January 2014

Volume 26, No. 1

CCC L I M A T EL I M A T EL I M A T E AAA L E R TL E R TL E R T Ja

nu

ary

20

14

— V

olu

me

26

, N

o.

1

CLIMATE INSTITUTE

A Publication of the Climate Institute | Protecting the balance between climate and life on Earth

Special Edition Agriculture and Food Security

Page 2 Climate Institute | www.climate.org

Climate Alert

Commentary by

John C. Topping, Jr.

Five years ago a special issue of Cli-mate Alert on cli-mate change and

food security examined both the long-term implications of climate change for agriculture and human suste-nance and the near-term economic and political effects of a food–fuel tradeoff. This issue revisits the sub-ject, but in a world in which the cli-mate risks seems profoundly more acute than appeared the case in Sep-tember 2008. Super Typhoon Hai-yan—with the fiercest winds ever recorded from a tropical cyclone—has killed many thousands in the Phil-ippines. This disaster comes in a year when carbon dioxide concentrations have reached 400 parts per million, a concentration higher than at any pre-vious point in the history of the hu-man species. At the same time evi-dence is growing of a net loss from both the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets with a resulting acceleration in the rate of global sea level rise. Al-though contributing little to sea level rise, the shrinkage of volume of Sep-tember Arctic summer sea ice from 16855 cubic kilometres in 1979 to 3261 in 2012 may pose even more dire threats to humanity, potentially disrupting weather patterns world wide and speeding the release of huge stores of methane in thawing tundra and near-shore ocean sedi-ments. In light of the increasingly violent and dire effects of climate change on global temperatures and weather patterns, this issue re-examines the implications of climate change for

global food production. In an article on global fisheries, Didrik Dyrdal points out that the global fishing in-dustry that now supplies about a fifth of all animal protein consumed by humans is beset by a quadruple threat—over harvesting, pollution, ocean acidification, and climate change. Staple crop agriculture in poor countries is not the only portion of the land-based food system stressed, as Lowell George’s article about climate threats to wine grape production illustrates. Moreover, while some people hold on to the hope that genetically modified foods will be able to help humanity cope with the effects of climate change on food production, the ability of ge-netic engineering to respond to changes in the earth’s climate fast enough to make a difference is highly questionable, as Rebecca Green em-phasizes in an article on GM foods. Meanwhile, evidence is mounting that food production is not merely a victim of climate change—indeed; it may also be a driver of climate change, with livestock-related emis-sions perhaps equalling all fossil fuel emissions combined. Robert Good-land, a highly regarded environ-mental analyst, calculates that live-stock may be responsible for as much as 51% of net global greenhouse emissions once one considers the likely sequestration that would occur were the associated pastoral and livestock feed production land to re-vert to its natural state. A growing human population and increasing per capita meat consumption as incomes rise across the globe may confound energy-based climate mitigation strategies. Nevertheless, recent developments

provide a glimmer of hope, in spite of growing fossil fuel emissions, human resource consumption, and the toxic mix of what are euphemistically called “positive climate feed-backs,” (thawing Arctic permafrost, lessened snow and ice albedo, and tropical forest dieback). The summer 2013 special issue of Climate Alert argued for revamping climate mitiga-tion strategies to focus much more on curbing emissions, reducing the transport of black carbon, and con-trolling tropospheric ozone-forming compounds, and methane in icy re-gions, notably the Arctic, Antarctica, the Himalayas, and the Andes. A No-vember report by the World Bank and the International Cryosphere Initiative, Thinning Ice, underscores some of the same points made in the summer 2013 Climate Alert, pointing to cost-effective measures that could save millions of lives from respiratory disease while at the same time slow-ing glacial and sea ice melt. These strategies included a concerted effort globally to transform cookstoves and, to protect the Arctic, a focused drive to reduce agricultural burning as much as 90%. Complementing such an effort should be an imaginative effort to reduce livestock generated emis-sions. Some of this can be realized by such measures as recycling livestock manure for energy or changing feed mix, but inevitably, if we are to avert a climatic cataclysm, our species must move to a much more plant-based diet. A handful of people will transform their diets for health rea-sons as Bill Clinton did a few years ago in moving to a largely vegan diet. Three years ago after speaking to a climate conference organized by World Preservation Foundation at

A MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

Thought for food: rethinking both food production and climate mitigation

Page 3 Climate Institute | info@climate.org

Climate Alert

the British Parliament and being per-suaded by other speakers that live-stock growth was imperilling the cli-mate, biodiversity and water avail-ability, I joined my three children as a vegetarian, a quarter century after each of them had done this while pre- teens. Thanks to great advances in

the taste and texture of vegetarian and vegan foods since the mid 1980s I was making much less of a sacrifice than my children had. The active in-terest of Bill Gates and many others in Silicon Valley and information in-dustry venture capital firms in fund-ing vegan and vegetarian food inno-vations and even the in vitro labora-tory meat experiment at University of

Maastricht funded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin suggest that the talent and resources that have changed the way we communicate, work, and live may produce dramatic changes in food production and diet. If this results in tastier, healthier, and cheaper food, we may have hope of a sustainable human future.

Volume 26, No. 1

tries. Angola, Cambodia, the Democ-ratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Norway, Japan, and Por-tugal are among countries that rely on fish for more than 20% of people’s animal protein intake. The exact im-portance of fisheries is hard to estab-lish because subsistence fisheries of-ten remain undocumented. In the richer countries, much of the fish come from aquaculture, which now provides nearly half the world’s fish supply. Poor countries in the south still rely on the capture of wild fish. In addition to the direct dietary contri-bution of fish in many poor countries, fisheries also provide foreign export earnings and employment. Vietnam, for example, exported fish worth over USD 5 billion in 2010. The sale of fish increases the ability of poor countries and individual families and persons to buy food. Climate change threatens to disturb and harm the world’s fish stocks, but we have only a vague understanding of its effects on fisheries. In part, this is because rampant overfishing and pollution make it hard to separate the effects of climate change from other environmental problems. Gen-erally, we expect that some fish spe-cies will become extinct and some will decline in numbers, while others

