Stakeholder-based modelling in climate change planning for the agriculture sector in Argentina

Prévia do material em texto

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcpo20
Climate Policy
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcpo20
Stakeholder-based modelling in climate change
planning for the agriculture sector in Argentina
Verónica Gutman, Federico Frank, Adrian Monjeau, Pablo L. Peri, Daniel
Ryan, José Volante, Luciana Apaza & Virginia Scardamaglia
To cite this article: Verónica Gutman, Federico Frank, Adrian Monjeau, Pablo L. Peri, Daniel
Ryan, José Volante, Luciana Apaza & Virginia Scardamaglia (26 Oct 2023): Stakeholder-based
modelling in climate change planning for the agriculture sector in Argentina, Climate Policy,
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024
Published online: 26 Oct 2023.
Submit your article to this journal 
View related articles 
View Crossmark data
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tcpo20
https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tcpo20
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=tcpo20&show=instructions
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=tcpo20&show=instructions
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024&domain=pdf&date_stamp=26 Oct 2023
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024&domain=pdf&date_stamp=26 Oct 2023
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Stakeholder-based modelling in climate change planning for the
agriculture sector in Argentina
Verónica Gutmana,b, Federico Frankc,d, Adrian Monjeaue,g, Pablo L. Peric,g, Daniel Ryan f,
José Volantec, Luciana Apazae,g and Virginia Scardamagliab
aFundación Torcuato Di Tella, Buenos Aires, Argentina; bFundación Avina, Buenos Aires, Argentina; cInstituto Nacional de
Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA), Buenos Aires, Argentina; dFacultad de Cs. Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Nacional de La
Pampa, Santa Rosa, La Pampa, Argentina; eFundación Bariloche, San Carlos de Bariloche, Río Negro, Argentina; fInstituto
Tecnológico de Buenos Aires (ITBA), Buenos Aires, Argentina; gConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
(CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina
ABSTRACT
The development of long-term scenarios to outline pathways for achieving carbon
neutrality by 2050 has become a standard practice in climate change policy
planning. In Argentina, a modelling process was initiated in 2019 in the agriculture,
forestry and other land use (AFOLU) sector utilizing three tools: FABLE calculator,
Dinamica EGO and Nature Map. In order to generate technical inputs for the
modelling exercise a stakeholder dialogue was launched. A 2050 Carbon Neutrality
scenario was developed, alongside several intermediate scenarios based on
stakeholders´ visions of the future. The modelling results demonstrated the
biophysical feasibility of achieving carbon neutrality in the Argentinean AFOLU
sector by 2050. However, alignment with current sectoral priorities was identified
as a challenge, leading stakeholders to propose less ambitious scenarios as more
attainable targets. This experience underscored the significance of constructing
multiple policy scenarios, facilitating the evaluation of diverse potential future
trajectories for policymaking. These different pathways provided contrasting
perspectives between political objectives, such as achieving carbon neutrality, and
the practical feasibility of local implementation. Moreover, the process highlighted
the vital role of integrating the private sector and environmental non-
governmental organizations (NGOs) in long-term climate planning, emphasizing
the need for inclusive collaboration to address climate challenges effectively.
Key policy insights:
. Stakeholder-based modelling approaches serve as valuable discussion tools to
initiate and accompany political discussions concerning the efforts required to
achieve carbon neutrality.
. Modelling outputs provide quantitative demonstrations of the challenges
involved, while stakeholder dialogues facilitate the identification of barriers and
enabling conditions required to promote a successful transition.
. It is necessary to enhance institutionalized public-private dialogue spaces that
extend beyond specific projects and government changes, given their
importance in facilitating participatory long-term thinking.
. Nevertheless, collective scenario construction alone seems insufficient to drive the
profound changes that are required.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 20 February 2023
Accepted 29 September
2023
KEYWORDS
Climate change; carbon
neutrality; scenario planning;
integrated modelling;
stakeholder integration
1. Introduction
Scenario planning constitutes a long-standing methodology of foresight research that is increasingly consider-
ing stakeholder-based approaches to inform policymakers (Renn, 2006; Wright et al., 2020; Schmitt Olabisi et al.,
© 2023 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
CONTACT Verónica Gutman veronica.gutman@ftdt.cc, verogutman@hotmail.com Av. Córdoba 2122, Buenos Aires City, Argentina
CLIMATE POLICY
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1080/14693062.2023.2267024&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2023-10-13
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4699-5448
mailto:veronica.gutman@ftdt.cc
mailto:verogutman@hotmail.com
http://www.tandfonline.com
2021). There is a rich literature on the use of scenarios as a tool for policy planning (e.g. Cook et al., 2014; Volkery
& Ribeiro, 2009) and on ways of constructing them (e.g. Wright et al., 2019). Scenario construction entails choos-
ing appropriate frameworks, models and actors to be involved.
The use of long-term scenarios in climate change policy planning is becoming a standard practice in the
elaboration processes of long-term strategies aimed at achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. Scenarios show
different feasible pathways to achieve the stated goals and help policy makers evaluate the overall impacts
of different policy packages (Aro et al., 2023). With regards specifically to the agriculture sector, country-
scale scenario modelling of food and land-use systems may be a first step to allow representation of local con-
texts and facilitate structured and constructive dialogues with stakeholder groups (van Soest et al., 2019), thus
leading to higher acceptability of public policies (Waisman et al., 2019).
