NASA NTRS2015
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).