Abstract: This article compares the theoretical and functional specification of production in partial equilibrium (PE) and computable general equilibrium (CGE) models of the global agricultural and food system included in the AgMIP model comparison study. The two model families differ in their scopepartial versus economy-wideand in how they represent technology and the behavior of supply and demand in markets. The CGE models are deep structural models in that they explicitly solve the maximization problem of consumers and producers, assuming utility maximization and profit maximization with production/cost functions that include all factor inputs. The PE models divide into two groups on the supply side: (1) shallow structural models, which essentially specify area/yield supply functions with no explicit maximization behavior, and (2) deep structural models that provide a detailed activity-analysis specification of technology and explicit optimizing behavior by producers. While the models vary in their specifications of technology, both within and between the PE and CGE families, we consider two stylized theoretical models to compare the behavior of crop yields and supply functions in CGE models with their behavior in shallow structural PE models. We find that the theoretical responsiveness of supply to changes in prices can be similar, depending on parameter choices that define the behavior of implicit supply functions over the domain of applicability defined by the common scenarios used in the AgMIP comparisons. In practice, however, the applied models are more complex and differ in their empirical sensitivity to variations in specificationcomparability of results given parameter choices is an empirical question. To illustrate the issues, sensitivity analysis is done with one global CGE model, MAGNET, to indicate how the results vary with different specification of technical change, and how they compare with the results from PE models.

Abstract: The effects of short-and long-term salinisation were studied by comparing tomato growth on a soil exposed to one-season salinisation (short term) vs growth on a soil exposed to >20 years salinisation (long term). Remarkable differences were associated to substantial modifications of the soil physical-chemical characteristics in the root zone, including deteriorated structure, reduced infiltration properties and increased pH. Fresh yield, fruit number and fruit weight were similarly affected by short-and long-term salinisation. In contrast, the marketable yield was significantly lower in the long-term salinised soil-a response that was also associated to nutritional imbalance (mainly referred to P and K). As reported for plants growing under oxygen deprivation stress, the antioxidant capacity of the water soluble fraction of salinised tomato fruits was enhanced by short-term salinisation, also. Overall, long-term salinisation may cause physiological imbalances and yield reductions that cannot be solely attributed to hyperosmotic stress and ionic toxicity. Therefore, the ability of plants to cope with nutritional deficiency and withstand high pH and anoxia may be important traits that should be considered to improve plant tolerance to long-term salinised soils.

Abstract: Climate change impact assessments on agriculture are subject to large uncertainties, as demonstrated in the present review of recent studies for Africa. There are multiple reasons for differences in projections, including uncertainties in greenhouse gas emissions and patterns of climate change; assumptions on future management, aggregation, and spatial extent; and methodological differences. Still, all projections agree that climate change poses a significant risk to African agriculture. Most projections also see the possibility of increasing agricultural production under climate change, especially if suitable adaptation measures are assumed. Climate change is not the only projected pressure on African agriculture, which struggles to meet demand today and may need to feed an additional one billion individuals by 2050. Development strategies are urgently needed, but they will need to consider future climate change and its inherent uncertainties. Science needs to show how existing synergies between climate change adaptation and development can be exploited.