@article{WenzKalkuhlSteckeletal.2016,
  author    = {Wenz, Leonie and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Steckel, Jan Christoph and Creutzig, Felix},
  title     = {Teleconnected food supply shocks},
  series = {Environmental research letters},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Environmental research letters},
  publisher = {IOP Publ. Ltd.},
  address   = {Bristol},
  issn      = {1748-9326},
  doi       = {10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/035007},
  pages     = {10},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {The 2008-2010 food crisis might have been a harbinger of fundamental climate-induced food crises with geopolitical implications. Heat-wave-induced yield losses in Russia and resulting export restrictions led to increases in market prices for wheat across the Middle East, likely contributing to the Arab Spring. With ongoing climate change, temperatures and temperature variability will rise, leading to higher uncertainty in yields for major nutritional crops. Here we investigate which countries are most vulnerable to teleconnected supply-shocks, i.e. where diets strongly rely on the import of wheat, maize, or rice, and where a large share of the population is living in poverty. We find that the Middle East is most sensitive to teleconnected supply shocks in wheat, Central America to supply shocks in maize, and Western Africa to supply shocks in rice. Weighing with poverty levels, Sub-Saharan Africa is most affected. Altogether, a simultaneous 10\% reduction in exports of wheat, rice, and maize would reduce caloric intake of 55 million people living in poverty by about 5\%. Export bans in major producing regions would put up to 200 million people below the poverty line at risk, 90\% of which live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Our results suggest that a region-specific combination of national increases in agricultural productivity and diversification of trade partners and diets can effectively decrease future food security risks.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KalkuhlEdenhofer2016,
  author    = {Kalkuhl, Matthias and Edenhofer, Ottmar},
  title     = {Ramsey meets Th{\"u}nen},
  series = {International tax and public finance},
  volume    = {24},
  journal   = {International tax and public finance},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {0927-5940},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10797-016-9403-6},
  pages     = {350 -- 380},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Land taxes can increase production in the manufacturing sector and enhance land conservation at the same time, which can lead to overall macroeconomic growth. Existing research emphasizes the non-distorting properties of land taxes (when fixed factors are taxed) as well as growth-enhancing impacts (when asset portfolios are shifted to reproducible capital). This paper furthers the neoclassical perspective on land taxes by endogenizing land allocation decisions in a multi-sector growth model. Based on von Th{\"u}nen's observation, agricultural land is created from wilderness through conversion and cultivation, both of which are associated with costs. In the steady state of our general equilibrium model, land taxes not only may reduce land consumption (associated with environmental benefits) but may also affect overall economic output, while leaving wages and interest rates unaffected. When labor productivity is higher in the manufacturing than in the agricultural sector and agricultural and manufactured goods are substitutes (or the economy is open to world trade), land taxes increase aggregate economic output. There is a complex interplay of conservation policy, technological change and land taxes, depending on consumer preferences, sectoral labor productivities and openness-to-trade. Our model introduces a new perspective on land taxes in current policy debates on development, tax reforms as well as forest conservation.},
  language  = {en}
}