Regional Disparities in the Beneficial Effects of Rising CO2 Emissions on Crop Water Productivity
No abstract available
Deryng, Delphine↗
Engineering topics
Elliott, Joshua
Publications and source records attributed to Elliott, Joshua.
Spatial Sampling of Weather Data for Regional Crop Yield Simulations
Field-scale crop models are increasingly applied at spatio-temporal scales that range from regions to the globe and from decades up to 100 years. Sufficiently detailed data to capture the prevailing spatio-temporal heterogeneity in weather, soil, and management conditions as needed by crop models are rarely available. Effective sampling may overcome the problem of missing data but has rarely been investigated. In this study the effect of sampling weather data has been evaluated for simulating yields of winter wheat in a region in Germany over a 30-year period (1982-2011) using 12 process-based crop models. A stratified sampling was applied to compare the effect of different sizes of spatially sampled weather data (10, 30, 50, 100, 500, 1000 and full coverage of 34,078 sampling points) on simulated wheat yields. Stratified sampling was further compared with random sampling. Possible interactions between sample size and crop model were evaluated. The results showed differences in simulated yields among crop models but all models reproduced well the pattern of the stratification. Importantly, the regional mean of simulated yields based on full coverage could already be reproduced by a small sample of 10 points. This was also true for reproducing the temporal variability in simulated yields but more sampling points (about 100) were required to accurately reproduce spatial yield variability. The number of sampling points can be smaller when a stratified sampling is applied as compared to a random sampling. However, differences between crop models were observed including some interaction between the effect of sampling on simulated yields and the model used. We concluded that stratified sampling can considerably reduce the number of required simulations. But, differences between crop models must be considered as the choice for a specific model can have larger effects on simulated yields than the sampling strategy. Assessing the impact of sampling soil and crop management data for regional simulations of crop yields is still needed.
upscaling↗
The AgMIP Coordinated Global and Regional Assessments (CGRA) of Climate Change Impacts on Agriculture and Food Security
The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) has been working since 2010 to construct a protocol-based framework enabling regional assessments (led by regional experts and modelers) that can provide consistent inputs to global economic and integrated assessment models. These global models can then relay important global-level information that drive regional decision-making and outcomes throughout an interconnected agricultural system. AgMIPs community of nearly 800 climate, crop, livestock, economics, and IT experts has improved the state-of-the-art through model intercomparisons, validation exercises, regional integrated assessments, and the launch of AgMIP programs on all six arable continents. AgMIP is now launching Coordinated Global and Regional Assessments (CGRA) of climate change impacts on agriculture and food security to link global and regional crop and economic models using a protocol-based framework. The CGRA protocols are being developed to utilize historical observations, climate projections, and RCPsSSPs from CMIP5 (and potentially CMIP6), and will examine stakeholder-driven agricultural development and adaptation scenarios to provide cutting-edge assessments of climate changes impact on agriculture and food security. These protocols will build on the foundation of established protocols from AgMIPs 30+ activities, and will emphasize the use of multiple models, scenarios, and scales to enable an accurate assessment of related uncertainties. The CGRA is also designed to provide the outputs necessary to feed into integrated assessment models (IAMs), nutrition and food security assessments, nitrogen and carbon cycle models, and additional impact-sector assessments (e.g., water resources, land-use, biomes, urban areas). This presentation will describe the current status of CGRA planning and initial prototype experiments to demonstrate key aspects of the protocols before wider implementation ahead of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.
models↗
Implications of Climate Mitigation for Future Agricultural Production
Climate change is projected to negatively impact biophysical agricultural productivity in much of the world. Actions taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate future climate changes, are thus of central importance for agricultural production. Climate impacts are, however, not unidirectional; some crops in some regions (primarily higher latitudes) are projected to benefit, particularly if increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is assumed to strongly increase crop productivity at large spatial and temporal scales. Climate mitigation measures that are implemented by reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations lead to reductions both in the strength of climate change and in the benefits of carbon dioxide fertilization. Consequently, analysis of the effects of climate mitigation on agricultural productivity must address not only regions for which mitigation is likely to reduce or even reverse climate damages. There are also regions that are likely to see increased crop yields due to climate change, which may lose these added potentials under mitigation action. Comparing data from the most comprehensive archive of crop yield projections publicly available, we find that climate mitigation leads to overall benefits from avoided damages at the global scale and especially in many regions that are already at risk of food insecurity today. Ignoring controversial carbon dioxide fertilization effects on crop productivity, we find that for the median projection aggressive mitigation could eliminate approximately 81% of the negative impacts of climate change on biophysical agricultural productivity globally by the end of the century. In this case, the benefits of mitigation typically extend well into temperate regions, but vary by crop and underlying climate model projections. Should large benefits to crop yields from carbon dioxide fertilization be realized, the effects of mitigation become much more mixed, though still positive globally and beneficial in many food insecure countries.
