|
|
von Lampe, M., Willenbockel, D., Ahammad, H., Blanc, E., Cai, Y., Calvin, K., et al. (2014). Why do global long-term scenarios for agriculture differ? An overview of the AgMIP Global Economic Model Intercomparison. Agric. Econ., 45(1), 3.
Abstract: Recent studies assessing plausible futures for agricultural markets and global food security have had contradictory outcomes. To advance our understanding of the sources of the differences, 10 global economic models that produce long-term scenarios were asked to compare a reference scenario with alternate socioeconomic, climate change, and bioenergy scenarios using a common set of key drivers. Several key conclusions emerge from this exercise: First, for a comparison of scenario results to be meaningful, a careful analysis of the interpretation of the relevant model variables is essential. For instance, the use of real world commodity prices differs widely across models, and comparing the prices without accounting for their different meanings can lead to misleading results. Second, results suggest that, once some key assumptions are harmonized, the variability in general trends across models declines but remains important. For example, given the common assumptions of the reference scenario, models show average annual rates of changes of real global producer prices for agricultural products on average ranging between -0.4% and +0.7% between the 2005 base year and 2050. This compares to an average decline of real agricultural prices of 4% p.a. between the 1960s and the 2000s. Several other common trends are shown, for example, relating to key global growth areas for agricultural production and consumption. Third, differences in basic model parameters such as income and price elasticities, sometimes hidden in the way market behavior is modeled, result in significant differences in the details. Fourth, the analysis shows that agro-economic modelers aiming to inform the agricultural and development policy debate require better data and analysis on both economic behavior and biophysical drivers. More interdisciplinary modeling efforts are required to cross-fertilize analyses at different scales.
|
|
|
|
Waha, K., Müller, C., & Rolinski, S. (2013). Separate and combined effects of temperature and precipitation change on maize yields in sub-Saharan Africa for mid- to late-21st century. Global and Planetary Change, 106, 1–12.
Abstract: Maize (Zea mays L) is one of the most important food crops and very common in all parts of sub-Saharan Africa. In 2010 53 million tons of maize were produced in sub-Saharan Africa on about one third of the total harvested cropland area (similar to 33 million ha). Our aim is to identify the limiting agroclimatic variable for maize growth and development in sub-Saharan Africa by analyzing the separated and combined effects of temperature and precipitation. Under changing climate, both climate variables are projected to change severely, and their impacts on crop yields are frequently assessed using process-based crop models. However it is often unclear which agroclimatic variable will have the strongest influence on crop growth and development under climate change and previous studies disagree over this question. We create synthetic climate data in order to study the effect of large changes in the length of the wet season and the amount of precipitation during the wet season both separately and in combination with changes in temperature. The dynamic global vegetation model for managed land LPJmL is used to simulate maize yields under current and future climatic conditions for the two 10-year periods 2056-2065 and 2081-2090 for three climate scenarios for the A1b emission scenario but without considering the beneficial CO2 fertilization effect. The importance of temperature and precipitation effects on maize yields varies spatially and we identify four groups of crop yield changes: regions with strong negative effects resulting from climate change (<-33% yield change), regions with moderate (-33% to -10% yield change) or slight negative effects (-10% to +6% yield change), and regions with positive effects arising from climate change mainly in currently temperature-limited high altitudes (>+6% yield change). In the first three groups temperature increases lead to maize yield reductions of 3 to 20%, with the exception of mountainous and thus cooler regions in South and East Africa. A reduction of the wet season precipitation causes decreases in maize yield of at least 30% and prevails over the effect of increased temperatures in southern parts of Mozambique and Zambia, the Sahel and parts of eastern Africa in the two projection periods. This knowledge about the limiting abiotic stress factor in each region will help to prioritize future research needs in modeling of agricultural systems as well as in drought and heat stress breeding programs and to identify adaption options in agricultural development projects. On the other hand the study enhances the understanding of temperature and water stress effects on crop yields in a global vegetation model in order to identify future research and model development needs. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Webber, H., Ewert, F., Kimball, B. A., Siebert, S., White, J. W., Wall, G. W., et al. (2016). Simulating canopy temperature for modelling heat stress in cereals. Env. Model. Softw., 77, 143–155.
Abstract: Crop models must be improved to account for the effects of heat stress events on crop yields. To date, most approaches in crop models use air temperature to define heat stress intensity as the cumulative sum of thermal times (TT) above a high temperature threshold during a sensitive period for yield formation. However, observational evidence indicates that crop canopy temperature better explains yield reductions associated with high temperature events than air temperature does. This study presents a canopy level energy balance using Monin ObukhovSimilarity Theory (MOST) with simplifications about the canopy resistance that render it suitable for application in crop models and other models of the plant environment. The model is evaluated for a uniform irrigated wheat canopy in Arizona and rainfed maize in Burkina Faso. No single variable regression relationships for key explanatory variables were found that were consistent across sowing dates to explain the deviation of canopy temperature from air temperature. Finally, thermal times determined with simulated canopy temperatures were able to reproduce thermal times calculated with observed canopy temperature, whereas those determined with air temperatures were not. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Webber, H., Ewert, F., Olesen, J. E., Müller, C., Fronzek, S., Ruane, A. C., et al. (2018). Diverging importance of drought stress for maize and winter wheat in Europe. Nat. Comm., 9, 4249.
Abstract: Understanding the drivers of yield levels under climate change is required to support adaptation planning and respond to changing production risks. This study uses an ensemble of crop models applied on a spatial grid to quantify the contributions of various climatic drivers to past yield variability in grain maize and winter wheat of European cropping systems (1984-2009) and drivers of climate change impacts to 2050. Results reveal that for the current genotypes and mix of irrigated and rainfed production, climate change would lead to yield losses for grain maize and gains for winter wheat. Across Europe, on average heat stress does not increase for either crop in rainfed systems, while drought stress intensifies for maize only. In low-yielding years, drought stress persists as the main driver of losses for both crops, with elevated CO2 offering no yield benefit in these years.
|
|
|
|
Webber, H., White, J. W., Kimball, B. A., Ewert, F., Asseng, S., Rezaei, E. E., et al. (2018). Physical robustness of canopy temperature models for crop heat stress simulation across environments and production conditions. Field Crops Research, 216, 75–88.
Abstract: Despite widespread application in studying climate change impacts, most crop models ignore complex interactions among air temperature, crop and soil water status, CO2 concentration and atmospheric conditions that influence crop canopy temperature. The current study extended previous studies by evaluating Tc simulations from nine crop models at six locations across environmental and production conditions. Each crop model implemented one of an empirical (EMP), an energy balance assuming neutral stability (EBN) or an energy balance correcting for atmospheric stability conditions (EBSC) approach to simulate Tc. Model performance in predicting Tc was evaluated for two experiments in continental North America with various water, nitrogen and CO2 treatments. An empirical model fit to one dataset had the best performance, followed by the EBSC models. Stability conditions explained much of the differences between modeling approaches. More accurate simulation of heat stress will likely require use of energy balance approaches that consider atmospheric stability conditions.
|
|
