Climate change is projected to intensify economic damages worldwide, while trade can buffer these impacts by reallocating goods across regions. This adaptive role depends on the reliability of global trade networks, and maritime chokepoints are exposed: localized shocks can propagate through shipping networks, generating welfare losses far beyond the directly affected region. This paper studies this mechanism using the Panama Canal, whose lock system relies on a freshwater reservoir (Gatun Lake), tracing three margins: Canal operations, trade flows, and network propagation. Canal throughput declines once Gatun Lake falls below the Authority’s 82-foot water-security threshold. Low-water months have about 8% fewer transits and 6% less toll revenue, with the adjustment concentrated in the number of transits rather than in cargo per vessel. To estimate the trade response, I construct a scarcity index and decompose it into seasonal, low-frequency, and unanticipated components. Predictable seasonal scarcity has no detectable trade effect, while the low-frequency component remains entangled with global demand cycles. The unanticipated component–hydrological variation shippers cannot plan around–reduces trade on Canal-exposed routes by ~1% per foot, while trade along routes that bypass the Canal expands. To quantify propagation, I develop a structural maritime network model with endogenous routing and spillovers. A one-foot unexpected decline raises transport costs on Canal-incident links by ~0.11%. General-equilibrium spillovers amplify the average trade decline among Canal-exposed pairs from about 1% to about 4%. Losses concentrate in the Canal’s neighbors, Latin America and the Caribbean; every U.S. state loses, while some economies along the Suez, Cape, and Malacca corridors gain as trade reallocates. Globally, the aggregate effect is approximately zero–a redistribution across trading partners, not a net loss.

We decompose state-level U.S. agricultural greenhouse gas emissions growth into output growth, input emission intensity, and total factor productivity (TFP). Combining EPA emissions data with USDA productivity accounts over 1990–2015, we find that TFP growth historically slowed emissions but has recently weakened. Declining input emission intensity, concentrated in the Southeast, has become the dominant mitigating factor. Further decomposition suggests that land productivity gains are more closely linked to emission reductions than labor productivity gains.

Global population growth has increased food demand, particularly in emerging economies such as Latin America. There, the subsequent increase in livestock production has been a main driver of greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation. Silvopasture emerges as a promising solution for both economic and environmental sustainability. However, to be successful, cattle ranchers need to implement (set-up) and afterwards adopt (continued use after implementation) silvopasture. Although resources have been invested in the implementation of silvopastoral systems in Colombia, adoption rates remain variable. In this study, we aim to understand the barriers to adoption of silvopasture in Colombia by surveying 182 ranchers who received technical assistance and payment for ecosystem services to implement silvopasture in Colombia. We used survey results and precipitation and temperature data to identify socioeconomic and environmental variables that could explain the varying levels of adoption among ranchers. Our results indicate that high precipitation and temperature during the dry season have a negative impact on adoption. Ranchers who have experienced food insecurity are more likely to adopt while ranchers with larger farms, tractors, and water pumps, all indicators of good economic status, are less likely to adopt silvopastoral applications. Collectively, our data suggests that ranchers facing economic and environmental challenges are more likely to adopt silvopastoral technologies. This highlights the need for future implementation programs to focus on socially and environmentally vulnerable farmers, who stand to benefit the most and are more likely to maintain these practices long-term.