food supply scenarios - full

8/6/2019 Food Supply Scenarios - Full

1/136

Victorian Food Supply ScenariosImpacts on availability of a nutritious diet

Kirsten Larsen, Victorian Eco-Innovation Lab, University of Melbourne

Dr. Graham Turner, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems

Prof. Chris Ryan, Victorian Eco-Innovation Lab, University of Melbourne

Assoc. Prof. Mark Lawrence, Deakin University

April 2011


2/136

Contacts

KirstenLarsen

PolicyResearchManager,VictorianEco-Innovation

Lab,FacultyofArchitecture,PlanningandBuilding,

UniversityofMelbournePh:+61383449189

Email:[email protected]

www.ecoinnovationlab.com

Prof.ChrisRyan

Director,VictorianEco-InnovationLab,Facultyof

Architecture,PlanningandBuilding,

UniversityofMelbournePh:+61383449175


www.ecoinnovationlab.com

Dr.GrahamTurner

SeniorResearchScientist,CSIROEcosystemSciences

GPOBox284CanberraCityACT2601,Australia

Ph:+61262421653


Assoc.Prof.MarkLawrence

Director,FoodPolicyUnit

WHOCollaboratingCentreforObesityPrevention,

DeakinUniversity

Ph:+61392443789


Thisreport(andmoredetailedinformationfromtheproject)canbedownloadedfrom

http://www.ecoinnovationlab.com/research/food-supply-scenarios

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank VicHealth for their support of this project and the workshop

participants for their thoughtful contributions. We would particularly like to thank the following

individualsfortheirinvaluableadvice,feedbackanddetailedcomments.LeonSoste

FutureFarmingSystemsResearchDivision,

DepartmentofPrimaryIndustries

EmmaGreenhatch

FoodStrategyManager,DepartmentofBusinessand

Innovation

VeronicaGraham,KellyNevilleandMariannaPisani

PreventionandPopulationHealth,Departmentof

Health

PeterHouston

PrimaryIndustriesandResources,SouthAustralia

BrendanTatham

JulianCribbFTSE

Prof.AlbertMcGill

FoodSecurityDelegate,AustralianInstituteofFood

ScienceandTechnology(AIFST);Australian

Representative,FoodSecurityTaskForce,

InternationalUnionofFoodScienceandTechnology

(IUFoST).Citation:Larsen,K.,Turner,G.,Ryan,C.,&Lawrence,M.,(2011), VictorianFoodSupplyScenarios:

ImpactsonAvailabilityofaNutritiousDiet,VictorianEco-InnovationLab(UniversityofMelbourne),

CSIROandDeakinUniversity,Melbourne

Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code 00113B


3/136

Thiswell-balancedandexpertreportistimely.ItwillhelpshapeourwiderthinkinginAustraliaas

wetacklethenowurgent,andunavoidable,taskofreshapingsocialprioritiesandourmethodsof

productionandconsumptioninordertoachieveasustainablefuture-forthiscountryandfortheworld.

Foodsystemsarecrucialtohumanwellbeingandhealth,andareamajorpartofoureconomy.

Thesortofinnovativethinkingandexpertmodellingevidentinthisreportwillhelpustobring

ourfoodproductionandfoodchoices,inAustralia,backintobalancewiththelong-termneedsof

the environment - recognising also the now clear prospects of climate changeand declines in

energyandchemicalfertiliserinputs.

Prof.A.J.McMichael,NationalCentre forEpidemiology&PopulationHealth,ANUCollegeofMedicine,

BiologyandEnvironment,TheAustralianNationalUniversity

Australiaisarelativelyfood-securecountryinanincreasinglyfood-insecureworld.Aswemoveto

the peak in humandemand for food of the mid-century, essential food-producing resources of

water,land,oil,nutrients,technology,fishandstableclimateswillbecomeincreasinglyscarceand

costlyandthiswillimpactonAustralianfoodsystemsandnationalsecurityaswellasthoseof

theworldasawhole.InthisstudyKirstenLarsenandhercolleaguesexplorethesecriticalissues,

encouragingustotakewiseforethoughtandtimelyactioninordertoensureourfuturehealth,

wellbeingandsafetythroughfood.

JulianCribb,authorofTheComingFamine2010

Climatechangewillaffectfoodproduction,andweneedtofacethefactthatwhatweeatand

drinkislikelytochangewithlimitstoland,water,fuelandfertilisers.Thisreportencouragesusto

recogniseproblems,tothinklaterallyandplanourfutureinsuchawaysoastoachievethebestoutcomeforasmanypeopleaspossible.It'snotallbadsincethedietthatisbestforthehealthof

theplanetjusthappenstoalsobebestforthehealthofthepeople.

DrRosemaryStantonOAM,nutritionist


4/136

TableofContents

EXECUTIVESUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. I

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 11.1 REPORTSTRUCTURE.....................................................................................................................................11.2 AIMSANDOBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................................21.3 SCOPE .......................................................................................................................................................2

1.3.1 ANutritiousDiet...............................................................................................................................21.3.2 FoodAvailability ...............................................................................................................................31.3.3 OtherElementsofFoodSecurity ......................................................................................................4

1.4 CONTEXT ...................................................................................................................................................51.4.1 ClimateChange ................................................................................................................................51.4.2 Oil .....................................................................................................................................................71.4.3 Fertilisers ..........................................................................................................................................91.4.4 Population ........................................................................................................................................9

2.

METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................................................11

2.1 FOODREQUIREMENTSFORANUTRITIOUSDIET ...............................................................................................112.2 QUALITATIVESCENARIODEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................................132.3 QUANTITATIVESCENARIOMODELLING..........................................................................................................14

2.3.1 TheAustralianStocksandFlowsFramework .................................................................................142.3.2 HistoryandPreviousUse................................................................................................................172.3.3 WorkingwiththeASFF:Tensions .................................................................................................182.3.4 WhataboutPrices? ........................................................................................................................18

3. RESULTS..............................................................................................................................................213.1 ESTIMATEDFOODREQUIREMENTSFORANUTRITIONALLYADEQUATEFOODSUPPLY...............................................21

3.1.1 Selectingfoodstorepresenteachfoodgroup................................................................................21

3.1.2 Selectingpopulationcategoriesforassessmentofnutritionimplications .....................................213.1.3 Determiningthenumberofrecommendedservesforeachfoodgroup ........................................213.1.4 Estimatingtheamountsoffoodstuffrequired ...............................................................................22

3.2 QUALITATIVESCENARIOSSTRUCTUREANDSTORYLINES .................................................................................243.2.1 IdentifyingDynamicsofChange.....................................................................................................243.2.2 Divergence......................................................................................................................................273.2.3 ScenarioDescriptions .....................................................................................................................28

3.3 QUANTITATIVESCENARIOS..........................................................................................................................333.3.1 TheBackgroundScenario ...............................................................................................................353.3.2 VariablesTranslatingtheScenarios ............................................................................................383.3.3 Adjustment.....................................................................................................................................403.3.4 TimetoTakeControl ......................................................................................................................47

3.3.5 DIY ..................................................................................................................................................543.3.6 ComparativeResults.......................................................................................................................62

4. DISCUSSION........................................................................................................................................674.1 CHALLENGESTOFOODAVAILABILITY.............................................................................................................67

4.1.1 Production ......................................................................................................................................674.1.2 MakingFoodAvailabletoConsumers ............................................................................................694.1.3 EasingorIncreasingTensions.........................................................................................................69

4.2 EMISSIONS,ENVIRONMENTANDRESOURCECONSTRAINTS ...............................................................................71


5/136

4.2.1 Land................................................................................................................................................724.2.2 WaterandEnvironmentalFlows ....................................................................................................744.2.3 GreenhouseGasEmissions.............................................................................................................754.2.4 Oil ...................................................................................................................................................774.2.5 Fertiliser(Phosphorus)....................................................................................................................78

4.3 ECONOMICSTRUCTURE ..............................................................................................................................794.4 VULNERABILITIES .......................................................................................................................................81

4.4.1 GlobalTrade...................................................................................................................................814.4.2 ExtremeWeatherEventsandNaturalDisasters ............................................................................824.4.3 Biodiversity&Biosecurity ...............................................................................................................824.4.4 Population ......................................................................................................................................83

4.5 OPPORTUNITIESTHESWEETSPOT .............................................................................................................834.6 AFINEBALANCEETHICS ..........................................................................................................................84

5. CONCLUSION,RECOMMENDATIONSANDFURTHERWORK.................................................................865.1 RESEARCH ................................................................................................................................................87

5.1.1 DevelopmentofMethodology........................................................................................................875.1.2 ResearchExtensionWhatNext?..................................................................................................88

5.2 POLICYIMPLICATIONS ................................................................................................................................895.2.1 InformingDecisionMaking ............................................................................................................895.2.2 SpecificPolicyTools........................................................................................................................90

REFERENCES...............................................................................................................................................91

APPENDIX1:ASFFINTERNALLOGIC ...........................................................................................................97

APPENDIX2:SCENARIOINFLUENCES .........................................................................................................98

APPENDIX3:ADDITIONALNATIONALRESULTS ........................................................................................102

APPENDIX4:FOODSURPLUSANDDEFICITGRAPHS .................................................................................105

APPENDIX5:WATERREGIONSINTHEASFF .............................................................................................118

APPENDIX6:PRIORITIESFORFURTHERMETHODOLOGYDEVELOPMENT .................................................119

ListofTables

TABLE2-1:NUMBEROFDAILYSAMPLESERVESNEEDEDTOACHIEVEANUTRITIOUSDIET .....................................13

TABLE3-1:ESTIMATEDFOODREQUIREMENTSFORANUTRITIONALLYADEQUATEFOODSUPPLY .........................23TABLE3-2:PRE-WORKSHOPDRIVERSANDDYNAMICSOFCHANGE ..........................................................................25

TABLE3-3:INCLUDEDANDEXCLUDEDFACTORS ..........................................................................................................34