Climate policy in Argentina, a South American middle-income country, is framed through a series of initiat-
ives aimed at implementing the country’s commitments under the Paris Agreement. Argentina submitted its
first Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) in 2015, which was revised in 2016, and its second NDC in
2020, which was revised in 2021. Argentina’s current target is to not exceed the emission of 349 million tons
of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) by 2030 (Argentina, 2021). In November 2022, during the 27th Confer-
ence of the Parties (COP 27) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Sharm El-
Sheik, Egypt, Argentina submitted its Long-term Low-Emission Resilient Development Strategy, stating its com-
mitment to make efforts to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 (Argentina, 2022).
In 2019, a national Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Law was passed (law N° 27,520). This norm
institutionalized the National Climate Change Cabinet that had been created previously in 2016 as a govern-
ance body aimed at coordinating climate change policies at the national level. In addition, as part of the Bonn
Challenge, Argentina has pledged to restore or reforest one million hectares of degraded and deforested land
by 2030 (IUCN, 2019). Furthermore, the country hasratified the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Aichi
Targets by pledging increased environmental protection efforts by national and provincial entities (CBD,
2021).
The agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) sector in Argentina contributes 39% of the country’s
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Out of these emissions, 40% are attributed to enteric fermentation and
manure management from livestock, 34% to agricultural soils and 26% to land use changes (MAyDS,
2022). As a result, any national strategy aiming to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 must address the
reduction of agricultural GHG emissions and the promotion of carbon sequestration in forests and soils.
However, the agricultural, livestock and agro-industrial production sectors (with a strong focus on oilseeds
and cereals, particularly soybean, corn and wheat) significantly contribute to Argentina’s gross domestic
product (GDP) and exports. In 2019, agricultural-based products represented 62% of total exports (INDEC,
2019). This economic dependence on agriculture poses a significant challenge for decarbonizing the Argen-
tinian AFOLU sector.
In this context, the Project ‘Towards a National Long-term Development Strategy (LTS) with Low Greenhouse
Gas Emissions in the Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Other Land Uses Sector’ (henceforth, the ‘AFOLU LTS
Project’) was launched in 2019. To define feasible pathways towards achieving carbon neutrality by 2050, the
project involved the development of sectoral long-term scenarios derived from stakeholders’ inputs. These
inputs were gathered through a dialogue process based on workshops and semi-structured interviews. This
project was part of the Strategic Partnership Implementation for the Paris Agreement (SPIPA) and received
technical support from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), the Natural Resources
Institute of Finland (LUKE) and the NewClimate Institute (NCI).
The AFOLU LTS Project was led by two national institutions - the National Institute for Agricultural Technol-
ogy (INTA) and Fundación Bariloche – together with Fundación AVINA (Barth et al., 2020). Eighteen public and
private sector institutions and environmental non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were convened to the
stakeholder dialogue. Three modelling tools were used to represent possible future pathways: FABLE Calculator
(a food and land-use systems accounting tool), Dinamica EGO (a land-use allocation tool) and Nature Map (a
prioritization model that focuses on limiting the expansion of productive areas by allocating projected pro-
tected areas to ensure the conservation of local biodiversity). Thus, the participatory process generated
inputs that fed a combination of country-level models aimed at designing 2050 pathways that could be
2 V. GUTMAN ET AL.
compatible with three targets: carbon neutrality, biodiversity conservation and maintenance of current food
production and consumption levels. In a previously published article (Frank et al., 2022) the results of this mod-
elling approach were thoroughly explained.
This paper presents a synthesis of the AFOLU LTS Project’s findings with a specific focus on the integration of
stakeholders into the modelling approach. Additionally, it explores the tradeoffs identified concerning the bio-
physical, economic and political feasibility of achieving carbon neutrality in Argentina by 2050. The first section
of the paper elucidates the methodological aspects of the research, including the modelling tools utilized and
the stakeholder dialogue processes. In the next section, various scenarios resulting from the modelling exercise
are presented, alongside an analysis of the divergent visions of the future held by stakeholders. Moreover, the
section delves into the economic and political challenges acknowledged by stakeholders and the enabling con-
ditions required to facilitate a successful transition, as revealed through the dialogues. Subsequently, a third
section engages in a comprehensive discussion of the results, providing insights into the implications of the
findings. The last section concludes, summarizing key lessons learned and potential implications for future
research.
2. Methods
A participatory backcasting approach (Robinson et al., 2011) was applied to guide both the stakeholder dialo-
gue and the modelling processes. Net zero emissions in the AFOLU sector by 2050 was stated as the goal to be
achieved. Then, different pathways that could place Argentina from there to the present were analyzed as well
as less ambitious scenarios that would not be carbon neutral but would be politically feasible according to sta-
keholders´ views. These pathways diverged in their assumptions about land use distribution, the efficiency of
productive activities, agricultural management practices, technological progress, the evolution of individual
environmental concerns, the impact of changing attitudes on food consumption choices at the global level,
and the evolution of government regulation of natural resources and ecosystems at the national and global
levels.
The stakeholder dialogue process consisted of two workshops developed in October and November 2019
respectively, together with eighteen semi structured interviews developed virtually during 2021, with model
construction taking place mainly during 2019 and 2020.
2.1. The modelling process
Through an approach explained in detail in Frank et al. (2022), we used the FABLE calculator (FABLE, 2021) to
generate a national food and land use scenario compatible with carbon neutrality in Argentina together with a
business as usual (BAU) scenario for comparison. The FABLE calculator is an Excel-based accounting tool used to
explore the potential evolution of food and land-use systems over the period 2000–2050. It relies on multiple
assumptions, parameters and interconnections that spread out throughout different worksheets. This tool
identifies and quantifies food production and land-use changes associated with a combination of eighteen
assumptions related to diet trends, food waste, energy sourcing, climate change, population growth, agricul-
tural expansion and productivity, water use, international trade, reforestation and protected area expansion
(Mosnier et al., 2020).