We rarely think about the effects of climate change on global fisheries and human food secu-rity. This reflects a general lack of at-

tention to maritime sustainability and fish stocks. In contrast to visible envi-ronmental destruction on land, envi-ronmental degradation in the sea is largely hidden in the ocean depths. Nevertheless, humans are affecting the ocean and fish stocks, and cli-mate change threatens to disturb the availability of protein and fatty acid-rich fish in the future. Warmer tem-peratures will affect the diversity of fish species and their geographic dis-tribution, but the total effects are very uncertain. According to a 2012 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report, three billion people get nearly 20% of their animal protein from fish. Climate change will have most effect on fish stocks in northern latitudes, but southern countries in Africa and Asia will bear the majority of the effects on society. For numer-ous people in poor countries, access to cheap fish is not a luxury, but a dietary necessity. Fisheries provide an important food and revenue source for many coun-

(Continued from page 2)

Climate change & fish stocks: a threat to our natural protein source

By Didrik dyrdal, Graduate Research Fellow

will thrive in the warmer conditions. The geographical distribution of fish and numbers will also change, as spe-cies migrate to remain in their pre-ferred temperature range. The most vulnerable fish are the species that occupy a narrow type of habitat or ecological niche, and fish populations that are already at the limits of their temperature tolerance. The warming effect of climate change is largest in places in the northern hemisphere, and the effects on fish stocks will consequently be greatest there. In addition to climate change, the re-lease of carbon dioxide into the at-mosphere causes the so-called “other carbon problem.” When we burn fossil fuels, about one-third of the carbon released enters the ocean, which makes it more acidic. This hin-

NOAA regulates US fisheries to protect them from overfishing and other threats (www.fishwatch.gov).

Page 4 Climate Institute | www.climate.org

Climate Alert

ders corals and important small spe-cies’ ability to produce shells. Climate change is one among many factors that affects fish stocks, which already face pollution and overfish-ing. The fishing pressure on many stocks taxes them beyond their ca-pacity to reproduce, which in the worst cases leads to commercial or even absolute extinction. The UN or-ganization FAO estimates that 80% of the world’s fish stocks are fully ex-ploited or overfished. Another prob-lem is pollution, which especially af-fects areas near coastlines, where the majority of fish live. Industrial and agricultural pollution is an important reason for the increase in dead zones in recent years. Dead zones are life-less areas in the ocean that lack the oxygen to sustain life. Even if fisheries’ productivity re-mains unharmed on a global scale, climate change will change the geo-graphical fish distribution, which will

challenge regional and local fisheries. Disruption or reduction of fish stocks will have the largest effects on poor countries located in Africa and in South and South East Asia. An article in Fish and Fisheries estimates that Angola, DR Congo, Russia, Maurita-nia, Senegal, and Mali are the most vulnerable countries for which data is available. Most of these nations catch few fish compared to industri-alized countries, but fishing never-theless constitutes a large part of their economies and provides many

jobs. The poverty and lack of effec-tive governments in these countries also hinders their ability to adapt, unlike rich and stable countries like Norway, Japan, and Iceland, which can find alternative sources of reve-nue and food. At present, overfishing and pollution pose graver dangers to fish stocks than climate change, but changing temperatures threaten to worsen an already dire situation with unknown consequences. References Alder. J., et al (2008) “In Dead Water:

Merging of climate…”, available at www.unep.org

Edward. H., et al (2009) “Vulnerability of national economies to the im-pacts...”, Fish and Fisheries, Vol 10.

Doney. S. C., (2006) “The dangers of ocean acidification”, Scientific American

FAO, The State of the World’s Fisher-ies..., Rome 2009 / Sofia 2012, avail-able at www.fao.org

Genetically Modified Organisms

By Rebecca Green, Graduate Research Fellow

A walk through the organic aisle of one’s local grocery store today yields many foods labelled “non-GMO.” Ge-netically modified

foods (GM foods or GMOs) have be-come a hot public issue in the past two decades. Much of the concern has been about their safety for hu-man consumption, and the furore over GM foods has been particularly acute in Europe, where governments and consumers alike have rejected the crops, for the most part. Never-theless, investigators and regulatory authorities on both sides of the At-lantic have thus far failed to find per-

suasive evidence that there is any significant difference between the effects of GM and non-GM crops on the human system (Paarlberg, 2010). Safety concerns aside, today’s geneti-cally modified crops are also signifi-cant because of their potential—though as yet unproven—role in helping cope with the discombobu-lating effects of climate change on weather patterns and agriculture over the next several decades. This essay will focus on genetically modi-fied plants, although livestock can also be genetically modified. Though farmers have been modify-ing the genetic makeup of their crops and animals for thousands of years through breeding, “genetically modi-

fied” as it is used today refers to plants whose genetic makeup has been enhanced in the lab with genes from non-related species. Scientists developed techniques for combining DNA from unrelated species other-wise unable to breed with one an-other in the 1980s, and genetically modified foods have been available to consumers since the 1990s. Most of the GM crops developed until now have been developed to be herbicide or insect resistant. Some of the most famous examples of genetic modifi-cation have been Monsanto’s pro-duction of “Roundup Ready” seed varieties that are resistant to Mon-santo’s Roundup weed killer. Using the two products together, farmers are able to spray their fields of herbi-

The Atlantic cod is profoundly affected by changing ocean temperatures, recently migrating northeast of its traditional habitat, but the effect on the fishery is as yet uncertain (www.fishwatch.gov).