TABLE3-4:BACKGROUNDSETTINGS ...............................................................................................................................35TABLE3-5:SUMMARYOFHIGH-LEVELSCENARIOSETTINGS ......................................................................................39

TABLE4-1:NETFOODAVAILABILITY..............................................................................................................................67

TABLE4-2:POTENTIALEFFECTSOFEXCLUDEDPARAMETERS...................................................................................70TABLE4-3:ADVANTAGESANDDISADVANTAGES...........................................................................................................70

TABLE4-4:COMPARISONOFSCENARIORESULTS .........................................................................................................72TABLE4-5:ACHIEVEDEMISSIONSREDUCTION(ON1990LEVELS)..........................................................................75

TABLE0-1:SCENARIO-BASEDPROJECTSCONSIDERED ................................................................................................98


6/136

ListofFiguresFIGURE1-1:FOODAVAILABILITYASACOMPONENTOFFOODSECURITY .....................................................................3

FIGURE1-2:IEAPROJECTEDWORLDOILPRODUCTIONBYTYPE(NEWPOLICIESSCENARIO) ..............................8

FIGURE1-3-AUSTRALIANPOPULATIONPROJECTIONS................................................................................................10FIGURE2-1:THEAUSTRALIANGUIDETOHEALTHYEATING.......................................................................................12

FIGURE2-2:SCHEMATICFLOWDIAGRAMOFMODERNECONOMY .............................................................................16FIGURE2-3:MAJORCOMPONENTSANDINFORMATIONFLOWSINTHEASFF..........................................................19FIGURE3-1-DRIVERSANDDYNAMICSFROMPARTICIPANTS......................................................................................25

FIGURE3-2:SCENARIOLOGICDIAGRAM .........................................................................................................................28FIGURE3-3:FEEDBACKPROCESSESINTHEASFF.........................................................................................................36

FIGURE3-4:OTHERFOODS(NOTADJUSTEDINSCENARIOS) ....................................... ............................................ .....38

FIGURE3-5:VICTORIANLANDUSE(ADJUSTMENT) ............................................. ............................................ .............41FIGURE3-6:VICTORIANELECTRICITYDEMAND/USE(ADJUSTMENT).....................................................................42

FIGURE3-7:VICTORIANELECTRICITYPRODUCTION(ADJUSTMENT).........................................................................42

FIGURE3-8:TRANSPORTFUELCOMBUSTION(ADJUSTMENT).....................................................................................43FIGURE3-9:INPUTEFFICIENCYVARIABLES ...................................................................................................................44

FIGURE3-10:GREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS(ADJUSTMENT)............................................................................... HIN45FIGURE3-11:AUSTRALIANGREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS(ADJUSTMENT)..............................................................46

FIGURE3-12:NETFOOD(ADJUSTMENT)........................................................................................................................47

FIGURE3-13:VICTORIANLANDUSE(CONTROL)..........................................................................................................48FIGURE3-14:VICTORIANELECTRICITYDEMAND/USE(CONTROL).........................................................................49

FIGURE3-15:VICTORIANELECTRICITYPRODUCTION(CONTROL).............................................................................49FIGURE3-16:TRANSPORTFUELCOMBUSTION(CONTROL) ....................................... ............................................ .....50

FIGURE3-17:GREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS(CONTROL) ........................................... ............................................ .....52

FIGURE3-18:AUSTRALIANGREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS(CONTROL)....................................................................52FIGURE3-19:NETFOOD(CONTROL)..............................................................................................................................54

FIGURE3-20:VICTORIANLANDUSE(DIY) ........................................... ............................................. ........................... 55

FIGURE3-21:VICTORIANELECTRICITYDEMAND/USE(DIY)..................................................................................56FIGURE3-22:VICTORIANELECTRICITYPRODUCTION(DIY)......................................................................................57

FIGURE3-23:PRIVATETRANSPORTENERGYUSEREDUCESWITHDENSITY............................................................57FIGURE3-24:TRANSPORTFUELCOMBUSTION(DIY)..................................................................................................58

FIGURE3-25:GREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS(DIY)CUMULATIVE.........................................................................60

FIGURE3-26:AUSTRALIANGREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS(DIY)..............................................................................60FIGURE3-27:NETFOOD(DIY).......................................................................................................................................61

FIGURE3-28:DIVERSIONOFFOODCROPSTOBIOFUELS(DIY).................................................................................62

FIGURE3-29:NETENVIRONMENTALFLOWS(ALL).....................................................................................................63FIGURE3-30:NETOILIMPORTVOLUME(ALL)............................................................................................................64

FIGURE

3-31:

NET

PHOSPHATE

IMPORT

VOLUME

(ALL

).............................................................................................65FIGURE3-32:GDPPERCAPITA(ALL) ...................................... ............................................. ......................................... 66

FIGURE3-33:NETTRADESURPLUS(DEBT)TOGDP(ALL) ............................................ .......................................... 66

FIGURE3-34:UNEMPLOYMENTRATE(ALL) .......................................... ............................................ ........................... 66FIGURE4-1:GREENHOUSEGASEMISSIONS(ALL) ........................................ ............................................ .................... 75

FIGURE4-2:HISTORICALANDFUTURESOURCESOFPHOSPHORUSFERTILISERS.....................................................79


7/136

ExecutiveSummary

i

ExecutiveSummary

There areresource allocationandmanagementdecisions beingmadenow inVictoria, andAustralia,

thatwill have significant implications for the flexibilityand options for our food supply in the next

decadesandforfuturegenerationsofAustralians.Thisprojectsetsoutaframeworkformoredetailed

investigationofsomeverycriticalquestions,bydevelopinganddemonstratingamethodologythatcan

beextendedtotestvariousoptionsforfoodsecuritypolicy.

Thisresearchexploreshowthesedecisionswillimpactonourabilitytoprovideareliablesurplusofthe

foods required for a nutritious diet, whilst providing for ongoing health of the environment, the

economy and ultimately the wellbeing of people and communities (both farming and urban

communities).

The Victorian Food Supply Scenarios project has been a 12-month research project funded by the

Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) through the Healthy Eating stream of their

ResearchInnovationgrants,providedtoresearchanewconceptormethodologyrelevanttothetheory,

policyandpracticeofhealthpromotion.

Theprimarypurposeofthisprojectwastodevelopanddemonstrateanewmethodology tolinkland

andresourceusewithavailabilityofanutritionallyadequatefoodsupplyforVictoriaspopulation.The

researchmadenewuseofanexistingphysicalmodeloftheAustralianeconomydevelopedbyCSIRO(oneoftheprojectpartners)totrackthecomplexinteractionoflandandresourcesystemsastheyaffect

theavailabilityof food.Theresearchwasundertakenwithin stricttimeandresourceconstraintsand

there was consequently a limit to the analysis of data sets and settings. The assumptions,

approximationsandgeneralisationsarenotedthroughoutthereport.

Thetensionsidentifiedthroughthisworkaresignificant,inspiteoflevelsofuncertaintyresultingfrom

theprojectconstraints.Theystronglysuggestthatasophisticatedandstrategicapproachtoresource

allocationisurgentlyrequired,ifthemultipleobjectivesoffoodsecurity,energysecurity,greenhouse

emissionsreductions,sustainableresourceuse,ahealthyenvironmentandaviableeconomyaretobe

achieved.Theoutcomesdonotprovideanyeasyanswers,orsuggestthatoneapproachtotheseissues

isclearlybetterthananother.

Context

Availabilityofsufficientfoodsforanutritiousdiet

Thisprojectisfocusedonfoodavailability: sufficientquantitiesoffoodofappropriatequality,supplied

through domestic production or imports (including food aid) (FAO 2011); this recognises that the

irreducible base of food security is the physical ability to provide for the nutritional needs of the

population. We use an indicator of net food availability i.e. how much of each food group under

investigationisproducedinVictoria/Australia,comparedtothatrequired.

Foodavailabilityisnecessary,butnotinitselfsufficient,toensurethatahouseholdorpopulationis

foodsecure.Thisanalysisdoesnotdiscountthecriticalimportanceofotheraspectsofaccesstofood

that affectsecurity, e.g.price,consumerpreferences,advertising,food safetyandso on,but theyareoutsidethescopeoftheresearch.

Itisassumedthatitispossibletoimportfood,andothercriticalresources,ifrequired;howeverrelative

levels of domestic sufficiency are compared under different scenarios. It is also assumed that food

producedisphysicallyavailabletoconsumersi.e.thatthesystemsfunctioneffectivelytodistributefood

(evenifthosesystemsoperatedifferentlyacrossthescenarios).


8/136

VictorianFoodSupplyScenarios

ii

Nowheretohide

There are four overarching drivers that shape this research: climate change; oil; fertilisers and

population growth. These drivers contextualise the challenges we face in securing food availability.

Whiletheseissuesmaynotbefullyinourcontrol,itisthedivergentstrategiesforourresponsethat

shapefuturescenarios.Inthisanalysiswehaveassumed:

Climate change is already occurring and is a result of human activity through the emission ofgreenhousegasesintotheatmosphere.Itwillintensifyinthestudyperiod,astheclimatesystemrespondstolevelsofgreenhousegasesthatarealreadyintheatmosphere.

Ambitiousactiontoreduceemissionsby2030isnecessaryandwilloccur. Australias oil production has peaked and increasing imports are required to meet increasing

demand.TheInternationalEnergyAgencysuggeststhatglobal(conventional)oilproductionpeaked

in2006(IEA2010).Theincreasingcost(energyandfinancial)ofextractingoilresourcesmeansthat

costs will rise significantly. This will drive substantial transformation of the economy, with

implicationsforthefoodsystem.

Increasingglobaldemand,andchallengestothesupply,offertilisers(particularlyphosphorus)willreduceavailabilityandincreasecost.

Globalpopulationgrowthwillcontinue,asitwillinAustralia.KeyMessages

Foodavailabilityiscomplexitiscloselylinkedwithresourceandlanduse,trade,employmentand

energyandwaterusage.Assessingormanagingfoodavailabilityrequiresacoherentassessmentofthe

interactionsofallofthesefactors.

