|
|
Heinke, J., Ostberg, S., Schaphoff, S., Frieler, K., Müller, C., Gerten, D., et al. (2013). A new climate dataset for systematic assessments of climate change impacts as a function of global warming. Geosci. Model Dev., 6(5), 1689–1703.
Abstract: In the ongoing political debate on climate change, global mean temperature change (Delta T-glob) has become the yardstick by which mitigation costs, impacts from unavoided climate change, and adaptation requirements are discussed. For a scientifically informed discourse along these lines, systematic assessments of climate change impacts as a function of Delta T-glob are required. The current availability of climate change scenarios constrains this type of assessment to a narrow range of temperature change and/or a reduced ensemble of climate models. Here, a newly composed dataset of climate change scenarios is presented that addresses the specific requirements for global assessments of climate change impacts as a function of Delta T-glob. A pattern-scaling approach is applied to extract generalised patterns of spatially explicit change in temperature, precipitation and cloudiness from 19 Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models (AOGCMs). The patterns are combined with scenarios of global mean temperature increase obtained from the reduced-complexity climate model MAGICC6 to create climate scenarios covering warming levels from 1.5 to 5 degrees above pre-industrial levels around the year 2100. The patterns are shown to sufficiently maintain the original AOGCMs’ climate change properties, even though they, necessarily, utilise a simplified relationships between Delta T-glob and changes in local climate properties. The dataset (made available online upon final publication of this paper) facilitates systematic analyses of climate change impacts as it covers a wider and finer-spaced range of climate change scenarios than the original AOGCM simulations.
|
|
|
|
Braunmiller, K., & Köchy, M. (2013). Grassland datasets (Vol. 1).
Abstract: In the MACSUR project, there are several grassland models in use that were designed for and adjusted with data from different climatic regions. To be able to run these modelsfor a wide geographical range, there is a need to validate and calibrate them on the same basis.Therefore, a high-quality dataset is needed, which includes a wide range of climatic conditions, management systems and other variables.Through this search 23 grassland related institutes from eleven countries were found and contacted, where 12 of them responded to the request. Nine institutes from cooler (e.g. Finland) and warmer regions (e.g. Israel) are now willing to provide their experimental data. One contributor is even planning to join the project bringing its own grassland model.These new grassland datasets cover in addition to already available ones (Fig. 1) a wide range of climatic regions for a substantiated calibration and validation of the models. Data supplied by the institutes have been checked for internal consistency and cast into a common format. The data have been passed on to WP L2 (Model intercomparison on climate change in relation to livestock and grassland). No Label
|
|
|
|
Bennetzen, E. H., Smith, P., Soussana, J. - F., & Porter, J. R. (2012). Identity-based estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from crop production: case study from Denmark. European Journal of Agronomy, 41, 66–72.
Abstract: In order to feed the world we need innovative thinking on how to increase agricultural production whilst also mitigating climate change. Agriculture and land-use change are responsible for approximately one-third of total anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but hold potential for climate change mitigation but are only tangentially included in UNFCCC mitigation policies. To get a full estimate of GHG emissions from agricultural crop production both energy-based emissions and land-based emissions need to be accounted for. Furthermore, the major mitigation potential is likely to be indirect reduction of emissions i.e. reducing emissions per unit of agricultural product rather than the absolute emissions per se. Hence the system productivity must be included in the same analysis. This paper presents the Kaya-Porter identity, derived from the Maya identity, as a new way to calculate GHG emissions from agricultural crop production by deconstructing emissions into five elements; the GHG intensity of the energy used for production (kg CO2-eq./MJ), energy intensity of the production (MJ/kg dry matter), areal productivity (kg dry matter/ha), areal land-based GHG emissions (CO2-eq./ha) and area (ha). These separate elements in the identity can be targeted in emissions reduction and mitigation policies and are useful to analyse past and current trends in emissions and to explore future scenarios. Using the Kaya-Porter identity we have performed a case study on Danish crop production and find emissions to have been reduced by 12% from 1992 to 2008, whilst yields per unit area have remained constant. Both land-based emissions and energy-based emissions have decreased, mainly due to a 41% reduction in nitrogen fertilizer use. The initial identity based analysis for crop production presented here needs to be extended to include livestock to reflect the entire agricultural production and food demand sectors, thereby permitting analysis of the trade-offs between animal and plant food production, human dietary preferences and population and resulting GHG emissions. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Castañeda-Vera, A., Leffelaar, P. A., Álvaro-Fuentes, J., Cantero-Martínez, C., & Mínguez, M. I. (2015). Selecting crop models for decision making in wheat insurance. European Journal of Agronomy, 68, 97–116.
