|
|
Köchy, M., & Banse, M. (2013). Kickoff Workshop, Session on Capacity building and Workshop coordination (Vol. 1).
Abstract: Non available. No Label
|
|
|
|
Matthews, A. (2016). Is agriculture off the hook in the EU’s 2030 Climate Policy (Vol. 9 C6 -).
Abstract: EU climate policy and AFOLU•Overall 2030 level of ambition agreed by European Council October 2014•Commission ESR proposal July 2016 – sharing of effort in NETS across MS plus trading mechanisms•Commission LULUCF proposal – integration of LULUCF into climate policy•AFOLU mitigation pursued through CAP as well as flanking environmental policies•No specific EU targets for agricultural mitigation in NETS•Ultimately, how AFOLU mitigation is pursued will depend on MS decisions2Implications of EU bubble•Commission has put in place trading mechanisms in NETS sectors to ensure least-cost fulfilment of overall EU targets•Challenge of MS ESR targets also depends on use MS make of trading mechanisms•MS have not to date made use of these mechanisms and prefer to meet targets domestically•A number of MS have domestic targets in addition to EU targets•ESR IA looked at adding central information site, central market place for AEA transfers or mandatory auctioning•Links with annual monitoring and 5-year legal compliance checks (2027 and 2032)
|
|
|
|
Hutchings, N., & Kipling, R. (2014). Inventory of farm-scale models within LiveM (Vol. 3).
Abstract: The aim of WP3 is to improve the assessment of the impact of climate change on livestock and grassland systems at the farm-scale. The first step in this process is to understand the current state of the art in farm-scale modelling, and the resources available within the MACSUR knowledge hub. Here, an inventory of the farm-scale models available within LiveM is presented, along with a summary of the types of model represented. Thirteen farm-scale models were identified, three of which focus on environmental aspects of farm systems (GHG emissions etc.) and ten of which focus on management strategies (productivity, economics etc.).
|
|
|
|
Janssen, S. (2015). Inventory of data and data sharing mechanism for model linking and scaling exercises (Vol. 6).
Abstract: This deliverable lays out the work as done as part of MACSUR CropM on ‘Inventory of data and data sharing mechanism for model linking and scaling exercises’. In summary not much work was done, as it was found that there was not real demand for the activity in this task. The task in itself was servicing the other work as part of MACSUR, and as the service was not in demand, it was decided to take a low profile and wait for specific requests by partners for data in relation to model linking and upscaling. No Label
|
|
|
|
Sanna, M., Acutis, M., & Bellocchi, G. (2014). Interrelationship between evaluation metrics to assess agro-ecological models (Vol. 3).
Abstract: When evaluating the performances of simulation models, the perception of the quality of the outputs may depend on the statistics used to compare simulated and observed data. In order to have a comprehensive understanding of model performance, the use of a variety of metrics is generally advocated. However, since they may be correlated, the use of two or more metrics may convey the same information, leading to redundancy. This study intends to investigate the interrelationship between evaluation metrics, with the aim of identifying the most useful set of indicators, for assessing simulation performance. Our focus is on agro-ecological modelling. Twenty-three performance indicators were selected to compare simulated and observed data of four agronomic and meteorological variables: above-ground biomass, leaf area index, hourly air relative humidity and daily solar radiation. Indicators were calculated on large data sets, collected to effectively apply correlation analysis techniques. For each variable, the interrelationship between each pair of indicators was evaluated, by computing the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. A definition of “stable correlation” was proposed, based on the test of heterogeneity, allowing to assess whether two or more correlation coefficients are equal. An optimal subset of indicators was identified, striking a balance between number of indicators, amount of provided information and information redundancy. They are: Index of Agreement, Squared Bias, Root Mean Squared Relative Error, Pattern Index, Persistence Model Efficiency and Spearman’s Correlation Coefficient. The present study was carried out in the context of CropM-LiveM cross-cutting activities of MACSUR knowledge hub. No Label
|
|