Inthisproject,wehavedevelopedandtestedthreescenarios(describedinSection3.2anddepictedin

Figure3-2)toexplorefoodavailabilityandtoinvestigateitsinteractionwithpopulation,resourceuse

and the economy. One scenario, labelled as Adjustment, assumes free markets and high levels of

internationaltrade;Control,asthesecondscenario,assumesstrongpolicyandregulatoryintervention

in the market to ensure the domestic supply of core foods; the third, DIY, envisages a more

decentralisedfuturewithlight,mostlylocal,governmentintervention.

Thescenariosreflectdifferentstrategicapproachestotheissueoffoodavailabilityandcreatedivergent

sets of variables formodelling: energy demand, efficiency andsources; allocation of land andwater

resources;levelsofwasteandlosses;levelsofwaterandfertiliserefficiencyinagriculturalproduction;

andtransportpatternsandmodes.Keyfindingsareoutlinedbelow.

Allfoodsarenotcreatedequal

Byconsidering theneeds foranutritiousdiet,rather thanthedietastypicallyconsumed,thisproject

hasrevealedearlyandimmediatetensionsinavailabilityofthefoodsrequired.Anoverallsurplusof

foodproductsisnotthesameasproductionofanutritionallyadequatefoodsupply.1Resultsfromthe

analysisshow tensionsin providingfor anutritiousdiet, asdescribed insections3.3.3.6, 3.3.4.6and

3.3.5.6anddiscussedinsection4.1.Theseinclude: Australian production of fruit andvegetables already falls short of providingsufficient serves of

thesefoodstomeettherecommendedfoodintakepatterns.

Twoof thescenarios reallocate land fromone typeof production (grazing)to another(fruitandvegetables) in an attempt tomaintain sufficient production of required foods at a national and

1Nutritionalhealthrequiresbothadequateamountsoffoodtomeethumanenergyrequirementsandadequatevarietyoffoods

toprovidethediversityandamountsofnutrientsrequired.


9/136

ExecutiveSummary

iii

Victorian level respectively. Thisis successful inproviding fruit andvegetablesbutcreatesother

tensions,resultinginshortagesofdairy(by2030)andlamb(by2060).

Somefoodcropscanbeusedasbiofuels.Twoofthescenariosseediversionofcereals,sugarandoilcrops to1stgenerationbiofuels, withone producinga seriousconflictbetweenfood andfuel by

2030.

Inallscenarios,Victoriabecomesborderlineoranetimporterofcerealsby2030.Australiaretainsacerealsurplusto2030,butitisinsteadydeclineinallscenarios.

The project shows that under the expected future conditions (climate change, increasing

populationanddiminishingavailabilityofoil), thedomesticproductionofasurplusofrequired

foodsateitherVictorianorAustralianlevelmustnotbetakenforgranted.

Nosuchthingasafreelunch

Ultimately thesuccessfulprovisionof foodisdeterminedbythebio-physicalfactorsnecessary forits

production (land,soils, sunlight, nutrients, feed-stocks)andthe availability ofresourcesrequired for

organising production, processing and distribution. The scenarios test challenging, but realistic,

possibilitiesforchangetoavailability,allocationanduseofresources.Theseimpacton:

Useofland,waterandenergyresources; Productionanddistributioninfrastructure; Targetsforreductioningreenhousegasemissions; Levelsofimportrelianceforoilandfertilisers;and Settings for key economic indicators (i.e. GDP; unemployment and trade balance) that are

consideredrepresentativeofhealthyeconomicactivity.

The rationale and settings for each scenarioare described throughout section 3.3. Key settings and

findingsareoutlinedbelow.

Land:Productivelandareareducesinallscenarios,duetovaryingcombinationsandratesofdiversion

toforests(forcarbonsequestrationandbioenergy)andurbanlandexpansion.Thechangeoflanduse

fromirrigatedtodry-landproductionalsohasanimpact.

Water:Largereductionsinwaterextractionforirrigationfailtoavertnegativeenvironmentalflowsinkeyriversystems,intwooutofthethreescenarios(sections3.3.6.1and4.2.2).

The Victorian irrigation districts analysed (Gippsland andMurray) have negative environmentalflowsby2040-50 evenwith the greatly reduced extractions inAdjustment and Control. TheDIY

scenariohasa75%reduction,whichstabilisesandmaintainsenvironmentalflowsthroughoutthe

studyperiod,althoughMurrayisstilldeclining.

River systemswith negativeenvironmental flows forany periodof timeareunlikely to supportfoodproductioninthelongerterm.Itshouldbenotedthatthereducedextractionlevels,whilelarge,

arenotattheextreme(highclimatechange)levelthatCSIRO(2008)suggestedmayberequiredfor

theVictorianregionsoftheMurrayDarlingBasin.Thistensionclearlycannotbesustained.

GreenhouseGas Emissions: all scenarios have significantly reduced greenhouseemissionsby

2020,withtwomeetingIPCCrequirementsforAnnex1countriesatanationallevel(sections3.3and4.2.3).

Thescenarioshavedifferentlevelsofambitioninreducinggreenhousegasemissions(Table4-5). ThesettingsfortheAdjustmentandControlscenariosovershoottheiremissionsreductiontargets

and achieve greater reductions on 1990 levels thanwere sought by 2030, but fail against later

targets.

DIYhasthemostambitioustargets.Itistheonlyscenariothatdoesnotachieveitsintended2030reduction level ata Victorian level, but it exceeds IPCC requirements by2020 and its own 60%

reductiontargetatanationallevelin2030.


10/136


iv

DIYisalsotheonlyscenariothatisabletosustainemissionsreductionsbeyond2040.Thisisduetoareducedpercapitaconsumptionofgoodandservices(andcorrespondinglyenergyuse)acrossthe

economy, which has negative implications for GDP per capita and unemployment (as currently

measured).

Intheothertwoscenarios,theeconomicindicatorsremainhealthybutgreenhousegasemissionsstartrisingagainfrom2040.Thisisduetoincreasingenergydemandoutpacingefficiencygainsand

thenetbenefitfromcarbonsequestrationinforestsdecliningaslandavailabilityreduces.

Oil:onescenarioachievesahighlevelofenergysecurityandsignificantlyreducesimportedoil

reliance,althoughmassiveandimmediateinterventionisrequired(sections3.3.6.2and4.2.4).

TheControlscenarioachievesthemostsignificantreductioninimportedoildependence,duetoanimmediateshifttoelectricvehicles(allnewpassengervehiclesfrom2011)andrapidscale-upofgas

forelectricityandtransportfuel.Thisleadstoelectricvehiclesusingmoreelectricitythanbuildings

by2030andseesconventionalgasresourcesunderseverestrainby2060.

ThesubstantialdiversionofcropsforbiofuelsinAdjustmentandDIYhasanimpactonoildemand,butismarginalcomparedtothedeclineinAustralianoilproduction.It isalargediversionoffood

foraminimalenergygain.

Allofthepossibilitiesforfuelsubstitutionthatarenotquantitativelyincludedintheprojectwouldhaveothercostselsewheree.g.increasedgreenhousegasemissions(coal-to-gasandcoal-to-liquids)or environmental damage (and additional loss of agricultural land or water resources) from

accessingnon-conventionalgasresources.

Phosphorous: all scenarios reduce reliance on imported phosphorus, but retain a large

requirement(sections3.3.6.3and4.2.5).

Thesignificantreductionsinimportedphosphorusrequirementsachievedarelargelyduetodemand-

sidemeasures,including:

Changeofdiet(therequirementforanutritionaldietmodelledinthisprojecthasasignificantlylowerrequirementformeatproductsthantheAustralianaverage.TheControlandDIYscenarios

reducetheproportionofmeatanddairyproductsbeingproduced);

Reducingwaste/losslevelsinsomescenarios;and Agriculturalefficienciesthatreducedemandforphosphorus(relativetoamountoffoodproduced).These unresolved tensions in the results point to a need for more detailed investigation. For

example,anetzeroenvironmentalflowinkeyriversystemsisnotanacceptable(orviable)outcome.

Similarly,constraintsonglobaloilsupplyordomesticgascouldmeanthattheenergyuseassumedin

thisworkiseithernotpossibleorprohibitivelyexpensive.Testinghowandwhetherthesetensionscan

beresolvedbecomesapriorityforfurtherwork.

Methodology

The purpose of this project was to develop and demonstrate a new methodology to link land and

resourceusewithavailabilityofanutritionallyadequatefoodsupplyforVictoriaspopulation.Todoso,

it has built the capacity of the CSIRO stocks and flows model as a platform for on-going what-ifinvestigationofVictorianandAustralianfoodsupplysecurity.

Thethreeelementsofthemethodologydevelopedare:

1. Determiningtheamountandvarietyoffoodsrequiredtomeettherecommendationsofnutritionreferencestandardsforthepopulation;

2. Constructingqualitativescenariostoframedivergentsocio-economicandtechnicaltrajectories;and3. Translatingqualitativescenariostoquantitativescenariosandanalysingtheirimplications.


11/136


12/136


vi

setofinterrelatedsystemspolicyoractionconsideringoneissue,suchaswaterorenergyorland,in

isolationfromtheotherswillsimplydisplaceproblemstoelsewhereinthesystem.Inpractice,noneof

the scenario parameters are tightly defined and it is possible to adjust the value of some of those

parameters so that net food deficits are reduced or inadvertently increased; the results of such

adjustmentswillofcoursebesomechangeinothersystemfunctions.

Inthis first stageofresearch,manytensionsremainunresolved.Thesebecomeapriorityfor further

work,forfurtheriterationsofscenariosettingsandmodelling,toseewhether(andhow)theycouldbe.

