Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Isabelle Weindl is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Isabelle Weindl.


Nature Communications | 2014

Reactive nitrogen requirements to feed the world in 2050 and potential to mitigate nitrogen pollution

Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Alexander Popp; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Jan Philipp Dietrich; Susanne Rolinski; Isabelle Weindl; Christoph Schmitz; Christoph Müller; Markus Bonsch; Anne Biewald; Miodrag Stevanovic

Reactive nitrogen (Nr) is an indispensable nutrient for agricultural production and human alimentation. Simultaneously, agriculture is the largest contributor to Nr pollution, causing severe damages to human health and ecosystem services. The trade-off between food availability and Nr pollution can be attenuated by several key mitigation options, including Nr efficiency improvements in crop and animal production systems, food waste reduction in households and lower consumption of Nr-intensive animal products. However, their quantitative mitigation potential remains unclear, especially under the added pressure of population growth and changes in food consumption. Here we show by model simulations, that under baseline conditions, Nr pollution in 2050 can be expected to rise to 102-156% of the 2010 value. Only under ambitious mitigation, does pollution possibly decrease to 36-76% of the 2010 value. Air, water and atmospheric Nr pollution go far beyond critical environmental thresholds without mitigation actions. Even under ambitious mitigation, the risk remains that thresholds are exceeded.


Environmental Research Letters | 2014

Investigating afforestation and bioenergy CCS as climate change mitigation strategies.

Alexander Popp; Jan Philipp Dietrich; David Klein; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Markus Bonsch; Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Isabelle Weindl; Miodrag Stevanovic; Christoph Müller

The land-use sector can contribute to climate change mitigation not only by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but also by increasing carbon uptake from the atmosphere and thereby creating negative CO2 emissions. In this paper, we investigate two land-based climate change mitigation strategies for carbon removal: (1) afforestation and (2) bioenergy in combination with carbon capture and storage technology (bioenergy CCS). In our approach, a global tax on GHG emissions aimed at ambitious climate change mitigation incentivizes land-based mitigation by penalizing positive and rewarding negative CO2 emissions from the land-use system. We analyze afforestation and bioenergy CCS as standalone and combined mitigation strategies. We find that afforestation is a cost-efficient strategy for carbon removal at relatively low carbon prices, while bioenergy CCS becomes competitive only at higher prices. According to our results, cumulative carbon removal due to afforestation and bioenergy CCS is similar at the end of 21st century (600–700 GtCO2), while land-demand for afforestation is much higher compared to bioenergy CCS. In the combined setting, we identify competition for land, but the impact on the mitigation potential (1000 GtCO2) is partially alleviated by productivity increases in the agricultural sector. Moreover, our results indicate that early-century afforestation presumably will not negatively impact carbon removal due to bioenergy CCS in the second half of the 21st century. A sensitivity analysis shows that land-based mitigation is very sensitive to different levels of GHG taxes. Besides that, the mitigation potential of bioenergy CCS highly depends on the development of future bioenergy yields and the availability of geological carbon storage, while for afforestation projects the length of the crediting period is crucial.


Gcb Bioenergy | 2016

Trade‐offs between land and water requirements for large‐scale bioenergy production

Markus Bonsch; Alexander Popp; Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Jan Philipp Dietrich; Susanne Rolinski; Anne Biewald; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Isabelle Weindl; Dieter Gerten; Miodrag Stevanovic

Bioenergy is expected to play an important role in the future energy mix as it can substitute fossil fuels and contribute to climate change mitigation. However, large‐scale bioenergy cultivation may put substantial pressure on land and water resources. While irrigated bioenergy production can reduce the pressure on land due to higher yields, associated irrigation water requirements may lead to degradation of freshwater ecosystems and to conflicts with other potential users. In this article, we investigate the trade‐offs between land and water requirements of large‐scale bioenergy production. To this end, we adopt an exogenous demand trajectory for bioenergy from dedicated energy crops, targeted at limiting greenhouse gas emissions in the energy sector to 1100 Gt carbon dioxide equivalent until 2095. We then use the spatially explicit global land‐ and water‐use allocation model MAgPIE to project the implications of this bioenergy target for global land and water resources. We find that producing 300 EJ yr−1 of bioenergy in 2095 from dedicated bioenergy crops is likely to double agricultural water withdrawals if no explicit water protection policies are implemented. Since current human water withdrawals are dominated by agriculture and already lead to ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss, such a doubling will pose a severe threat to freshwater ecosystems. If irrigated bioenergy production is prohibited to prevent negative impacts of bioenergy cultivation on water resources, bioenergy land requirements for meeting a 300 EJ yr−1 bioenergy target increase substantially (+ 41%) – mainly at the expense of pasture areas and tropical forests. Thus, avoiding negative environmental impacts of large‐scale bioenergy production will require policies that balance associated water and land requirements.


