Climate Change and Agriculture Trade: Risks and Responses

- Future Needs in SPS Technical Cooperation -

Richard A. SikoraChairman SP-IPM, CGIAR

Professor, University of Bonn Germany

1. Crop Germplasm Conservation, Enhancement, and Use

2. Diets, Agriculture, Nutrition, and Health

3. Institutional Innovations, ICTs, and Markets

4. Climate Change and Agriculture

5. Agricultural Systems for the Poor and Vulnerable

6. Water, Soils, and Ecosystems

7. Forests and Biomass

The Building Blocks of the Strategy and Results Framework are a Set of Seven Interlinked MEGA Programs

and Two Platforms- Gender and Capacity Strengthening -

World population growth, reduced crop land, water scarcity and climate change

will greatly influence how we grow foodand

Pests and disease will continue to limit yield therefore

IPM in international development is important to food security and trade

Fishbowls – “Gettyi amges”

CGIAR Systemwide Program on IPM

• What SP-IPM does:

• Develop knowledge and technologies for innovative crop protection

• Promote strategies to increase yield of safe and affordable food

• Stress 4 new thrusts to better respond to new global challenges:

1. Adapt IPM to climate change2. Improve food and feed security and safety3. Increase agro-ecosystem resilience4. Promote capacity building in IPM

Climate change impactsIncreased hungerSpread of diseaseChanges in water availabilityInfrastructure damageChange in forest coverLoss of biodiversitySea level rise

Padgham, 2007

Maize yield variability and ENSO activity In Zimbabwe. Source: Cane et al., 1994

Impacts will not be evenly distributed and this make IPM even more complex

Climate change threats to food security and trade

• increase in population and life cycles of existing pests• range expansion, higher pest pressure in existing range• invasion by introduced or migrated alien species • reduction of crops tolerance and resistance • increase in mycotoxin contamination • loss of wild crop races needed for resistance breeding • decrease in soil biodiversity and natural biocontrol• reduction of beneficial insects for pest and weed control• reduction in pesticide effectiveness due to selection

Total food consumption 2003 - 2050 ca. + 100 % increase

Population growthFood consumption/person, Total

consumption (134 countries)

%

95 Total Consumption(total cereals)

Population dynamics

Consumption/person

75

55

35

15

-5

-25

1993 2003 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

0

1

2

3

4

5

6EU

-25

Mex

ico

Chin

aJa

pan

Oth

Eur

ope

East

Asi

aUS

AW

orld

tota

lIn

dia

Oth

Lat

. Am

er.

Cana

daO

th A

sia

Arge

ntin

aM

idea

stBr

azil

Aust

ralia

for.

USS

RAf

rica

Tonn

es/h

ecta

reWheat yields 2008 and needed by 2020

UN/FAO production goal for wheat 4 tons/ha by 2020

Average by 2020 to produce 760 mlln t

World average 2008

Yield losses caused by pests, diseases and weeds

(Oerke et al., 1994)

Crop

Rice 15.1 20.7 15.6 51.4

Wheat 12.4 9.3 12.3 34.0

Barley 10.1 8.8 10.6 29.4

Maize 10.8 14.5 13.1 38.3

Potato 16.3 16.1 8.9 41.3

Soya 9.0 10.4 13.0 32.4

Cotton 10.5 15.4 11.8 37.7

Coffee 14.9 14.9 10.3 40.0

Yield losses (%)

Diseases

Pests Weeds Total

Mean 12.4 13.8 12.0 38.1

346.5 M t

40.6 M t22.1 M t

92.5 M t

31.4 M t

25.4 M t

37.8 M t

29.3 M t 30.0 M t

180.6 M t

41.5 M t

0.780

0,610

0.632

0.424

0.583

0.447

0.523

0.691

0.560

0.6910.805

0.822

0.349

0,349

0.312

0.248

0.255

0.255

0.237

0.286

0.247

0.3000.354

0.417

Effect of Pests and Crop Protection on Maize Production, 2002-04- the contribution of targeted plant protection to crop security -

Production potential940.3 x 106 t (= 100%)

Production without control296.7 x 106 t (= 31.6%)

Production with control648.5 x 106 t (= 69.0%)

Loss potential 68.4% Actual losses 31.0%

EC Oerke, unpublished

SP-IPM Thrust I:Adapt IPM to climate change

1. increase in population and life cycles of existing pests

2. range expansion

3. higher pest pressure in existing range

4. invasion by introduced or migrated alien species

5. need for suitable IPM approaches

Potato Tuber MothPhthorimaea operculella (PTM)

• Invasive species; reported from more than 90 countries• Adapted to wide range of different climates and agroecologies• Yield losses due to leaf and tuber infestation at harvest• Storage pest in tropical and subtropical countries

The main world potato production areas and range expansion = PTM occurrences

•Phthorimaea operculella•Symmetrischema tangolias

•Tecia solanivora

Table 1. Estimated annual costs associated with some non-indigenous species introduction in the USA (x millions of dollars). Mod. after Pimentel, D. et al, (1999).

___________________________________________________________________________________Non-Indigenous Losses and Control

Category Species Damages costs Total_PLANTS 25,000

Purple loosestrife --- --- $45Aquatic weeds $10 $100 110Crop weeds 24,000 3,000 27,000Weeds in pastures 1,000 5,000 6,000

ARTHROPODS 4,500Imported fire ant 600 400 1,000Formosan termite 1,000 NA 1,000Green crab 44 NA 44Gypsy moth NA 11 11Crop pests 13,000 500 13,500Forest pests 2,100 NA 2,100

MICROBES 20,000 Crop plant pathogens 21,000 500 21,500Forest plant pathogens 2,100 NA 2,100Dutch elm disease NA 100 100

____________________________________________________________________________________

Climate change scenarios for the potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella

A: Generation index (generations/year) under present temperature conditions(only potato production areas are shown).

