from running household kitchen app

277、liances.Renewable energy and clean cooking are two cost-effective measures for limiting this growing emissions category.LICs Can Bypass a High-Emission Development Path,Seizing Climate-Smart Opportunities for Greener,More Competitive EconomiesLICs contribute the least to climate change but suffer th

278、e most.Historically,LICs bear a negligible responsibility for GHG emissions and global warming,accounting for just 3.65 percent of cumulative historical emissions since 1850(Evans 2021;Jones etal.2023).Today,LICs contribute 4.2 percent to global GHG emissions(Climate Watch 2023)and 11 percent to glo

279、bal agrifood system emissions(World Bank 2024,FAOSTAT 2023a).This suggests that LICs are not yet locked into a high-emission trajectory.Currently,53 percent of agrifood system emissions in HICs comes from the energy-intensive postharvest stages,whereas the emissions from these stages are negligible

280、in LICs.However,this is starting to change.As countries industrialize and move up the income ladder,energy-consuming technology,such as refrigeration or food-processing machinery,tends to enter the food value chain and increase energy demand.Also,82 percent of LIC emissions come from the agrifood sy

281、stem,well above the global average of 31 percent(Crippa etal.2021),and half of LICs agrifood emissions comes from land use,land use change,and forestry(Climate Watch 2022;Crippa etal.2021).That said,climate change disproportionately affects agrifood systems in LICs,which are highly dependent on agri

282、culture and have low adaptive capacity(IPCC 2022a).Moreover,the human toll in developing countries from extreme weather events is much costlier than that in developed countries,with a staggering 91 percent of disaster-related deaths occurring in poorer countries(United Nations 2021).Preserving and r

283、estoring forests is a cost-effective way to promote development and limit the growth of LICs emissions.Forest conversion contributes over half of LICs agrifood system emissions,compared with 17 percent in MICs and 6 percent in HICs.Apart from Brazil,Sub-Saharan Africa has the largest block of primar

284、y forest in the world.However,the demand for agricultural commodities has been increasing the pressure on forests in LICs,and in response the forest area is shrinkingfrom 31.3 percent in 1990 to 26.3 percent in 2020.8 For instance,in Congo Basin countries,there has been a 40 percent increase in land

285、 allocated for oil palm from 1990 to 2017(Ordway etal.2019).In addition to conservation,forest restoration can achieve climate objectives and drive development.By one estimate,forest restoration could deliver a net benefit of$7 to$30 for every dollar invested through ecosystem services(Verdone and S

286、eidl 2017).Agroforestrythe practice of integrating trees in croplandsproduces benefits in LICs(FAO 2023b)beyond carbon storage,such as greater land productivity,livelihood opportunities,diversified diets,and greater ecosystem resilience and services(FAO 2023b).Emerging economies are beginning to mon

287、etize their forest cover and agrifood emission reductions UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxlithrough carbon credits and emissions trading.A global study of all country types shows that LICs can earn the highest potential income from carbon sequestration.LICs can avoid GHG lock-in by improv

288、ing agrifood system efficiency and marketing sustainable products.This GHG lock-in occurs when a countrys investments or policies hinder the transition to lower-emission practices even when they are technically feasible and economically viable.Lock-in has already largely occurred in HICs and MICs,wh

289、ere high-emitting infrastructure and other long-lived assets are costly to decommission(Rozenberg and Fay 2019).By contrast,these and other barriers are less entrenched in LICs.One way to avoid lock-in is for LICs to improve their food system efficiency and productivity.Agriculture value added in LI

290、Cs is only$210 per hectare,whereas in MICs it is five times that at$1,100 per hectare.9 In fact,most LICs and MICs are achieving less than half of their potential agricultural output,whereas HICs are achieving 70 percent.Another way for LICs to avoid lock-in would be to orient their agrifood systems

291、 toward low-emission food options.Such options cater to potential emissions trading schemes that tax GHG emissions and favor emerging retail markets for healthy foods.For example,global markets for certified organic products have grown by 102 percent between 2009 and 2019(Willer etal.2021).Still,onl

292、y 1.5 percent of all agricultural land in 2019 was geared toward producing such foods(Willer etal.2021).Climate-smart agriculture(CSA)provides LICs an avenue to low-emission rural development.CSA is an integrated approach to managing agricultural production that can achieve the“triple win”(World Ban

293、k 2021)of the following:(1)economic gains,(2)climate resilience,and(3)lower GHG emissions.There are 1,700 combinations of production systems and technology that could be classified as CSA,with two-thirds pertaining to cropping systems for maize,wheat,rice,and cash crops.Only 18 percent of CSA techno

294、logies are for livestock systems,and just 2 percent are for aquaculture systems(Sova etal.2018).Adopting CSA practices reduces emissions and contributes to economic development,a particularly helpful outcome in LICs.For example,in Zambia,the economic rate of return for such practices was 2735 percen

295、t(World Bank 2019).CSA practices can also help LICs access carbon markets and benefit from emissions trading schemes.Furthermore,CSA can improve rural development.For example,developing renewable energy sources in agrifood systems has been shown to contribute to rural electrification and increased i

