Lotze-Campen, H., von Lampe, M., Kyle, P., Fujimori, S., Havlik, P., van Meijl, H., et al. (2014). Impacts of increased bioenergy demand on global food markets: an AgMIP economic model intercomparison. Agric. Econ., 45(1), 103–116.
Abstract: Integrated Assessment studies have shown that meeting ambitious greenhouse gas mitigation targets will require substantial amounts of bioenergy as part of the future energy mix. In the course of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), five global agro-economic models were used to analyze a future scenario with global demand for ligno-cellulosic bioenergy rising to about 100 ExaJoule in 2050. From this exercise a tentative conclusion can be drawn that ambitious climate change mitigation need not drive up global food prices much, if the extra land required for bioenergy production is accessible or if the feedstock, for example, from forests, does not directly compete for agricultural land. Agricultural price effects across models by the year 2050 from high bioenergy demand in an ambitious mitigation scenario appear to be much smaller (+5% average across models) than from direct climate impacts on crop yields in a high-emission scenario (+25% average across models). However, potential future scarcities of water and nutrients, policy-induced restrictions on agricultural land expansion, as well as potential welfare losses have not been specifically looked at in this exercise.
|
|
Rötter, R. P., & Höhn, J. (2014). An overview of climate change impacts on crop production and its variability in Europe, related uncertainties and research challenges. (pp. 106–145). Chapter 4 in: Proceedings, FAO Expert consultation on Climate Change and Food Systems: Global implications for food security, water and trade, 5-6 Nov. 2013.
|
Dumont, B., Leemans, V., Mansouri, M., Bodson, B., Destain, J. - P., & Destain, M. - F. (2014). Parameter identification of the STICS crop model, using an accelerated formal MCMC approach. Env. Model. Softw., 52, 121–135.
Abstract: This study presents a Bayesian approach for the parameters’ identification of the STICS crop model based on the recently developed Differential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis (DREAM) algorithm. The posterior distributions of nine specific crop parameters of the STICS model were sampled with the aim to improve the growth simulations of a winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L) culture. The results obtained with the DREAM algorithm were initially compared to those obtained with a Nelder-Mead Simplex algorithm embedded within the OptimiSTICS package. Then, three types of likelihood functions implemented within the DREAM algorithm were compared, namely the standard least square, the weighted least square, and a transformed likelihood function that makes explicit use of the coefficient of variation (CV). The results showed that the proposed CV likelihood function allowed taking into account both noise on measurements and heteroscedasticity which are regularly encountered in crop modelling. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
Banse, M., Brouwer, F., Palatnik, R. R., & Sinabell, F. (2014). The Economics of European Agriculture under Conditions of Climate Change (Editorial). German Journal of Agricultural Economics, 63(3), 131–132.
Abstract: This Special Issue on “The Economics of European Agriculture under Conditions of Climate Change” brings together a selection of papers that contribute to the understanding of recent developments related to agriculture and climate change in four European coun- tries. The focus of the Special Issue is on quantitative modeling and empirical analyses. The papers presented here not only cover the heterogeneity of agriculture in Europe with case studies from the Mediterranean (Italy), central (Austria) and north-western Europe (Ireland and Scotland) but also give insights into the diversity of quantitative modeling approaches in agriculture.
|
|
Twardy, S., & Kopacz, M. (2014). Comparison of concentrations and loads of macronutrients brought with precipitation and leaching from the soil profile. Pol. J. Environ. Stud., 23(3a), 132–136.
|
