Cited by 141Climate change impacts on agricultureLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesAgricultural economics and policies

Global market integration increases likelihood that a future African Green Revolution could increase crop land use and CO 2 emissions

Open access
Hertel, Thomas W., Ramankutty, Navin, Baldos, Uris Lantz C.·2014·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: Agriculture is a key driver of tropical deforestation, and there is heated debate about whether productivity-enhancing crop innovations can slow such environmental degradation. For fixed food demand, globally higher yields will reduce cropland and hence deforestation. However, regional innovations often boost agricultural profitability and lower prices, thereby leading to cropland expansion in the innovating region. This paper develops a framework for understanding the impact of regional innovations on global land use and the environment. Although the historical Green Revolution in Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East is shown to have been land sparing, a future Green Revolution in Africa could lead to global cropland expansion in the context of a more fully integrated global agricultural economy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1403543111

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. IPCC (2014) Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, UK).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hertel, T. W., Ramankutty, N., & Baldos, U. L. C.
Affiliations
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • McGill University (CA)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2014-09-08
Volume
111
Issue
38
Pages
13799-13804
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2116032367
Cited by
141
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 1
FWCI
14.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE‐SC005171)
  • Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
  • University of Minnesota
  • Office of Science (DE-SC005171)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Climate change impacts on agriculture
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Agricultural economics and policies
Keywords
African Green Revolution, land sparing, land use, agricultural productivity, CO2 emissions, counterfactual analysis, globalization of agriculture, land rent, crop prices, agricultural intensification, environmental impact of agriculture
MeSH terms
Africa, Carbon Dioxide, Humans, Models, Biological, Crops, Agricultural, Models, Economic, Marketing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review