296、ncomes in LICs(Christiaensen,Rutledge,and Taylor 2021).Enabling Environment:The World Must Strengthen the Enabling Environment for the Agrifood System Transformation through Global and Country-Level ActionsInvestmentsGovernments and businesses can remove barriers to agrifood sector climate investmen

297、ts through improved targeting,de-risking,accountability,and carbon markets.New business opportunities linked to agrifood systems transformation will likely be worth$4.5 trillion per year by 2030.However,investment risks and the high transaction costs of dealing with many small producers and small an

298、d medium enterprises pose challenges to investors and financial service providers.To facilitate the private sectors risk acceptance for decarbonization projects requires embracing higher risk-return profiles(Guarnaschelli etal.2018;Santos etal.2022)and building a pipeline of bankable projects that c

299、an secure financing(Apampa etal.2021;IFC 2017).Part of the problem is that investors find short-term loans with UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Planetxliiimmediate returns appealing but shy away from offering medium-and longer-term financial solutions(Apampa etal.2021),which a

300、re necessary for food system transformation.Blended finance can overcome these concerns by leveraging public finance to reduce credit risks for private investments in climate action(OECD 2021).Increased corporate accountability can also make investments more effective(Santos etal.2022)through govern

301、ment policies and business standards.Further,there are opportunities to expand innovative financing mechanisms,such as results-based climate finance and climate bonds.Incentivizing carbon credits and carbon taxes also offers opportunities to control the agrifood systems GHG emissions.At present,howe

302、ver,a relatively small share of the worlds carbon markets and carbon pricing schemes apply to nonenergy agricultural emissions(despite covering a quarter of economy-wide emissions)(World Bank 2022).That said,carbon markets offer growing opportunities for carbon finance.The voluntary carbon market ha

303、s grown considerably over the past five years,reaching approximately$2 billion in 2022(Shell and BCG 2023),with expectations of further growth of from$5 billion to$50 billion by 2030,depending on many factors(Blaufelder etal.2021).However,carbon markets and carbon pricing still suffer from several f

304、laws.They are subject to“carbon panics,”emissions exemptions are common,carbon markets are very complex,and emissions are difficult to measure.Carbon markets can overcome these flaws through greater transparency and carbon credit integrity.IncentivesPolicy measures that could accelerate the transfor

305、mation to a net zero argifood system are emerging.Two decades ago,HICs pioneered the development of mitigation policies for the agrifood sector,and in recent years,several MICs have followed suit.This movement toward agrifood sector mitigation is increasingly reflected in countries NDCs.Currently,14

306、7 of 167 second-round NDCs include AFOLU or agrifood systems in their mitigation commitments.This is a 20 percentage point increase from first-to second-round NDCs(figure O.10)(Crumpler et al.,forthcoming).10 The quality of these commitments has also improved:the share of NDCs with agriculture secto

307、rspecific GHG targets nearly doubled from 20 to 38 percent,and the share with specific agriculture-related mitigation actions increased from 63 to 78 percent(Crumpler et al.,forthcoming).However,most NDC commitments are conditional on international support,including 92 percent of MIC NDC commitments

308、 in the AFOLU sector(Crumpler et al.,forthcoming).This share is 100 percent for LICs but only 54 percent for HICs.Therefore,unfulfilled financial pledges have limited NDC implementation.Further,a lack of national policy coherence across sectors and within the agrifood sector also inhibits policy eff

309、ectiveness.Improving this coherence and repurposing harmful subsidies toward agrifood system mitigation can deliver emissions reduction and multiple other benefits.A recent World Bank report shows that repurposing$70 billion of the worlds approximately$638 billion in annual agriculture support durin

310、g 201618(Gautam etal.2022;Voegele 2023)toward technologies that reduce emissions and improve productivity will boost crop production by 16 percent and livestock production by 11 percent.This would also increase national incomes by 1.6 percent,reduce the cost of healthy diets by 18 percent,and decrea

311、se overall agricultural emissions by 40 percent compared with business-as-usual 202040 levels(Gautam etal.2022).InformationImproving GHG monitoring can unlock climate finance.The measurement,reporting,and verification(MRV)of GHG emissions reductions is a complex,and often inaccurate,process UNCORREC

312、TED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxliiiFIGURE O.10 Agrifood Systems Have Become a Stronger Component of Nationally Determined ContributionsSource:World Bank based on data and original analysis carried out by the Food and Agriculture Organization for this report.Note:Figure compares NDC mitigation co

313、ntributions to the agrifood sector in first-round and second-round NDCs.GHG=greenhouse gas;NDCs=Nationally Determined Contributions.863780255075100Long-termmitigation goalSector includedin mitigationcontributionSector-specifcGHG targetMitigation actionin sectorPercent of NDCsFirst-round N

314、DCsSecond-round NDCs(Toman etal.2022).Nevertheless,MRV is important for accessing carbon markets,assessing emissions reduction progress,and tracking project performance,among other reasons.However,several constraints are holding back the development of robust MRV systems.They include limited budgets

