| |
Records |
Links |
|
Author |
Zhao, G.; Siebert, S.; Enders, A.; Rezaei, E.E.; Yan, C.; Ewert, F. |
|
| |
Title  |
Demand for multi-scale weather data for regional crop modeling |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology |
Abbreviated Journal |
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology |
|
| |
Volume |
200 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
156-171 |
|
| |
Keywords |
multi-scale; spatial heterogeneity; spatial resolution; crop model; climate variability; climate-change scenarios; integrated assessment; large-scale; phenological development; agricultural systems; spatial-resolution; data aggregation; european-union; winter-wheat; input data |
|
| |
Abstract |
A spatial resolution needs to be determined prior to using models to simulate crop yields at a regional scale, but a dilemma exists in compromising between different demands. A fine spatial resolution demands extensive computation load for input data assembly, model runs, and output analysis. A coarse spatial resolution could result in loss of spatial detail in variability. This paper studied the impact of spatial resolution, data aggregation and spatial heterogeneity of weather data on simulations of crop yields, thus providing guidelines for choosing a proper spatial resolution for simulations of crop yields at regional scale. Using a process-based crop model SIMPLACE (LINTUL2) and daily weather data at 1 km resolution we simulated a continuous rainfed winter wheat cropping system at the national scale of Germany. Then we aggregated the weather data to four resolutions from 10 to 100 km, repeated the simulation, compared them with the 1 km results, and correlated the difference with the intra-pixel heterogeneity quantified by an ensemble of four semivariogram models. Aggregation of weather data had small effects over regions with a flat terrain located in northern Germany, but large effects over southern regions with a complex topography. The spatial distribution of yield bias at different spatial resolutions was consistent with the intra-pixel spatial heterogeneity of the terrain and a log-log linear relationship between them was established. By using this relationship we demonstrated the way to optimize the model resolution to minimize both the number of simulation runs and the expected loss of spatial detail in variability due to aggregation effects. We concluded that a high spatial resolution is desired for regions with high spatial environmental heterogeneity, and vice versa. This calls for the development of multi-scale approaches in regional and global crop modeling. The obtained results require substantiation for other production situations, crops, output variables and for different crop models. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
0168-1923 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
Article |
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
CropM, ft_macsur |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
MA @ admin @ |
Serial |
4753 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Bellocchi, G.; Rivington, M.; Matthews, K.; Acutis, M. |
|
| |
Title |
Deliberative processes for comprehensive evaluation of agroecological models. A review |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
Agronomy for Sustainable Development |
Abbreviated Journal |
Agron. Sust. Developm. |
|
| |
Volume |
35 |
Issue |
2 |
Pages |
589-605 |
|
| |
Keywords |
component-oriented programing; deliberative approach; modeling; model evaluation; multiple metrics; stakeholders; decision-support-systems; environmental-models; performance evaluation; groundwater models; farming systems; climate-change; irene-dll; simulation; validation; integration |
|
| |
Abstract |
The use of biophysical models in agroecology has increased in the last few decades for two main reasons: the need to formalize empirical knowledge and the need to disseminate model-based decision support for decision makers (such as farmers, advisors, and policy makers). The first has encouraged the development and use of mathematical models to enhance the efficiency of field research through extrapolation beyond the limits of site, season, and management. The second reflects the increasing need (by scientists, managers, and the public) for simulation experimentation to explore options and consequences, for example, future resource use efficiency (i.e., management in sustainable intensification), impacts of and adaptation to climate change, understanding market and policy responses to shocks initiated at a biophysical level under increasing demand, and limited supply capacity. Production concerns thus dominate most model applications, but there is a notable growing emphasis on environmental, economic, and policy dimensions. Identifying effective methods of assessing model quality and performance has become a challenging but vital imperative, considering the variety of factors influencing model outputs. Understanding the requirements of stakeholders, in respect of model use, logically implies the need for their inclusion in model evaluation methods. We reviewed the use of metrics of model evaluation, with a particular emphasis on the involvement of stakeholders to expand horizons beyond conventional structured, numeric analyses. Two major topics are discussed: (1) the importance of deliberative processes for model evaluation, and (2) the role computer-aided techniques may play to integrate deliberative processes into the evaluation of agroecological models. We point out that (i) the evaluation of agroecological models can be improved through stakeholder follow-up, which is a key for the acceptability of model realizations in practice, (ii) model credibility depends not only on the outcomes of well-structured, numerically based evaluation, but also on less tangible factors that may need to be addressed using complementary deliberative processes, (iii) comprehensive evaluation of simulation models can be achieved by integrating the expectations of stakeholders via a weighting system of preferences and perception, (iv) questionnaire-based surveys can help understand the challenges posed by the deliberative process, and (v) a benefit can be obtained if model evaluation is conceived in a decisional perspective and evaluation techniques are developed at the same pace with which the models themselves are created and improved. Scientific knowledge hubs are also recognized as critical pillars to advance good modeling practice in relation to model evaluation (including access to dedicated software tools), an activity which is frequently neglected in the context of time-limited framework programs. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