Page 5 Climate Institute | info@climate.org

Climate Alert

cide-resistant soybeans, cotton, and canola to kill unwanted weeds with-out killing their crops. Monsanto has also developed varieties of insect-resistant seed varieties by transfer-ring a gene from the Bacillus thur-ingiensis (Bt) soil bacterium to cotton and corn (Paarlberg, 2010). The pri-mary motivation for developing GM foods for the past two decades has been to increase farmers’ yields and to enhance the longevity or appear-ance of various foods (Qaim, 2009). Yet given the rapid changes in cli-mate and weather that have already begun to reshape the world as a con-sequence of global warming, the most important challenge facing world food production will be changes in rainfall, especially drought in many regions. Another problem farmers will face is the need for saline-tolerant crops, as water shortages and the need to bring as much land as possible into cultivation will re-

quire more flexibility with regard to the salinity of water and soil. Unfortu-nately, scientists have not yet been able to develop such crops, despite ongo-ing attempts and trials (Lawlor, 2013). At the same time, as genetic modification techniques are perfected, it may be-come possible for scien-tists to modify widely-grown staple crops by drawing on the genes of a more diverse range of tra-ditional crops to solve fu-ture problems related to a changing climate. In this way, scientists and farmers may be able to leverage some of the benefits of biodiversity in a world increasingly dominated by a lack of diversity in seed varieties by using the genes of rare plants or of plants traditionally bred for special regional conditions to enhance the drought and saline resis-

tance of common crops (Charles et al, 2010). Genetic modification may, in time, help hu-manity cope with the effects of climate change, yet those peo-ple who take for granted that the neces-sary technological ad-vances will materialize may be setting them-selves up for disap-pointment. At the same time, it would be foolish to cast away genetic modification as a tool because it is not yet perfected or be-cause there are linger-ing questions about

safety (Charles et al, 2010). Just as with other emerging technologies for combating or adapting to global warming—whether carbon capture and sequestration, complex systems of dykes and reservoirs for cities fac-ing rising seas, or various geo-engineering projects for enhancing nature’s own ways of adjusting to changing conditions—genetic modifi-cation for agriculture cannot be the world’s only line of defense, yet it can also be a very valuable component of a complex global strategy for dealing with climate change. References Charles. H., & Godfray. J., (2010) “Food

Security: The challenge of feeding...”, Science, 327

Lawlor. D., (2013) “Genetic engineering to improve plant performance under drought:...”, Journal of Experimental Botany, 64

Paarlberg. R., (2010) “Food Politics: What everyone needs to know”, New York, Oxford University Press

Qaim. M., (2009) “The economics of Ge-netically Modified Crops”, Annual Review of Resource Economics, Vol. 1

Volume 26, No. 1

(Continued from page 4)

While some foods have been modified for aesthetic reasons or to make them resistant to commercial herbicides, so called "golden rice" has been devel-oped to address vitamin A deficiency, a problem that affects thousands of children in developing countries. The rice has genes added that produce beta carotene, a vitamin A precursor, when digested (www.wikipedia.org).

Based on the Palmer Drought Index, “severe to ex-treme” drought affected about 5% of the contiguous United States (CONUS) as of the end of November 2013, a decrease of about 3% from last month. About 15% of the CONUS fell in the “severely to extremely wet” categories (www.ncdc.noaa.gov).

Page 6 Climate Institute | www.climate.org

Climate Alert

The UN Food and Agriculture Organi-zation (FAO) pub-lished a report last month arguing that livestock are respon-sible for about 15%

of anthropogenic greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions – and that the world should expect a 70% increase in live-stock production by 2050 (Gerber et al., 2013). According to the report, greenhouse gas emissions from the livestock sector are set to increase from the current 7.1 gigatons per year. Emissions would top out at 8.5 gigatons per year – but only if farmers cut emissions from livestock by 30% through adoption of more efficient breeding and feeding practices. In contrast, according to a widely-cited assessment by the World Bank Group’s Jeff Anhang and me, the entire life cycle and supply chain of livestock prod-ucts accounts for at least 51% of anthropogenic GHG emissions (Goodland and Anhang, 2009). We notably assess carbon dioxide in livestock respiration and its reflection in carbon absorption forgone on land set aside for livestock and feed pro-duction, estimated by the Interna-tional Livestock Research Institute to occupy 45% of all land on earth (Thornton et al., 2011), which the FAO neglects to count. In both the FAO’s new analysis and its prior analysis, it has failed to ac-count for the projection from both the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the International Energy Agency that the concentra-tion of GHG in our atmosphere may

rise to irreversibly catastrophic levels by 2017 if nothing is done to change course (Goodland, 2013). Though the FAO’s report claims that eliminating 30% of GHG emis-sions from the livestock sector would stabilize its contribution to green-house emissions, national govern-ments have called on all industries worldwide to eliminate 80% to 95% of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 compared to 1990 (EC, 2011). In any event, the FAO hasn’t ex-

plained how a 30% reduction in GHG emissions can possibly be achieved in the livestock sector. It seems impos-sible, as livestock specialists have asserted over the years that such GHG mitigation potential is less than 10% (Petherick, 2012). Also, the FAO has failed to explain how its new re-port determined that emissions at-tributable to livestock have dropped from the level of 18% of anthropo-genic GHG emissions estimated by the FAO in 2006 (Steinfeld et al., 2006) to the level of 14.5% estimated in its report published last month. The FAO has more generally failed

to use basic principles of environ-mental assessment. Notably, it has examined risks involved in such areas as air and water pollution, and has claimed that those risks must be bal-anced with benefits available from raising livestock. Such an assessment fails to separate livestock’s lesser risks and impacts from their greater ones – a basic task of environmental assessment. The greatest environ-mental risks are normally defined as those that are diverse, irreversible, and unprecedented – which, in this

case, aren’t associated with air and water pollution but with climate change. Also, the FAO has assessed only livestock products and has failed to per-form any analysis of alterna-tives, another basic element of environmental assessment. Conversely, our analysis iden-tifies a unique dual benefit of replacing a substantial amount of today’s livestock products with alternatives. That is, such replacement can both signifi-cantly reduce greenhouse gas

emissions and free up land to permit reforestation that would provide large-scale greenhouse gas seques-tration. Much land used for livestock and feed production was once for-ested, and could be forested again. The FAO’s analysis omits counting carbon dioxide from livestock respi-ration. However, reality no longer reflects the old model of the carbon cycle, in which photosynthesis bal-anced respiration. That model was valid as long as there were roughly constant levels of respiration and photosynthesis on Earth. In recent decades, respiration has increased exponentially with livestock produc-

Happier Meals

By Dr. Robert Goodland*

Burning forest to create more agricultural land, as shown here in the Amazon, not only releases more carbon into the atmosphere, but also reduces the area of land available for carbon sequestration (www.earthobservatory.nasa.gov).

