Mark Rosegrant Global Landscapes Forum IFPRI Session: Informing the policymaking landscape: From research to action in the fight against climate change and hunger Marrakech, Morocco November 16, 2016

1. Modeling to Better Inform
Food, Energy, and Water
Policies: Country Perspective
Mark W. Rosegrant
Director, Environment and Production Technology Division
International Food Policy Research Institute
Global Landscape Forum
IFPRI Session: Informing the policymaking landscape: From research to action in the fight
against climate change and hunger
November 16, 2016

2. Challenges and Responses for Modeling for
Policy Impact
CHALLENGES RESPONSES
Asking the right questions
Find out the needs and intentions of the
policymakers
Modeling design useful to policy- and
decisionmakers
Improve modeling design
• Integration of biophysical-hydrology-
economics
• Multi-scales – local, national, regional
• Consistent upscaling and downscaling
across levels
• Greater spatial disaggregation to address
basin and sub-basin issues
Information for enhanced understanding
• Better description and presentation
• Use of interactive models
Transparency and open access
Encourage transparency through open access
for effective policy outreach

3. Linked modeling system for the assessment of agricultural
climate change impacts on the Philippine economy

4. Cost of Climate Change in Agriculture
 PhP 186 billion per year cost of climate change:
 Php 41 billion from increased malnutrition
 Php 145 billion in economywide losses
 Climate change reduces crop productivity growth,
increases food prices, and reduces food security
 Large negative effects on the rest of the economy:
 increased international commodity prices cause terms of trade
and real exchange rate losses
 reducing growth in industrial and service sectors and consumer
welfare

5. Welfare impact from different adaptation strategies
with and without climate effect, 2050
56.5
42.3
-2.7
127.8
118.2
81.3
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Increase rice
productivity
Increase irrigated
area
Agriculture tariff
reduction
Increase rice
productivity
Increase irrigated
area
Agriculture tariff
reduction
NFA subsidy (% change from base in 2050) No NFA subsidy (% change from base in 2050)
BillionPhp/year
Priv. Consumption Investment Gov. Consumption Annual absoptionTotal Welfare
NFA subsidy (change from base in 2050) No NFA subsidy (change from base in 2050)

6. Philippine TIMES-CGE-IMPACT WEF Nexus
Impact and Trade-offs Assessment
Philippine-
TIMES
MODEL
Philippine
CGE
MODEL
 Electricity demand
 Fossil fuel prices
 Electricity production mix
 Optimal energy balance
Policyand
investmentsfor
sustainablewater,
energy,and
agricultural
development
 Economic and
environmental
impacts in
agriculture, industry,
and services
 Welfare impacts by
income level
 Enhanced WEF
security
Outcomes/Impacts
IMPACT
MODEL

7. Reference and Alternative Policy Scenario
Results
Primary energy supply-mix in all scenarios for 2040
Imp. dep: 2014-40> 13.5 EJ 7.2 EJ, ↓
47%…
7.3 EJ, ↓ 46%
2580 TWh, ↑ 40%
6.4 EJ, ↓ 53%
2580 TWh, ↑41%
10.7 EJ, ↓ 21%
2196 TWh, ↑ 20%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Ref-2040 CO2-Mit-Target Carbon Tax Coal Externality Renewable-Target
Systemcostincreased(%)
Resourcelevel(PJ)
Biomass Coal Gas Geothermal Hydro Solar Wind System cost

8. Conclusions: Based on preliminary results
 CO2-Mit-Target scenario - best option to mitigate emissions
and integrate renewable energy technologies in the energy
system
 Dependency on imported fuel decreases in CO2-Mit-Target
scenario by 47% compared to the reference scenario
 This scenario contributes to an increase in the total system
costs of 5.3% compared to the reference scenario
 Improves energy security and helps to develop a low-carbon
society

9. Conclusions
 Modeling is an important tool in the development, influencing or
strengthening of climate change and food security policies
 Integrated biophysical-hydrological-economic modeling enhances
understanding of climate change and food security
 Down-scaling global models to micro-levels helps to target results
and policies at the national to community levels
 Building user-friendly models for hands-on scenario analysis by
policy analysis country levels is beneficial
 Carefully targeting output to different stakeholders can enhance
policy impact

10. How to Achieve Impacts: Beyond Modeling
BOUNDARY PARTNERS
• Along each impact pathway
- Identify who will take up and use the research results
- What influence they have
- What they need
• Involve them as early and consistently as
possible
- To make sure that research addresses issues they see as
relevant
• Need to cut across departmental silos: e.g.
Finance, Agriculture, Energy, Water
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
• For each pathway, identify
key phrases being used,
by whom, with what values
• What are “poison pills” to
be avoided for farmers,
practitioners, etc.?
• Economics language may
not be the way to convey
the messages
COMMUNICATIONS
Work with communications
people to identify
• How to convey the message
• Where
• To whom (audience analysis)
ADVOCACY COALITIONS
Identify coalitions (e.g. environmental NGOs and displaced people vs government and downstream farmers on
dams)
• If model is to be used in helping to make decisions, at least one trusted person in each coalition needs to understand the model
• Identify those coalitions and involve them in your capacity building.