Abstract: This study aimed to determine short term farm responses of Irish dairy farms under climate change. The Irish National Farm Survey data and Irish weather data were the main datasets used in this study. A set of simulation models were used to determine grass yields and field time under a baseline scenario and a future climate scenario. An optimising farm level model which maximises farm net income under limiting farm resources was then run under these scenarios. Changes in farm net incomes under the climate change scenario compared to the baseline scenario were taken as a measure to determine the effect of climate change on farms. Any changes in farm activities under the climate run compared to the baseline run were considered as farm’s responses to maximise farm profits. The results showed that there was a substantial increase in yields of grass (49% to 56%) in all regions. The impact of climate change on farms was different based on the regions. Dairy farms in the Border, Midlands and South East regions suffered whereas dairy farms in other regions generally fared better under the climate change scenario. For a majority of farms, a substitution of concentrate feed with grass based feeds and increasing stocking rate were identified as the most common farm responses. However, farms replaced concentrate feed at varying degree. Dairy farms in the Mid East showed a move towards beef production system where medium dairy farms in the South East regions shifted entire tillage land to grass land. Farms in the South East region also kept animals on grass longer under the climate change scenario compared to the baseline scenario.

Abstract: Agriculture is a key driver of change in the Anthropocene. It is both a critical factor for human well-being and development and a major driver of environmental decline. As the human population expands to more than 9 billion by 2050, we will be compelled to find ways to adequately feed this population while simultaneously decreasing the environmental impact of agriculture, even as global change is creating new circumstances to which agriculture must respond. Many proposals to accomplish this dual goal of increasing agricultural production while reducing its environmental impact are based on increasing the efficiency of agricultural production relative to resource use and relative to unintended outcomes such as water pollution, biodiversity loss, and greenhouse gas emissions. While increasing production efficiency is almost certainly necessary, it is unlikely to be sufficient and may in some instances reduce long-term agricultural resilience, for example, by degrading soil and increasing the fragility of agriculture to pest and disease outbreaks and climate shocks. To encourage an agriculture that is both resilient and sustainable, radically new approaches to agricultural development are needed. These approaches must build on a diversity of solutions operating at nested scales, and they must maintain and enhance the adaptive and transformative capacity needed to respond to disturbances and avoid critical thresholds. Finding such approaches will require that we encourage experimentation, innovation, and learning, even if they sometimes reduce short-term production efficiency in some parts of the world.

Abstract: Alongside Robert Costanza and colleagues’ plea to abandon gross domestic product as a measure of national success (see Nature 505, 283–285; 2014), we believe that there is an urgent need to change the way currencies are valued — by using a new ‘carbon standard’ that links economy to ecology. This would work in a similar way to the old gold-exchange standard, except that a country’s currency value would instead be determined by its saved and standing stocks of fossil and non-fossil carbon. Governments would need to decide whether to risk devaluing their currency by depleting carbon stocks — while still honouring a commitment to keep fossil-carbon stocks at 80% as a safeguard against extreme climate change. After the Second World War, huge investments radically altered the economies of the United States, the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom. In the face of climate change, it is now the global energy system that needs reinvention.