Marketforcesallocateresourcestheydonotmakethemexist

There is a prevailing argumentthat constraintson foodor energy supplywill bepartially or largely

overcome through market forces as price signals drive innovation, technology development and

efficiency improvements. The researchhasnot ignored these issues, theyareexplored through the

scenariosasfactorsthatdeterminetheallocationofresources.Keypointsrelatingtopricesinclude:

Theeffectsofchangingpricesareimplicitinallscenariosthepricesignals,marketstructuresandgovernment actions are defined outside the model, but are translated as assumptions about

efficienciesorestablishmentofthenewtechnologiesorpractices(i.e.assumingthattheybecome

economicallyfeasibleresponsestotensionsexposedthroughthemodelling).

There arebothphysicaland financial constraints to resourceextraction, regardlessofwhatlevelprices for key resources reach. For critical resources like oil, continually increasing prices areunlikely to be economically sustainable, reducing the capital available to access the remaining

resourceortodevelopsubstitutes.

Byassessingthephysicallimitations,itisevidentthattherearerealconstraintsonhowmuchcanactuallybeprovidedfromwhatisultimatelyafiniteresourcebase.

Vulnerabilitiesandresilience

Thestructuraldifferencesintheinfrastructuresoffoodsupply

exploredinthescenarioswouldbelikelytoaffecttheresilience

ofeachfoodsystemtheextenttowhichfoodavailabilitycan

bemaintained, or the food system can bounce back, in theeventofshocksorrapidsystemicchange.Theresearchwasnot

able to explore these issues in any depth, although it is

recognisedthatthisisacriticaltestoftheviabilityofthefood

system, one that will become increasingly significant as the

impactsofclimatechangeandpeakoilimpingeonglobaland

localmarkets.

Thereareclearsignsofvulnerabilitiesinglobaltradepatterns

thatraisequestionsaboutrelianceonimported foods tomeet

corenutritionalrequirements. These include:an increasing incidence of governments responding to

domesticfoodsecurityconcernsbyslowingorbanningexportsoffood(andfertilisers);severityand

frequencyofextremeweathereventsdisruptingbothproductionanddistributionoffood;andpotential

forenergyandfood constraints todirectlyimpactondistributionsystems, and/or triggersocial andpoliticalunrest.

Furtheranalysisisrequiredtosubjectthemodelledsystemstosomeofthepotentialshocksthatmight

occurinthefuture,totesttheirresilience.

Tightprofitmarginsonfoodproducts,

for example, will make some current

sourcesunprofitableasthepriceoffuel

risesand local suppliers becomemorecompetitive.Retailindustrieswillneed

to either re-evaluate the just-in-time

businessmodel,whichassumesaready

supplyofenergythroughoutthesupply

chainorincreasetheresilienceoftheir

logisticsagainstsupplydisruptionsand

higher prices. [Lloyds Risk Insight

2010].


13/136

ExecutiveSummary

vii

Whatnext?

Research

Researchextensions to thisprojectwouldallinvolve furtherdevelopmentof this physicalmodelling

capability forgreaterunderstanding (andimproved adaptivemanagement)of complexchange inthe

foodsystem,andtofurtherinformpolicyandpractice.Prioritieswouldbetoconductmoredetailedanalysisofkeytensionareas,toworktoresolvetensions(totestwhetherandhowthiscouldbedone)

andtoevaluateissuesofresilience.Thisprojectprovidesastrongfoundationfortheidentification(in

collaborationwithpolicy-makers),ofpolicyopportunities,gapsandbarriersacrossthefoodsystemand

how potential policy interventionsmight be prioritised. More detail is provided in section 5.1 and

Appendix6.

Opportunities

ForAustralias futuredevelopment,addressingthe issuesandchallengesexploredin thisprojectwill

requiresubstantialreconfigurationofthefoodsystem.Whilenoscenarioprovidesaneasyanswerto

howthiscanorshouldbedone,theyallsuggestpossibleresponsesandsolutionsthatcanbefurther

explored.ThisisnotachallengeuniquetoAustralia;intheconductofthisresearchitbecameclearthatmanycountriesandregionswerealreadygrapplingwiththeissuesweexploredandinmanycontexts

theneedforinnovationisbeinggivenahighpriority.

Significantopportunitiesthatarereferencedinthequalitativescenariosbuthavenotbeenaccounted

for in the quantitative analysis include: use of waste-water; re-cycling of organic waste and other

productstoproduceenergy,foodand fuel;reductionofemissions inagricultureandsequestrationof

carbon in soil; next generation biofuels, and so on. It is likely that these could make significant

contributionstoeasingthetensionsidentifiedandshouldbeprioritiesforfurtherresearchandaction.

Policy

Akeyquestionarisingfromtheanalysisisabouthowuseoflimitedandcontestedresourcescanbe

optimised tomeet critical objectives. This raises fundamental issues about howwe frame decisionsabout land andresourceuse, particularlyin light of concernsabout foodavailability.Arethe critical

objectivesprofitorproductivity,orresilience?Shouldweplanforshort-to-mediumtermtargets(on

theassumptionthatfuturetechnologicalgainswilleasethetensions)orshouldwefocusnowonthe

long-termpublicgoodbasedonmoreconservativetechnologicalassumptions?

For policy makers, the challenge is to optimise use of land and resources for the public good,ensuringthatappropriateincentivestructuresstimulateprivateenterpriseand innovationto this

end.

Giventhelong-termconstraints,usingpriceastheonlymechanismtodeterminetheflowoflandandresourcesintheshortterm(i.e.tohighestvalueuse)couldeffectivelyreducetheresourcebase

andoptionsavailabletomeetpopulationrequirements.

Sensibleandstrategicdecision-makingabouthowresourcesareusedneeds tobe informedbyanevidencebase thataccounts forphysical realities aswell as economicdrivers.Themethodology

outlinedherecouldbefurtherdevelopedtothisend .

Theassumptionsandvariablesdefinedin thisworkpointtowheremorespecificpolicytoolsmaybeapplied, and can inform policy frameworks for considering these issues. Key areas for policy

considerationare:

o Reducingwasteclosingcyclesandincreasingresilienceofproductionanddistributionsystems(reducingextentoflossestoextremeevents);


14/136


viii

o Obtaining multiple outcomes from land and resources, including: mosaic farming for food,energy, biodiversity and carbon sequestration; andurban andperi-urban foodproduction to

utilisewastewaterandnutrientsconcentratedinpopulationcentres;

o Preventing irreversible loss of food production capability, particularly relating to non-substitutablefoods(e.g.fruitandvegetables);

o Regeneratingsoilqualityandcapabilitytomeetthechallengeofreducedfertiliseravailability;o Reducingoverall energy andtransport demand inboth household(passenger) andindustrial

(freight)sectors;

o Technology and practice change for energy and fuel efficiency, including development ofsubstitutetransportfuelsandtransformationofthetransportsystem;

o Waterandnutrientavailabilityandusedevelopingalternativewaterandnutrientresourcesthatdonotimposeadditionalenergycosts;and

o Developstrategicapproachestopotentiallyprolongedchallengestofoodavailability.Couldthewelfare and emergency food systems cope with extended price impacts of food availability

issues?


15/136

Introduction

1

1. IntroductionTheFoodandAgricultureOrganisation(FAO)hasdefinedfoodsecurityasbeingwhenallpeopleatall

times havephysical andeconomicaccess tosufficient, safeand nutritious foodtomeettheirdietary

needsandfoodpreferencesforanactivelife[FAO2011].Lang[2010]hasstressedtheimportanceof

extendingthisdefinitionsoastoencompassenvironmentalsustainabilityconsiderationsanditisthis

extensionthatisbeingexploredinthisresearch.

Ideally,sufficientfoodforanutritiousdietshouldbesecurelyavailableregardlessofpopulationgrowth,

changinglanduses,wateravailability,energysupplyandclimate,andsoon.Giventhatatleast6%of

Victoriansarealreadyfoodinsecure(haverunoutoffoodandbeenunabletoaffordmore)[McCaughey

Centre2007],thatdemandforemergencyfoodreliefhasincreasedrapidly(mostnotablyinregional

areas)[VicReliefFoodbank2008],andclimateinstabilityishavingsevereimpactsonfoodsupply;itis

timelyto investigatehowexacerbatedenvironmental andresourcechallengescouldimpacton future

foodsecurityforVictorians.

In April 2008, the Victorian Eco-Innovation Lab released Sustainable and Secure Food Systems for

Victoria: What do we know? What do we need to know? (SSFSV) [Larsen et al. 2008]. That report

cataloguedtheenvironmentalchallengesandresourceconstraintsthatwillimpact(andinmanycases

are already impacting) on the Victorian food system. These include water scarcity, water and soil

quality, energy (including oil) and nutrient scarcity, climate change and diminishing biodiversity

[Larsenetal.2008].Thesechangingcircumstancesareglobalaswellaslocal,andareexpectedtohave

animpactonthevolumeanddiversityoffoodsproducedandconsumed.

TheSSFSVreport identifiedmanyresearch gaps, including a lackofVictorian researchexploring the

relationshipbetweenenvironmentalandresourceconstraintsandfuturefoodsecurity,orhowsupply

challengesmightaffectsecureaccesstoanutritiousdiet.

Since the release of the SSFSV report, there has been growing attention to the links between

environmentalandresourceconstraints,thedeclineofnaturalresourcesandthesustainableandsecure

provisionoffoodinVictoria,Australiaandaroundtheworld. 2Awarenessofthevulnerabilitiesofthe

globalfoodsystemis rapidlyincreasing,heightenedby thegrowingcontestforlimitedresourcesand

frequency of events that challenge the highly interconnected global food supply. In Australia,

governmentsatlocal,stateandfederallevelarebeginningtograpplewiththecomplexchallengesand

opportunitiespresentedbyachangingfoodsystem,inthecontextofrapidchangeintheothersystems

aroundittheeconomy,climate,energysupply,water,ecosystemandhumanhealthandnutrition.

TheVictorianFoodSupplyScenariosprojectwasa12-monthresearchprojectfundedbytheVictorian

Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) through the Healthy Eating stream of their research

innovationgrants,providedtoresearchanewconceptormethodologyrelevanttothetheory,policy

andpracticeofhealthpromotion.