Sporleder et al. (2008)

B: Generation index change by 2050 due to increased temperature predicted by using the atmospheric general circulation model by Govindasamy et al. (2003). (only potato production areas are shown).

Sporleder et al. (2007)

Climate change scenarios for the potato tuber moth Phthorimaea operculella

1-88-1212-1618-19

SP-IPM’s answer to expected climate change challenges

• Development of methodologies to identify regions and cropping systems vulnerable to increased pest damage

• Improve NARS capacity to identify dangerous invasive pest and disease organisms

• Design IPM strategies to enhance resilience of vulnerable agro-ecosystems

• Development of strategies for adapting IPM to pests under different climatic conditions

• Capacity building to decrease contaminants

Contaminants in the food chain

• Pests and Diseases • Pesticides• Aflatoxins and Mycotoxins• Microbial pathogens

Depending on what you eat or drink determines their importance

Depending on where you live determines what you eat or drink

Depending on what you can afford determines your pollution intake

Depending on IPM used the level of contamination affects you and trade

The haves and the have-nots !

- An increase in the use of pesticides

- More biotechnology

- Proper use is acceptable

- Improper use will impact users, consumers & trade

SP-IPM Thrust II:Improve food and feed security and safety

Pesticide Misuse Alleys - a Trade Barrierzones of improper & irrational use of pesticides

SP-IPM SolutionsCapacity building in integrated crop management

1. Training of policy makers and IPM specialists

2. Courses on new IPM strategies

3. Upgrading of extension techniques

4. Public-Private partnerships

SP-IPM Thrust II continued:Improve food and feed security and safety

Climate change will increase presence mycotoxins in food thereby negatively impacting health and trade

H

Mycotoxin Contamination: A Perennial Concern in all Climates

Economics Health Trade Storage Food Security Child DevelopmentEconomics Health Trade Storage Food Security Child Development

Aflatoxin-belt

35°N

35°S

Zone with PerennialContamination Risk

Aflatoxin Belt Impacts Food & Feed Safety

• Health risks associated with food derive from mycotoxins (esp. from Aspergillus, Fusarium, Penicillium spp.)

• Approx. 4.5 billion people in the developing world are exposed daily to mycotoxins, esp. aflatoxins through consumption of staple food

• Contaminants in food limit farmers’ ability to export their crops

• Mycotoxins in feeds represent high risk to growth of livestock

Aflatoxin and Human Health

Death Impairs growth and development of childrenSuppress immune systemAflatoxin enhances HBV5-60 times higher cancer riskImpedes uptake and utilization of micronutrientsAssociated with Kwashiorkor in children

Aflatoxin Contamination in W. Africa

Maize: 4000 – BeninPeanut: 216 – GhanaSorghum: 80 – GhanaMillet: 200 – NigeriaTiger nuts: 120 –Nigeria

Primary products• Peanut paste: 3278 – Ghana• Peanut sauce: 943 – Ghana• Leaf sauce: 775 – Gambia• Maize dough: 313 – Ghana• Kenkey: 524 – Ghana• Cashew paste: 366 – Ghana• Peanut oil: 500 – Nigeria• Yam flour: 7600 – Nigeria• Local beer: 135 - Nigeria

Food products

CODEX standard: 20 ppb; EU: 2 ppb

Trade Losses due to Mycotoxins• CODEX standard: 20 ppb; EU: 2 ppb Aflatoxins• African exports to EU (51%) & US (22%)• World Bank estimate of lost trade

– 2001 study: US$670 million – 2005 study: ~ several hundred 1000s

• Some countries active to meet standards by putting in place relevant institutions

• Best quality exported; poorer quality consumed domestically.

Categories of operators in value chains and their relationsFinal Con-sumers

SpecificInputproviders

Farmers,(primaryproducers)

Packers,Agro-industry

Traders

Basic sequence of functions in an agribusiness value chain

Trade

StoreTransportDistribute

Con-sumption

Retail SalesConsume

SpecificInputs

Provideright variety

Production

Grow, harvest

Conditioning Processing

GradeWashPack

Pollutants in the Food and Value Chains – and the PoorMultiple factors affecting trade

1

GTZ – Dr. A. Schöning, Modified

Pest – Diseases – Pesticides – Mycotoxins – Trade Barriers

• Genetic enhancement: Taking advantage of biotechnology in enhancing host resistance (conventional, transgenics and wide hybrids); enhancing screening methods (CIMMYT)

• Competitive exclusion: reduction of aflatoxin producing strains through soil inoculation with non-toxigenic strains of A. flavusindigenous to Africa (IITA)

• Detection: Development and adoption of low-cost, high through-put ELISA detection tools (ICRISAT)

• Technology transfer: For wider adoption of integrated strategies and aflatoxin diagnostic tools, storage, harvesting time, rotations

• Capacity building: Policy makers and extension leaders

SP-IPM SolutionsPlant Health Managament Solutions

Globalgap, Eurogap, KenyagapWe must have the conviction that there are

extraordinary possibilities in ordinary farmers

There is a solution

Thank you for listening !

Richard A. SikoraChairman SP-IPM, CGIAR