|
Ewert, F., van Bussel, L. G. J., Zhao, G., Hoffmann, H., Gaiser, T., Specka, X., et al. (2015). Uncertainties in Scaling up Crop Models for Large Area Climate-change Impact Assessments. In C. Rosenzweig, & D. Hillel (Eds.), (pp. 261–277). Handbook of Climate Change and Agroecosystems: The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) Integrated Crop and Economic Assessments — Joint Publication with American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America (In 2 Parts), ICP Series on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation, . London: Imperial College Press.
|
|
Dono, G., Cortignani, R., Giraldo, L., & Roggero, P. P. Climate change and irrigated farming in the Mediterranean: lower expectation of favorable conditions to profitability rather than harshening of adverse conditions.
|
|
Deligios, P., Ledda, L., Farci, R., Doro, L., & Roggero, P. P. (2012). Impatto dei cambiamenti climatici sulla produzione di colza da bioenergia in un ambiente mediterraneo..
|
Roggero, P. P. (2013). Strategies for engagement on adaptation and mitigation with national and EU policy makers and with the agro-food chain sector (Vol. 2).
Abstract: A process for the strategic mapping of national and EU policy makers to be engaged in an interactive and iterative process of learning was designed, based on literature review and specific experience of some participants. In this first intermediate version, we propose a stakeholder mapping process design which will ideally lead to setting the boundaries of context-sensitive systems of interest for pilot actions or interdisciplinary case studies. The mapping exercise will be tested by participants No Label
|
Roggero, P. P., & Matthews, R. (2015). Strategies for engagement on adaptation and mitigation with national and EU policy makers and with the agro--food chain sector (Update) (Vol. 6).
Abstract: This report is grounded on the hypotheses, methodologies and approaches for stakeholder mapping designed during the early stages of MACSUR and described in the previous report1. It describes the kind of activities conducted by the WPC6-3-4 MACSUR team and the emerging design of activities for the second phase of MACSUR (2015-2017). The designed process of strategic stakeholder mapping was implemented by some of the teams involved in the task and through hub initiatives. Key actions were the (i) development of suitable intermediary objects to engage with stakeholders, through the regional pilot case studies, (ii) the design and implementation of key events (we report here the case of the Agroscenari event at the case study scale, the national event between the MACSUR Italian partnership with Italian policy makers held in Rome in July 2014, the international stakeholder events at the MACSUR mid term meeting in Sassari (April 2014), and the one held in Bruxelles on 6 May 2015) and (iii) the process of stakeholder and stakeholding mapping at the case study scale. Results indicate that when dealing with high level stakeholders (e.g. institutional or large agro-food enterprises), occasional stakeholder events will only serve as opportunity for showcasing and possibly for a data collection useful for researchers, with almost no impact on the ongoing social learning process sought by the designed activities. At the case study scale, instead, the long term and ongoing activities can generate new spaces for mutual learning and knowledge hybridization, through a variety of mediating objects emerging from the continuous interactions. The lesson learned is that the engagement of high level stakeholders can be effective insofar they are somehow involved in the interactions with stakeholders at the case study scale, as this can provide a key experience leading to a change in understanding about the nature of the issues that can ultimately result into a change in practice. These results will be the basis for the design of new strategies for engaging EU policy makers and large agro-food energy representatives in the second phase of MACSUR. No Label
|
