Danielle Rones
Danielle Rones
2 March 2025
Implications of Climate Change on Future Crop Yields and Potential Solutions
Climate change is quickly becoming one of the most pressing global issues, with implications for the natural world and human societies. Many are researching its effects; for example, scholars at the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition have conducted research that mainly focuses on how future crop yields will be affected and, in turn, how this will affect malnutrition and famine rates (Coughlan De Perez et al., 2024). This paper has inspired me to do further research on this topic.
The global rise in temperature, driven by greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, is accelerating shifts in climate patterns, resulting in significant changes to ecosystems, biodiversity, and the balance of life on Earth. These shifts impact the physical environment, social stability, economic health, and food security. For example, melting of the arctic ice threatens the survival of many arctic animals, including polar bears, while also contributing to rising sea levels that threaten low-lying countries such as Bangladesh and island nations such as the Maldives. Cultural and local food traditions are under threat of vanishing because climate change and famine are causing the loss of indigenous crops and farming methods. This raises the question of how it eventually affects our lives, particularly in regions relying heavily on local agriculture. Extreme weather events such as droughts, tornadoes, floods, and heat waves are becoming more frequent and severe. These events can devastate crops, livestock, and fisheries, disrupt food production, and lead to spikes in prices, shortages, and, in some cases, mass displacement of communities. The recurring question is how prepared we are to manage these outcomes. What will we do when the next disaster destroys the
food supply? And more importantly, what measures can be taken to mitigate the risks? For countries that are highly dependent on local agriculture, the risk is high. A single failed growing season due to an unpredictable climate event could result in widespread hunger, especially in regions that have a limited ability to import food.
Famine is typically declared only when a country or region experiences a catastrophic collapse in food availability, leading to mass malnutrition, starvation, and death. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) provides that famine is declared only in extreme cases: 20% of households lack food access, over 30% of children suffer from malnutrition, and the mortality rate must exceed two deaths per 10,000 people per day (U.S. Agency for International Development, n.d.). For example, the 2017 drought in Somalia, which led to 90% of the country being in extreme drought conditions, impacted over 8 million people and is still impacting them to this day. While famine is no longer a likely outcome as it was a few years ago, there are still 4.4 million people suffering from food insecurity, which is when there is limited access to food, especially quality options (European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations, n.d.).
However, famine is more than just a statistic of a natural disaster; it is also a socio-economic phenomenon. Definitions of famine often focus on its observable outcomes, such as starvation, malnutrition, and death, rather than the underlying causes or conditions that lead to it. This definition offers no criteria for the severity of a famine. Factors such as poverty, political instability, weak governance, and unequal resource distribution can exacerbate vulnerability to famine. Addressing these underlying systemic inequalities will help improve resilience as part of famine prevention efforts.
The study Famine Risk Under Climate Change: Assessing the Impact on Local Food Production and the Potential Role of Adaptation Strategies evaluates the risks posed by climate change
on agriculture, particularly local food production (Coughlan De Perez et al., 2024). The analysis focuses on global projections of extreme weather events and their impacts on crop yields and in turn famine, with and without adaptation measures.
Figure 1. Famine systems model (Coughlan De Perez et al., 2024).
The study further employs a famine systems model (Figure 1) to understand how climate-induced changes in agriculture may influence famine risk globally (Howe, 2018). This shows how pressure arises from a combination of shocks and vulnerabilities. Shocks may result from environmental factors, such as extreme weather events driven by climate change, or political factors, such as armed conflict or governance failures. These shocks impact populations who are particularly vulnerable due to their dependence on local agriculture or because they are deliberately targeted during conflicts. Vulnerability magnifies the pressure caused by these shocks, creating conditions where crises might arise. In many cases, the pressure can be alleviated through global humanitarian aid, which provides food, medical assistance, and other resources to the affected population. Alternatively, populations may migrate to areas where they can access these resources and escape the immediate danger from conflict or environmental stressors. However, when there is a hold preventing the delivery of aid or limiting mobility, the pressure remains unrelieved. Holds can take various forms, such as ongoing conflicts, restrictive policies, or logistical barriers that block access to support. When pressure remains due to an unresolved hold, it can trigger self-reinforcing dynamics, such as price inflation for
food and goods or social breakdown. If the hold remains in place for long enough, a famine system will take place, which will lead to rapid increases in food security, malnutrition, and mortality rates. The longer the hold endures, the deeper the crisis becomes. Eventually, the system will rebalance when the hold is removed, meaning external assistance is successfully delivered, a conflict is resolved, or agricultural productivity in the affected region is restored. However, the recovery process lasts for a long time, and the long-term consequences such as loss of life, economic damage, and societal disruption, may persist for years.