315、,data availability,technical capacity among practitioners,and infrastructure to monitor emissions.That said,a growing number of international organizations are helping countries build MRV capacity to track Paris Agreement targets(WRI 2024).There are three main technologies that assist practitioners

316、in measuring agricultural emissions:(1)remote-sensing technologies,(2)ground-based sensors,and(3)ecosystem carbon flux measurements(Dhakhwa et al.2021).Likewise,emerging digital technologies offer new opportunities to improve MRV and lower its costs.Digital technologies enable faster and easier acce

317、ss to information for all players in the agrifood value chain.This information flow incentivizes farmers to adopt production tools and systems that can mitigate climate change,contribute to environmental sustainability,and optimize productivity(Schroeder,Lampietti,and Elabed 2021).InnovationInnovati

318、ve practices for reducing agrifood emissions are expanding and becoming cost-effective,though there is a desperate need for more research and development(R&D)to continue this trend.Nascent,innovative mitigation technologies could greatly contribute to emissions reductions and improved productivity i

319、n the agrifood system(Alston etal.2011).These technologies include using chemical methane inhibitors,feed additives from UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONRecipe for a Livable Planetxlivred seaweed,crop roots to sequester carbon,indoor farming methods,precision machinery,plant-based meats,lab-grown

320、protein,and other protein sources.Moreover,some of these technologies are already providing viable solutions that are affordable.A conservative estimate is that innovative agrifood technologies that are cost-effective in the near term could reduce 2 GtCO2eq per year.R&D can drive many of these innov

321、ative technologies by further reducing costs and making them competitive with fossil fuel options(Bosetti etal.2009).The Paris Agreement specifically recognizes the importance of R&D and calls for“collaborative approaches”to enhance and produce climate-related technologies.11 Returns from R&D expend

322、itures are high for both developing and developed countries:a 1 percent increase in R&D investment yields internal rates of return of 46 percent in developed countries and 43 percent in developing countries(Alston etal.2000).However,R&D spending in the agrifood sector remains minimal.InstitutionsCli

323、mate institutions will govern the agrifood systems transformation to a net zero model.The global institutional architecture supporting climate action in the agrifood system is complex and operates at various levels(figure O.11).This architecture includes international frameworks to aid developing co

324、untries in acquiring finance,technologies,and knowledge to address climate change challenges.For example,one of UNFCCCs mandates is to promote and facilitate environmentally sound technology transfers to these nations,ensuring effective climate change mitigation and adaptation.Likewise,at the UN Cli

325、mate Change Conference in 2009(COP15),HICs pledged to mobilize$100 billion annually to support developing countries in their climate actions.Growing steadily since 2015,HICs provided$89.6 billion in total climate finance in 2021.This was a 7.5 percent increase from 2020 but still$10.4 billion short

326、of the goal(OECD 2023).Nearly half of this total went to the energy and transport sectors,and only 8 percent went to agriculture,forestry,and fishing.Similarly,multilateral and bilateral donors are positioning themselves to lead in climate action but still lag in the agrifood transformation.For exam

327、ple,multilateral development banks reached a record of nearly$100 billion of climate financing in 2022 but allocated only$2.3 billion to mitigation in agrifood-related sectors.That said,agrifood mitigation has increasingly become a part of climate negotiations and NDCs,with a full day dedicated to f

328、ood,agriculture,and water for the first time at the UN Climate Change Conference in 2023(COP28).National and subnational institutions also have important roles to play in agrifood system mitigation,but this theme is often fragmented across various institutions that lack policy coherence,making coord

329、inated action difficult.Creating“green jurisdictions,”where subnational jurisdictions come together around climate action,can help overcome many subnational divisions.However,in many cases,these jurisdictions are also fragmented or focus on competing or parallel issues(Khan,Gao,and Abid 2020).Inclus

330、ionGovernments and civil society must work together to ensure that the agrifood system transformation is equitable,inclusive,and just.Poorly targeted mitigation policies could raise production costs and food prices in the short term,which accounts for a larger share of household budgets for poor peo

331、ple than for the well-off,leading to unequal burden sharing.Therefore,a just transition in the agrifood system means reducing emissions while ensuring jobs,good health,livelihoods,and food security to vulnerable groups and smallholder farmers(Baldock and Buckwell 2022;Tribaldos and Kortetmki 2022).T

332、he transition must UNCORRECTED PROOF:NOT FOR CITATIONOverviewxlvFIGURE O.11 Governments,Businesses,Civil Society Groups,and International Organizations All Have Roles to Play in Scaling Climate ActionSource:Original figure for this publication.Note:CCAP=Climate Change Action Plan;CSA=Climate-Smart A

333、griculture;ESG=environmental,social,and governance;MRV=measurement,reporting,and verification;R&D=research and development.Civil societyEnrich publicawareness Promote advocacy and accountability Infuence consumer behaviorBusinessesCreate bankable solutions Design fnancial products and solutions for CSA Mainstream climate into investment planningGovernmentsProvide public goods and services Ensure t