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 sustainable development of agricultural systems is currently challenged by many complex agro-environmental issues. These are characterized by an incomplete understanding of the situation and the problems that arise, and the conflicting opinions that result, issues over boundaries that are often difficult to define, and controversy over the multiple goals and uncertain outcomes. Added to these characteristics, we also have the slow and often inadequate uptake and implementation of research outcomes in this complex, real world. In order to improve sustainability of agro-ecosystems, agronomic research must move away from the linear research approaches and extension practices adopted so far that have focused purely on biophysical agro-ecosystems. The theoretical operational space of agronomic research must be transformed by considering agronomic issues as part of a broader social-agro-ecosystem. One aspect of this transformation is the inclusion of knowledge collected on a local level with the participation of farmers on the ground. The integration of local experiential knowledge with traditional agronomic research is by necessity based on the participation of many different stakeholders and there can be no single blueprint for how best to develop and use the input received. However, agronomists and policy advisors require general guidelines drawn up from actual experience in order to accelerate positive agronomic change. We address this need through a comparative analysis of two case studies; one involves multi-stakeholder research in a cropping system in the dairy district of Arborea, Sardinia, Italy. The central question was: How can high crop production be maintained while also achieving the EU target water quality and minimizing the production costs? The second case is a multi-stakeholder soil health project from south-eastern Australia. Here the central question was: How can soil decline be prevented and reversed in this district, and soils made more resilient to future challenges? The Social Learning for the Integrated Management and sustainable use of water (SLIM) framework, a useful heuristic tool for exploring the dynamics of transformational change, guided the analysis of the case studies. Within this framework, a key indicator of success is the emergence of new knowledge from the creation of new spaces for learning between researchers and local stakeholders. The Italian case study appears to have been the most successful in this sense, as opportunities for joint exploration of research data allowed new potential farming responses to the central question to emerge. The multi-stakeholder processes in the Australian case focused more on providing public openings for individual learning, and missed the opportunity for new knowledge to emerge through joint exploration. We conclude that participatory approaches may enable transformative practice through knowledge integration, but that this process is not an automatic outcome of increased community participation.

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.