To further asses the particular shocks that can lead to the famine system, future crop production estimates were derived using the Global Agro-Ecological Zones (GAEZ) crop simulations (Fischer et al. 2021). This global model evaluates the future potential for crop growth under normal climate change scenarios using historical climate data from 1961 to 2010 and future projections based on the IPCC’s Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP 8.5) using varying agricultural inputs (high or low) and water conditions (rainfed or irrigated).
Similarly, the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6th generation of climate models (CMIP6), which represents a pessimistic scenario compared to the historical baseline, was used, specifically under a high climate change scenario (RCP 8.6) and in the long term. This allowed for an examination of the increasing frequency of extreme weather events and long-term changes in crop production.
Figure 2. Projected climate changes 2081-2100 under the RCP8.5 scenario, CMIP6 multi-model means. (a) Change in the annual number of days above 40°C. (b) Change in the annual number of frost days (below 0°C). (c) Percent change in precipitation on the wettest day of the year. (d) Change in how many days are in the longest string of consecutive dry days per year (Coughlan De Perez et al., 2024).
Projections for the late 21st century (2081-2100) under the RCP8.5 scenario include changes in extreme heat days, frost days, peak precipitation, and prolonged dry periods (Figure 2). These are important to understand regional vulnerabilities and the potential for what adaptation strategies can be invested in to protect each region.
Figure 3. Projected change in calorie production from agriculture between the current period, 2011-2040, to the future period, 2041-2070, assuming that the crops planted are the same and agricultural production stays proportional. The color scale on the right indicates negative or positive rates of change for calorie production (Coughlan De Perez et al., 2024).
The change in calorie production due to changing climate (Figure 3) is mostly in negative kilocalories per gridbox, meaning that there will be a decrease in calorie production by 2070. Referring back to how the climate is expected to change (Figure 2), the zones that have the most decrease in calorie production are the same areas that have an increase in number of annual days that have temperatures over 40ºC and have the longest consecutive strings of dry days.
Figure 4. Opportunities for adaptation: The projected change in attainable yield between the current period (2011-2040) and future period (2041-2070) of the crop that will have the highest projected improvement to yield in each location. The color scale on the right indicates negative or positive rates of change for attainable yield (Coughlan De Perez et al., 2024).
When looking at the expected yield rates in future years, the crops in the prediction model with adaptation (Figure 4) are expected to have the highest projected improvement in yield in each location where climate is predicted to change the most. The yield is significantly higher throughout the map compared to crops used in current times (Figure 3).
These crop yields are severely affected by climate change, primarily from the changing ecosystems and intensifying agricultural challenges, such as rising temperatures and shifting precipitation patterns that contribute to an increase in weeds, pests, and diseases. Elevated CO2 levels promote weed growth by significantly increasing their photosynthetic rate, creating competition for resources like water, nutrients, and sunlight (USDA Climate Hubs, n.d.). Climate change will also affect human health and agricultural labor through the spread of vectorborne diseases. As global temperatures rise, mosquitoes and other disease carriers expand their geographic range, leading to increased risks of malaria, dengue fever, and other illnesses that
affect agricultural workers and vulnerable populations (Jordan, 2019). Higher temperatures will also lead to degradation of water quality, which will increase the amount of diseases in the crops. Increased heavy precipitation events together with higher water temperatures will accelerate the transport of pathogens and other pollutants such as pesticides, sediments, and salt and thermal pollution (Kundzewicz et al., 2008).