Page 7 Climate Institute | info@climate.org

Climate Alert Volume 26, No. 1

tion, while intensified livestock and feed production has been accompa-nied by large-scale deforestation and forest-burning, huge increases in volatilization of carbon, and a dra-matic decline in both Earth's photo-synthetic capacity and its GHG se-questration capacity (Goodland, 2013). Two hundred tons of carbon per hectare are typically stored in forest, and are at risk of being released through deforestation. Indeed, all of that carbon is regularly released when forest is burned to create pas-ture for grazing livestock or cropland for growing feed for livestock. From incomplete combustion, emissions include black carbon, which can add to the climatic effect of carbon diox-ide, and also cause adverse health effects. Moreover, an additional 200 tons of carbon per hectare (or more) are typically stored in the soil beneath, and are at risk of being released when the forest above it is degraded. It’s estimated that each year between 2000 and 2010, an area larger than England (about 1.3 million hectares) was deforested (FAO, 2010). As a re-sult, either carbon dioxide in livestock respiration – or its reflection in car-bon absorption forgone on land used for livestock and feed production – should be counted as emissions. The only way for most industries to reduce GHG emissions on a large scale is by using renewable energy. But studies show that sufficient re-newable energy infrastructure to stop climate change would take at least 20 years and cost $18 trillion to develop (International Energy Agency, 2011). The livestock sector is a notable ex-ception among industries, as the bulk of its GHG emissions are not from

energy usage, but from biological processes. So it’s easier, and there-fore, especially important to achieve a large and rapid reduction in GHG from the livestock sector. The objective of recent interna-tional climate treaty negotiations has been to reduce GHG emissions by about 13% by 2017. If, as our re-search shows, at least 51% of human-induced greenhouse gas is attribut-able to livestock, then we could meet the treaty target by replacing about 25% of today's livestock prod-ucts with alternatives. Paradoxically, if livestock emissions are actually at the lower level that the FAO says, then it would require replacing a greater amount of live-stock products with alternatives to achieve the same treaty target; in fact, at least 85% of today's livestock products would need to be replaced with alternatives. Alternatives to livestock products can range from whole grains and legumes to an array of fancy meat and egg substitutes made from such items as peas, sorghum, and beans. Such products are generally respon-sible for minimal GHG emissions (Goodland, 2013a). There is documented potential for agricultural change to draw down atmospheric carbon to pre-industrial revolution levels within five years, by stopping deforestation and prioritiz-ing reforestation. Doing so while simultaneously replacing a substan-tial amount of livestock products with better alternatives may be the only pragmatic way to halt climate change within the few years remain-ing before climate disruption be-comes irreversible. One of the advantages of replacing livestock products versus replacing fossil fuel infrastructure is that it is easy for any individual consumer to

do the former on his or her own, unlike the latter. Still, to ensure that sufficient action is taken, govern-ments should develop policies to pro-vide incentives for replacing at least 25%of today’s livestock products with better alternatives by 2017. Finally, replacing at least 25% of today’s live-stock products with better alterna-tives by 2017 may be the only avail-able business case for industry lead-ers to act pragmatically to stop cli-mate change before it is too late. References * Robert Goodland is retired and writing in a personal capacity, having served as senior environmental adviser to the World Bank Group for 23 years.

EC., (2011) “A roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050”, available at eur-lex.europa.eu

Gerber. P. J., et al (2013). “Tackling cli-mate change through livestock…”, 139 pp. Food and Agriculture Organi-zation (FAO), Rome, 139 pp, avail-able at www.fao.org

Goodland. R., (2013) “Lifting livestock’s long shad...”, Nature Climate Change 3: 2, available at www.nature.com

Goodland, R., (2013a) “Happier Meals, Eating Greenfully, and Chomping Climate Change”, available at www.chompingclimatechange.org

Goodland. R., & Anhang. J., (2009) “Livestock and Climate Change. What if the key...” Worldwatch Insti-tute, Washington, DC, Pp. 10–19, available at www.worldwatch.org

International Energy Agency (2011) “World Energy Outlook”, available at www.worldenergyoutlook.org

Petherick. A., (2012) “Light is cast on a long shadow”, Nature Climate Change 2: 705-706, available at www.nature.com

Steinfeld. H., et al (2006) Livestock’s Long Shadow, FAO, Rome, Italy. 388 pp.

Thornton. P. K., et al (2011) “Livestock and climate change”, International Livestock Research Institute, avail-able at www.cgspace.cgiar.org

(Continued from page 6)

Page 8 Climate Institute | www.climate.org

Climate Alert

An increase in temperature of 1.5o-2.5oC beyond to-day’s values could put 20-30% of plant and animal species at risk of extinction

(European Commission). This grave projection is one of countless conse-quences of global climate change that will have an impact on aspects of life as significant as agricultural pro-duction and as small as daily rou-tines. In the Mediterranean region, tem-peratures and their variability are expected to increase and levels of precipitation are projected to decline further, with these effects being ex-acerbated during the summer. Mod-els suggest that the Mediterranean climate, which usually experiences mild, wet winters and hot, dry sum-mers, might be especially vulnerable to climate change (Giorgi and Li-onello, 2008). Because this region is home to farms, climate changes will have significant impacts on land use and agriculture. Temperature-sensitive crops, like grapes, coffee beans, and tea leaves, will be at risk if

global climate change is not slowed. Changes in production of these crops affect the manufacture of related products such as wine, coffee, and tea, which would have a dramatic impact on the world economy. While all three crops are of great impor-tance to the economy, the following focuses on grapes and the problems climate change will cause for wine production. While grapes are fairly adaptable and grow in a variety of climates, cer-tain basic conditions are favourable for wine production. These condi-tions are typical of the Mediterra-nean climate: hot, dry areas with mild winters and good air movement and drainage. Growing season length and temperature are key factors in wine grape production because they influence grapes’ ripening to ideal levels of sugar, acid, and flavour (Jones et al, 2005). Therefore, cli-matic changes could affect grapevine phenology, grape production, and wine quality. Wine grapes also require particular climatic conditions for different parts of the growth process; during the growing season, the optimal mean

