• Energy Research
• 2. Zero hunger close
• 8. Economic growth close
• US close
• DE close
• ES close
• EU close

The ‘4 per mille Soils for Food Security and Climate’ was launched at the COP21 with an aspiration to increase global soil organic matter stocks by 4 per 1000 (or 0.4 %) per year as a compensation for the global emissions of greenhouse gases by anthropogenic sources. This paper surveyed the soil organic carbon (SOC) stock estimates and sequestration potentials from 20 regions in the world (New Zealand, Chile, South Africa, Australia, Tanzania, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, India, China Taiwan, South Korea, China Mainland, United States of America, France, Canada, Belgium, England & Wales, Ireland, Scotland, and Russia). We asked whether the 4 per mille initiative is feasible for the region. The outcomes highlight region specific efforts and scopes for soil carbon sequestration. Reported soil C sequestration rates globally show that under best management practices, 4 per mille or even higher sequestration rates can be accomplished. High C sequestration rates (up to 10 per mille) can be achieved for soils with low initial SOC stock (topsoil less than 30 t C ha− 1), and at the first twenty years after implementation of best management practices. In addition, areas which have reached equilibrium will not be able to further increase their sequestration. We found that most studies on SOC sequestration only consider topsoil (up to 0.3 m depth), as it is considered to be most affected by management techniques. The 4 per mille number was based on a blanket calculation of the whole global soil profile C stock, however the potential to increase SOC is mostly on managed agricultural lands. If we consider 4 per mille in the top 1m of global agricultural soils, SOC sequestration is between 2-3 Gt C year− 1, which effectively offset 20–35% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. As a strategy for climate change mitigation, soil carbon sequestration buys time over the next ten to twenty years while other effective sequestration and low carbon technologies become viable. The challenge for cropping farmers is to find disruptive technologies that will further improve soil condition and deliver increased soil carbon. Progress in 4 per mille requires collaboration and communication between scientists, farmers, policy makers, and marketeers.

The ‘4 per mille Soils for Food Security and Climate’ was launched at the COP21 with an aspiration to increase global soil organic matter stocks by 4 per 1000 (or 0.4 %) per year as a compensation for the global emissions of greenhouse gases by anthropogenic sources. This paper surveyed the soil organic carbon (SOC) stock estimates and sequestration potentials from 20 regions in the world (New Zealand, Chile, South Africa, Australia, Tanzania, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, India, China Taiwan, South Korea, China Mainland, United States of America, France, Canada, Belgium, England & Wales, Ireland, Scotland, and Russia). We asked whether the 4 per mille initiative is feasible for the region. The outcomes highlight region specific efforts and scopes for soil carbon sequestration. Reported soil C sequestration rates globally show that under best management practices, 4 per mille or even higher sequestration rates can be accomplished. High C sequestration rates (up to 10 per mille) can be achieved for soils with low initial SOC stock (topsoil less than 30 t C ha− 1), and at the first twenty years after implementation of best management practices. In addition, areas which have reached equilibrium will not be able to further increase their sequestration. We found that most studies on SOC sequestration only consider topsoil (up to 0.3 m depth), as it is considered to be most affected by management techniques. The 4 per mille number was based on a blanket calculation of the whole global soil profile C stock, however the potential to increase SOC is mostly on managed agricultural lands. If we consider 4 per mille in the top 1m of global agricultural soils, SOC sequestration is between 2-3 Gt C year− 1, which effectively offset 20–35% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. As a strategy for climate change mitigation, soil carbon sequestration buys time over the next ten to twenty years while other effective sequestration and low carbon technologies become viable. The challenge for cropping farmers is to find disruptive technologies that will further improve soil condition and deliver increased soil carbon. Progress in 4 per mille requires collaboration and communication between scientists, farmers, policy makers, and marketeers.

Abstract Social acceptance of innovative technologies is a key element of an effective transition towards more sustainable energy economies. However, innovative technologies like genetic modification also tend to spark controversy and backlash. So far, efforts to inform the public about any risks and benefits of novel technologies not only have struggled to foster acceptance but also neglect the interdependent foundations of consumer decision-making. Through a controlled experiment with German consumers (N = 322), we examine whether consumer support and rejection of genetic modification in bioenergy crops is influenced by the statements and actions of actors throughout the supply chain. In specific, we show that the decision of energy companies to sell and support GM bioenergy positively impacts consumer decisions to support. To ensure that decision outcomes were specifically impacted by the expressions of corporate actors, we controlled for the content and valence of information by random assignment to one of three treatments in which participants received positive, negative, or balanced (risks and benefits) information. We find that negative messaging diminished support and increased rejection relative to the other treatments. Lastly, the statements and actions of corporate actors also exerted an indirect influence on consumer decisions through their interactions with social trust and labels, e.g. greater support by farmers had a positive influence only for those who are more generally trustworthy. Given these results, we anticipate more attention to the importance of actors such as farmers and energy companies for the social acceptance of novel technologies in the energy sphere.

Abstract Social acceptance of innovative technologies is a key element of an effective transition towards more sustainable energy economies. However, innovative technologies like genetic modification also tend to spark controversy and backlash. So far, efforts to inform the public about any risks and benefits of novel technologies not only have struggled to foster acceptance but also neglect the interdependent foundations of consumer decision-making. Through a controlled experiment with German consumers (N = 322), we examine whether consumer support and rejection of genetic modification in bioenergy crops is influenced by the statements and actions of actors throughout the supply chain. In specific, we show that the decision of energy companies to sell and support GM bioenergy positively impacts consumer decisions to support. To ensure that decision outcomes were specifically impacted by the expressions of corporate actors, we controlled for the content and valence of information by random assignment to one of three treatments in which participants received positive, negative, or balanced (risks and benefits) information. We find that negative messaging diminished support and increased rejection relative to the other treatments. Lastly, the statements and actions of corporate actors also exerted an indirect influence on consumer decisions through their interactions with social trust and labels, e.g. greater support by farmers had a positive influence only for those who are more generally trustworthy. Given these results, we anticipate more attention to the importance of actors such as farmers and energy companies for the social acceptance of novel technologies in the energy sphere.

This article presents a model of development, civil war and climate change. There are multiple interactions. Economic growth reduces the probability of civil war and the vulnerability to climate change. Climate change increases the probability of civil war. The impacts of climate change, civil war and civil war in the neighbouring countries reduce economic growth. The model has two potential poverty traps – one is climate-change-induced and one is civil-war-induced – and the two poverty traps may reinforce one another. The model is calibrated to sub-Saharan Africa and a double Monte Carlo analysis is conducted in order to account for both parameter uncertainty and stochasticity. Although the IPCC Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES) is used as the baseline, thus assuming rapid economic growth in Africa and convergence of African living standards to the rest of the world, the impacts of civil war and climate change (ignored in SRES) are sufficiently strong to keep a number of countries in Africa in deep poverty with a high probability.