Besides pests and diseases, the agricultural hydrological cycle is a critical concern, as Earth’s water levels are directly linked to climate change. Changes in precipitation patterns result in uneven water distribution, with some regions experiencing severe droughts while others face increased flooding. Such imbalances mainly disrupt irrigation systems and damage crops by threatening Earth’s main source of freshwater: groundwater, which accounts for ~20% of water use worldwide, holding 70 times more freshwater than surface water (Earman and Dettinger, 2011, as cited in Dao et al., 2024). Groundwater up to 100m deep is vulnerable to global warming, which affects water quality degradation and quantity diminishment (Dao et al., 2024). Rising temperatures in groundwater will completely change its chemical compound, leading to more acidity, metals, and CO2 release. Warmer climates may have a problem of more harmful algae growth, which was previously a problem limited to surface waters. The changing precipitation, whether it’s more rain, less rain, or more extreme, can impact how much water reaches the underground water supplies that replenish groundwater, called aquifers. When there are more frequent and heavier rainfalls, they can carry more chemicals and particles from the surface, such as road salts in the winter, and soil into the aquifers and affect the quality, while long dry periods will directly impact a lower quantity of groundwater. Furthermore, prolonged dry periods may result in cracking of land, which would result in more infiltration during subsequent rainfall. For example, in crop areas, pesticides, nutrients, and herbicides may move past the crop root zone into the
subsoil, contaminating groundwater while also decreasing their effectiveness towards the crops. Finally, the sea level rise can cause saltwater intrusion into coastal aquifers. When this happens, the chemical composition of groundwater can be changed significantly, causing more bacteria and lower salinities.
Governments and international organizations play an important role in mitigating these risks. While it is impossible to eliminate all risks, many strategies can be taken to reduce vulnerability. One way is by investing in climate-resilient agriculture, which is one of the most effective strategies to reduce the risks caused by climate change. For example, developing and promoting drought-resilient crops, which require less water once established, can significantly enhance adaptation to shifting climate conditions. Droughts remain the primary cause of agricultural loss and are a major threat to food security. Types of crops such as lima beans, corn, and kamut can withstand prolonged periods of low rainfall and hot weather, ensuring stable yields even during dry spells (De Peyster, 2016). Similarly, salt-tolerant crops, such as cotton, barley, safflower, or sugar beet, can be grown in relatively saline soils (Shannon & Qualset, 1984). These crops can be valuable in areas where good quality water is not available and can instead use saline irrigation waters, such as brackish underground well water, drain water, or diluted seawater. This salttolerant species would be important to improve yields in areas that are now naturally affected by salt or areas with limited water resources.
Another way governments can help is by funding research and development of climate-resilient technologies. For example, the Netherlands, despite being quite food secure, invests heavily in reducing famine worldwide. Although the Netherlands is small, they are the world’s second-largest exporter of agricultural products and food technology by value, behind the United States. About two decades ago, they were concerned about feeding their 17 million population (Reiley, 2022). Now, they produce twice as
much food using half as many resources. The Dutch invest a lot of research into discovering the next best product and technology to reduce climate emissions. For example, they have researched cellcultured meat, vertical farming, seed technology, and robotics in milking and harvesting, innovations that all reduce water usage as well as carbon and methane emissions. The Dutch company Jaap Mazereeuw spends around $100 million annually on research and introduces about 150 new vegetable varieties each year. They breed seeds for all climatic zones and for outdoor and indoor conditions.
Using vertical farming as an example for further research, it is a farming technique that has been developed to reduce the environmental impacts of agriculture while maximizing productivity (Blom et al., 2022). Closed-box vertical farms (CBVFs) are indoor growth systems that use artificial light and air treatment systems exclusively alongside multi-layer hydroponic, water-based nutrient solution rather than soil systems, allowing for the CBVF to have year-round production with maximum productivity. CBVFs reduce the use of water, pesticides, and herbicides whilst increasing productivity per unit area.
