Abstract: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and other international agencies have concluded that global crop production is at risk due to climate change, population growth, and changing food preferences. Society expects that the agricultural sciences will innovate solutions to these problems and provide food security for the foreseeable future. My thesis is that an integrated research plan merging agronomic and genetic approaches has the greatest probability of success. I present a template for a research plan based on the lessons we have learned from the Green Revolution and from the development of genetically engineered crops that may guide us to meet this expectation. The plan starts with a vision of how the crop management system could change, and I give a few examples of innovations that are very much in their infancy but have significant potential. The opportunities need to be conceptualized on a regional basis for each crop to provide a target for change. The plan gives an overview of how the tools of plant biotechnology can be used to create the genetic diversity needed to implement the envisioned changes in the crop management system, using the development of drought tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.) as an example that has led recently to the commercial release of new hybrids in the USA. The plan requires an interdisciplinary approach that integrates and coordinates research on plant biotechnology, genetics, physiology, breeding, agronomy, and cropping systems to be successful.

Abstract: Global climate is changing and food production is very sensitive to weather and climate variations. Global assessments of climate change impacts on food production have been made since the early 1990s, initially with little attention to the uncertainties involved. Although there has been abundant analysis of uncertainties in future greenhouse gas emissions and their impacts on the climate system, uncertainties related to the way climate change projections are scaled down as appropriate for different analyses and in modelling crop responses to climate change, have been neglected. This review paper mainly addresses uncertainties in crop impact modelling and possibilities to reduce them. We specifically aim to (i) show ranges of projected climate change-induced impacts on crop yields, (ii) give recommendations on use of emission scenarios, climate models, regionalization and ensemble crop model simulations for different purposes and (iii) discuss improvements and a few known unknowns’ affecting crop impact projections.

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.