The outputs of the FABLE calculator were used in the stakeholder workshops to illustrate the efforts that are
needed to achieve carbon neutrality in the AFOLU sector in the country. They were also used as inputs to run
Dinamica EGO (Soares Filho et al., 2002), which is a free land use allocation tool based on cellular automata. This
discrete computational model consists of a regular grid of cells, each one having a finite number of states (in
this case, land uses), surrounded by a set of cells called the ‘neighborhood’. The model performs neighbour-
hood-based transitional functions, incorporates a spatial feedback approach to a stochastic multi-step simu-
lation engine and applies logistic regression to calculate the spatial dynamic transition probabilities. These
probabilities depend on around 20 ‘explanatory variables’ that were selected because of their influence on
different land-use changes and incorporated into the model (e.g. rainfall, temperature, soil quality, slope and
distance to roads). As explained in Frank et al. (2022), we used Dinamica EGO to process 2000 (initial) and
CLIMATE POLICY 3
2050 (final) Land Use and Land Cover (LULC) maps to obtain the most likely land use distribution simulated in
the FABLE Calculator.
Both FABLE calculator scenarios and land use allocation decisions in Dinamica EGO were constrained by pro-
jected protected areas allocation and extents needed to conserve local biodiversity generated using Nature
Map (Jung et al., 2021). This model is based on a prioritization algorithm that identifies the sites that maximize
the simultaneous protection of carbon stocks in biomass and soils, high value sites for biodiversity conservation
and potential clean water sources. These three‘assets’ were operationalized in the model under the following
categories: (i) carbon data (living above-ground and below-ground biomass; litter and dead wood and active
soil organic carbon); (ii) biodiversity data (all threatened terrestrial mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians
weighted by threat status and endemism); and (iii) water data (potential clean water provision). We used the
Nature Map approach to prevent the expansion of crops and other land use changes that could generate nega-
tive impacts on threatened species, carbon stocks and water resources in high conservation value areas.
The applied multi-model approach is graphically represented in Figure 1.
It is worth pointing out that there are not many examples in the literature of a single integrated model cur-
rently linking food and land-use systems change scenarios for ecological assessments or as a spatially explicit
optimization tool (e.g. Beyer et al., 2022). However, as shown, inputs and outputs of single models can be
reworked to provide a holistic view. The modelling results have been published in Frank et al. (2022).
2.2. The stakeholder dialogue process
Eighteen organizations (see Table 1 below) were invited to join the dialogue process in 2019 with the objective
of generating inputs that could feed the modelling exercise based on sectoral actors’ perceptions. The criteria
for selecting stakeholders were the following: (i) sectoral experience and knowledge; (ii) diversity of interests
and visions; (iii) broad geographical representation; and (iv) balance between technical expertise and political
Figure 1. Schematics of the holistic multi-model approach to which stakeholders provided inputs.
Source: Modified from Frank et al., 2022.
4 V. GUTMAN ET AL.
representation. Each organization was asked to appoint a technical focal point to participate throughout the
process.
As mentioned above, two workshops were developed in October and November 2019, both of them held in
Buenos Aires City.
In order to help create a trusted environment and foster free discussion and exchange among the participants,
the workshops were held under the Chatham House Rule. According to this rule, the participants –as well as the
organizers- are free to use and share the information received but they are allowed to reveal neither the identity
nor the affiliation of who made any particular comment (Chatham House, 2022). For this reason, this paper does
not identify any statements or claims made by any of the actors participating in the process.
During the first workshop, a basic interactive GHG emissions calculator tool was presented to the partici-
pants in order to familiarize them with the challenges of achieving carbon neutrality in the AFOLU sector. Par-
ticipants were asked to give qualitative answers to the following questions according to their organizations’
points of view: (i) What are the main climate challenges the Argentinian AFOLU sector will face in the next
30 years?; (ii) Howwill agricultural and forestry production evolve by 2050?; (iii) What are the main contributions
the AFOLU sector can make to GHG emissions reduction in Argentina by 2050? and (iv) What technological and
management factors are key to achieving carbon neutrality?
During the second workshop, the FABLE model was introduced to the participants, focusing on the infor-
mation the model needs to run scenarios. Stakeholders were asked to estimate quantitatively, according to
their organizations’ views, possible ranges of values for the following key variables in 2050: (i) agricultural
and livestock productivity increase; (ii) sectoral exports and imports increase; (iii) deforestation rates and (iv)
afforestation rates. They were also asked to identify enabling conditions that could facilitate the transition
towards carbon neutrality.
The inputs collected throughout these workshops were used to run different scenarios within the FABLE Cal-
culator model. These scenarios, based on stakeholders’ perceptions, were in turn contrasted with the Carbon
Neutral Scenario that had been run previously and the gap between what is needed to achieve carbon neu-
trality and stakeholders’ views was analyzed. These results, as mentioned above, served in turn as inputs to
feed Dinamica Ego and Nature Map models.
Table 1. List of organizations whose representatives acted as stakeholders in the AFOLU LTS Project in Argentina (2019–2021).