In looking at the carbon footprint of vertical farming, there are several different emissions to take into account. There are carbon emissions released during crop cultivation, which are the main source of emission in all crop production, and emissions produced by the pre-production and post-production processes of the crop, such as upstream, downstream, and end-of-life emissions of the crop life cycle. Unfortunately, the carbon emissions produced by vertical farming compared to other forms of farming are significantly higher, meaning that vertical farming today is not a sustainable solution to global issues of decreasing availability of arable land and increasing food demands. However, there is limited research and data on these, and with more research and data, energy use can be significantly lowered (Blom et al., 2022). The Netherlands serves as a model for addressing food security
and climate challenges through its dedication to innovation and collaboration.
Another technology that can be invested in to help with the impacts of climate change is biologically engineering plants to be more resistant to certain types of natural disasters. Researchers at MIT have come up with a way to protect seeds from the stress of water shortage during their germination phase, the most important phase where the seed becomes able to grow and even provides extra nutrients (Trafton, 2024). Furthermore, they have a previous version of the coating that can withstand more salinity in soils. It is a two-layer coating developed over years of research. The first layer of the coating takes inspiration from natural drought-resistant seeds, such as chia seeds or basil seeds. The coating is engineered to stop the seed from drying out, providing a gel-like coating that holds onto moisture. The second, inner layer of the coating contains microorganisms called rhizobacteria that will help the seeds grow. The microorganisms are self-replicating and provide nitrogen to the plant, decreasing the amount of nitrogen-based fertilizers that are required and enriching the soil. When exposed to soil and water, the microbes will fix nitrogen into the soil, providing extra nutritious fertilizer to help the growing seed. Although the coating needs to undergo further testing, it could be implemented in many arid places around the world, as it is simple enough that it can be implemented at a local level. Furthermore, the materials for this technology are already used in the fertilizer industry, are fully biodegradable, and can also be developed from food waste. It can also be applied to virtually any seed. Although the coating would increase the cost of the seeds, it would decrease the cost of water and fertilizer. This is what would need to be tested more. This type of technology is crucial in the farming industry and should be a key focus of government investment, as it can be implemented to almost any seed and deployed in arid areas around the world.
Another potential technology that can be used is artificial intelligence. There are more and more developments to AI every year and in turn, more dependence on the technology. Although using AI and other such technologies consumes a significant amount of energy and contributes to a majority of carbon dioxide emissions, its potential benefits for improving agricultural practices and food security can't be overlooked. In 2023, over 70% of farmers across 8 countries reported that they have already seen impacts of climate change on their farms. Over 73% have reported increased pest and disease threats (Spencer, 2018). AI offers solutions to optimize resource management for farmers, enhancing efficiency and sustainability (Cordis, 2023). For example, the COpernicus Applications and services for low-impact agriculture in Australia (COALA project), an Australian-based service for irrigation and nutrient management, shows how AI-driven tools can help agriculture systems through their technologies that predict crop yield. They use data sources such as satellite imagery, UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) data, airborne surveys, and in-field sensor readings. The data sources can be used with AI systems, which then monitor factors such as crop water levels and nutritional status. This information helps farmers make better decisions about irrigation schedules, fertilizer application, and pest control, which can reduce waste in farming and improve yields. Instead of relying on guesswork or traditional farming calendars, farmers can change their practices to the real needs of their crops, conserving water and nutrients while minimizing environmental impact. Beyond yield prediction, AI can also identify early signs of plant diseases or pest infestations. Farmers can then act before significant damage occurs. Furthermore, AI systems can analyze historical and real-time weather data to forecast extreme weather events, helping farmers better prepare for potential droughts, floods, or heat waves. The predictive capability is essential in this time of increasing climate unpredictability. However, there are more problems with using AI. In addition to the large amount of
carbon emissions, AI is only as good as the data it is given. Poor data can drastically affect how well the technology is being used. If many farmers are using this kind of technology, not only would the data be more accurate, but there would also be significantly more gains from crop yields, benefiting both economic growth and food production.