temperature is between 12 and 22oC (Lorenzo et al, 2013). As stated ear-lier, current climate change projec-tions show the Mediterranean region getting hotter. While hotter tem-peratures are favourable for grape production and photosynthesis in grapes appears to adapt to high tem-peratures, those above 40oC (or around 100oF) during growth and development have a negative impact on fruit production and berry weight (Caprio and Quamme, 2002; National Horticulture Board). According to studies, while warm temperatures are required for flower formation, they might negatively impact flower development later (Caprio and Quamme, 2002). In addition to the problems higher temperatures will have on the growth processes of grapes, the com-bination of hotter temperatures and reduced precipitation will result in decreased freshwater availability, more droughts, and as a result, a greater need for irrigation. Water stress, often associated with higher temperatures, causes decreased grape production. Droughts can also lead to forest fires, which, if uncon-trolled, would have a negative effect on grape production and land health as a whole. According to one study, “Currently, many European regions appear to be at or near their optimum growing season temperatures” (Jones et al, 2005). Even if global warming occurs gradually, the predicted levels of change are sufficient to upset the balance for those grape varieties at their optimal growing temperature. For regions outside the optimal con-ditions, climatic shift could be benefi-

Effects of Climate Change on Wine Grape Production

By Lowell George, CELT Virtual Intern

A grape farm in Cyprus (www.wikipedia.org).

Page 9 Climate Institute | info@climate.org

Climate Alert

cial and push some areas to their op-timum temperature. A study on Italy has found that the changes in tem-perature and precipitation in the Mediterranean over the past forty years have improved wine quality (Dalu et al, 2013). While this seems like a positive change for wine pro-duction, these changes in climate do not have a predicted stopping point. As temperatures rise and precipita-tion decreases, the climatic condi-tions will soon become unfavourable for grape growth in traditional wine producing regions, such as the Medi-terranean. On the other hand, northern areas or regions with cooler climates might benefit from climate change as aver-age temperatures increase and be-come more suitable for grape pro-duction. According to one study in British Columbia, Canada, the pre-dicted climatic changes would im-prove its grape production, but this might not be the case for all regions as there are other climatic conditions that influence grape production (Caprio and Quamme, 2002). While over time, wine production could be sustained through the shift from pro-duction in the Mediterranean climate to the currently cooler climates such as Canada, consumers and the econo-mies of producing countries would have to adapt to these changes. In 2010, the major wine-producing countries were Italy, France, and Spain (Wine Institute). Spain ex-ported €1.143 billion worth of wine in 2012 (Wines from Spain). Wine is a significant source of income for these Mediterranean countries, and their economies are dependent in part on the wine industry. Because wine has been such an important product for

the Mediterranean region, it has not only economic ties, but also cultural significance that would suffer from the movement of grape production to other regions. The trends in global climate change show no sign of slowing, and scien-tific investigations are finding that the range of consequences of climate change cross continents and indus-tries. Biodiversity and especially tem-perature-sensitive crops such as grapes are at risk. Rising tempera-tures and decreased precipitation will have negative effects on the wine industry and the economies and cul-tures of the Mediterranean in the future unless action is taken to miti-gate climate change now. References Caprio. J., and Quamme. H., (2002)

“Weather conditions associated with grape production in the Okanagan Valley of British Columbia and poten-tial impact of climate change,” Cana-dian Journal of Plant Science

Dalu. J.D., et al (2013) “Mediterranean climate patterns and wine quality in North and Central Italy,” Interna-tional Journal of Biometeorology 57

European Commission, “Climate Action,” available at http://ec.europa.eu/

Giorgi. F., and Lionello. P., (2008) “Climate change projects for the Mediterranean region,” Global and Planetary Change 63.

Jones. G., et al (2005) “Climate change and global wine quality,” Climatic Change 73

Lorenzo. M., et al (2013) “Influence of climate on grape production and wine quality in the Rias Baixas, northwestern Spain,” Regional Envi-ronmental Change 13

National Horticulture Board of India, “Grapes,” available at www.nhb.gov.in

Wine Institute, “World Wine Production by Country, 2007-2010 and Percent Change 2010/2007,” available at http://www.wineinstitute.org

Wines from Spain, “Wine in Figures,” available at www.winesfromspain.com

Volume 26, No. 1

(Continued from page 8)

Vineyard in La Rioja, a famous Spanish wine-making region (www.wikipedia.org).

Page 10 Climate Institute | www.climate.org

Climate Alert

In an October 9 speech in Boston to the 2013 Annual Convention of the International Bar Association (IBA), Climate Institute Chairman Sir Crispin Tickell discussed climate change jus-tice and human rights. Wishing suc-cess to the IBA’s recently created President’s Task Force on Climate Change Justice and Human Rights, the former United Kingdom Perma-nent Representative to the United Nations noted the emergence of an Anthropocene epoch with: “changes in weather everywhere, with more extreme events manifest in storms and droughts; accelerated melting of the Arctic and Antarctic icecaps and of glaciers elsewhere; rising sea levels, affecting coastal cities and acidification of many parts of the ocean; availability and distri-bution of fresh water; changes in ecosystems, including insects and microorganisms of all kinds, with their multiple effects on human health; human proliferation on a ma-jestic scale; undermining of current

social, and in particular urban infra-structure; movement of people within and between countries as environ-mental refugees.”