Theprimarypurposeofthisprojectwastodevelopanddemonstrateanewmethodology tolinkland

andresourceusewiththeavailabilityofanutritionallyadequatefoodsupplyforVictoriaspopulation.

1.1ReportStructure

This report outlines and discusses the assumptions, methodology, results and implications of this

project.

Inthe interestsof transparencyand anopen contribution tothe debate, thereportcontainsdetailed

information about the methodology developed, including assumptions and settings within complex

quantitativeanalysis.Tofullyunderstandhowtheresultswereachieved,itisrecommendedthatthe

2ExamplesincludeLarsenetal.[2008],Campbell[2008],Cribb[2010],Heinberg&Bomford[2009],UNEP[2009]andIAASTD

[2008].


16/136


2

reportis readinfull.However,recognisingthatformanyreadersthiswillnotbefeasible,the results

anddiscussioncanbeunderstoodwithoutafulltechnicalunderstandingofthemethodologysection.

Keyassumptionsandareaswherefurtherworkisrequiredareclearlyidentifiedthroughout,usingthe

symbolsbelow.

! Keyassumptionsandpoints

Potentialfurtherresearchorwork

1.2 AimsandObjectivesThisprojectaimedtodevelopanddemonstrateanewmethodologyto:

Explorewhetherpotential changesaffecting Victorias foodsystem,within itsbroader context inVictoria, Australia and internationally, could impact on the secure and sustainable provision of

nutritionallyadequatedietsforVictoriascommunities;and

Consider how the provision of nutritionally adequate diets might impact on the quality of ournaturalresourcebaseandtheecologicalandeconomichealthofVictoria.

A detailed exploration of the above is an immensely complex task. This 12-month project was

established to test the applicability of scenario and quantitative resourcemodelling to identify andassessthemostcriticalpotentialchallengestoVictoriasfoodsupply.Mostimportantly,theprojectwas

intendedtoputinplaceanappropriatelystructuredmodel,populatedwithsufficientdata,tolaythe

groundworkformoredetailedwhatifresearchtobeconductedinthefuture.

Theprojectsobjectiveswereto:

EngageadiversegroupofstakeholdersinthinkingaboutchallengesandopportunitiesforthefutureofVictoriasfoodsystemtoinformofasetofqualitativescenarios;

Investigatethepotentialapplicabilityofstocksandflowsframeworkmodelstoexplorebio-physicalquestionsrelatedtofoodsystemsandbuildmodellingcapability;and

Conductinitialexplorationsofplausiblefuturescenariosandtheirimplicationsforthe: Abilityofthefoodsystemtoprovideasufficientamountandvarietyofthecorefoodsrequired

foranutritiousdietforallVictorians;

ImpactonVictoriasenvironmentanduseofcriticalresourcesfromtheprovisionofanutritiousdiet;and

Impactsonkeyeconomicindicators:GDP;unemploymentandtradebalance.1.3 ScopeTheUN Foodand AgricultureOrganisation(FAO)hasfurtherdefinedfood securityas encompassing

four components: availability; access; utilisation and stability. This project focuses principally on

availability:sufficientquantitiesoffoodofappropriatequality,suppliedthroughdomesticproductionor

imports(includingfoodaid)[FAO2011].

Thisfocusonavailabilityrecognisesthattheirreduciblebaseoffoodsecurityisthephysicalabilitytoprovideforthenutritionalneedsofourpopulation.Thenecessaryconditionforthemodellingofallthe

scenarios (the commonsocial objective) is that sufficient quantitiesand variety offood tomeet the

requirementsofanutritiousdietareavailableforallcitizens.

1.3.1 ANutritiousDietInthisprojectthephrasesufficientquantitiesoffoodofappropriatequalityisinterpretedasmeaning,

for Victorians, the recommended number, amount and variety of serves as specified in official


17/136

Introduction

3

recommendations fora nutritionally adequatediet. Theproject isonly concernedwithassessing the

availabilityoffoodrequiredtomeettheseofficialrecommendations.

Therefore,thefoodandnutritionanalysisisbasedonanidealdietprofile,notcurrentnormsthatare

characterisedbyoverconsumptionanddietaryimbalances.Recommendedintakelevelsof corefoods

differconsiderably fromfoodconsumptionpatternsofmanypopulationgroupsreportedin the1995

NationalNutritionSurvey(NNS).Forexample,overhalfofmalesaged12-44yearsnationallyhadnot

eatenfruitthedaybeforetheNNSsurveywasconducted[ABS1995].Forothercorefoodssuchasmeatanddairy,movingtothedietaryrecommendationsconstitutesareduceddemandforthesefoodstuffs.

Thesechangescanbeseenascorrectionsaroundthe2010pointintheFoodSurplus/Deficitgraphsin

theconsumedlines(seeAppendix4).

Currentfruit andvegetable productionin Australia falls short of providingsufficientserves of these

foodstomeettherecommendedfoodintakepatterns[ABS2000].However,thisshortfallismaskedto

a certain extent because current food consumption patterns are not consistent with nutrient

recommendationsandsothegapbetweenproductionandrequiredlevelisnotexposed.

1.3.2 FoodAvailability! Foodavailabilityisfundamentallyafunctionoftheamountoffoodrequiredandtheamountproduced.

! Food can beproducedin Victoria,Australia oroverseas. Itis assumedthat itis possible toimport food ifrequired.

! Foodavailabilityalsodependsoneffectivelyfunctioningfoodsystemsandinfrastructure.Itisassumedthat

foodproducedisphysicallyavailabletoconsumersi.e.thatthesystemsfunctioneffectivelytodistributefood.

Food availability is understood as including how much is produced, as well as the physical

infrastructurenecessarytoensurethatfoodisphysicallyavailabletoconsumerssuchasprocessingand

packaging,distributionandstorage(includingthelastmileofhowpeopleactuallygettheirfood).This

understandingisreflectedinFigure1-1.

Figure1-1:FoodAvailabilityasaComponentofFood

Security(Ingram2008)

Themain indicator used toexplore this isnet

foodavailability,thatis,howmuchisproduced

comparedtorequirements.Thisisafunctionof:

Food produced in Victoria for Victorianconsumption; Surplus foodproducedin Victoriathat is

surplus to consumption requirements,

generally exported to Australia and rest of

world;and

Deficitconsumptionrequirementsthatarenot met through Victorian production and

areimportedfromtherestofAustraliaand

theworld.

Inthisproject, itis assumedthatprocessing,packaging,distributionandstorage systemscontinue to

function effectively,providing foodof sufficient qualityto meetnutritional requirements, evenwhile

substantialchangesareappliedtotheiroperatingstructure.

ChangestoVictorianorAustralianfoodproductionareonlyonepartofacomplexsystem(including

factorssuch asproductionelsewhere,distributionandprice impacts),and thereforedonottranslate


18/136


4

directlyandimmediatelyintoalackoflocalfoodavailability.Itisimportanttonotethatthisprojectis

NOTtryingtopredictormodelglobalfood(orotherresource)availabilitythemodellingassumesthat

imports are available to meet domestic requirements. However, through this work we are able to

exploretheextenttowhichresourceallocationdecisionscouldaffectoursurplusesanddeficitsofcore

foods.Theintentistoestablishbasedatathatcouldunderpinfurther,moredetailed,investigationsof

thevulnerabilityorresilienceofourfoodsupplysysteminthefaceofcomplexchange.Vulnerabilities

arefurtherdiscussedinSection4.4.

Theallocationofphysicalresources to competinguses (e.g. land orenergy resourcesfor agriculture

versus other areas ofproduction); availability of technological systems for theefficient utilisationof

resources (e.g. water or fertiliser);information flows (e.g. to reducewaste); andchanges in climatic

conditions,arethemselvesaffectedbysocial,political,culturalandeconomicconditionsandsystems.In

this work those socio-technical landscapes are framed through alternative scenarios that provide

settingsforthewaytheessentialphysicaldeterminantsoffoodproductionanddistributionplayout

overtime.While these landscapes themselves arecritical inallocationof resourcesand howfood is

produced,thisprojectisfocusedonthephysicalandtechnicallimitstotheavailabilityoffood.

1.3.3 OtherElementsofFoodSecurity! Foodavailabilityisnecessary,butnotsufficient,forfoodsecurity.

Therearemanysocio-economicortechnicalaspectsbeyondavailabilitythatarecriticaltofoodsecurity

overall. This project is in no way suggesting that availability alone provides food security it is

undeniablynecessary,butnotsufficient.Theotherthreecriticalelementsinfoodsecurityidentifiedby

theFAOare:access,utilisationandstability.Whilethesearenotthefocusofthisproject,assumptions

havebeenmadeaboutthemthatframethisinvestigation.Theseareoutlinedbelow.

Access

Notincluded:

Whetherorhowindividualshaveadequateresources(entitlements)for

acquiringappropriatefoodsfora

nutritiousdiet. Priceimpactsofthephysicalchanges

modelled.

Impactsofpriceorotherfactors(e.g.culture,marketingormarketcontrol)on

demandforandconsumptionofa

nutritiousdiet.

Assumed:

Availabilityofthefoodsforanutritiousdietdoesnotmeanthatthesefoodsarenecessarilyaccessible.Producemaybe

exportedifabetterpricecanbeobtainedelsewhere,and

someindividualsmaybeunabletoacquireandconsumeit. Similarly,itwouldbepossibleforfoodproducedin

Australiatobedirectlyexportedtomeettheneedsofother

countries,particularlyiftheyowntheland.

Awiderangeofmechanismscouldneedtobeconsideredtoensurefoodaccessinthecaseofsignificantpricebarriersor

prolongedscarcityofcorefoodse.g.fromwelfarethrough

toexportrestrictionsorrationing.

Consumerpreferencesarecomplex,andsignificantlyshapedbymarketingandinfluenceofsocialnorms.Bynot

exploringthesecriticalfactors,thisprojectimplicitly

assumesthatpeoplewillconsumetheavailablediet.

Definingthepolicyandsocialchangesthatwouldenable/

causethistohappenisoutsidetheprojectscope.