After researching these potential issues, I wonder why it doesn’t seem like any current solutions are helping the situation on climate change get better. This is because of the many barriers that stop countries from prioritizing climate change. For example, a major political barrier to effective climate action is the lack of consistent political will across nations. Governments often prioritize short-term economic growth over addressing long-term climate challenges. For example, in the United States, recent presidential debates focused heavily on issues like economic growth, taxes, tariffs, immigration, and foreign policy, with climate change receiving minimal attention. Even when discussed, climate-related topics lacked actionable and unified strategies. Being one of the most powerful countries in the world, the United States has a powerful influence on other countries. By being a leader in taking action to help climate change, the United States can influence and help many other countries. The Paris Climate Agreement (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 2016), which aimed to limit global temperature rise to 1.5ºC, is another example of a barrier because now it seems that reaching that goal is nearly impossible. Achieving the goal now requires drastic measures, such as shutting down major carbon-emitting factories that carry too significant economic consequences to be beneficial. Additionally, international cooperation remains difficult due to differing national priorities and the lack of a central authority to maintain delicate relationships. Developed nations emphasize reducing emissions, while developing countries, often focused on economic growth, require substantial financial support to implement mitigation
strategies. But not all developing countries accept foreign investments, and even if they are received, their political systems may be too unbalanced to effectively use the investments. These regions that have political instability or weak governance structures often focus on balancing their political systems first, and even after this, focus on economic growth rather than effective climate adaptation planning and implementation.
However, switching to renewable energy is both environmentally and economically beneficial. In a 2022 study, researchers looked at three different ways to switch to renewable energy: not switching at all, a slow transition, and a rapid transition (Way et al. 2022). They found that a rapid transition to renewable energy would be much cheaper than continuing with a fossil fuelbased system. While the cost of fossil fuels has remained relatively the same over the past few decades, the costs of renewable energy technologies have fallen and are even predicted to continue falling. Switching to a decarbonized energy system by 2050 could save the global economy at least $12 trillion compared to maintaining current fossil fuel usage. The researchers looked at data on solar, wind, and battery storage costs, finding that previous models overestimated the expenses associated with clean energy technologies. Their rapid transition scenario suggests that a shift to renewable energy would not only reduce costs but also increase global energy services by approximately 55% by mid-century. Accelerating the adoption of green technologies is essential for achieving net-zero carbon emissions.
There are also social barriers to climate change, as many people are either not aware it is an issue or do not believe it is an issue for them. Public awareness and engagement are key to helping communities understand the long-term risks associated with climate change. Misinformation campaigns often fuel skepticism, apathy, and misunderstanding surrounding climate change. Cultural resistance to change also plays a part, as seen with the slow adoption of electric vehicles and other sustainable
technologies in certain regions. A Pew Research Center survey found that only about three in ten Americans say they would consider purchasing an electric vehicle (Beshay, 2024). While this may be an issue in the production of electric vehicles rather than how the population wants to act, there is still a lot of misinformation spread about electric vehicles that can factor into purchasing decisions, for example, about the reliability and effects on the environment. Furthermore, it is often not realistic for people to switch to an electric car when they already own a working car. It becomes harder to drive policy changes or implement mitigation strategies, such as switching to renewable energy, without widespread public support.
Overcoming these barriers requires concentrated efforts, such as technological development, international cooperation, and public support from all populations. Financial support, particularly for developing nations, is essential to help implement climate adaptation measures while still pursuing economic growth. This could mean outside help from world organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or the United Nations (UN) or foreign investments. Public education campaigns and advocacy can help raise awareness and dispel misinformation while creating a more united community. This could mean teaching about these issues in school or having more local volunteer events to help struggling neighborhoods. Achieving political consensus at both national and international levels is crucial for countries to work together and fight climate change together. For example, recent US governance policy changes related to climate change and international food assistance have set an example for other countries and have implications for years to come. It is essential to focus on creating systems that balance economic growth with environmental sustainability rather than focusing on one country’s individual growth, as we only have one planet.