Sir Crispin, who spearheaded some of the early international focus on an emerging environmental refu-gee challenge in the early 1990s, noted that many of the most adverse effects of climate change are falling on many of the world’s poorest populations, who live in nations that lack the resources to cope. Noting

the slowness of international nego-tiations to make a profound differ-ence in slowing climate change and the absence of an overarching entity such as a “World Environment Or-ganization,” he identified the utility of a ”partial approach” in which in-dustrial countries work at the na-tional level to indentify environ-mental impacts and costs and re-sponse options. Such options might include changes in overseas aid and business investment policy and the introduction of payments for some ecosystem services whose loss could harm vulnerable communities. Sir Crispin also mentioned the growing interest in such responses in popu-lous developing countries, including China, India, and nations in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa. To realize the achievement of climate change justice while maintaining the rule of law, Sir Crispin endorsed the conclusions and recommendations by the Independent Expert to the UN Human Rights Council last December.

Sir Crispin Tickell Calls for Comprehensive Approach to Climate Justice

in Speech to International Bar Association

Dr. Daniel Wildcat, Visiting Professor at Dartmouth College, Brings

Indigenous Peoples Climate Change Working Group to Hanover

A member of the Climate Institute Board since 2008, Dr. Daniel Wildcat is serving in the Fall 2013 Term as the Gordon W. Russell Visiting Professor in Native American Studies at Dart-mouth College. A member of the Steering Committee of CELT since the

group’s inception, he has already worked closely with CELT members to enhance the links between CELT, Dartmouth, and tribal colleges in ad-vancing climate protection and sus-tainable design. Dr. Wildcat, CELT member Patryc Wiggins, Armand

Thompson, and John Topping re-cently discussed Patryc’s idea for an advanced manufacturing innovation institute to promote sustainable en-ergy in Northern New England and how it might be adapted for use in the Great Plains, where many tribal

Page 11 Climate Institute | info@climate.org

Climate Alert

reservations have access to cheap, plentiful wind energy. On November 3-5 Dartmouth hosted a workshop of the Indigenous Peoples Climate Change Working Group founded about seven years ago by Dr. Wildcat. About seventy climate protection advocates from tribal colleges, Native American organizations, environmental NGOs, and collaborating federal agencies were joined by a large Dartmouth contingent, including Dartmouth President Philip Hanlon. This should

provide an opportunity for collabora-tion between the Dartmouth commu-nity and tribal colleges, an idea CELT members have advanced in meetings with former Interim President Carol Folt and more recently with President Hanlon. Another example of such potential collaboration emerged during a brainstorming dinner discussion hosted at his Vermont home for Dan Wildcat and John Topping by David Kadoch, an Israeli American architect and sustainable agriculture expert who has worked closely with CELT. The conversation centered on the

possibility of adapting Israel’s experi-ence using hydroponic agriculture in the Negev Desert for tribal lands in the US Southwest that face similar climatic challenges. This is the problem solving focus and collaboration CELT advances. CELT is working with allies at Dartmouth, including the Dickey Center for International Understanding, the Rockefeller Public Service Center, and the Dartmouth Native American Studies Program, to translate some of these ideas into workable solutions.

Volume 26, No. 1

(Continued from page 10)

Heherson (Sonny) Alvarez, who has served on the Climate Institute’s board of advisors for over two decades, has recently assumed chairmanship of the board. Mr. Alvarez currently holds the position of Climate Change Commissioner of the Philippines, has served as chair of the Environment Committee of the Philippine Senate, and has held cabinet posts for agrarian reform and the environment. In September 1996 during the Climate Institute’s 10th Anniversary Washington Climate Summit, he received from the Climate Institute an Award for Outstanding Public Policy Achieve-ment in recognition of his having organized and chaired the 1995 Manila Asia Pacific Leaders Climate Summit. During the 1996 Washington Summit Senator Alvarez, Climate Institute Chairman Sir Crispin Tickell, and Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman participated in a wide-ranging panel discussion. Senator Alvarez was the founder of the Earth

Senator Heherson Alvarez of the Philippines Chairing Board of Advisors

of the Climate Institute

Savers Movement, an organization of young Filipinos and Filipinas who have been at the cutting edge in cre-ating climate awareness. Its most notable feature is the Earth Savers Dreams Ensemble, a song and dance group of young people, many physi-cally disabled, which is organized by Senator Alvarez’s wife, Cecile Gidote. The group performs environmentally themed pieces in both English and Tagalog. In February 1995 Earth Sav-ers performed under the moonlight in the courtyard of the Manila Hotel for the Manila Climate Sum-mit delegates. In De-cember 1997, after being admitted to the Kyoto Conference as members of the Cli-mate Institute delega-tion, about two dozen Earth Savers per-formed throughout the conference. On September 25

during events revolving around the opening of the UN General Assembly session, Senator Alvarez; his wife Cecile Gidote; Marla Mase, a well known New York composer and lead vocalist; Serge Martin, Founder of the Great Explorers; Nasir Khattak, Climate Institute Chief Operating Offi-cer; and Climate Institute President John Topping gathered near the UN for a lively dinner discussion on how to connect with the public to inspire climate action.

Senator Heherson Alvarez at the DOHA climate change talks

In June Lou Brown participated in the Conference of the Parties of the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI) in Montevideo as Chair of the IAI Rules Commit-tee. A major focus of the meeting was to consider how dialogue be-tween scientific research and deci-sion-making related to global change in the Americas could be strengthened. In October he partici-pated in the meeting of the Steering

Page 12 Climate Institute | www.climate.org

Climate Alert

Serge Martin, a businessman and philanthropist from Montreal, re-cently agreed to lead an effort to ex-tend the Sir Crispin Tickell Interactive Climate Network beyond its largely Mexican and US base to other na-tions. Currently the Tickell Network consists of the Tickell High Altitude Climate Observatory (the earth’s highest greenhouse monitoring sta-tion), 14 climate theaters, and the Center for Environmental Leadership Training, the Climate Institute’s edu-cational arm. The theaters are equivalent to a planetarium for cli-mate education, and the Tickell Net-work has 13 in Mexico and one in the United States, in the Adirondaks. As President of Martin Interna-tional, Serge Martin has organized world-class exhibitions on finance, entrepreneurship, and new technolo-gies in many nations. In 1974 he founded Les Grands Explorateurs (The Great Explorers), a series of film presentations on natural and cultural wonders of the world. He is working closely with UNESCO to protect

