Implications of incorporating N cycling and N limitations on primary production in an individual-based dynamic vegetation model

The LPJ-GUESS dynamic vegetation model uniquely combines an individual- and patch-based representation of vegetation dynamics with ecosystem biogeochemical cycling from regional to global scales. We present an updated version that includes plant and soil N dynamics, analysing the implications of accounting for C–N interactions on predictions and performance of the model. Stand structural dynamics and allometric scaling of tree growth suggested by global databases of forest stand structure and development were well reproduced by the model in comparison to an earlier multi-model study. Accounting for N cycle dynamics improved the goodness of fit for broadleaved forests. N limitation associated with low N-mineralisation rates reduces productivity of cold-climate and dry-climate ecosystems relative to mesic temperate and tropical ecosystems. In a model experiment emulating free-air CO₂ enrichment (FACE) treatment for forests globally, N limitation associated with low N-mineralisation rates of colder soils reduces CO₂ enhancement of net primary production (NPP) for boreal forests, while some temperate and tropical forests exhibit increased NPP enhancement. Under a business-as-usual future climate and emissions scenario, ecosystem C storage globally was projected to increase by ca. 10%; additional N requirements to match this increasing ecosystem C were within the high N supply limit estimated on stoichiometric grounds in an earlier study. Our results highlight the importance of accounting for C–N interactions in studies of global terrestrial N cycling, and as a basis for understanding mechanisms on local scales and in different regional contexts

The carbon cycle in Mexico: past, present and future of C stocks and fluxes

PublishedThe Supplement related to this article is available online at doi:10.5194/bg-13-223-2016-supplement.We modeled the carbon (C) cycle in Mexico with a process-based approach. We used different available products (satellite data, field measurements, models and flux towers) to estimate C stocks and fluxes in the country at three different time frames: present (defined as the period 2000–2005), the past century (1901–2000) and the remainder of this century (2010–2100). Our estimate of the gross primary productivity (GPP) for the country was 2137 ± 1023 TgC yr−1 and a total C stock of 34 506 ± 7483 TgC, with 20 347 ± 4622 TgC in vegetation and 14 159 ± 3861 in the soil. Contrary to other current estimates for recent decades, our results showed that Mexico was a C sink over the period 1990–2009 (+31 TgC yr−1) and that C accumulation over the last century amounted to 1210 ± 1040 TgC. We attributed this sink to the CO2 fertilization effect on GPP, which led to an increase of 3408 ± 1060 TgC, while both climate and land use reduced the country C stocks by −458 ± 1001 and −1740 ± 878 TgC, respectively. Under different future scenarios, the C sink will likely continue over the 21st century, with decreasing C uptake as the climate forcing becomes more extreme. Our work provides valuable insights on relevant driving processes of the C cycle such as the role of drought in drylands (e.g., grasslands and shrublands) and the impact of climate change on the mean residence time of soil C in tropical ecosystems.The lead author (G. Murray-Tortarolo) thanks CONACYT-CECTI, the University of Exeter and Secretaría de Educación Pública (SEP) for their funding of this project. The authors extend their thanks to Carlos Ortiz Solorio and to the Colegio de Posgraduados for the field soil data and to the Alianza Redd+ Mexico for the field biomass data. This project would not have been possible without the valuable data from the CMIP5 models. A. Arneth, G. Murray-Tortarolo, A. Wiltshire and S. Sitch acknowledge the support of the European Commission-funded project LULCC4C (grant no. 603542). A. Wiltshire was partsupported by the Joint UK DECC/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101)

The terrestrial carbon budget of South and Southeast Asia

This is the final version of the article. Available from IOP Publishing via the DOI in this record.Accomplishing the objective of the current climate policies will require establishing carbon budget and flux estimates in each region and county of the globe by comparing and reconciling multiple estimates including the observations and the results of top-down atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) inversions and bottom-up dynamic global vegetation models. With this in view, this study synthesizes the carbon source/sink due to net ecosystem productivity (NEP), land cover land use change (E LUC), fires and fossil burning (E FIRE) for the South Asia (SA), Southeast Asia (SEA) and South and Southeast Asia (SSEA = SA + SEA) and each country in these regions using the multiple top-down and bottom-up modeling results. The terrestrial net biome productivity (NBP = NEP - E LUC - E FIRE) calculated based on bottom-up models in combination with E FIRE based on GFED4s data show net carbon sinks of 217 ±147, 10 ±55, and 227 ±279 TgC yr-1 for SA, SEA, and SSEA. The top-down models estimated NBP net carbon sinks were 20 ±170, 4 ±90 and 24 ±180 TgC yr-1. In comparison, regional emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels were 495, 275, and 770 TgC yr-1, which are many times higher than the NBP sink estimates, suggesting that the contribution of the fossil fuel emissions to the carbon budget of SSEA results in a significant net carbon source during the 2000s. When considering both NBP and fossil fuel emissions for the individual countries within the regions, Bhutan and Laos were net carbon sinks and rest of the countries were net carbon source during the 2000s. The relative contributions of each of the fluxes (NBP, NEP, E LUC, and E FIRE, fossil fuel emissions) to a nation's net carbon flux varied greatly from country to country, suggesting a heterogeneous dominant carbon fluxes on the country-level throughout SSEA.This research was partly supported by the NASA Land Cover and Land Use Change Program (NNX14AD94G) and the US National Science Foundation (No. NSF-AGS-12-43071)

