The comments from The Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry (KSLA) concern the part “Summary for Policymakers” (text category).
The report is at a high-quality level and scientifically based, but understandable at a very brief comprehensive level. The climate impact of fossil energy use is emphasized, which is important and relevant. KSLA realize the challenge of writing a synthesis report, when the effects extend over such different geographical areas and different sectors. The global perspective in the report needs to be broken down regionally and nationally.
For the agriculture sector, the reflection is: KSLA lack the main task of agriculture; to supply a growing population of 10 billion with food by the year 2050. Food security and the need for increased production should be emphasized. KSLA call for a discussion on where and how we ensure food production in the best way for both climate and humanity.
For the agriculture sector, the reflection is: The report does not sufficiently highlight the beneficial resource of productive arable land when discussing land use. Cultivated land is valuable and should be maintained/prioritized during current times of climate change. In addition: Areas where you can produce with a lower climate footprint, should be protected even more clearly, both for food supply and from a climate point of view. In the future, increased responsibility will fall on those areas that continue to have cultivation conditions with the help of the appropriate combination of climate, agriculture land and water.
For the agriculture sector, the reflection is: KSLA would like the report to more refer to agricultural land as a source of carbon sequestration, and the role of agriculture land as an active carbon sink. Increased production above ground means increased carbon capturing in soil.
For the agriculture sector, the reflection is: Agricultural measures need to clearly consider the whole system of agriculture, which is complex, and not focus on separate sources of emissions, as it is usually done. Without systems thinking, the risk of “maladaptation” is high. Agriculture is based on biological processes. An example: to enable Soil-C, which is a desirable reduction, Soil-N is needed. However, there is a risk that increased N-fertilization will generate more N2O – emissions if the fertilization is not properly handled.
These comments were submitted to the IPCC on March 18, 2022.
KSLA har beretts tillfälle att lämna synpunkter på rapporten Research quality evaluation in Sweden – FOKUS, Dnr U2014/07505/F.
KSLA har beretts tillfälle att lämna synpunkter på Formas rapportutkast Uppdrag om växtskyddsforskning.
KSLA har lämnat synpunkter på Statskontorets rapport Skyddet av Levande skogar.