World Heritage Sites and to sustain its ocean science programs, and he partners with the World Tourism Or-ganization to develop sustainable tourism. In spearheading the expan-sion of the Tickell Network both geo-graphically and visually, Mr. Martin brings both a global breadth of con-tacts and a record as a pioneer in ex-hibitions and video projections. Cli-mate Institute Executive Vice Presi-

dent Luis Roberto Acosta, who has been working to enhance the projec-tion capabilities of the Tickell Net-work Climate Theatres, has ex-pressed delight at drawing on the knowhow of The Great Explorers. The first major effort in this grow-ing partnership occurred during the World Congress of the Organization of World Heritage Cities held re-cently in Oaxaca, Mexico November 18-23, 2013. Oaxaca is the site of

Climate Institute Senior Fellow Lou Brown

Committee (SC) for the Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research (APN) in Colombo as a Co-Opted Member of the SC. This meet-ing made recommendations to the APN on how it might best advance activities under its two key frame-works—its Low Carbon Initiatives Framework (particularly the work of the Low Carbon Area Research Net-work, ”LoCARNet”) and its Climate Adaptation Framework (especially a

new regional Forum on Loss and Damage). Lou has also been active in the work of the team that just presented an interim report to the International Council for Science (ICSU) with com-ments and recommendations on how regional cooperation in global change research in North America might best proceed under ICSU's Future Earth program.

Serge Martin Assumes Lead in Effort to Extend Tickell Climate Network

Beyond Mexico

Serge Martin and Carlos Diaz Leal meeting for lunch at an event in Oaxaca

Page 13 Climate Institute | info@climate.org

Climate Alert Volume 26, No. 1

In June, Climate Institute Chief Sci-entist Mike Mac-Cracken partici-pated in the Ameri-can Geophysical Union’s Chapman

Conference on Climate Communica-tion held in Granby, Colorado. The purpose of the meeting was to dis-cuss new approaches for communi-cating the importance and signifi-cance of climate change and its im-pacts to the public. While Dr. Mac-Cracken’s talks focused on lessons to be drawn from approaches used as the problem developed, many of par-ticipants reported on new outreach efforts through schools, museums, and other forums. With Climate Institute intern Ash-win Kumar Seshadri, Dr. MacCracken helped coordinate a contest organ-ized by the MIT Climate CoLab that solicited new ideas for geoengineer-ing the climate (see here). While a

number of interesting strategies were suggested, none would in any way reduce the need for aggressive efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to prepare more thor-oughly for the intensifying impacts of climate change. In July Dr. MacCracken joined Dan Wildcat at the Rising Voices of Indige-nous Peoples Gathering in Boulder, Colorado. During the first national climate change assessment in the late 1990s, Dr. MacCracken served as the liaison from the National Assess-ment Coordination Office to the Na-tive Peoples/Native Homelands as-sessment team, and he was asked to reflect on how that effort had con-tributed to the early activities by the Native Peoples community to identify and address emerging climate change impacts. Dr. MacCracken then went on to the biennial meeting of the Interna-tional Association of Meteorology and Atmospheric Sciences (IAMAS),

which held its joint scientific meet-ing with the International Associa-tion of Cryospheric Sciences in Davos, Switzerland. Dr. MacCracken had served as IAMAS president from 2003-07, and this year he presented a paper on the potential for regional climate engineering and helped pre-pare a resolution for IAMAS on re-sponsible planning for research on geoengineering. Then late in July, Dr. MacCracken

travelled to Chicago to serve as one

of the two science advisers to Al

Gore at the Climate Reality Project’s

speaker and leadership training

meeting. While the formal aspect of

Mike’s participation was to organize

and help in answering questions

arising as a result of Mr. Gore’s pres-

entations, he also spent extensive

time interacting with the many par-

ticipants, addressing their questions.

Above: The TIckell Network Climate

Theater in Oaxaca.

Right: Map showing location of Oaxaca

in Mexico

News from Mike MacCracken, Climate Institute Chief Scientist

one of the Tickell Network Climate Theaters. The City of Oaxaca on No-vember 18, the opening night, hosted a special presentation for delegates, including the mayors of many world heritage cities, at its climate theater. Working with Mr. Martin to generate interest in the Tickell Network during the World Congress are Carlos Diaz Leal, Inter-national Liaison for the Climate Insti-tute, and Dra. Aurora Elena Ramos, Senior Advisor to the Institute.

(Continued from page 12)

Set up in 2010 as an educational catalyst involving students, faculty, and alumni of Dartmouth College, Vermont Law School, and Kimball Union Academy, the Center for Envi-ronmental Leadership Training (CELT) has grown to include members from over twenty schools and over a half dozen nations. Its initial core group of Dartmouth students have already registered some impressive achievements. Celeste Winston, Dartmouth 2014, was named as a Beinecke Scholar. Ma Ko Quah (Abigail) Jones, Dart-mouth 2014 joined Climate Institute President John Topping in September 2012 at the Smithsonian Inuit Studies Conference for an unveiling of the Arctic Climate Action Registry. On October 30 Ma Ko Quah introduced State Representative Ponka We-Victors, first Native American woman elected to the Kansas legislature, be-fore Representative Victor’s speech to the Dartmouth community. Leehi Yona, Dartmouth 2016, who hails from Montreal, was recently named one of Canada’s top 25 environmen-talists under 25.

Armand Thompson, Dartmouth 2015, and President of Dartmouth’s World Affairs Society, is currently serving under a Rockefeller Public Service Center Internship as CELT Fall Term Coordinator. On October 22 he organized a lunch panel discussion at the Rockefeller Center on climate change, the Arctic, and indigenous peoples. Professor Daniel Wildcat, a Climate Institute Board member, Ma Ko Quah Jones, Leehi Yona, Armand Thompson, and John Topping were panellists. The next day Armand Thompson, John Topping and about

seventy others watched a compelling lecture at Dartmouth’s Thayer School of Engineering by Dr. Devra Lee Davis on health risks of cell phones and other emitters of non-ionizing radia-tion. Dr. Davis is the author of sev-eral books on health and the environ-ment, including When Smoke Ran Like Water, The Secret History of the War on Cancer, and Disconnect.

