Conclusion: Major Findings and Future Activities.

Rosenzweig, Cynthia E.; Hillel, Daniel

Home/Archive/NASA NTRS

NASA NTRS · 20150022465

Conclusion: Major Findings and Future Activities.

Rosenzweig, Cynthia E.·Hillel, Daniel

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) incorporates a number of major advances in the way that climate impacts, vulnerability, and adaptation are being simulated. At its core is a protocol approach that results in impact assessments being more scientifically credible and thus ultimately having greater value to the wide range of agricultural stakeholders. Moreover, the use of the protocol approach enables closer scrutiny and intercomparison of models and methods so that they can be improved over time. By creating a truly trans-disciplinary, systems-based approach, AgMIP impact assessments and evaluation of adaptations become useful to agricultural decision-makers at multiple scales. The chapters in this two-part set demonstrate the use of this approach and represent early steps towards the full realization of these new methods and their application.

Explore related subjects

damage assessment agriculture protocol (computers)

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Rosenzweig, Cynthia E., Hillel, Daniel. 2015-04-27. Conclusion: Major Findings and Future Activities.. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20150022465

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

NASA NTRS2016

Crop Model Improvement Reduces the Uncertainty of the Response to Temperature of Multi-Model Ensembles

To improve climate change impact estimates and to quantify their uncertainty, multi-model ensembles (MMEs) have been suggested. Model improvements can improve the accuracy of simulations and reduce the uncertainty of climate change impact assessments. Furthermore, they can reduce the number of models needed in a MME. Herein, 15 wheat growth models of a larger MME were improved through re-parameterization and/or incorporating or modifying heat stress effects on phenology, leaf growth and senescence, biomass growth, and grain number and size using detailed field experimental data from the USDA Hot Serial Cereal experiment (calibration data set). Simulation results from before and after model improvement were then evaluated with independent field experiments from a CIMMYT worldwide field trial network (evaluation data set). Model improvements decreased the variation (10th to 90th model ensemble percentile range) of grain yields simulated by the MME on average by 39% in the calibration data set and by 26% in the independent evaluation data set for crops grown in mean seasonal temperatures greater than 24 C. MME mean squared error in simulating grain yield decreased by 37%. A reduction in MME uncertainty range by 27% increased MME prediction skills by 47%. Results suggest that the mean level of variation observed in field experiments and used as a benchmark can be reached with half the number of models in the MME. Improving crop models is therefore important to increase the certainty of model-based impact assessments and allow more practical, i.e. smaller MMEs to be used effectively.

damage assessment↗

NASA NTRS2014

Uncertainty in Agricultural Impact Assessment

This chapter considers issues concerning uncertainty associated with modeling and its use within agricultural impact assessments. Information about uncertainty is important for those who develop assessment methods, since that information indicates the need for, and the possibility of, improvement of the methods and databases. Such information also allows one to compare alternative methods. Information about the sources of uncertainties is an aid in prioritizing further work on the impact assessment method. Uncertainty information is also necessary for those who apply assessment methods, e.g., for projecting climate change impacts on agricultural production and for stakeholders who want to use the results as part of a decision-making process (e.g., for adaptation planning). For them, uncertainty information indicates the degree of confidence they can place in the simulated results. Quantification of uncertainty also provides stakeholders with an important guideline for making decisions that are robust across the known uncertainties. Thus, uncertainty information is important for any decision based on impact assessment. Ultimately, we are interested in knowledge about uncertainty so that information can be used to achieve positive outcomes from agricultural modeling and impact assessment.

damage assessment↗