When it comes to global-warming research, Nature Climate Change is one of the world's leading peer-reviewed journals. That is why its publication of a new paper on carbon taxes by a team of researchers led by Tomoko Hasegawa is so timely and important.
Here's what Hasegawa and his colleagues found:
By 2050, stringent climate mitigation policy, if implemented evenly across all sectors and regions, would have a greater negative impact on global hunger and food consumption than the direct impacts of climate change.
This is, to say the least, a stunning discovery. Even more remarkable is the revelation that Hasegawa, et al, are the first researchers ever "to compare across models the effects of climate change on agriculture with the costs and effects of mitigation policies, and look at subsequent effects on food security and the risk of hunger."
After more than thirty years of hearing that "the science is settled," can it really be the case that no one has until now bothered to ask whether carbon taxes will help or hinder the world's food security?