This is due to the fact that developed countries have many more resources to utilize in adaptation strategies than do developing countries. Globally, both minor and major levels of adaptation can help restore world production levels (especially when CO2 physiological effects are included), compared to climate change scenarios with no adaptation. Low level adaptation largely offsets the negative climate change effects on yields in developed countries, thus improving their comparative advantage in world markets. However, developing countries are predicted to benefit little from this level of adaptation, and may experience a negative change of -9% to -12% in cereal production. More intensive adaptation may effectively eliminate the overall global reduction of cereal yields. Whereas under low adaptation cereal price increases range from 10 to almost 100%, under more intensive adaptation the compounding price responses range from a decline of 5% to an increase of 35%. Not only do preliminary analyses of direct effects of global warming indicate greater adverse effects in poor countries, but these same countries are less able to achieve the changes required for adapting. Less developed countries also tend to have less developed capital markets, with access for farmers being a pervasive and chronic problem for many. High interest rates are common even where loans for the agricultural sector can be obtained. If the needed adjustments require investment, these factors will slow or eliminate farmers' ability to adapt. Alternative assumption -lowering of trade barriers, low economic growth, and low population growth- were tested both in the absence and in the presence of climate change. Without climate change, the combination of full trade liberalization and low population growth would have beneficial effects on the world food system, whereas the effects of low economic growth would be detrimental.
