|
|
Foskolis, A., & Moorby, J. (2016). Lifetime nitrogen efficiency of dairy cattle: Model description and sensitivity analysis. In FACCE MACSUR Reports (Vol. 8, pp. SP8–9).
Abstract: Conference poster PDF
|
|
|
Dumont, B., Basso, B., Leemans, V., Bodson, B., Destain, J. - P., & Destain, M. - F. (2013). A Site-Specific Grain Yield Response Surface : Computing the Identity Card of a Crop Under Different Nitrogen Management Scenarios..
|
|
|
|
Jägermeyr, J., Gerten, D., Schaphoff, S., Heinke, J., Lucht, W., & Rockström, J. (2016). Integrated crop water management might sustainably halve the global food gap. Environ. Res. Lett., 11(2), 025002.
Abstract: As planetary boundaries are rapidly being approached, humanity has little room for additional expansion and conventional intensification of agriculture, while a growing world population further spreads the food gap. Ample evidence exists that improved on-farm water management can close water-related yield gaps to a considerable degree, but its global significance remains unclear. In this modeling study we investigate systematically to what extent integrated crop water management might contribute to closing the global food gap, constrained by the assumption that pressure on water resources and land does not increase. Using a process-based bio-/agrosphere model, we simulate the yield-increasing potential of elevated irrigation water productivity (including irrigation expansion with thus saved water) and optimized use of in situ precipitation water (alleviated soil evaporation, enhanced infiltration, water harvesting for supplemental irrigation) under current and projected future climate (from 20 climate models, with and without beneficial CO2 effects). Results show that irrigation efficiency improvements can save substantial amounts of water in many river basins (globally 48% of non-productive water consumption in an ‘ambitious’ scenario), and if rerouted to irrigate neighboring rainfed systems, can boost kcal production significantly (26% global increase). Low-tech solutions for small-scale farmers on water-limited croplands show the potential to increase rainfed yields to a similar extent. In combination, the ambitious yet achievable integrated water management strategies explored in this study could increase global production by 41% and close the water-related yield gap by 62%. Unabated climate change will have adverse effects on crop yields in many regions, but improvements in water management as analyzed here can buffer such effects to a significant degree.
|
|
|
|
Brouwer, F., & Sinabell, F. (2015). Three years of collaboration in TradeM – Agricultural markets and prices. In FACCE MACSUR Reports (Vol. 6, pp. SP6–4). Brussels.
Abstract: Some farmers may claim that climate change adaptation is easy compared to the difficulties caused by policiesAction based on weather observations only, is insufficient for farmers to respond to climate change. Researchers need support from farmers in understanding the responses in practice.Policies might be too slow to respond to needs for change in agriculture. Winners and losers seem to be observed everywhere.The impacts of climate change is heterogeneous among farm types and regionsEffects beyond 2050 remain largely unclear, mainly because the effects of extreme events are not consideredVariability of yields is important to farm incomes, but most studies only consider average changesFarmers are ready to design their site-specific adaptation response providing that new knowledge and learning spaces are available. A learning process based on integrated models, assessment of short- and long-term effects, is needed for farmers to adapt to climate change, price fluctuations and policy change. No Label
|
|
|
|
Ahmadi, V. (2015). Impacts of Common Agricultural Policy 2015 reforms on animal health and welfare of Scottish dairy herds (Vol. 5).
Abstract: The latest Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2015 reforms bring a substantial change in the way farm support is paid in Scotland where previous direct CAP payments were largely based on historical entitlements. Under the new payment scheme, three rates of payment are designated based on land uses and capabilities. As a result, it is anticipated that, average large dairy farms will lose out up to 32% of their farm net margins, while small dairy farms will lose out between 7-20% of their farm net margins. Such reductions of payment support may force dairy farmers to cut costs of production on farms especially livestock variable costs including labour costs and costs of prevention, control, treatment and management of livestock diseases and welfare conditions. This will have direct and indirect consequences on health and welfare of dairy cattle. This study aims to assess the impact of new support payments under CAP 2015 reforms on financial capabilities of dairy herds in tackling three conditions namely: infertility, mastitis and lameness. A detailed inventory of 42 commercial dairy farms in Scotland that contains both physical (i.e. farm area, nutrition and labour supply, etc.) and health data collected in 2013 and was used to parameterise an optimisation model. The model is a linear programme (LP) model which optimises farm net margin under limiting farm resources. The model also consists of feed demand and supply components that are used to determine monthly feed requirements for each of the animals on a farm as well as grass yield for pasture area of the land. The model is run for both ‘healthy’ and ‘diseased’ herds under previous and future CAP support payments. Details of the model and the dataset used as well as some results will be presented at the conference. No Label
|
|