Abstract: In crop insurance, the accuracy with which the insurer quantifies the actual risk is highly dependent on the availability on actual yield data. Crop models might be valuable tools to generate data on expected yields for risk assessment when no historical records are available. However, selecting a crop model for a specific objective, location and implementation scale is a difficult task. A look inside the different crop and soil modules to understand how outputs are obtained might facilitate model choice. The objectives of this paper were (i) to assess the usefulness of crop models to be used within a crop insurance analysis and design and (ii) to select the most suitable crop model for drought risk assessment in semi-arid regions in Spain. For that purpose first, a pre-selection of crop models simulating wheat yield under rainfed growing conditions at the field scale was made, and second, four selected models (Aquacrop, CERES-Wheat, CropSyst and WOFOST) were compared in terms of modelling approaches, process descriptions and model outputs. Outputs of the four models for the simulation of winter wheat growth are comparable when water is not limiting, but differences are larger when simulating yields under rainfed conditions. These differences in rainfed yields are mainly related to the dissimilar simulated soil water availability and the assumed linkages with dry matter formation. We concluded that for the simulation of winter wheat growth at field scale in such semi-arid conditions, CERES-Wheat and CropSyst are preferred. WOFOST is a satisfactory compromise between data availability and complexity when detail data on soil is limited. Aquacrop integrates physiological processes in some representative parameters, thus diminishing the number of input parameters, what is seen as an advantage when observed data is scarce. However, the high sensitivity of this model to low water availability limits its use in the region considered. Contrary to the use of ensembles of crop models, we endorse that efforts be concentrated on selecting or rebuilding a model that includes approaches that better describe the agronomic conditions of the regions in which they will be applied. The use of such complex methodologies as crop models is associated with numerous sources of uncertainty, although these models are the best tools available to get insight in these complex agronomic systems. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Zimmermann, A., Webber, H., Zhao, G., Ewert, F., Kros, J., Wolf, J., et al. (2017). Climate change impacts on crop yields, land use and environment in response to crop sowing dates and thermal time requirements. Agric. Syst., 157, 81–92.
Abstract: Impacts of climate change on European agricultural production, land use and the environment depend on its impact on crop yields. However, many impact studies assume that crop management remains unchanged in future scenarios, while farmers may adapt their sowing dates and cultivar thermal time requirements to minimize yield losses or realize yield gains. The main objective of this study was to investigate the sensitivity of climate change impacts on European crop yields, land use, production and environmental variables to adaptations in crops sowing dates and varieties’ thermal time requirements. A crop, economic and environmental model were coupled in an integrated assessment modelling approach for six important crops, for 27 countries of the European Union (EU27) to assess results of three SRES climate change scenarios to 2050. Crop yields under climate change were simulated considering three different management cases; (i) no change in crop management from baseline conditions (NoAd), (ii) adaptation of sowing date and thermal time requirements to give highest yields to 2050 (Opt) and (iii) a more conservative adaptation of sowing date and thermal time requirements (Act). Averaged across EU27, relative changes in water-limited crop yields due to climate change and increased CO2 varied between -6 and + 21% considering NoAd management, whereas impacts with Opt management varied between + 12 and + 53%, and those under Act management between 2 and + 27%. However, relative yield increases under climate change increased to + 17 and + 51% when technology progress was also considered. Importantly, the sensitivity to crop management assumptions of land use, production and environmental impacts were less pronounced than for crop yields due to the influence of corresponding market, farm resource and land allocation adjustments along the model chain acting via economic optimization of yields. We conclude that assumptions about crop sowing dates and thermal time requirements affect impact variables but to a different extent and generally decreasing for variables affected by economic drivers.
|
|