PLOS ONE | 2015

Global food demand scenarios for the 21st century

Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Susanne Rolinski; Anne Biewald; Isabelle Weindl; Alexander Popp; Hermann Lotze-Campen

Long-term food demand scenarios are an important tool for studying global food security and for analysing the environmental impacts of agriculture. We provide a simple and transparent method to create scenarios for future plant-based and animal-based calorie demand, using time-dependent regression models between calorie demand and income. The scenarios can be customized to a specific storyline by using different input data for gross domestic product (GDP) and population projections and by assuming different functional forms of the regressions. Our results confirm that total calorie demand increases with income, but we also found a non-income related positive time-trend. The share of animal-based calories is estimated to rise strongly with income for low-income groups. For high income groups, two ambiguous relations between income and the share of animal-based products are consistent with historical data: First, a positive relation with a strong negative time-trend and second a negative relation with a slight negative time-trend. The fits of our regressions are highly significant and our results compare well to other food demand estimates. The method is exemplarily used to construct four food demand scenarios until the year 2100 based on the storylines of the IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES). We find in all scenarios a strong increase of global food demand until 2050 with an increasing share of animal-based products, especially in developing countries.


Environmental Research Letters | 2015

Livestock in a changing climate: production system transitions as an adaptation strategy for agriculture

Isabelle Weindl; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Alexander Popp; Christoph Müller; Petr Havlik; Mario Herrero; Christoph Schmitz; Susanne Rolinski

Livestock farming is the worlds largest land use sector and utilizes around 60% of the global biomass harvest. Over the coming decades, climate change will affect the natural resource base of livestock production, especially the productivity of rangeland and feed crops. Based on a comprehensive impact modeling chain, we assess implications of different climate projections for agricultural production costs and land use change and explore the effectiveness of livestock system transitions as an adaptation strategy. Simulated climate impacts on crop yields and rangeland productivity generate adaptation costs amounting to 3% of total agricultural production costs in 2045 (i.e. 145 billion US


Environmental Science & Technology | 2015

Land-Use and Carbon Cycle Responses to Moderate Climate Change: Implications for Land-Based Mitigation?

Alexander Popp; Miodrag Stevanovic; Christoph Müller; Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Markus Bonsch; Jan Philipp Dietrich; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Isabelle Weindl; Anne Biewald; Susanne Rolinski

). Shifts in livestock production towards mixed crop-livestock systems represent a resource- and cost-efficient adaptation option, reducing agricultural adaptation costs to 0.3% of total production costs and simultaneously abating deforestation by about 76 million ha globally. The relatively positive climate impacts on grass yields compared with crop yields favor grazing systems inter alia in South Asia and North America. Incomplete transitions in production systems already have a strong adaptive and cost reducing effect: a 50% shift to mixed systems lowers agricultural adaptation costs to 0.8%. General responses of production costs to system transitions are robust across different global climate and crop models as well as regarding assumptions on CO2 fertilization, but simulated values show a large variation. In the face of these uncertainties, public policy support for transforming livestock production systems provides an important lever to improve agricultural resource management and lower adaptation costs, possibly even contributing to emission reduction.


Science Advances | 2016

The impact of high-end climate change on agricultural welfare

Miodrag Stevanovic; Alexander Popp; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Jan Philipp Dietrich; Christoph Müller; Markus Bonsch; Christoph Schmitz; Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Isabelle Weindl

Climate change has impacts on agricultural yields, which could alter cropland requirements and hence deforestation rates. Thus, land-use responses to climate change might influence terrestrial carbon stocks. Moreover, climate change could alter the carbon storage capacity of the terrestrial biosphere and hence the land-based mitigation potential. We use a global spatially explicit economic land-use optimization model to (a) estimate the mitigation potential of a climate policy that provides economic incentives for carbon stock conservation and enhancement, (b) simulate land-use and carbon cycle responses to moderate climate change (RCP2.6), and (c) investigate the combined effects throughout the 21st century. The climate policy immediately stops deforestation and strongly increases afforestation, resulting in a global mitigation potential of 191 GtC in 2100. Climate change increases terrestrial carbon stocks not only directly through enhanced carbon sequestration (62 GtC by 2100) but also indirectly through less deforestation due to higher crop yields (16 GtC by 2100). However, such beneficial climate impacts increase the potential of the climate policy only marginally, as the potential is already large under static climatic conditions. In the broader picture, this study highlights the importance of land-use dynamics for modeling carbon cycle responses to climate change in integrated assessment modeling.