Acronym Full name (in Spanish) Type of institution Webpage
AACREA Asociación Argentina de Consorcios Regionales de
Experimentación Agrícola
Farmers association http://crea.org.ar
AAPRESID Asociación Argentina de Productores en Siembra Directa Agribusiness association http://aapresid.org.ar
AFOA Asociación Forestal Argentina Forest industry
association
http://afoa.org.ar
CIEFAP Centro de Investigación y Extensión Forestal Andino
Patagónico
Research Center http://ciefap.org.ar
– El Futuro está en el Monte Small and family farmers
network
http://elfuturoestaenelmonte.
org
Fundapaz Fundación para el desarrollo en justicia y paz Socio-environmental NGO http://fundapaz.org.ar
FVS Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina Environmental NGO http://vidasilvestre.org.ar
SRA Sociedad Rural Argentina Agribusiness association http://sra.org.ar
MAGyP Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería y Pesca de la Nación National Government
sector
http://argentina.gob.ar/
agricultura
ACSOJA Asociación de la Cadena de la Soja Argentina Agribusiness association acsoja.org.ar
BCCBA Bolsa de Cereales de Córdoba Agribusiness association bccba.org.ar
BCR Fundación Bolsa de Comercio de Rosario Agribusiness association fundacion.bcr.com.ar
BDA Bodegas de Argentina Agribusiness association bodegasdeargentina.org
CAA Consejo Agroindustrial Argentino Agribusiness consortium –
CIARA/CEC Cámara de la Industria aceitera de la República Argentina /
Centro de Exportadores de Cereales
Agribusiness association ciaracec.com.ar
– Fundación Gran Chaco Socio-environmental NGO gran-chaco.org
Fundación
INAI
Instituto para las Negociaciones Agrícolas Internacionales International trade think
tank
inai.org.ar
GPS Grupo de Países Productores del Sur Agribusiness association grupogps.org
Source: Own elaboration.
CLIMATE POLICY 5
http://crea.org.ar
http://aapresid.org.ar
http://afoa.org.ar
http://ciefap.org.ar
http://elfuturoestaenelmonte.org
http://elfuturoestaenelmonte.org
http://fundapaz.org.ar
http://vidasilvestre.org.ar
http://sra.org.ar
http://argentina.gob.ar/agricultura
http://argentina.gob.ar/agricultura
The modelling exercise resulted in a series of conditions that should be met in order to achieve the triple
objective of achieving carbon neutrality, conserving biodiversity and maintaining current food production
and consumption levels in 2050. These conditions were shared with the participants during 2021 in individual
semi-structured interviews that were carried out virtually. The objective of these interviews was to get feedback
regarding how feasible stakeholders think the transition to a Carbon Neutrality scenario could be.
3. Results
3.1. Modelling results
The outcomes of the modelling work showed that the BAU and Carbon Neutrality scenarios differ radically both
in terms of the estimated GHG emissions expected by 2050 and the resulting land use and land cover deploy-
ment (Figure 2(A)). According to these results, in the BAU scenario the lack of climate change policies and the
increase in production, inputs use and livestock herds are the main drivers of GHG emissions increase. The scen-
arios also differ in terms of land-use categories distribution (Figure 2(B)). In the Carbon Neutrality scenario there
is a greater distribution of forests mainly in the northwest of the country and a consequently lighter distribution
of crops and pastures.
The Carbon Neutrality scenario could be achieved in 2050 as a result of completely halting GHG emissions
from land-use changes (mostly deforestation) and enhancing carbon sequestration through afforestation,
native forests restorationand recovery, and through more efficient livestock systems. In addition, in order to
supply a growing demand for food without expanding the agricultural area, significant increases in agricultural
productivity would be needed. All these changes should be made without compromising the ability of Argen-
tina to produce enough food for its population and maintain (or even increase) its commodities exports. These
conditions were explicitly included in the modelling approach.
To increase carbon stocks and carbon sequestration, the natural forest surface should increase at least 11%
and the implanted forest surface should grow around 300%. Currently, the natural forest area in Argentina
encompasses around 32 million hectares and the implanted forest area occupies less than 2 million hectares.
The required forest area expansion could be achieved partially by increasing the extent of protected areas (up
to 30% of the area), allowing for natural regrowth of previously forested lands and also by increasing afforesta-
tion efforts.
With regards to the areas that should be prioritized for biodiversity conservation, the modelling exercise
showed that the focus should be on preserving 80% of currently threatened species distribution areas. This,
in turn, would prevent the emission of 147 GtCO2 into the atmosphere and protect 177,694 Mm
3/year of
water demand. Water basin protection is also essential to mitigate the expected medium and long-term
drought effects.
Figure 2 below synthesizes the modelling results, comparing the outputs of the BAU and Carbon Neutrality
scenarios in terms of expected GHG emissions and land use distribution.
In addition to these extreme scenarios (BAU and Carbon Neutrality), seven intermediate scenarios were
developed using the FABLE calculator based on stakeholders´ visions of the future. They showed considerable
variability regarding expected GHG emissions: 4–79 MtCO2eq/year by 2050, the majority of them ranging
between 59 and 73 MtCO2eq/year. These scenarios, considered attainable by stakeholders, imply GHG emis-
sions that far exceed the maximum possible for carbon neutrality in Argentina.
3.2. Stakeholders´ views
Although reaching carbon neutrality in the Argentinean AFOLU sector may be technically feasible according to
the results of the multi-model exercise, the stakeholder dialogue process showed that achieving net zero in the
real world faces several challenges given the existence of economic, political, institutional and governance
barriers.
Firstly, stakeholders highlighted that at present public policy decisions are hindering any movement
towards carbon neutrality, since there are currently no incentives in place for farmers to implement sustainable
6 V. GUTMAN ET AL.
agricultural practices. Additionally, the two main national laws aimed at halting native forest deforestation (Law
26,331) and fostering cultivated forests (Law 25,080) lack financial support for their effective implementation.
Thus, the existing incentive structure in the AFOLU sector today is compromising long-term trajectories that are
intensive in GHG emissions.
