|
|
Schönhart, M. (2016). Case 1: Integrated assessment of climate change mitigation and adaptation trade-offs in Austria.. Rotterdam (Netherlands).
Abstract: Presentation SC 2.10 Farming systems. Case 1: Integrated assessment of climate change mitigation and adaptation trade-offs in Austria, Martin Schönhart, Universität für Bodenkultur Wien, Austria (2016). Presented at the international conference Adaptation Futures 2016, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. No Label
|
|
|
|
Schönhart, M. (2016). Uncertainties from Climate Change on Farms and Ecosystem Services of a Grassland Dominated Austrian Landscape (Vol. 9 C6 -).
Abstract: MACSUR 1: development of a method to analysefarm and landscape scale impacts of CC, mitigationand adaptation effects– cropland dominated landscape, crop choice and soilmanagement– climate model uncertainty• Now: test and improve the robustness of the method– grassland landscape, cropland expansion and livestock– uncertainty analysis– variability of weather conditions High spatial resolution creates interfaces to disciplinarymodels and indicators• Challenging data & modelling demand• Increasing productivity can increase intensification pressures• Threatened permanent (extensive) grasslands and landscape elements, but• subject to resource constraints, costs and prices• Future RDP and environmental policy design (e.g. WFD) may need to takechanging productivity into account• Future research: analyze uncertainties & environmentalimpacts• Ensembles of crop and grassland models• Sensitivity analysis on economic input parameters• Qualitative surveys with agricultural experts and farmers
|
|
|
|
Schönhart, M. (2015). Integrated Assessment of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Impacts at Landscape Level in the Austrian Mostviertel Region (Vol. 5).
Abstract: Climate change poses fundamental challenges on agriculture. It triggers autonomous adaptation responses of famers and thereby impacts the success of climate change mitigation. Integrated modelling frameworks (IMF) on land use serve as decision support instruments under such conditions by considering climate signals and accounting for combined mitigation and adaptation policies. We apply an IMF at the farm level in two contrasting grassland and cropland dominated landscapes in Austria to analyze climate change impacts on land use as well as impacts from mitigation and adaptation policies on the abiotic and biotic environment and the landscape. Results show that the impacts on farm gross margins and the abiotic and biotic environment are substantial either directly from climate change (e.g. changing erosion levels) or triggered via adaptation responses (i.e. land use and management change). Average gross margins increase between 1% and 12% depending on the case study landscape, the climate change scenario, and the policy scenario. With respect to biodiversity indicators, land use changes in the adaptation scenario decrease plant species diversity on farmland by 13% on average and losses are up to 80% for some farms. These changes are driven by policies in the adaptation scenario as responses on climate change in the absence of policies are modest with minor impacts on biodiversity. Results indicate the effectiveness of climate change adaptation in increasing farm incomes and the need to coordinate mitigation and adaptation policies to manage environmental outcomes. The IMF turns out to be effective in revealing heterogeneity of climate change impacts among farms and regions and linkages among adaptation and mitigation policies. No Label
|
|
|
|
Schönhart, M. (2015). Analysis of climate change adaptation with bio-economic farm models: lessons from MACSUR regional pilot studies (Vol. 5).
Abstract: Integrated land use models (ILM) featuring agronomic and economic drivers of land use are frequently applied to serve the high information demand of stakeholders. This presentation results from collaboration among bio-economic farm modelers across the MACSUR regional pilot studies (www.macsur.eu) and shall compare and finally reveal good practice examples on the representation of climate change adaptation in bio-economic farm models. First results show a considerable diversity of approaches employed in the MACSUR regional pilot studies. All are programming models that optimize more or less elaborated forms of utility. All consider or plan to consider crop yield impacts from bio-physical crop models based on daily-resolution climate data. While some models include pest and diseases or livestock impacts, none take climate change impacts on market prices or interactions among farms into account so far. Clearly, adaptation options determine the solution space and are mainly expert-based in the regional case studies. Overall, the models are normative and analyze economically rational and optimal land use and management at the farm level, capable of showing the likely direction of differences in future management as a response to exogenous parameter changes (prices, yields, disease pressure, changed policy conditions, etc.). Such detailed models and their results may be applied in stakeholder interaction. Integrating the different direct and indirect effects of climate change, including the policy dimension, is the main contribution of farm level modelling of agricultural systems in the domain of climate change adaptation research. No Label
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