Environmental Science & Technology | 2017

Mitigation Strategies for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Agriculture and Land-Use Change: Consequences for Food Prices

Miodrag Stevanovic; Alexander Popp; Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Christoph Müller; Isabelle Weindl; Jan Philipp Dietrich; Hermann Lotze-Campen; Ulrich Kreidenweis; Susanne Rolinski; Anne Biewald; Xiaoxi Wang

Welfare losses from climate change in agriculture will mainly affect consumers, particularly in the low-latitude regions. Climate change threatens agricultural productivity worldwide, resulting in higher food prices. Associated economic gains and losses differ not only by region but also between producers and consumers and are affected by market dynamics. On the basis of an impact modeling chain, starting with 19 different climate projections that drive plant biophysical process simulations and ending with agro-economic decisions, this analysis focuses on distributional effects of high-end climate change impacts across geographic regions and across economic agents. By estimating the changes in surpluses of consumers and producers, we find that climate change can have detrimental impacts on global agricultural welfare, especially after 2050, because losses in consumer surplus generally outweigh gains in producer surplus. Damage in agriculture may reach the annual loss of 0.3% of future total gross domestic product at the end of the century globally, assuming further opening of trade in agricultural products, which typically leads to interregional production shifts to higher latitudes. Those estimated global losses could increase substantially if international trade is more restricted. If beneficial effects of atmospheric carbon dioxide fertilization can be realized in agricultural production, much of the damage could be avoided. Although trade policy reforms toward further liberalization help alleviate climate change impacts, additional compensation mechanisms for associated environmental and development concerns have to be considered.


Advances in Animal Biosciences | 2015

Pasture harvest, carbon sequestration and feeding potentials under different grazing intensities

Susanne Rolinski; Isabelle Weindl; Jens Heinke; Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Anne Biewald; Hermann Lotze-Campen

The land use sector of agriculture, forestry, and other land use (AFOLU) plays a central role in ambitious climate change mitigation efforts. Yet, mitigation policies in agriculture may be in conflict with food security related targets. Using a global agro-economic model, we analyze the impacts on food prices under mitigation policies targeting either incentives for producers (e.g., through taxes) or consumer preferences (e.g., through education programs). Despite having a similar reduction potential of 43-44% in 2100, the two types of policy instruments result in opposite outcomes for food prices. Incentive-based mitigation, such as protecting carbon-rich forests or adopting low-emission production techniques, increase land scarcity and production costs and thereby food prices. Preference-based mitigation, such as reduced household waste or lower consumption of animal-based products, decreases land scarcity, prevents emissions leakage, and concentrates production on the most productive sites and consequently lowers food prices. Whereas agricultural emissions are further abated in the combination of these mitigation measures, the synergy of strategies fails to substantially lower food prices. Additionally, we demonstrate that the efficiency of agricultural emission abatement is stable across a range of greenhouse-gas (GHG) tax levels, while resulting food prices exhibit a disproportionally larger spread.


Environmental Science & Technology | 2018

Decoupling livestock from land use through industrial feed production pathways

Ilje Pikaar; Silvio Matassa; Benjamin Leon Bodirsky; Isabelle Weindl; Korneel Rabaey; Nico Boon; Michele Bruschi; Zhiguo Yuan; Hannah H.E. van Zanten; Mario Herrero; Willy Verstraete; Alexander Popp

Grasslands cover not only two-thirds of the terrestrial surface but also play a crucial role in global biogeochemical cycles, sequester carbon, produce feed for livestock and provide various ecosystem services. Next to climatic conditions, the productivity of pasture also depends on management and grazing pressure. In order to provide better estimates for the current and future potential of grass for feed use, a combination of approaches is necessary. Here, we contribute by a modelling study that enhances the estimation of potential feed supply of global pastures and related uncertainties in response to differences in grazing pressure. Our results are intended to be used by agro-economical modelling in order to estimate optimal land use patterns that ensure the provision of global food supply of crop and animal products.

Collaboration


Dive into the Isabelle Weindl's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Benjamin Leon Bodirsky

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alexander Popp

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Hermann Lotze-Campen

Humboldt University of Berlin

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Susanne Rolinski

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Anne Biewald

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jan Philipp Dietrich

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Miodrag Stevanovic

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Christoph Müller

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Markus Bonsch

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Christoph Schmitz

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge