|
|
Schmitz, C., Kreidenweis, U., Lotze-Campen, H., Popp, A., Krause, M., Dietrich, J. P., et al. (2014). Agricultural trade and tropical deforestation: interactions and related policy options. Reg Environ Change, 15(8), 1757–1772.
Abstract: The extensive clearing of tropical forests throughout past decades has been partly assigned to increased trade in agricultural goods. Since further trade liberalisation can be expected, remaining rainforests are likely to face additional threats with negative implications for climate mitigation and the local environment. We apply a spatially explicit economic land-use model coupled to a biophysical vegetation model to examine linkages and associated policies between trade and tropical deforestation in the future. Results indicate that further trade liberalisation leads to an expansion of deforestation in Amazonia due to comparative advantages of agriculture in South America. Globally, between 30 and 60 million ha (5-10 %) of tropical rainforests would be cleared additionally, leading to 20-40 Gt additional emissions by 2050. By applying different forest protection policies, those values could be reduced substantially. Most effective would be the inclusion of avoided deforestation into a global emissions trading scheme. Carbon prices corresponding to the concentration target of 550 ppm would prevent deforestation after 2020. Investing in agricultural productivity reduces pressure on tropical forests without the necessity of direct protection. In general, additional trade-induced demand from developed and emerging countries should be compensated by international efforts to protect natural resources in tropical regions.
|
|
|
|
Wolf, J., Kanellopoulos, A., Kros, J., Webber, H., Zhao, G., Britz, W., et al. (2015). Combined analysis of climate, technological and price changes on future arable farming systems in Europe. Agricultural Systems, 140, 56–73.
Abstract: In this study, we compare the relative importance of climate change to technological, management, price and policy changes on European arable farming systems. This required linking four models: the SIMPLACE crop growth modelling framework to calculate future yields under climate change for arable crops; the CAPRI model to estimate impacts on global agricultural markets, specifically product prices; the bio-economic farm model FSSIM to calculate the future changes in cropping patterns and farm net income at the farm and regional level; and the environmental model INTEGRATOR to calculate nitrogen (N) uptake and losses to air and water. First, the four linked models were applied to analyse the effect of climate change only or a most likely baseline (i.e. B1) scenario for 2050 as well as for two alternative scenarios with, respectively, strong (i.e. A1-b1) and weak economic growth (B2) for five regions/countries across Europe (i.e. Denmark, Flevoland, Midi Pyrenees, Zachodniopomorsld and Andalucia). These analyses Were repeated but assuming in addition to climate change impacts, also the effects of changes in technology and management on crop yields, the effects of changes in prices and policies in 2050, and the effects of all factors together. The outcomes show that the effects of climate change to 2050 result in higher farm net incomes in the Northern and Northern-Central EU regions, in practically unchanged farm net incomes in the Central and Central-Southern EU regions, and in much lower farm net incomes in Southern EU regions compared to those in the base year. Climate change in combination with improved technology and farm management and/or with price changes towards 2050 results in a higher to much higher farm net incomes. Increases in farm net income for the B1 and A1-b1 scenarios are moderately stronger than those for the B2 scenario, due to the smaller increases in product prices and/or yields for the B2 scenario. Farm labour demand slightly to moderately increases towards 2050 as related to changes in cropping patterns. Changes in N2O emissions and N leaching compared to the base year are mainly caused by changes in total N inputs from the applied fertilizers and animal manure, which in turn are influenced by changes in crop yields and cropping patterns, whereas NH3 emissions are mainly determined by assumed improvements in manure application techniques. N emissions and N leaching strongly increase in Denmark and Zachodniopomorski, slightly decrease to moderately increase in Flevoland and Midi-Pyrenees, and strongly decrease in Andalucia, except for NH3 emissions which zero to moderately decrease in Flevoland and Denmark. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All tights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Sanz-Cobena, A., García-Marco, S., Quemada, M., Gabriel, J. L., Almendros, P., & Vallejo, A. (2014). Do cover crops enhance N2O, CO2 or CH4 emissions from soil in Mediterranean arable systems? Science of the Total Environment, 466-467, 164–174.
Abstract: This study evaluates the effect of planting three cover crops (CCs) (barley, Hordeum vulgare L.; vetch, Vicia villosa L.; rape, Brassica napus L.) on the direct emission of N(2)O, CO(2) and CH(4) in the intercrop period and the impact of incorporating these CCs on the emission of greenhouse gas (GHG) from the forthcoming irrigated maize (Zea mays L.) crop. Vetch and barley were the CCs with the highest N(2)O and CO(2) losses (75 and 47% increase compared with the control, respectively) in the fallow period. In all cases, fluxes of N(2)O were increased through N fertilization and the incorporation of barley and rape residues (40 and 17% increase, respectively). The combination of a high C:N ratio with the addition of an external source of mineral N increased the fluxes of N(2)O compared with -Ba and -Rp. The direct emissions of N(2)O were lower than expected for a fertilized crop (0.10% emission factor, EF) compared with other studies and the IPCC EF. These results are believed to be associated with a decreased NO(3)(-) pool due to highly denitrifying conditions and increased drainage. The fluxes of CO(2) were in the range of other fertilized crops (i.e., 1118.71-1736.52 kg CO(2)-Cha(-1)). The incorporation of CC residues enhanced soil respiration in the range of 21-28% for barley and rape although no significant differences between treatments were detected. Negative CH(4) fluxes were measured and displayed an overall sink effect for all incorporated CC (mean values of -0.12 and -0.10 kg CH(4)-Cha(-1) for plots with and without incorporated CCs, respectively).
|
|
|
|
Popp, A., Rose, S. K., Calvin, K., Van Vuuren, D. P., Dietrich, J. P., Wise, M., et al. (2014). Land-use transition for bioenergy and climate stabilization: model comparison of drivers, impacts and interactions with other land use based mitigation options. Clim. Change, 123(3-4), 495–509.
Abstract: In this article, we evaluate and compare results from three integrated assessment models (GCAM, IMAGE, and ReMIND/MAgPIE) regarding the drivers and impacts of bioenergy production on the global land system. The considered model frameworks employ linked energy, economy, climate and land use modules. By the help of these linkages the direct competition of bioenergy with other energy technology options for greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation, based on economic costs and GHG emissions from bioenergy production, has been taken into account. Our results indicate that dedicated bioenergy crops and biomass residues form a potentially important and cost-effective input into the energy system. At the same time, however, the results differ strongly in terms of deployment rates, feedstock composition and land-use and greenhouse gas implications. The current paper adds to earlier work by specific looking into model differences with respect to the land-use component that could contribute to the noted differences in results, including land cover allocation, land use constraints, energy crop yields, and non-bioenergy land mitigation options modeled. In scenarios without climate change mitigation, bioenergy cropland represents 10-18 % of total cropland by 2100 across the different models, and boosts cropland expansion at the expense of carbon richer ecosystems. Therefore, associated emissions from land-use change and agricultural intensification as a result of bio-energy use range from 14 and 113 Gt CO2-eq cumulatively through 2100. Under climate policy, bioenergy cropland increases to 24-36 % of total cropland by 2100.
|
|
|
|
Heinke, J., Ostberg, S., Schaphoff, S., Frieler, K., Müller, C., Gerten, D., et al. (2013). A new climate dataset for systematic assessments of climate change impacts as a function of global warming. Geosci. Model Dev., 6(5), 1689–1703.
Abstract: In the ongoing political debate on climate change, global mean temperature change (Delta T-glob) has become the yardstick by which mitigation costs, impacts from unavoided climate change, and adaptation requirements are discussed. For a scientifically informed discourse along these lines, systematic assessments of climate change impacts as a function of Delta T-glob are required. The current availability of climate change scenarios constrains this type of assessment to a narrow range of temperature change and/or a reduced ensemble of climate models. Here, a newly composed dataset of climate change scenarios is presented that addresses the specific requirements for global assessments of climate change impacts as a function of Delta T-glob. A pattern-scaling approach is applied to extract generalised patterns of spatially explicit change in temperature, precipitation and cloudiness from 19 Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models (AOGCMs). The patterns are combined with scenarios of global mean temperature increase obtained from the reduced-complexity climate model MAGICC6 to create climate scenarios covering warming levels from 1.5 to 5 degrees above pre-industrial levels around the year 2100. The patterns are shown to sufficiently maintain the original AOGCMs’ climate change properties, even though they, necessarily, utilise a simplified relationships between Delta T-glob and changes in local climate properties. The dataset (made available online upon final publication of this paper) facilitates systematic analyses of climate change impacts as it covers a wider and finer-spaced range of climate change scenarios than the original AOGCM simulations.
|
|