Utilisation

Notincluded:

Whetherorhowindividualshavetheabilitytoutiliseavailablefoodfor

nutritionalwell-being,throughclean

water,sanitationandhealthcare.

Assumed:

Thattheseareinplace,thatfoodsafetyandwaterqualitysystemsarefunctioningeffectively,foodprocessingis

availabletospreadsurplusacrosstheyearetc.,sothatthe

foodthatisavailablecanmeetnutritionalneeds.

Availablefoodsareofsufficientnutritionalvaluetoprovide


19/136

Introduction

5

theestimatedamountofkeynutrientsusedtodetermine

requirements.Thisassumesthatthechangingclimate,

productionsystems,andprocessing,storageand

distributionsystems,donotreducethenutritionalvalueof

foodsthatreachtheconsumer.

Stability

Notincluded:

Acutestabilityissuesi.e.responsetosuddendisruptionssuchaspandemics,

socialactionssuchastruckstrikes,or

floodsandfires.

Limitstotimelyorrepeatedrestorationofpre-existingservices.

Assumed:

Thisprojectfocusesattentionondynamicsthatcouldundermineexistingsystems,potentiallyrequiringstructural

changeincurrentsystemsofprovision.

Themodellingallowsforthecomplexinteractionsbetween(bio)physicalsystems(water,energy,climate,soil)thatcan

produceunexpectedorrapidchangesinfoodsupply.

Understandingtheserelationshipsiscriticaltolonger-term

stabilityofthepopulationsfoodsupply.

1.4 ContextTheVictorianEco-InnovationLab(VEIL)isanon-profit,university-based,designandresearchthink-tank established by the Victorian Government through the Environmental Sustainability Action

Statement in 2006 (initially funded through the Victorian Sustainability Fund). Its mission is to

envision and critically review plausible sustainable futures. This has involved the exploration of

scenarios forthe futuredevelopmentofMelbourne /Victoriaover thenext25years,considering,in

particular,changesinsystemsofprovisionofwater,energy,food,transportandbuiltinfrastructureto

meet the requirements of a low carbon economy and to increase resilience in the face of changing

patternsofclimate.VEILsscenario,designandinnovationprojectionsinrelationtofoodprovidedthe

initialbackgroundtothescenarioformationprocess.

VEIL and itsresearchpartners haveembarkedon this projectwith an escalating concernabout key

drivers of change inthe food system that appear tobe accelerating faster thanpolicy, researchand

innovation is responding. A critical aspect of this project is to investigate whether the nutritionalrequirements can bemet considering the challenges of, and response to, climate change; peak oil;

populationandfertiliser/nutrientavailability.

Ourunderstandinghasinformedhowtheseissuesarehandledandissummarisedbelow.

1.4.1 ClimateChange! HighlevelsofclimatechangeconsistentwiththeA1F1IPCCscenarioaretheminimumthatcanbeexpected.

! ThereisscientificconsensusontheneedforAnnex1countries(suchasAustralia)toreducegreenhousegas

emissionsbyatleast20-45%on1990levelsby2020toavoidcatastrophic,irreversibleclimatechange.

Thisprojectattemptstoinformeffortstodoso.

1.4.1.1ClimateImpactsThisprojectispositionedwithinthecontextofahighlevelofclimatechange.Thepotentialimpactsof

climatechangeonavailabilityoffoodareextremelydiverseandcomplex.Asconcernabouttheimpacts

andresponsestoclimatechangeisakeydriveroftheproject,littlewouldbegainedfrominclusionofa

lowclimatechangescenario.

ThehighlevelofclimatechangetakenasabaselineassumptionofthisprojectisbasedontheA1F1

scenariofromtheIntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChangesSpecialReportonEmissionsScenarios

(IPCCSRES),whichhasthefollowingkeyassumptions:


20/136


6

Highglobaleconomicgrowthrates; Populationgrowthwhichpeaksmid-century(2050)anddeclines; Highlevelsofglobalco-operationandlivingstandards(convergence); Energyrequirementsprincipallyderivedfromfossilfuelsources;and Increasinglyefficienttechnology[IPCC2000].The context of the scenarios should therefore be understood as consistent with the A1F1 climatescenario,asdescribedforSouthWestVictoria,fortheperiod2010-2030,inaVictorianDPIproject:

Rainfallin SEAustraliais becoming increasingly erratic. Sometimeswe getlittleornorain for a few

years.Thenwegetaburstinsummerfollowedbynothing.Agriculturebecomesopportunistic.Theoverall

reduction inrainfallproduces significantly lower crop yields.Extreme stormsproducemajor losses in

whatisleft.Anycommoditythatsurvivesboththelowrainfallandthestormsgetsagoodprice,butthisis

patchy in location and timing. Climate change seems to happening faster than we thought itwould.

Householdstressinfarmingfamiliesincreasessignificantly.

Temperatureis increasingatorabovetheupperenvelopeoftheIPCCprojections.Historicalrecordsfor

thenumberofdaysabove35oCareexceededalmosteveryyear.IntensebushfiresarefrequentinVictoria.

Fuel loadseventuallybecome depletedthroughburningand limited regrowth.Smokehazebecomes a

regularfeatureoftheskyscape.Asthmabecomesarealproblem.TheGreenlandicesheethasdecreasedto

alarming levels. Thawing of frozentundra producesmethane release.The rate of temperature rise isfurtheraccelerated.Sea-levelriseiscausingproblemsinBangladesh.Stormsurgesareexacerbatingthe

plightofHollandandotherlow-levelcountries.Scientistsarewarningofabreakdowninfundamental

ecosystemservices.Climaterefugeesappearinincreasingnumbers[DPI2009:13].

Thisclimatecontextsetsthesceneforhigh(butvarying)levelsofwaste/ lossandreducedirrigation

reliabilityinallscenarios.

1.4.1.2GreenhouseEmissionReductions! Thereisascientificandinternationalpoliticalconsensusontheneedforrapidreductioningreenhousegas

emissions.

! Australiawillendeavourtoreduceemissionsinlinewithinternationalcommitmentsandrequirements.

There is a scientific and international political consensuson theneedto limit temperature riseto amaximumof2Cabovepre-industriallevels toavoidcatastrophic,irreversibleclimatechange.Thisis

mostrecentlyaffirmedintheCancunagreementtowhichAustraliaisasignatory[UNFCCC2011:2]:

3. Recognizes that warming of the climate system is unequivocal and that most of the observed increase in

global average temperatures since the mid twentieth century is very likely due to the observed increase in

anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations, as assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change in its Fourth Assessment Report.

4. Further recognizes that deep cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions are required according to science,and as documented in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change,

with a view to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions so as to hold the increase in global average

temperature below 2C above pre-industrial levels, and that Parties should take urgent action to meet this

long-term goal, consistent with science and on the basis of equity.

Fora50percentchanceoflimitingtemperatureriseto2degrees,atmosphericCO2-ewouldneedtobe

stabilisedat450ppm(partspermillion).ThiswouldrequireAnnex1countries(suchasAustralia)to

reduceemissionsby2540%on1990levelsby2020and80-95%by2050[IPCC2007].

ButtheCancunAgreementgoesfurtherand alsorecognizestheneedtoconsiderstrengtheningthe

long-termglobalgoalon thebasisofthebestavailablescientificknowledge, includingin relation toa

globalaveragetemperaturerise of1.5C [UNFCCC2011:2].The best available scientificknowledge

includesevidence from leadingclimate scientists that limiting to2C is dangerously inadequate. For

example,Hansenetal.[2008]suggeststhatatmosphericlevelsofCO2above350ppm(partspermillion)


21/136

Introduction

7

will destabilise the climate and trigger runaway (i.e. unpredictable and non-linear) effects. They

thereforesuggestthatatmosphericCO2levelsmustbestabilisedandreducedfromthecurrentlevelof

391ppm3asamatterofurgency.Acorrespondingaspirationforemissionsreductionsisintherealmof

60%by2020,orfaster.

Withagriculturemakingup16%ofAustralianemissions,andthefoodsystemapproximately28%[ACF

2007] it is clear that anysignificantreduction ingreenhouse gasemissionsacross theeconomywill

requiresubstantialchangestohowfoodisprovidedandcouldimpactonfoodavailability.Thisprojectinvestigatesthebroaderphysicalimpactsofsubstantialandeffectiveaction,particularlyin

relation to food availability, with a view to informing strategies for achieving these emissions

reductions.Therefore,theprojectexploresambitiousemissionsreductionprograms,withallscenarios

includingprogramsoverthenexttwenty-fiveyears.

A highclimate change scenariohasbeenmaintained regardless of thediffering emissionsreduction

trajectoriesbecause:

A1F1SREShasalreadybeenshowntobeconservativeas bothglobalemissionsandtheapparentimpactsofclimatechangehaveexceededthoseunderpinningoranticipatedinthisscenario[Allison

et. al. 2009;Climate CongressCopenhagen 2009;Hurrell 2010]. There is noagreed worse than

A1F1scenario.

Thereis a long lag inclimate systems,so emissions reductionsbetween2010 and 2030willnotreduceclimatechangeimpactsby2060[Solomonetal.2009]. Thereisastrongpossibilityofhittingclimatetippingpointsandtriggeringfeedbackloopswhich

meansthattheclimateisunlikelytoreturntoapreviousstatealongthesametrajectory[Allisonet

al. 2009]. Reducingouremissions thisyeartowhattheywere in1990willnotgiveus the same

climateas1990,evenby2060[Solomonetal.2009].

1.4.2 Oil! Massivechangestohowoilissuppliedandusedareunavoidableandimminent. Thereisapossibilitythat

fundamentalshiftsineconomicstructuremayalsoberequired.Theextenttowhichthepeakingofglobal

oilproduction threatens future food availability in Victoria will depend on the successof a varietyof

strategies,manyofwhichareexploredinthisproject.