Bibliography
Beshay. (2024, November 18). About 3 in 10 Americans would seriously consider buying an electric vehicle. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/shortreads/2024/06/27/about-3-in-10-americans-wouldseriously-consider-buying-an-electric-vehicle/
Blom, T., Jenkins, A., Pulselli, R., & Van Den Dobbelsteen, A. (2022). The embodied carbon emissions of lettuce production in vertical farming, greenhouse horticulture, and open-field farming in the Netherlands. Journal of Cleaner Production, 377, 134443.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134443
Cordis, C. (2023, November 17). Satellite monitoring tools key to sustainable agriculture. CORDIS | European Commission. https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/447657-satellitemonitoring-tools-key-to-sustainableagriculture?WT.mc_id=exp
Coughlan De Perez, E., Howe, P., Jaime, C., Nyofane, M., Masters, W., Maxwell, D., Marks Miller, S., Mphonyane, N., Rathod, K., Sanga, U., Sharma, A., Thorn, A., De la Torre, D., & Van Sant, C. (2024). Famine risk under climate change: Assessing the Impact on Local Food Production and the Potential Role of Adaptation Strategies. Journal of Public Health Policy.
Dao, P. U., Heuzard, A. G., Le, T. X. H., Zhao, J., Yin, R., Shang, C., & Fan, C. (2023). The impacts of climate change on groundwater quality: A review. The Science of the Total Environment, 912, 169241.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169241
De Peyster, E. (2016). Drought-Resistant Crops and Varieties. In University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Earman, E. and Dettinger, M. (2011) Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Groundwater Resources A Global Review.
Journal of Water and Climate Change, 2, 213-229. https://doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2011.034
Fischer, G., Nachtergaele, F.O., van Velthuizen, H.T., Chiozza, F., Franceschini, G., Henry, M., Muchoney, D. and Tramberend, S. 2021. Global Agro-Ecological Zones v4 –Model documentation. Rome, FAO.
Howe, P. (2018). Famine systems: A new model for understanding the development of famines. World Development, 105, 144–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.12.028
Howe, P., & Devereux, S. (2004). Famine Intensity and Magnitude Scales: A Proposal for an Instrumental Definition of Famine. Disasters, 28(4), 353–372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0361-3666.2004.00263.x
Jordan, R. (2019, March 15). How does climate change affect disease? Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability. https://sustainability.stanford.edu/news/how-does-climatechange-affect-disease
Pests & Disease | USDA Climate Hubs. (n.d.). https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/taxonomy/term/400#
Reiley, L. (2022, November 21). Netherlands is the second-largest exporter of agricultural products. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2022 /netherlands-agriculture-technology/
Shannon, M. C., & Qualset, C. O. (1984). Benefits and limitations in breeding salt-tolerant crops. In California Agriculture. https://www.ars.usda.gov/arsuserfiles/20361500/pdf_pubs/ P889.pdf
Somalia. (n.d.). European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations. https://civil-protection-humanitarianaid.ec.europa.eu/where/africa/somalia_en
Spencer, G. (2018, September 4). AI for Earth: Helping save the planet with data science. Microsoft News. https://news.microsoft.com/apac/features/ai-for-earthhelping-save-the-planet-with-data-science/
Trafton, A. (2024, November 1). Making agriculture more resilient to climate change. MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. https://news.mit.edu/2024/making-agriculturemore-resilient-climate-change-1101
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2016). THE PARIS AGREEMENT [Pressrelease].
https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/parisagreement _publication.pdf
U.S. Agency for International Development. (n.d.). Integrated food security phase classification (IPC): Explainer. https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/integrated-foodsecurity-phase-classification-ipc-explainer
W. Kundzewicz, Z. (2008). ScienceDirect. Climate Change Impacts on the Hydrological Cycle, 8(2–4), 195–203. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S164235 9308700752?via%3Dihub
Way, R., Ives, M. C., Mealy, P., & Farmer, J. D. (2022).
Empirically grounded technology forecasts and the energy transition. Joule, 6(9), 2057–2082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2022.08.009