Mueller, Christoph↗
Assessing Impacts of Climate Change on Food Security Worldwide
The combination of a warming Earth and an increasing population will likely strain the world's food systems in the coming decades. Experts involved with the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) focus on quantifying the changes through time. AgMIP, a program begun in 2010, involves about 800 climate scientists, economists, nutritionists, information technology specialists, and crop and livestock experts. In mid-September 2015, the Aspen Global Change Institute convened an AgMIP workshop to draft plans and protocols for assessing global- and regional-scale modeling of crops, livestock, economics, and nutrition across major agricultural regions worldwide. The goal of this Coordinated Global and Regional Integrated Assessments (CGRA) project is to characterize climate effects on large- and small-scale farming systems.
farm crops↗
A Framework for the Cross-Sectoral Integration of Multi-Model Impact Projections: Land Use Decisions Under Climate Impacts Uncertainties
Climate change and its impacts already pose considerable challenges for societies that will further increase with global warming (IPCC, 2014a, b). Uncertainties of the climatic response to greenhouse gas emissions include the potential passing of large-scale tipping points (e.g. Lenton et al., 2008; Levermann et al., 2012; Schellnhuber, 2010) and changes in extreme meteorological events (Field et al., 2012) with complex impacts on societies (Hallegatte et al., 2013). Thus climate change mitigation is considered a necessary societal response for avoiding uncontrollable impacts (Conference of the Parties, 2010). On the other hand, large-scale climate change mitigation itself implies fundamental changes in, for example, the global energy system. The associated challenges come on top of others that derive from equally important ethical imperatives like the fulfilment of increasing food demand that may draw on the same resources. For example, ensuring food security for a growing population may require an expansion of cropland, thereby reducing natural carbon sinks or the area available for bio-energy production. So far, available studies addressing this problem have relied on individual impact models, ignoring uncertainty in crop model and biome model projections. Here, we propose a probabilistic decision framework that allows for an evaluation of agricultural management and mitigation options in a multi-impactmodel setting. Based on simulations generated within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP), we outline how cross-sectorally consistent multi-model impact simulations could be used to generate the information required for robust decision making. Using an illustrative future land use pattern, we discuss the trade-off between potential gains in crop production and associated losses in natural carbon sinks in the new multiple crop- and biome-model setting. In addition, crop and water model simulations are combined to explore irrigation increases as one possible measure of agricultural intensification that could limit the expansion of cropland required in response to climate change and growing food demand. This example shows that current impact model uncertainties pose an important challenge to long-term mitigation planning and must not be ignored in long-term strategic decision making
farmlands↗
The AgMIP GRIDded Crop Modeling Initiative (AgGRID) and the Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI)
Climate change is a significant risk for agricultural production. Even under optimistic scenarios for climate mitigation action, present-day agricultural areas are likely to face significant increases in temperatures in the coming decades, in addition to changes in precipitation, cloud cover, and the frequency and duration of extreme heat, drought, and flood events (IPCC, 2013). These factors will affect the agricultural system at the global scale by impacting cultivation regimes, prices, trade, and food security (Nelson et al., 2014a). Global-scale evaluation of crop productivity is a major challenge for climate impact and adaptation assessment. Rigorous global assessments that are able to inform planning and policy will benefit from consistent use of models, input data, and assumptions across regions and time that use mutually agreed protocols designed by the modeling community. To ensure this consistency, large-scale assessments are typically performed on uniform spatial grids, with spatial resolution of typically 10 to 50 km, over specified time-periods. Many distinct crop models and model types have been applied on the global scale to assess productivity and climate impacts, often with very different results (Rosenzweig et al., 2014). These models are based to a large extent on field-scale crop process or ecosystems models and they typically require resolved data on weather, environmental, and farm management conditions that are lacking in many regions (Bondeau et al., 2007; Drewniak et al., 2013; Elliott et al., 2014b; Gueneau et al., 2012; Jones et al., 2003; Liu et al., 2007; M¨uller and Robertson, 2014; Van den Hoof et al., 2011;Waha et al., 2012; Xiong et al., 2014). Due to data limitations, the requirements of consistency, and the computational and practical limitations of running models on a large scale, a variety of simplifying assumptions must generally be made regarding prevailing management strategies on the grid scale in both the baseline and future periods. Implementation differences in these and other modeling choices contribute to significant variation among global-scale crop model assessments in addition to differences in crop model implementations that also cause large differences in site-specific crop modeling (Asseng et al., 2013; Bassu et al., 2014).
climate↗
The Parallel System for Integrating Impact Models and Sectors (pSIMS)
We present a framework for massively parallel climate impact simulations: the parallel System for Integrating Impact Models and Sectors (pSIMS). This framework comprises a) tools for ingesting and converting large amounts of data to a versatile datatype based on a common geospatial grid; b) tools for translating this datatype into custom formats for site-based models; c) a scalable parallel framework for performing large ensemble simulations, using any one of a number of different impacts models, on clusters, supercomputers, distributed grids, or clouds; d) tools and data standards for reformatting outputs to common datatypes for analysis and visualization; and e) methodologies for aggregating these datatypes to arbitrary spatial scales such as administrative and environmental demarcations. By automating many time-consuming and error-prone aspects of large-scale climate impacts studies, pSIMS accelerates computational research, encourages model intercomparison, and enhances reproducibility of simulation results. We present the pSIMS design and use example assessments to demonstrate its multi-model, multi-scale, and multi-sector versatility.