Secondly, stakeholders stressed that while many of the necessary changes will have to be driven by public
policy instruments (eg. more stringent regulations, economic incentives to ‘reward’ sustainable practices and to
discourage unsustainable ones), the macroeconomic context will play a key role in agricultural and forestry pro-
duction decisions. Macroeconomic stability, sustained economic growth, stable and competitive exchange
rates and predictability in public policies were especially highlighted as key enabling conditions to motivate
farmers to transition towards more sustainable production models. In this sense, current macroeconomic
Figure 2. Summary of the modelling results. (A) GHG emissions trajectories in the BAU and Carbon Neutral scenarios. The size of the pie charts
represents total GHG emissions (in black numbers, in Mt CO2-eq) while the length of the green arrows represents carbon sequestration from
afforestation (in green numbers, in Mt CO2-eq). (B) Land uses in 2020 and expected land uses in the BAU and Carbon Neutrality scenarios in
2050, resulting from the FABLE Calculator, Dinamica EGO and NatureMap integrated modelling.
Source: Adapted from Frank et al. (2022).
CLIMATE POLICY 7
fluctuations in Argentina, frequent changes in the ‘rules of the game’, lack of long-term financing, and few pos-
sibilities to hedge against risk prevent the private sector from thinking about long-term carbon neutral
strategies.
It was also highlighted that changes in local and international food demand will play an important role in
defining production decisions, beyond any public policy incentives that might be introduced. Regarding gov-
ernance, stakeholders mentioned that at present there is not enough coordination among climate, energy,
transport, agro-industrial, economic, financial and social policies. In particular, it was remarked that territorial
development policies are not aligned with the objective of protecting priority areas for biodiversity conserva-
tion. Therefore, stakeholders agreed on the fact that achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 will require not only
the promotion of technological changes but also profound economic and social transformations, including
deep changes in the education, science and technology systems and a deep revision of regulatory frameworks
and current incentive schemes.
Beyond these basic agreements, the stakeholder dialogue process showed that there are many disagree-
ments between private and public sector actors and environmental NGOs regarding how to define a Transition
Roadmap that could be acceptable for all. To start with, the ‘zero native forest deforestation’ imperative that
emerged as a key condition to achieve carbon neutrality in the modelling exercise was not widely accepted
by all stakeholders. Although everyone agreed on the fact that illegal deforestation should be curbed, never-
theless some actors stated that some forest areas will have to be deforested in order to produce the increasing
amounts of food that the constantly growing global population will demand.
With regards to native forest restoration, another key element the modelling exercise highlighted, some
actors considered that it should be a national priority, even though it will demand public funding, while
others declared that there are other social priorities that need to be addressed first. In a similar way, the strategy
to enhance forest plantations as carbon sinks did not achieve full consensus. While some actors affirmed that
forest plantations (mainly with exotic species such as Pinus, Eucalyptus and Populus) are needed to achieve net
emissions balance, others argued that they should be limited due to the impacts on natural ecosystems.
The potential for technological progress was another controversial point. While some actors affirmed that
technological innovations will enable increases in agricultural production without productive area expansion,
others feared that expanding productive lands will be unavoidable in order to meet growing demand for food.
Similarly, some controversy arose regarding current technologies and practices, with some actors claiming that
there is still ambiguous data regarding the mitigation potential of some of them.
With regards to the mitigation potential of agroforestry systems and, in particular, of Integrated Forest Man-
agement with Livestock (MBGI in Spanish), some actors argued that these practices are key to achieving carbon
neutrality, while others affirmed that MBGI practices are harmful, given that they involve overgrazing and selec-
tive deforestation, thus affecting natural forest regeneration capacity.
Controversy also arose around the expected changes in global diets and the potential impacts this would
have on Argentina’s role as a global food supplier. While many actors argued that a movement towards redu-
cing the consumption of meat and other animal-basedfood is taking place worldwide, others claimed that this
will entail no changes to demand for Argentina´s food exports.
Finally, with regards to agricultural practices, some actors stated that agroecology is a disruptive paradigm
towards which agribusiness urgently needs to transition, while others affirmed that some of these practices are
already being implemented in certain places in the country.
In sum, contrasting views and priorities emerged from the stakeholder dialogue process, revealing that there
is no unanimous consensus on the urgency to transition to a Carbon Neutrality scenario and how to achieve it.
To try to overcome this dilemma, as mentioned above, stakeholders were also asked to identify enabling
conditions that could facilitate the transition towards carbon neutrality. The main conditions they stated
were the following: (i) Maintain over time stakeholder dialogues in order to strengthen the exercise of thinking
collectively about Argentina´s future; (ii) Ensure compliance with current regulations at the national level, prior-
itizing illegal deforestation control as a national State policy; (iii) Foster a participatory territorial planning
process ensuring the participation of local communities and indigenous peoples; (iv) Promote the development
and use of biofuels and bioenergies made of biomass residues, the reuse of biomass, the use of by-products and
residues from industrial processes, circular management in agricultural processes and bio-inputs; (v) Design
8 V. GUTMAN ET AL.
appropriate policy instruments to promote change considering the specificities of each value chain and the
different types of actors, including incentives for sustainable management certifications and carbon footprint
estimates; (vi) Promote a research, development and innovation (R + D + i) agenda prioritizing the allocation of
economic and human resources to areas that should be defined jointly with sectoral stakeholders; (vii) Design
comprehensive environmental education and training programmes in all sectors and social groups; (viii)
Promote consumer awareness and foster change in consumption habits towards choosing low-carbon food
and energy products, based on traceability processes, labelling systems and digital technologies; (ix)
Promote, in parallel, mitigation policies in the transport and logistics sector with a focus on transitioning to
rail and river freight transport, biofuels and electromobility; and (x)Ensure that decisions implemented to
achieve carbon neutrality in the AFOLU sector do not undermine the ability of natural biological systems to
maintain ecosystem functionality.
