|
|
Hutchings, N., Sanders, D., Özkan, S., & De, H., Michel. (2014). Farm model comparison..
|
|
|
|
Eory, V., & Hutchings, N. (2016). Farm management and sustainability indicators: What and how to include in farm scale models (Vol. 8).
Abstract: Conference presentation PDF
|
|
|
|
Topp, K., Eory, V., Bannink, A., Bartley, D. J., Blanco-Penedo, I., Cortignani, R., et al. (2017). Modelling climate change adaptation in European agriculture: Definitions and Current Modelling (Vol. 10).
Abstract: Confidential content, in preparation for a peer-reviewed publication.
|
|
|
|
Hutchings, N. (2015). A comparison of farm-scale models to estimate greenhouse gas emissions from dairy farms in Europe (Vol. 5).
Abstract: Farm-scale models quantify the cycling of nitrogen (N) and carbon (C) so are powerful tools for assessing the impact of management-related decisions on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, especially on dairy cattle farms, where the internal cycling is particularly important. Farm models range in focus (economic, environmental) and the detail with which they represent C and N cycling. We compared four models from this range in terms of on-farm production and emissions of GHGs, using standardized scenarios. The models compared were SFarMod, DairyWise, FarmAC and HolosNor. The scenarios compared were based on two soil types (sandy clay versus heavy clay), two roughage systems (grass only versus grass and maize), and two climate types (Eindhoven versus Santander). Standard farm characteristics were; area (50 ha), milk yield (7000 kg/head/year), fertiliser (275 kg N and 150 kg N/ha/year for grass and maize, respectively). Potential yields for grass 10t dry matter (DM)/ha/year in both areas, maize 14 t DM/ha/ year in Eindhoven and 18t DM/ha/ year in Santander. The import of animal feed and the export/import manure and forages was minimized. Similar total farm direct GHG emissions for all models disguised a variation between models in the contribution of the different on-farm sources. There were large differences between models in the predictions of indirect GHG emission from nitrate leaching. Results could be explained by differences between models in the assumptions made and detail with which underlying processes were represented. We conclude that the choice of an appropriate farm model is highly dependent upon the role it should play and the context within which it will operate, so the current diversity of farm models will continue into the future. No Label
|
|
|
|
Dalgaard, T., Hutchings, N., & Noe, E. (2014). Methods for regional scale farming systems modelling and uncertainty assessment – sustainability assessment case studies of production, nutrient losses and greenhouse gas emissions from grassland based systems. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: In the EU Joint-Programming-Initiative: Modelling European Agriculturewith Climate Change for Food Security (MACSUR, LiveM: http://www.macsur.eu/index.php/livestock-modelling) we develop a research frameworkfor the modelling and sustainability assessment of livestock and grasslandbased farming systems at farm and regional scales.Based on results from related research and model development in Denmark,methodologies used for regional scaling, the description of data requirementsand sources, and methods to predict the effect and effectiveness of climate-and environment related policy measures are developed. In this study we present results from farm modelling in a study areaaround Viborg, Western Denmark using the http://www.Farm-N.dk/ model (Env.Pol. 159 3183-3192), including thedistribution of N-surpluses into different types of losses, and a comparisonwith empirical studies of farm nitrogen balances in the Danish study and fiveadditional European landscapes (Biogeosciences 9, 5303–5321). Based on this,methods and development needs for the mapping and uncertainty assessment ofnutrient losses and greenhouse gas emissions are discussed, referring to the presentdevelopment of the Farm-AC model and ongoing scenario studies in e.g. the www.dNmark.org project. In these scenarios, regional-scale policy measures areimplemented via the responses of a range of stakeholders, such as farmers,public interest groups, regulators and politicians. When modelling the outcomeof the policy measures implementation, it is often assumed that stakeholdersrespond as economically rational entities. However, social and cultural factorsare also known to play a role and modelling methods that permit these factorsto be taken into account will also be discussed.
|
|