1.4.2.1PeakOilPeakOilreferstothemaximumrateofoilproductioninanyarearecognisingthatitisafinitenatural

resource,subjecttodepletion[Campbell2011].Whenacountrysproductionpeaks,itbecomesmore

reliant on imports (unlessdemand is reduced). When the maximum rate of global oil production is

reached,increasesinconsumptioncannolongerbesustained-demandwilloutstripsupply.Theability

toaccess remaining oilreserves becomes increasinglyexpensiveanddifficult,requiringsubstantially

(andconsistently)higherpricestomakeinvestmentinthisproductioncommerciallyviable.

Australiasdomesticprimaryoilproduction(crudeoil,condensateandLPG)peakedin2000-01andhas

declined on average 5% per year to 2007-08 [APPEA 2008; ABARE 2008]. This has increased our

reliance on imported oil and oil products every year since. This research assumes that Australias

domesticoilproductioncontinuestofallovertheperiod20102030,requiringincreasingimportsoralternativefuelsourcestofulfildemand.

3Seewww.co2now.org


22/136


8

Figure1-2:IEAProjectedWorldOilProductionbyType

(NewPoliciesScenario)(IEA2010)

The latest WorldEnergy Outlook 2010 from the

International Energy Agency (IEA) [2010]

acknowledges a global peak in conventional oil

production in 2006 and anticipates substantial

decline rates from currently producing fields

(Figure1-2).

TheabilitytomeetglobaloildemandinthisIEAscenario (noting that the estimate demand

includesasubstantialglobalclimateresponseand

substantial demand reduction in developed

nations) is reliant on the unknown viability of

fieldsyettobedevelopedorfound[IEA2010:8].

1.4.2.2OilandFoodWhilepeakoilissometimesseenprimarilyasatransportissue,liquidfuelavailabilityandcostiscritical

to the agriculture and food system more widely. For example, fuel costs account for a significant

proportionofagriculturalexpenditureinAustralia:32.4%(cropping),21.1%(beef)and15.4%(dairy),

butlessthan1%ofcostsformostotherindustries[Sloan,SipeandDodson2008].Foodproductionanddistributionsystemsacrosstheworldaredependentonaccesstoaffordablefossil-fuelbasedenergy.

Oilandgasarealsousedforproductionofpesticidesandherbicidesandotheragriculturalchemicals,

particularly fertilisers(see1.4.3).Farmmachineryandpumpsare runwithpetroleumfuelandother

materialsandequipmentusedonfarmsareoftenderivedfromoilproductsordependonpetroleum

fuelsformanufacture.

1.4.2.3EROEIandEconomicExpansionTheprojectedincreasesin supplyfromunconventionaloilandfieldsyettobedevelopedor foundin

Figure1-2abovedonottakeintoaccountdecliningEnergyReturnonEnergyInvested(EROEI).EROEI

istheratioofhowmuchenergyisavailableforusecomparedtotheamountofenergytakentoextract,

refineanddeliveritandhencethepricethatmustbesustainedtomakeitworthproducing.Extracting

energy fromunconventional sources requiressignificantly greater inputs of energy than in thepast,thereforeitcostsmoreandhaslowerfinancialreturns.

The relationship between high oil prices and economic contraction, or low oil prices and economic

expansion,isattractingrenewedattention.Eventsinrecentyearshaveledtosuggestionssuchasthatof

Murphy and Hall [2010a; 2010b] that economic growth requires not only energy per se, but

inexpensiveenergy.Further, theInternationalEnergyAgencynotedin itsFebruary2011OilMarket

Update that the global oil burden4 in2010was thesecond-highest following amajorrecession and

could rise this year to levels close to those that have coincided in the past with marked economic

slowdowns[IEA2011citedinOGJEditors2011].Adetailedexplanationofhowandwhyhighoilprices

arecloselylinkedwitheconomicrecessioncanbefoundinTverberg[2011].Recentglobalmodellingof

thispeakoildilemmashowsjusthowcriticaltheseissuescanbecome[ERCUK2009;Korowicz2010].

Giventhatglobalproductionofconventionaloilhaspeaked,asithasinAustralia,significantchallenges

to availability and affordability of imported oil are taken as given. This critical problem for the oil

dependencyoftheAustralianfoodsystemandeconomymorebroadlyisakeydriverofallscenarios.

4Theoilburdenconceptisdefinedasnominaloilexpenditures(demandmultipliedbythecrudeprice)dividedbynominal

grossdomesticproduct(GDP).Arisingoilburdenwillnotnecessarilycauseaneconomicrecession,butitcangreatly

compoundtheeffectofothereconomicandfinancialshocks[IEA2011citedinOGJEditors2011].


23/136

Introduction

9

1.4.3 Fertilisers! There will be pressure on fertiliser availability and cost, but the responses to this pressure play out

differentlyacrossdifferentscenarios.

Availability and use of fertiliser and other agricultural inputs is a critical component to levels of

agriculturalproduction.Aswithoil,globaldemandforfertiliserproductsisincreasing.

The fertiliser ingredients that agriculture ismost reliant on are Phosphorus (P), Nitrogen (N) andPotassium (K). Phosphorus is, for the most part, derived from phosphate rock, a non-renewable

resourcethatismined.Theavailability/costofphosphatefertiliserisdependentontheextentand

locationofphosphorusreserves,whicharesubjecttothesamedepletionproblemasoilleadingto

concernaboutglobalpeakphosphorusoccurringby2030.Allfarmersneedphosphorus,butjustfive

countriescontrol85%oftheworldsremainingphosphaterockreserves[Whiteetal.2010].

Nitrogenfertilisers(e.g.ureaandammonia)aremanufacturedthroughaprocessthatusesnaturalgas

to supply hydrogen. The availability / cost of these fertilisers is therefore closely connected to the

availabilityandcostoffossilfuelse.g.oil.

Potassiumis generally appliedusing potash.All potassium-based fertiliserssuppliedin Australia are

currentlyimported[Ryan2010].

1.4.4 Population! MediumgrowthpopulationscenariopopulationofAustraliais29millionin2030and36millionin2050.

Thepopulationassumptionsunderlyingthisprojectarebasedonthemediumgrowthscenariooutlined

in the Australian Bureau of Statistics population projections, which suggest 29 million people in

Australiain2030and36millionin2050[ABS2008](Figure1-3).

While there areon-going tensions relating to population policy inAustralia, a continued increase is

assumedbecause:

Adegreeofpopulationgrowthisinherentindemographicandagestructureswithintheexistingpopulation.Populationstabilisationisunlikelywithoutsignificantpolicyintervention.

5

Substantialglobalpopulationgrowthis expectedtocontinue. Itis likelythatAustralias relativelylow population densities and high per-capita resource use will continue to attract potential

immigrants.

Theresourceandclimatepressuresexploredinthisprojectareanticipatedgloballyandmayleadtovery large population displacement. Pressure to accept refugees, particularly from conflict or

climate-affected areas can be expected to increase. A number of participants in this project

considered there to be a high likelihood of sharply increasing pressure to accept refugees,

particularlyfromclimate-affectedcountriesintheregion.

Undertaking analysisbased on assumptions of increasing population cancontribute to informeddebateastohowVictoriaandAustraliacansustainablyaccommodateagreaterpopulation.

Thereforeitisassumedthattheeconomicpressuretoacceptagrowingpopulationandrefugeedemand

incomingdecadeswilloutweighdomesticpoliticalpressuretostabilisepopulation.Conductinganalysis

based on the medium population projection takes a middle line between possible stabilisation and

pressureforlargerpopulationincreases.

5ABSSeriesDproducesastablepopulation,onthebasisofzeronetimmigrationandareducedfertilityrate(~1.6)[ABS2008].


24/136


10

Figure1-3-AustralianPopulationProjections


25/136

Methodology

11

2. MethodologyTheprimaryobjectiveofthisprojectwastodevelopanddemonstrateanewmethodologythatcanbe

usedtoexplorethelinksbetweenlandandresourceuseandtheprovisionofanutritiousdiettothe

population. This section outlines the methodology that has been developed and explains why this

combinationoftoolswasused.

Thethreeelementsofthemethodologydevelopedare:1. Determiningtheamountandvarietyoffoodsrequiredtomeettherecommendationsofnutrition

referencestandardsforthepopulation;

2. Constructingqualitativescenariostoframedivergentsocio-economicandtechnicaltrajectories;and3. Translatingqualitativescenariostoquantitativescenariosandanalysingtheirimplications.2.1 Foodrequirementsforanutritiousdiet

! Useof freshfoods: Ithasbeenassumed that required foodavailability couldbe assessed byestimating

availabilityofcertainamountsandtypesofrelativelyminimallyprocessedfoods,e.g.plainbreadandfresh

fruitandvegetables.

! Anutritiousdietisachievedbydailyconsumptionofadequateamountsofavarietyoffoodsfromthefivefood

groups,asoutlinedintheAustralianGuidetoHealthyEating.

ToinvestigateavailabilityofanutritiousdietfortheVictorianpopulation,itisfirstnecessarytodefine

whatitis.Akeychallengewhentranslatingnutritionanddietaryrecommendationsintopracticeisthe

quantificationoftheamountandtypesoffoodsneededtomeettheconceptsofbalance,varietyand

moderation for a nutritious diet. Government authorities have developed food selection guides as

research, educational,promotionalandplanning tools to translate scientificknowledgeof nutritional

requirementsandfoodcompositionintoapracticalguideforfoodselection.

Withtheexceptionofbreastmilkinthefirstfewmonthsoflife,noonefoodcanprovideanutritionally

adequate diet or achieve the dietary guidelines. Instead, governments with advice from nutrition

expertsrecommendthatanutritiousdietbeachievedby consumingcertainamountsof avarietyof

foodsfromthefivefoodgroupseachday,asoutlinedintheAustralianGuidetoHealthyEating(AGTHE)(Figure2-1)[CommonwealthDepartmentofHealthandFamilyServices1998].