As a final result of the modelling and stakeholder dialogue processes, several reports and policy briefs were
elaborated and submitted to the Argentinean Government to be considered as inputs for decision making.
4. Discussion
In the AFOLU LTS Project in Argentina, scenarios were used in two distinct ways. Firstly, the BAU and Carbon
Neutrality scenarios were employed as communication tools to make stakeholders comprehend the magnitude
of the efforts required to transition from existing productive and land use patterns to those necessary for
achieving a net zero world. Secondly, the intermediate scenarios, which were developed based on stakeholders’
visions of the future, served to inform policy makers about realistic and feasible goals within the prevailing
incentive structure and the current macroeconomic, political, institutional, and legal contexts.
Aro et al. (2023) point out that having a reference scenario based on currently applied policy measures and
an aspirational scenario to which climate policy should head to is a practical way to prepare an action plan. They
also remark that it is desirable to develop more than one alternative scenario in order to widen the array of
available policy options and instruments. In our project, we adopted a pragmatic approach by developing
both a BAU scenario and a Carbon Neutrality scenario as extreme contrasts, alongside several intermediate
scenarios reflecting stakeholders’ perspectives. This method allowed us to quantitatively visualize the gap
between the ideal and the achievable. Moreover, integrating questions about the enabling conditions required
to pave the way towards carbon neutrality within the dialogue process provided valuable insights on bridging
the identified gap.
However, the substantial differences in stakeholders’ views and the considerable effort required to achieve
carbon neutrality, along with the conflicting priorities that emerged during the dialogues, raise questions about
the feasibility of reaching a consensus in the short or medium term. This highlights both the potential and limit-
ations of participatory modelling approaches as effective tools for generating agreement. Collective scenario
construction undoubtedly enhances stakeholders’ and policymakers’ understanding of the challenges involved.
Nevertheless, it seems insufficient in itself to drive the profound changes that are needed. Ultimately, public-
private negotiations will be required in other domains to propel the necessary transformative actions.
Furthermore, our modelling process encountered some additional limitations. Firstly, although wemade dili-
gent efforts to include stakeholders representing diverse aspects of the Argentinean AFOLU sector, some insti-
tutions did not participate. This was either because they did not respond to the invitation or due to the
restricted project time frame. Additionally, the project faced interruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic
and a change of government, leading to the cancellation of certain planned in-person workshops. These chal-
lenges underscore the necessity of fostering institutionalized public-private dialogue spaces that extend
beyond specific projects and government changes. Such spaces are crucial for facilitating participatory long-
term thinking.
In this context, Schmitt Olabisi et al. (2021) highlight that participatory modelling can serve as a valuable tool
to facilitate discussions encompassing complex issues and involving multiple drivers and uncertainties. Our
own findings support this notion, as the application of stakeholder-based modelling proved effective in stimu-
lating meaningful discussions on carbon neutrality. Specifically, it played a crucial role in responding to the pol-
itical imperative of presenting ambitious commitments during ongoing international climate negotiations.
CLIMATE POLICY 9
5. Conclusions
Bringing together environmental NGOs and private and public stakeholders in scenario modelling exercises
offers a promising approach to facilitate political discussions on the necessary efforts to attain carbon neutrality
by 2050. By quantitatively demonstrating the challenges involved, model outputs offer valuable inputs for
workshops dedicated to bridging the gap between ideal aspirations and feasible solutions. The results
derived from these collaborative efforts can subsequently inform and influence national policies.
The main lesson learned from the AFOLU LTS Project in Argentina was the importance of involving stake-
holders in the development of long-term scenarios, ensuring a participatory and inclusive process. Given the
coexistence of contradictory priorities within the AFOLU sector, our participatory modelling exercise primarily
served as a discussion tool to identify barriers and enabling conditions, initiating technical discussions on how
to formulate a roadmap that could pave the way towards a successful transition.
We believe that expanding the scope of this type of exercise holds promise, given that all stakeholders share
sustainability as their ultimate goal. In this context, the use of iterative modelling, built upon successive inputs
gathered from workshops and interviews conducted within the framework of systematic dialogue processes,
can prove to be a valuable tool for promoting the expansion of consensus-building spaces.
Data availability statement
Not applicable.Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
The project was funded by The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). The work of AM, DR and LA was
supported by the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK) on the basis of a decision by the German Bun-
destag.
ORCID
Daniel Ryan http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4699-5448
References
Argentina. (2021). Update of the net emissions goal to 2030 of the Argentina’s Second NDC. Available at: https://unfccc.int/sites/
default/files/NDC/2022-05/Actualizacio%CC%81n%20meta%20de%20emisiones%202030.pdf.
Argentina. (2022). Estrategia de desarrollo resiliente con bajas emisiones a largo plazo a 2050. Available at: https://www.argentina.
gob.ar/sites/default/files/estrategia_de_desarrollo_resiliente_con_bajas_emisiones_a_largo_plazo_2050.pdf.
10 V. GUTMAN ET AL.
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4699-5448
https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2022-05/Actualizacio%CC%81n%20meta%20de%20emisiones%202030.pdf
https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2022-05/Actualizacio%CC%81n%20meta%20de%20emisiones%202030.pdf
https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/estrategia_de_desarrollo_resiliente_con_bajas_emisiones_a_largo_plazo_2050.pdf
https://www.argentina.gob.ar/sites/default/files/estrategia_de_desarrollo_resiliente_con_bajas_emisiones_a_largo_plazo_2050.pdf
Aro, K., Aakkula, J., Lauttamäki, V., Varho, V., Martens, P., & Rikkonen, P. (2023). The use of scenarios in climate policy planning: an
assessment of actors’ experiences and lessons learned in Finland. Climate Policy, 23, 199–211. DOI:10.1080/14693062.2022.