crop modeling↗
Assessing Agricultural Risks of Climate Change in the 21st Century in a Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison
Here we present the results from an intercomparison of multiple global gridded crop models (GGCMs) within the framework of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project and the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project. Results indicate strong negative effects of climate change, especially at higher levels of warming and at low latitudes; models that include explicit nitrogen stress project more severe impacts. Across seven GGCMs, five global climate models, and four representative concentration pathways, model agreement on direction of yield changes is found in many major agricultural regions at both low and high latitudes; however, reducing uncertainty in sign of response in mid-latitude regions remains a challenge. Uncertainties related to the representation of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and high temperature effects demonstrated here show that further research is urgently needed to better understand effects of climate change on agricultural production and to devise targeted adaptation strategies.
agriculture↗
Climate Change Effects on Agriculture: Economic Responses to Biophysical Shocks
Agricultural production is sensitive to weather and thus directly affected by climate change. Plausible estimates of these climate change impacts require combined use of climate, crop, and economic models. Results from previous studies vary substantially due to differences in models, scenarios, and data. This paper is part of a collective effort to systematically integrate these three types of models. We focus on the economic component of the assessment, investigating how nine global economic models of agriculture represent endogenous responses to seven standardized climate change scenarios produced by two climate and five crop models. These responses include adjustments in yields, area, consumption, and international trade. We apply biophysical shocks derived from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's representative concentration pathway with end-of-century radiative forcing of 8.5 W/m(sup 2). The mean biophysical yield effect with no incremental CO2 fertilization is a 17% reduction globally by 2050 relative to a scenario with unchanging climate. Endogenous economic responses reduce yield loss to 11%, increase area of major crops by 11%, and reduce consumption by 3%. Agricultural production, cropland area, trade, and prices show the greatest degree of variability in response to climate change, and consumption the lowest. The sources of these differences include model structure and specification; in particular, model assumptions about ease of land use conversion, intensification, and trade. This study identifies where models disagree on the relative responses to climate shocks and highlights research activities needed to improve the representation of agricultural adaptation responses to climate change.
farm crops↗
Constraints and Potentials of Future Irrigation Water Availability on Agricultural Production Under Climate Change
Freshwater availability is relevant to almost all socioeconomic and environmental impacts of climate and demographic change and their implications for sustainability. We compare ensembles of water supply and demand projections driven by ensemble output from five global climate models. Our results suggest reasons for concern. Direct climate impacts to maize, soybean, wheat, and rice involve losses of 400–2,600 Pcal (8–43% of present-day total). Freshwater limitations in some heavily irrigated regions could necessitate reversion of 20–60 Mha of cropland from irrigated to rainfed management, and a further loss of 600–2,900 Pcal. Freshwater abundance in other regions could help ameliorate these losses, but substantial investment in infrastructure would be required. We compare ensembles of water supply and demand projections from 10 global hydrological models and six global gridded crop models. These are produced as part of the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project, with coordination from the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project, and driven by outputs of general circulation models run under representative concentration pathway 8.5 as part of the Fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. Models project that direct climate impacts to maize, soybean, wheat, and rice involve losses of 400–1,400 Pcal (8–24% of present-day total) when CO2 fertilization effects are accounted for or 1,400–2,600 Pcal (24–43%) otherwise. Freshwater limitations in some irrigated regions (western United States; China; and West, South, and Central Asia) could necessitate the reversion of 20–60 Mha of cropland from irrigated to rainfed management by end-of-century, and a further loss of 600–2,900 Pcal of food production. In other regions (northern/eastern United States, parts of South America, much of Europe, and South East Asia) surplus water supply could in principle support a net increase in irrigation, although substantial investments in irrigation infrastructure would be required.
agriculture↗
Multisectoral Climate Impact Hotspots in a Warming World
The impacts of global climate change on different aspects of humanity's diverse life-support systems are complex and often difficult to predict. To facilitate policy decisions on mitigation and adaptation strategies, it is necessary to understand, quantify, and synthesize these climate-change impacts, taking into account their uncertainties. Crucial to these decisions is an understanding of how impacts in different sectors overlap, as overlapping impacts increase exposure, lead to interactions of impacts, and are likely to raise adaptation pressure. As a first step we develop herein a framework to study coinciding impacts and identify regional exposure hotspots. This framework can then be used as a starting point for regional case studies on vulnerability and multifaceted adaptation strategies. We consider impacts related to water, agriculture, ecosystems, and malaria at different levels of global warming. Multisectoral overlap starts to be seen robustly at a mean global warming of 3 degC above the 1980-2010 mean, with 11% of the world population subject to severe impacts in at least two of the four impact sectors at 4 degC. Despite these general conclusions, we find that uncertainty arising from the impact models is considerable, and larger than that from the climate models. In a low probability-high impact worst-case assessment, almost the whole inhabited world is at risk for multisectoral pressures. Hence, there is a pressing need for an increased research effort to develop a more comprehensive understanding of impacts, as well as for the development of policy measures under existing uncertainty.
policies↗