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 makin

Regional carbon fluxes from land use and land cover change in Asia, 1980–2009

This is the final version of the article. Available from IOP Publishing via the DOI in this record.We present a synthesis of the land-atmosphere carbon flux from land use and land cover change (LULCC) in Asia using multiple data sources and paying particular attention to deforestation and forest regrowth fluxes. The data sources are quasi-independent and include the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization-Forest Resource Assessment (FAO-FRA 2015; country-level inventory estimates), the Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGARv4.3), the 'Houghton' bookkeeping model that incorporates FAO-FRA data, an ensemble of 8 state-of-the-art Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVM), and 2 recently published independent studies using primarily remote sensing techniques. The estimates are aggregated spatially to Southeast, East, and South Asia and temporally for three decades, 1980–1989, 1990–1999 and 2000–2009. Since 1980, net carbon emissions from LULCC in Asia were responsible for 20%–40% of global LULCC emissions, with emissions from Southeast Asia alone accounting for 15%–25% of global LULCC emissions during the same period. In the 2000s and for all Asia, three estimates (FAO-FRA, DGVM, Houghton) were in agreement of a net source of carbon to the atmosphere, with mean estimates ranging between 0.24 to 0.41 Pg C yr−1, whereas EDGARv4.3 suggested a net carbon sink of −0.17 Pg C yr−1. Three of 4 estimates suggest that LULCC carbon emissions declined by at least 34% in the preceding decade (1990–2000). Spread in the estimates is due to the inclusion of different flux components and their treatments, showing the importance to include emissions from carbon rich peatlands and land management, such as shifting cultivation and wood harvesting, which appear to be consistently underreported.This work was supported by the Asia Pacific Network for Global Change Research (ARCP2013-01CMY-Patra/Canadell). LC was supported by the National Science Foundation East Asia Pacific Summer Institute (EAPSI) Fellowship. KI and PP were supported by the Environment Research and Technology Development Funds (2-1401) from the Ministry of the Environment of Japan. JGC thanks the support from the Australian Climate Change Science Program. AI and EK were supported by ERTDF (S-10) by the Ministry of the Environment, Japan. CK is supported by DOE-BER through BGC-Feedbacks SFA and NGEE-Tropics. AW was supported by the Joint UK DECC/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101) and EU FP7 Funding through project LUC4C (603542)

Exploring the usefulness of scenario archetypes in science-policy processes: experience across IPBES assessments

Scenario analyses have been used in multiple science-policy assessments to better understand complex plausible futures. Scenario archetype approaches are based on the fact that many future scenarios have similar underlying storylines, assumptions, and trends in drivers of change, which allows for grouping of scenarios into typologies, or archetypes, facilitating comparisons between a large range of studies. The use of scenario archetypes in environmental assessments foregrounds important policy questions and can be used to codesign interventions tackling future sustainability issues. Recently, scenario archetypes were used in four regional assessments and one ongoing global assessment within the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). The aim of these assessments was to provide decision makers with policy-relevant knowledge about the state of biodiversity, ecosystems, and the contributions they provide to people. This paper reflects on the usefulness of the scenario archetype approach within science-policy processes, drawing on the experience from the IPBES assessments. Using a thematic analysis of (a) survey data collected from experts involved in the archetype analyses across IPBES assessments, (b) notes from IPBES workshops, and (c) regional assessment chapter texts, we synthesize the benefits, challenges, and frontiers of applying the scenario archetype approach in a science-policy process. Scenario archetypes were perceived to allow syntheses of large amounts of information for scientific, practice-, and policy-related purposes, streamline key messages from multiple scenario studies, and facilitate communication of them to end users. In terms of challenges, they were perceived as subjective in their interpretation, oversimplifying information, having a limited applicability across scales, and concealing contextual information and novel narratives. Finally, our results highlight what methodologies, applications, and frontiers in archetype-based research should be explored in the future. These advances can assist the design of future large-scale sustainability-related assessment processes, aiming to better support decisions and interventions for equitable and sustainable futures

Multimodel Analysis of Future Land Use and Climate Change Impacts on Ecosystem Functioning

"Land use and climate changes both affect terrestrial ecosystems. Here, we used three combinations of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and Representative Concentration Pathways (SSP1xRCP26, SSP3xRCP60, and SSP5xRCP85) as input to three dynamic global vegetation models to assess the impacts and associated uncertainty on several ecosystem functions: terrestrial carbon storage and fluxes, evapotranspiration, surface albedo, and runoff. We also performed sensitivity simulations in which we kept either land use or climate (including atmospheric CO2) constant from year 2015 on to calculate the isolated land use versus climate effects. By the 2080–2099 period, carbon storage increases by up to 87 ± 47 Gt (SSP1xRCP26) compared to present day, with large spatial variance across scenarios and models. Most of the carbon uptake is attributed to drivers beyond future land use and climate change, particularly the lagged effects of historic environmental changes. Future climate change typically increases carbon stocks in vegetation but not soils, while future land use change causes carbon losses, even for net agricultural abandonment (SSP1xRCP26). Evapotranspiration changes are highly variable across scenarios, and models do not agree on the magnitude or even sign of change of the individual effects. A calculated decrease in January and July surface albedo (up to ?0.021 ± 0.007 and ?0.004 ± 0.004 for SSP5xRCP85) and increase in runoff (+67 ± 6 mm/year) is largely driven by climate change. Overall, our results show that future land use and climate change will both have substantial impacts on ecosystem functioning. However, future changes can often not be fully explained by these two drivers and legacy effects have to be considered. © 2019. The Authors.