2123773
Barth, I., Benito Amaro, I., Calamari, N., Casellas, K., Cristeche, E., Frank, F., Mosciaro, M., Pace Guerrero, I., Volante, J., & Zelarayan, A.
(2020). Scenarios and Impact on Greenhouse Gas Emissions. INTA Internal Report. 35 pp. Available at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/361256108_Scenarios_and_Impact_on_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Second_Report_INTA (Last checked 10/04/
2022).
Beyer, R. M., Hua, F., Martin, P. A., Manica, A., & Rademacher, T. (2022). Relocating croplands could drastically reduce the environ-
mental impacts of global food production. Communications Earth & Environment, 3(1), Article number: 49. https://doi.org/10.
1038/s43247-022-00360-6
CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). (2021). Latest National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans. Argentina. Available at:
https://www.cbd.int/nbsap/about/latest/#ar (Last checked 10/22/2021).
Chatham House. (2022). The Chatham House Rule. Available at https://www.chathamhouse.org/about-us/chatham-house-rule (Last
checked 08/17/2022).
Cook, C. N., Inayatullah, S., Burgman, M. A., Sutherland, W. J., & Wintle, B. A. (2014). Strategic foresight: How planning for the unpre-
dictable Can improve environmental decision-making. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 29(9), 531–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tree.2014.07.005
FABLE. (2021). The FABLE calculator resource page. Available at: https://www.abstract9 landscapes.com/fable-calculator (last
checked: 10/22/2021).
Frank, F., Volante, J., Calamari, N., Peri, P. L., González Chávez, B., García Martínez, P., Mosciaro, M. J., Martín, G., Benito Amaro, I., Pace
Guerrero, I., Casellas, K., Zuliani, M., Sirimarco, X., Gaitán, J., Cristeche, E., Barral, M. P., Villarino, S., Zelarayan, A. L., & Monjeau, A.
(2022). A multi-model approach to explore sustainable food and land use pathways for Argentina. Sustainability Science. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01245-5
INDEC (Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Censos). (2019). Complejos exportadores. Cifras del primer semestre de 2019. Available at:
https://www.indec.gob.ar/indec/web/Nivel4Tema-3-2-39 (last checked: 10/22/2021).
IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). (2019). Red List of Endangered Species ver 2019_2. Retrieved from: https://
www.iucnredlist.org/.
Jung, M., Arnell, A., de Lamo, X., García-Rangel, S., Lewis, M., Mark, J., Merow, C., Miles, L., Ondo, I., Pironon, S., Ravilious, C., Rivers, M.,
Schepaschenko, D., Tallowin, O., van Soesbergen, A., Govaerts, R., Boyle, B. L., Enquist, B. J., Feng, X.,… Visconti, P. (2021). Areas of
global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water. Nature, Ecology & Evolution, 5, 1499–1509. https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41559-021-01528-7
MAyDS. (2022). Informe Nacional de Inventario del Cuarto Informe Bienal de Actualización de la República Argentina a la Convención
Marco de las Naciones Unidas para el Cambio Climático (CMNUCC).
Mosnier, A., Penescu, L., Perez Guzman, K., Steinhauser, J., Thomson, M., Douzal, C., & Poncet, J. (2020). FABLE calculator 2020 update.
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN), Laxenburg,
Austria. DOI:10.22022/ESM/12-2020.16934
Renn, O. (2006). Participatory processes for designing environmental policies. Land Use Policy, 23(23), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.landusepol.2004.08.005
Robinson, J., Burch, S., Talwar, S., O’Shea, M., & Walsh, M. (2011). Envisioning sustainability: Recent progress in the use of participatory
backcasting approaches for sustainability research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(5), 756–768. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.techfore.2010.12.006
Schmitt Olabisi, L., Osuntade, O., Saweda, L., Liverpool-Tasie, O., & Adebiyi, J. (2021). Participatory modeling for climate change adap-
tation: the poultry sector in Nigeria. Climate Policy, 21(5), 666–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1891019
Soares Filho, B. S., Cerqueira, G. C., & Lopez Pennachin, C. (2002). DINAMICA – A stochastic cellular automata model designed to
simulate dynamics in an Amazonian colonization frontier. Ecological Modeling, 154(3), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-
3800(02)00059-5
van Soest, H. L., van Vuuren, D. P., Hilaire, J., Minx, J. C., Harmsen, M. J. H. M., Krey, V., Popp, A., Riahi, K., & Luderer, G. (2019). Analysing
interactions among Sustainable Development Goals with Integrated Assessment Models. Global Transitions, 1, 210–225. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.glt.2019.10.004
Volkery, A., & Ribeiro, T. (2009). Scenario planning in public policy: Understanding Use, impacts and the role of institutional context
factors. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(9), 1198–1207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.07.009
Waisman, H., Bataille, C., Winkler, H., Jotzo, F., Shukla, P., Colombier, M., Buira, D., Criqui, P., Fischedick, M., Kainuma, M., La Rovere, E.,
Pye, S., Safonov, G., Siagian, U., Teng, F., Virdis, M.-R., Williams, J., Young, S., Anandarajah, G.,… Trollip, H. (2019). A pathway design
framework for national low greenhouse gas emission development strategies. Nature Climate Change, 9(4), 261–268. https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41558-019-0442-8
Wright, D., Stahl, B., & Hatzakis, T. (2020). Policy scenarios as an instrument for policymakers. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, 154, 119972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119972
Wright, G., Cairns, G., O’Brien, F. A., & Goodwin, P. (2019). Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked pro-
blems: Pitfalls and potential. European Journal of Operational Research, 278(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.08.035
CLIMATE POLICY 11
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2022.2123773
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2022.2123773
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361256108_Scenarios_and_Impact_on_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Second_Report_INTA
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361256108_Scenarios_and_Impact_on_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Second_Report_INTA