TheAGTHEdefinesanutritiousdietas onethatmeetsthekeynutritionreferencestandards,namely,

theAustraliaRecommendedDietaryIntakes[NHMRC1991]andtheDietaryGuidelinesforAustralians

[NHMRC1992]andtheDietaryGuidelinesforChildrenandAdolescents(NHMRC1995a).Theaimofthe

AGTHEisto,encouragetheconsumptionofavarietyoffoodsfromeachofthefivefoodgroupsevery

day in proportions that are consistent with theDietary Guidelines for Australians" [Commonwealth

DepartmentofHealthandFamilyServices1998].


26/136


12

Figure2-1:TheAustralianGuidetoHealthy

Eating

The AGTHE has been constructed by arranging nutritious

foods, or core foods, into one of five food groups on the

basis of similar nutrient profiles. In particular there is a

distinguishing nutrient(s) for each food group. Foods

allocatedtoaparticularfoodgrouparearichsourceofthe

distinguishingnutrient(s)characteristicofthatfoodgroup.

A standard serve size is provided for foods in each foodgroup such that different foods within a particular food

groupcanbeexchangedtoprovideapproximatelyequivalent

amountsofthedistinguishingnutrient(s)forthatfoodgroup.

Arecommendednumberofservesperdayforfoodsineach

foodgroup is provided to support a nutritionally adequate

daily food intake for population groups depending on age,

genderandlife-stagecharacteristics.

Consumption of this recommended number and variety of food serves will contribute to a diet

consistent with the Recommended Dietary Intakes and Dietary Guidelines. However, for those

population groupswithenergy requirementsadditional to that provided by the recommended food

serves,thereis someflexibilityto includetheso-called extra foodswhilemaintaininga healthydiet.

Extrafoodshavearelativelylownutrientcontentand/orcontainahighamountoffat,sugarand/orsalt

andarenotessentialtotheachievementofanutritiousdiet.Thecombinationofcoreandextrafoodsis

capturedinTable2-1[AGHE1998].

From this information, an estimate of the amount and variety of foods required to meet the

recommendationsofnutritionreferencestandardsforthepopulationcanbeobtainedby:

1.Selectingfoodstorepresenteachfoodgroup;

2. Selectingthepopulationcategoriesforwhichthenutritionimplicationswouldbeassessed;3. Determiningthenumberofrecommendedservesforeachfoodgroup;and4. Estimatingtheamountsoffoodstuffsrequiredtomeetthenutritionreferencestandardsforthe

population.

TheresultsofthisprocessareexplainedinSection3.1.

Revisionoffoodestimatesbasedonupdatedfoodselectionguideanddietaryguidelines

Thefoodselectionguideonwhichtheassessmentofthenutritionaladequacyofthefoodsupplyunder

eachscenarioisbasedistheAGTHEdevelopedin1998asthisisthe currentAustralianfoodguideatthe

timethattheresearchwasundertaken.However,theAGTHEisunderreviewanditisanticipatedthatthe

guide,includingthenumberandtypesoffoodsrecommendedfromeachfoodgroup,willbeupdatedto

capturerevisednutritionrecommendationscontainedwithinthe2006NutrientReferenceValues(NRVs)

forAustralians[NHMRC2006]andtherevisedDietaryGuidelinedocumentsbeingpreparedforAustralian

Adults,AustralianChildrenandOlderAustraliansanticipatedtobereleasedduring2011.6

6Onepracticaldifferencethatwouldemergefromthefutureuseofthe2006NRVsisthatthescopeofthemodellingtoassess

thenutritionandhealthimplicationswouldneedtobeextendedtotakeintoaccounttheAcceptableMacronutrient

DistributionRanges(proportionofdietaryenergyderivedfromfat,carbohydrateandprotein).


27/136

Methodology

13

Table2-1:Numberofdailysampleservesneededtoachieveanutritiousdietforchildren,adolescentsandadults

2.2 QualitativeScenarioDevelopmentIneffect,toengagewithscenariosistoholdtwoormorestoriesinmindatthesametimeandtherefore,

holdthefuturenotasabelief,butasafiction [ESF/COST2008:18].

Scenarios are used in this project to enable exploration of a complex array of drivers of change,

includingeconomic,social,(bio)physicalandtechnologicalchanges,thathavethepotentialtoimpacton

foodavailabilityinVictoria.Astherearehighlevelsofuncertaintyinrelationtomany(ifnotall)ofthe

critical dynamics, theuse of scenarios allowsexplorationof different trajectorieswithoutneeding to

determinewhatismorelikelyorpreferable.

Qualitative what-if or exploratory scenarios are suitable for this purpose. These have plausible,

internallyconsistentstorylinesbuilt arounddifferent social,cultural, political andeconomicregimes.

Theyrepresentdifferentdynamicsofchange,responsesandpathways.Exploratoryscenariosarenot

intendedtomakepredictions,foreseethefuture,orgettherightanswer.

Divergent exploratory scenarios can also be used to describe different sets of operating conditions

resultingfromdifferentresponsestotheidentifieddriversanddynamics.Inthisway,theycanbeused

toexploredifferentpolicyorculturalapproachestokeyissues.

The scenario timeframe is a 25-year horizon, for both practical and strategic reasons (following a

processdevelopedintheworkofoneoftheresearchpartners,theVictorianEco-InnovationLab).This

timeframeissufficiently removedfromthepresentday thatmostworkshopparticipantsandreaders


28/136


29/136

Methodology

15

impacts,synergiesandtrade-offscanbeproperlyidentifiedintheASFF,unlikeothermodelsoranalysis

withlessscope.Additionally,thephysicalfeasibility(orotherwise)ofagivenscenarioishighlightedas

the relationships in the ASFF are based on irrefutable mass and energy balance. Furthermore,

innovativesolutionstoanyidentifiedproblemscanbeexploredintheASFFsincepastbehaviour(such

as economic relationships) is not hard-wired into the ASFF. However, past behaviour can be

approximated in future scenarios based on projections of historical parameters and use of key

feedbacks,asdescribedbelow.

TheopenbiophysicalnatureoftheASFFisintendedfordevelopmentofstrategyscenariosanalysed

arenotintendedtobenormative(ideal)orprescriptive.Itisdesignedtoexplorethequestionofwhere

thenationaleconomicsystemcouldgooverthelongtermwithinirrefutablebiophysicalconstraints,to

informthedevelopmentofappropriatepolicy.Nooptimisationorideologyisbuiltintothecoreofthe

ASFF,thoughsocio-economicfeedbacksareincorporatedinseveralways(see3.3.1).TheASFFemploys

mass-balanceidentitiesassociatedwithstockandflowdynamicsthroughoutthenationaleconomyand

its interactionwith the environment,but doesnotmodel behaviour, insteadusingmany exogenous

inputsforparametersofsocial,economicandtechnologicalchange. Initsoperation,theASFFisvery

analogous to a flight simulator, where the pilot learns from experimenting in the computer

environment,toavoidcrashingtheaircraftinreal-life. Aswithaflightsimulator,therearealsomany

fixedassumptionsthatgovernhowthesystemworks.

ThekeypurposeofusingtheASFF,then,istoidentifystrategicenvironmentalorresourceissuesin

advance and explore alternative physically-feasible pathways, rather than attempting to optimise

outcomesforfuturesthataremarginalvariationsonthepast.ThismakestheASFFanidealvehicleto

exploreimplicationsandlimitationsoffoodavailability.

WhiletheASFFhasnotpreviouslybeenusedtoexploreprovisionofanutritiousdiettothepopulation,

itisparticularlysuitedto investigationofresourceallocationissuesandprovidedunique insightsfor

thisanalysis.

SeeBox1formoreinformation.


30/136


16

Box1:TheAustralianStocksandFlowsFramework

TheAustralianStocksandFlowsFramework(ASFF)hasbeendeveloped toassess the biophysicallongevityofthe

Australianeconomy. Ittreatsthebiophysicalsystemsasprimaryif aphysicallimitis reached inthebiophysical

systemthen,whilethevalueofthedecliningresourcemayincrease,theneedsoftheeconomymaynotbeabletobe

met.

It is a process-based simulation that covers the physically significant elements of each sector of the Australian

economy,aswecurrentlyunderstandthem,includingsomeserviceaspects(seeFigure2-2).Naturalresources(land,

water, air, biomass and mineral resources) are also represented explicitly. Part of the framework incorporates a

physicalinput-outputmodelforthetransformationofbasicmaterialsandenergytypes[Lennox,Turneretal.2005].

Elsewhere, there are physical accounting relationships that represent the key processes, such as converting the

requirement fortransport ofgoodsintothe size ofthe freighttransport fleetand the fuel requirement.A detailed

explanationoftherelationshipsthroughouttheASFFisavailable[Poldy,Foranetal.2000].Allvariablesrepresenting

physicalstocksandflowsobeythethermodynamicconstraintsofconservationofmassandenergy.

Figure2-2:SchematicFlowDiagramofModernEconomy

Schematicsummaryofphysicalflowconnectionsofa

moderneconomylikeAustralias.Flowsofpeople,energyandmaterialsmayenterandexittheeconomy,

principallyasimportsandexportsontheleftandright

respectively.Withinthedomesticeconomy,natural

resourcesareextractedorharvestedfromthe

environment(shownatthecentrebottomofthe

diagram).Materialsaretransformedprogressively

(goingupwardinthediagram),withtheuseofsuitableenergy,toeventuallyprovidegoodsand

servicesforthepopulation.Thepopulationprovidesa

labourforce(atthetop)foralltheeconomicsectors.

Wastesandemissionsaregeneratedbytheeconomic

activity,andmayberecycled,exportedorreturnedto

theenvironment.Otherflowsoccurbetweeneconomic

sectors.

Geographically,theASFFcoverscontinentalAustralia,includingthemarineareawithinAustraliaseconomicexclusion

zone(forfishingandfuels).Withinspecificsectorsoftheframeworkdifferentgeographicresolutionsareused,e.g.,

agricultureisresolvedatthe58statisticaldivisionsacrossAustralia.ThetemporalextentoftheASFFislong-term:

scenariosoverthe futurearecalculated to2100,and themodelisalso run

food supply scenarios - full

Documents