English |
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1774-0746 1773-0155 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
Review |
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
CropM, LiveM, ft_macsur |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
MA @ admin @ |
Serial |
4551 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Heinschink, K.; Sinabell, F.; Tribl, C. |
|
| |
Title |
Decomposition of variable costs in the Austrian agricultural production |
Type |
Conference Article |
| |
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
Jahrbuch der ÖGA |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
| |
Volume |
25 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
231-240 |
|
| |
Keywords |
|
|
| |
Abstract |
|
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
Agrarian Perspectives XXIV, 25th Annual Conference of the Austrian Society of Agricultural Economics, 2015-09-16 to 2015-09-18, Prague |
|
| |
Notes |
TradeM |
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
MA @ admin @ |
Serial |
5029 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Ewert, F.; Rötter, R.; Brüser, K. |
|
| |
Title |
CropM: Understanding and Modelling Impacts of Climate Change on Crop Production |
Type |
Conference Article |
| |
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
FACCE MACSUR Reports |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
| |
Volume |
6 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
SP6-2 |
|
| |
Keywords |
|
|
| |
Abstract |
Key ambition:To developa shared comprehensive information system on the impacts of climate change on European crop production and food securityfirst shared pan-continental assessments and tools(Full) range of important crops and important crop rotationsImproved management and analysis of dataModel improvement (stresses and factors not yet accounted for)Advanced scaling methodsAdvanced link to farm and sector modelsComprehensive uncertainty assessment and reportingTo train integrative crop modelerData. for better understanding and modelling climate change impactEvaluation of data quality (platinum, gold, silver)Quantify data gaps for modellingEmpirical analysis of crop responses to past climate variability and changeObserved adaptation options and their efficacyEffect of extreme events (past analysis and projections)Climate change scenariosConcept for data management, data journalUncertaintyMethodology & protocols for uncertainty analysisMethodology for standardized model evaluationLocal-scale climate scenarios & uncertainties in climate projectionsBasic methodology for probabilistic assessment of CC impacts using impact response surfacesMethodology for probabilistic evaluation of alternative adaptation options Main aims in MACSUR2:Improve crop model to better capture extremesComplement knowledge from crop models with empirical crop-weather analysisConsider management variables in simulationsFull range of methods for analysing uncertainty in climate impact assessmentsEvaluate potential adaptation optionsContributing to cross-cutting issues and case studies.Further the links with other modelling activitiesLink local to European and global responses No Label |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
Brussels |
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
Climate-change impacts on farming systems in the next decades: Why worry when you have CAP? A FACCE MACSUR workshop for policymakers |
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
MA @ admin @ |
Serial |
2083 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Rötter, R. |
|
| |
Title |
Crop yield variance and yield gap analysis for evaluating technological innovations under climate change: the case of Finnish barley |
Type |
|
| |
Year |
2015 |
Publication |
FACCE MACSUR Reports |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
| |
Volume |
5 |
Issue |
|
Pages |
Sp5-50 |
|
| |
Keywords |
|
|
| |
Abstract |
The quest for sustainable intensification of agricultural systems has recently triggered research on determining and closing the gaps between farmers’ actual and potential crop yields that can be obtained under optimal management. This so-called “yield gap” is then taken as a yardstick for indicating the potential of technological innovations in agricultural production. In this paper, we argue that in order to assess risks and opportunities for technological innovations we need extra information on crop yield variances in different production situations.Starting point is to assess farmers’ actual yields using data in sufficient quality and resolutions. Crop simulation models are then applied to quantify crop yield potentials and their variances in a changing environment. Resultant information allows ex ante evaluation of innovations that aim at increasing and stabilizing yields.Here we present this approach for barley cultivation in Finland for observed (1981-2010) and future climate (projected for three time periods centered around 2025, 2055 and 2085). Mean and median levels, variances and probabilities of simulated potential and water-limited and observed farmers’ yields are generated for two contrasting regions for analysing production risks and assessing the effectiveness of alternative technologies. As farmers show different levels of risk-aversion, which influence their investments in technological innovations, a so-called ‘normal management mode’ is defined. Employing this then shows how future yields and yield variances are likely to develop under normal management. On this basis, we finally identify which future innovations have the potential to maintain or increase barley yields at acceptable risk levels. No Label |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
MACSUR Science Conference 2015 »Integrated Climate Risk Assessment in Agriculture & Food«, 8–9+10 April 2015, Reading, UK |
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
MA @ admin @ |
Serial |
2165 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