With the assistance of CELT gradu-ate fellows Charles Ffoulkes, Humiun Miah, and Rebecca Fields Green, CELT has recruited about thirty Vir-tual Fellows and Virtual Interns from three continents. In addition, about two dozen Virtual Fellows and Interns in the Institute’s Arctic Protection Initiative have teamed with CELT members on joint initiatives. Holly Beilin, a senior at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, has been Coordinator of CELT’s Smart Solu-tions Blog. Dennis Posadas, CELT In-ternational Fellow based in the Phil-ippines, has published numerous op-eds on energy and climate issues and has recently written a compelling book, Greenenergized. An interna-tional team of CELT and Arctic fellow has been working on a Saving the

Arctic Game, which highlights the potential of slowing Arctic melting by reducing emissions and transport of black carbon to the region. The Arctic Game Team is co-led by Chris-topher Philipp of Oakland, Califor-nia, an Emmy-winning filmmaker, designer of a website on mastering game play and design (gamelab), and Director of E-learning at the Cli-mate Institute; and Devin Routh, a Ph.D candidate at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. Other team members include Arctic Virtual Fellows, Yuliya Scherbina of Ukraine and Beryl Wu of Taiwan; CELT Virtual Fellow from Norway, Didrik Dyrdal; two CELT Virtual In-terns, John (Fritz) Wallace, a student at the University of New Hampshire, and Alexander Grant, a Hanover High School Senior and computer programmer; and John Topping, Climate Institute President. Ma Ko Quah, Jones is advising on climate-related displacement of indigenous people. After working for nearly six months, the team has a game design and is nearly ready to seek sponsor-ship from several interested firms in the information and game design industries.

CELT evolves past its Hanover, New Hampshire base to become a virtual

Global Institution

Page 14 Climate Institute | www.climate.org

Climate Alert

Page 15 Climate Institute | info@climate.org

Climate Alert Volume 26, No. 1

A new year means a new start. The Climate Institute has recently updated its website with a friendly user-interface with easier navigation and lots of new content. Visit the site at: www.climate.org. The site enables access to a wealth of con-tent on climate change and environmental issues. Aimed at knowledge transfer and edu-cation, the site provides an insight into the work and research of Climate Institute staff. Some of the highlights include the Arctic Cli-mate Action Registry (ACAR), the Sir Crispin Tickell Interactive Climate Network, and the Center for Environmental Leadership Training (CELT).

"We join Robert Goodland's family and friends in mourning the loss of a true pioneer, outstanding environ-mentalist and exceptional human being", said UNEP Executive Director and UN Under-Secretary-General Achim Steiner. He added: "Few among us have the courage, certi-tude and conviction to commit our life's journey to the greater good in the way Robert did. His clarity of thinking alongside his compassion and generosity enabled him to 'open the eyes' of people and institutions in ways that profoundly changed their outlook, thinking and actions on envi-ronment and sustainability." Goodland was elected Metropolitan Chair of the Ecological Society of America in 1989 and President of the International Environmental Assess-ment Association in 1993.

After leaving the World Bank in

2001, Goodland served as technical director to the independent Extrac-tive Industry Review of the World Bank Group's oil, gas, and mining portfolio, and worked for the Inspec-tion Panel in 2005 and 2006. Among other awards, he received the Millennial Conservation Prize in 2000 and the first-ever Coolidge Me-morial Medal presented by the In-ternational Union for Nature Conser-vation (IUCN) for outstanding contri-butions to environmental conserva-tion in 2008. Robert Goodland will be truly missed by many.

Statement by UNEP

The Climate Institute updates its website: www.climate.org

Robert Goodland, a global author-ity on a number of key environmental issues ranging from agricultural im-pacts to hydroelectricity, died on 28 December 2013. He is best known for his assessment that at least 51% of human-induced greenhouse gas is attributable to the life cycle and supply chain of live-stock products. Goodland, who began his career as a professor of tropical ecology at the University of Brasilia, became the first full-time ecologist at the World Bank in 1978. There he rose to the post of lead environmental adviser, and for more than 20 years instituted environ-mental assessments of the World Bank's development projects. He is credited with writing much of the Bank's mandatory social and environ-mental "safeguard policies".

In Memory of

ROBERT JAMES GOODLAND

September 26, 1939—December 28, 2013

F ounded in 1986, the Climate Institute was the first non-profit organization established primarily to address climate change issues. Working with an extensive network of experts, the Institute

has served as a bridge between the scientific community and policy-makers and has become a respected facilitator of dialogue to move the world toward more effective cooperation on climate change responses.

The Climate Institute’s mission is to …

CATALYZE innovative and practical policy solutions toward climate stabilization and educate the general public of the gravity of climate change impacts.

ENHANCE the resilience of humanity and natural systems to respond to global climate change impacts especially among vulnerable groups (e.g. Native American tribes and Small Islands).

WORK internationally as a bridge between policy-makers, scientists and environmental institutions.

Climate Institute 1400 16th St NW Suite 430

Washington DC 20036

Phone : (202) 552-4723 Fax : (202) 737-6410

Email : info@climate.org

CLIMATE INSTITUTECLIMATE INSTITUTECLIMATE INSTITUTE

Front cover image: Agriculture in Vietnam. Photo by D.G. Jarvis (www.wikimedia.org) Back cover image: Combine harvester in wheat field (www.agroinfo.com)

Editor’s note: For all citations and references, see the electronic version of this newsletter at www.climate.org

Sir Crispin Tickell, Chairman John C. Topping, President

Charles Ffoulkes, Editor-in-Chief Rebecca Green, Assistant Editor

The Climate Institute is a non-profit, 501 (c) (3) charitable, educational organization.

It receives financial support from government agencies, foundations, corporations and associations,

environmental and research organizations, and individuals.

January 2014 — Volume 26, No. 1

Climate Alert Published periodically by the Climate Institute © 2014 ISSN 1071-3271

www.climate.org