|
Mitter, H., Heumesser, C., & Schmid, E. (2015). Spatial modeling of robust crop production portfolios to assess agricultural vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Land Use Policy, 46, 75–90.
Abstract: Agricultural vulnerability to climate change is likely to vary considerably between agro-environmental regions. Exemplified on Austrian cropland, we aim at (i) quantifying climate change impacts on agricultural vulnerability which is approximated by the indicators crop yields and gross margins, (ii) developing robust crop production portfolios for adaptation, and (iii) analyzing the effect of agricultural policies and risk aversion on the choice of crop production portfolios. We have employed a spatially explicit, integrated framework to assess agricultural vulnerability and adaptation. It combines a statistical climate change model for Austria and the period 2010-2040, a crop rotation model, the bio-physical process model EPIC (Environmental Policy Integrated Climate), and a portfolio optimization model. We find that under climate change, crop production portfolios include higher shares of intensive crop management practices, increasing average crop yields by 2-15% and expected gross margins by 3-18%, respectively. The results depend on the choice of adaptation measures and on the level of risk aversion and vary by region. In the semi-arid eastern parts of Austria, average dry matter crop yields are lower but gross margins are higher than in western Austria due to bio-physical and agronomic heterogeneities. An abolishment of decoupled farm payments and a threefold increase in agri-environmental premiums would reduce nitrogen inputs by 23-33%, but also crop yields and gross margins by 18-37%, on average. From a policy perspective, a twofold increase in agri-environmental premiums could effectively reduce the trade-offs between crop production and environmental impacts. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
Havlik, P., Leclere, D., Valin, H., Herrero, M., Schmid, E., & Obersteiner, M. (2014). Effects of climate change on feed availability and the implications for the livestock sector. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Global mean surface temperature is projected to rise by 0.4-2.6°C until 2050, and the contrast in precipitations between wet and dry regions and wet and dry seasons will also increase according to the IPCC 5th Assessment Report (2013). The climate change will impact livestock in many ways going from heat stress through livestock diseases to feed quality and availability (Thornton et al., 2009). Recently, projected climate change impacts on crop and grassland productivity became available with high spatial resolution at global scale through the AgMIP and ISI-MIP projects. The objective of this paper is to investigate how climate change impacts on crops and grassland will influence livestock production globally and its distribution across regions. This analysis is carried out using the global partial equilibrium agricultural and forestry sector model GLOBIOM (Havlík et al., 2013). The model represents agricultural production at a spatial resolution going down to 5 x 5 minutes of arc. Crop and grassland productivities are estimated by means of biophysical process based models (EPIC and CENTURY) at this resolution for current and future climate. Livestock representation follows a simplified version of the Seré and Steinfeld (1996) production system classification. This approach recognizes differences in feed base and productivities between grazing and mixed crop-livestock production systems across different agro-ecological zones (arid, humid, temperate/highlands). Our study highlights that the differential impacts of climate change on crop and grassland productivity will influence the relative competitiveness of different livestock production systems. Maintaining livestock production in some regions will depend on their capacity to adapt. Institutional and physical infrastructure will be needed to facilitate these transformations.
|
|
|
Schönhart, M., Schauppenlehner, T., & Schmid, E. (2014). Integrated land use modelling of climate change impacts – preliminary results from two Austrian case study landscapes. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: We present an integrated land use modelling framework (ILM) to analyze impacts of climate change and CAP reform as well as farm adaptation using economic, biotic and abiotic indicators at field, farm and landscape scales. The IML is applied on the two contrasting landscapes in the Austrian MACSUR regional pilot study. The scenarios cover climate and policy changes until 2040. The anticipated policy changes lead to declines in farm gross margins by -36% and -5% in the two landscapes, respectively. In contrast, climate change leads to higher gross margins, where farms can reach pre-reform levels on average. Environmental impacts such as removing of landscape elements and increasing fertilization can be moderated by an agri-environmental program, but the opportunity costs of program participation may increase.
|
|
|
Schönhart, M., Schauppenlehner, T., Schmid, E., & Sinabell, F. (2014). Regional Pilot Case Study Mostviertel – AT: Preliminary Results. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: An integrated modelling framework (IMF) is developed to analyse impacts of climate andpolicy changes on farm welfare and the environment. The IMF is applied on two contrasting grassland (south) and cropland (north) dominated Austrian landscapes. The IMF combines the crop rotation model CropRota, the bio-physical process model EPIC and the bio-economic farm model FAMOS[space] and applies combined climate change and policy scenarios. Changing policies reduce farm gross margins by -36% and -5% in the two landscapes respectively. Climate change increases gross margins and farms can reach pre-reform levels on average. Climate induced intensification such as removing of landscape elements andincreasing fertilization can be moderated by an agri-environmental program (AEP). However, productivity gains from climate change increase the opportunity costs for AEP participation.
|
|
|
Mitter, H., Schoenhart, M., Larcher, M., & Schmid, E. (2018). The Stimuli-Actions-Effects-Responses (SAER)-framework for exploring perceived relationships between private and public climate change adaptation in agriculture. J. Environ. Manage., 209, 286–300.
Abstract: Empirical findings on actors’ roles and responsibilities in the climate change adaptation process are rare even though cooperation between private and public actors is perceived important to foster adaptation in agriculture. We therefore developed the framework SAER (Stimuli-Actions-Effects-Responses) to investigate perceived relationships between private and public climate change adaptation in agriculture at regional scale. In particular, we explore agricultural experts’ perceptions on (i) climatic and non climatic factors stimulating private adaptation, (ii) farm adaption actions, (iii) potential on-farm and off-farm effects from adaptation, and (iv) the relationships between private and public adaptation. The SAER-framework is built on a comprehensive literature review and empirical findings from semi structured interviews with agricultural experts from two case study regions in Austria. We find that private adaptation is perceived as incremental, systemic or transformational. It is typically stimulated by a mix of bio-physical and socio-economic on-farm and off-farm factors. Stimulating factors related to climate change are perceived of highest relevance for systemic and transformational adaptation whereas already implemented adaptation is mostly perceived to be incremental. Perceived effects of private adaptation are related to the environment, weather and climate, quality and quantity of agricultural products as well as human, social and economic resources. Our results also show that public adaptation can influence factors stimulating private adaptation as well as adaptation effects through the design and development of the legal, policy and organizational environment as well as the provision of educational, informational, financial, and technical infrastructure. Hence, facilitating existing and new collaborations between private and public actors may enable farmers to adapt effectively to climate change. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|