https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-022-00360-6
https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-022-00360-6
https://www.cbd.int/nbsap/about/latest/#ar
https://www.chathamhouse.org/about-us/chatham-house-rule
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.07.005
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.07.005
https://www.abstract9
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01245-5https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01245-5
https://www.indec.gob.ar/indec/web/Nivel4Tema-3-2-39
https://www.iucnredlist.org/
https://www.iucnredlist.org/
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01528-7
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01528-7
https://doi.org/10.22022/ESM/12-2020.16934
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.005
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.005
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.12.006
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.12.006
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1891019
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00059-5
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00059-5
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glt.2019.10.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glt.2019.10.004
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.07.009
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0442-8
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0442-8
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119972
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.08.035
	Abstract
	1. Introduction
	2. Methods
	2.1. The modelling process
	2.2. The stakeholder dialogue process
	3. Results
	3.1. Modelling results
	3.2. Stakeholders´ views
	4. Discussion
	5. Conclusions
	Data availability statement
	Disclosure statement
	ORCID
	References
<<
 /ASCII85EncodePages false
 /AllowTransparency false
 /AutoPositionEPSFiles false
 /AutoRotatePages /PageByPage
 /Binding /Left
 /CalGrayProfile ()
 /CalRGBProfile (Adobe RGB \0501998\051)
 /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2)
 /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1)
 /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Error
 /CompatibilityLevel 1.3
 /CompressObjects /Off
 /CompressPages true
 /ConvertImagesToIndexed true
 /PassThroughJPEGImages false
 /CreateJobTicket false
 /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default
 /DetectBlends true
 /DetectCurves 0.1000
 /ColorConversionStrategy /sRGB
 /DoThumbnails true
 /EmbedAllFonts true
 /EmbedOpenType false
 /ParseICCProfilesInComments true
 /EmbedJobOptions true
 /DSCReportingLevel 0
 /EmitDSCWarnings false
 /EndPage -1
 /ImageMemory 524288
 /LockDistillerParams true
 /MaxSubsetPct 100
 /Optimize true
 /OPM 1
 /ParseDSCComments false
 /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true
 /PreserveCopyPage true
 /PreserveDICMYKValues true
 /PreserveEPSInfo false
 /PreserveFlatness true
 /PreserveHalftoneInfo false
 /PreserveOPIComments false
 /PreserveOverprintSettings false
 /StartPage 1
 /SubsetFonts true
 /TransferFunctionInfo /Remove
 /UCRandBGInfo /Remove
 /UsePrologue false
 /ColorSettingsFile ()
 /AlwaysEmbed [ true
 ]
 /NeverEmbed [ true
 ]
 /AntiAliasColorImages false
 /CropColorImages true
 /ColorImageMinResolution 150
 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
 /DownsampleColorImages true
 /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic
 /ColorImageResolution 300
 /ColorImageDepth -1
 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1
 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000
 /EncodeColorImages true
 /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode
 /AutoFilterColorImages false
 /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG
 /ColorACSImageDict <<
 /QFactor 0.90
 /HSamples [2 1 1 2] /VSamples [2 1 1 2]
 >>
 /ColorImageDict <<
 /QFactor 0.40
 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1]
 >>
 /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict <<
 /TileWidth 256
 /TileHeight 256
 /Quality 15
 >>
 /JPEG2000ColorImageDict <<
 /TileWidth 256
 /TileHeight 256
 /Quality 15
 >>
 /AntiAliasGrayImages false
 /CropGrayImages true
 /GrayImageMinResolution 150
 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
 /DownsampleGrayImages true
 /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic
 /GrayImageResolution 300
 /GrayImageDepth -1
 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2
 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000
 /EncodeGrayImages true
 /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode
 /AutoFilterGrayImages false
 /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG
 /GrayACSImageDict <<
 /QFactor 0.90
 /HSamples [2 1 1 2] /VSamples [2 1 1 2]
 >>
 /GrayImageDict <<
 /QFactor 0.40
 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1]
 >>
 /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict <<
 /TileWidth 256
 /TileHeight 256
 /Quality 15
 >>
 /JPEG2000GrayImageDict <<
 /TileWidth 256
 /TileHeight 256
 /Quality 15
 >>
 /AntiAliasMonoImages false
 /CropMonoImages true
 /MonoImageMinResolution 1200
 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK
 /DownsampleMonoImages true
 /MonoImageDownsampleType /Average
 /MonoImageResolution 300
 /MonoImageDepth -1
 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000
 /EncodeMonoImages true
 /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode
 /MonoImageDict <<
 /K -1
 >>
 /AllowPSXObjects true
 /CheckCompliance [
 /None
 ]
 /PDFX1aCheck false
 /PDFX3Check false
 /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false
 /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true
 /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [
 0.00000
 0.00000
 0.00000
 0.00000
 ]
 /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true
 /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [
 0.00000
 0.00000
 0.00000
 0.00000
 ]
 /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (None)
 /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier ()
 /PDFXOutputCondition ()
 /PDFXRegistryName ()
 /PDFXTrapped /False
 /Description <<
 /ENU ()
 >>
>> setdistillerparams
<<
 /HWResolution [600 600]
 /PageSize [595.245 841.846]
>> setpagedevice