Crop failure rates in a geoengineered climate: impact of climate change and marine cloud brightening

International audienceThe impact of geoengineering on crops has to date been studied by examining mean yields. We present the first work focusing on the rate of crop failures under a geoengineered climate. We investigate the impact of a future climate and a potential geoengineering scheme on the number of crop failures in two regions, Northeastern China and West Africa. Climate change associated with a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide increases the number of crop failures in Northeastern China while reducing the number of crop failures in West Africa. In both regions marine cloud brightening is likely to reduce the number crop failures, although it is more effective at reducing mild crop failure than severe crop failure. We find that water stress, rather than heat stress, is the main cause of crop failure in current, future and geoengineered climates. This demonstrates the importance of irrigation and breeding for tolerance to water stress as adaptation methods in all futures. Analysis of global rainfall under marine cloud brightening has the potential to significantly reduce the impact of climate change on global wheat and groundnut production

Agrometeorological forecasting

Agrometeorological forecasting covers all aspects of forecasting in agrometeorology. Therefore, the scope of agrometeorological forecasting very largely coincides with the scope of agrometeorology itself. All on-farm and regional agrometeorological planning implies some form of impact forecasting, at least implicitly, so that decision-support tools and forecasting tools largely overlap. In the current chapter, the focus is on crops, but attention is also be paid to sectors that are often neglected by the agrometeorologist, such as those occurring in plant and animal protection. In addition, the borders between meteorological forecasts for agriculture and agrometeorological forecasts are not always clear. Examples include the use of weather forecasts for farm operations such as spraying pesticides or deciding on trafficability in relation to adverse weather. Many forecast issues by various national institutions (weather, but also commodity prices or flood warnings) are vital to the farming community, but they do not constitute agrometeorological forecasts. (Modified From the introduction of the chapter: Scope of agrometeorological forecasting)JRC.H.4-Monitoring Agricultural Resource

Assessing uncertainty and complexity in regional-scale crop model simulations

Crop models are imperfect approximations to real world interactions between biotic and abiotic factors. In some situations, the uncertainties associated with choices in model structure, model inputs and parameters can exceed the spatiotemporal variability of simulated yields, thus limiting predictability. For Indian groundnut, we used the General Large Area Model for annual crops (GLAM) with an existing framework to decompose uncertainty, to first understand how skill changes with added model complexity, and then to determine the relevant uncertainty sources in yield and other prognostic variables (total biomass, leaf area index and harvest index). We developed an ensemble of simulations by perturbing GLAM parameters using two different input meteorology datasets, and two model versions that differ in the complexity with which they account for assimilation. We found that added complexity improved model skill, as measured by changes in the root mean squared error (RMSE), by 5-10% in specific pockets of western, central and southern India, but that 85% of the groundnut growing area either did not show improved skill or showed decreased skill from such added complexity. Thus, adding complexity or using overly complex models at regional or global scales should be exercised with caution. Uncertainty analysis indicated that, in situations where soil and air moisture dynamics are the major determinants of productivity, predictability in yield is high. Where uncertainty for yield is high, the choice of weather input data was found critical for reducing uncertainty. However, for other prognostic variables (including leaf area index, total biomass and the harvest index) parametric uncertainty was generally the most important source, with a contribution of up to 90% in some cases, suggesting that regional-scale data additional to yield to constrain model parameters is needed. Our study provides further evidence that regional-scale studies should explicitly quantify multiple uncertainty sources

Increasing influence of heat stress on French maize yields from the 1960s to the 2030s

Improved crop yield forecasts could enable more effective adaptation to climate variability and change. Here, we explore how to combine historical observations of crop yields and weather with climate model simulations to produce crop yield projections for decision relevant timescales. Firstly, the effects on historical crop yields of improved technology, precipitation and daily maximum temperatures are modelled empirically, accounting for a nonlinear technology trend and interactions between temperature and precipitation, and applied specifically for a case study of maize in France. The relative importance of precipitation variability for maize yields in France has decreased significantly since the 1960s, likely due to increased irrigation. In addition, heat stress is found to be as important for yield as precipitation since around 2000. A significant reduction in maize yield is found for each day with a maximum temperature above 32 °C, in broad agreement with previous estimates. The recent increase in such hot days has likely contributed to the observed yield stagnation. Furthermore, a general method for producing near-term crop yield projections, based on climate model simulations, is developed and utilized. We use projections of future daily maximum temperatures to assess the likely change in yields due to variations in climate. Importantly, we calibrate the climate model projections using observed data to ensure both reliable temperature mean and daily variability characteristics, and demonstrate that these methods work using retrospective predictions. We conclude that, to offset the projected increased daily maximum temperatures over France, improved technology will need to increase base level yields by 12% to be confident about maintaining current levels of yield for the period 2016–2035; the current rate of yield technology increase is not sufficient to meet this target

Comparing the effects of calibration and climate errors on a statistical crop model and a process-based crop model

Understanding the relationship between climate and crop productivity is a key component of projections of future food production, and hence assessments of food security. Climate models and crop yield datasets have errors, but the effects of these errors on regional scale crop models is not well categorized and understood. In this study we compare the effect of synthetic errors in temperature and precipitation observations on the hindcast skill of a process-based crop model and a statistical crop model. We find that errors in temperature data have a significantly stronger influence on both models than errors in precipitation. We also identify key differences in the responses of these models to different types of input data error. Statistical and process-based model responses differ depending on whether synthetic errors are overestimates or underestimates. We also investigate the impact of crop yield calibration data on model skill for both models, using datasets of yield at three different spatial scales. Whilst important for both models, the statistical model is more strongly influenced by crop yield scale than the process-based crop model. However, our results question the value of high resolution yield data for improving the skill of crop models; we find a focus on accuracy to be more likely to be valuable. For both crop models, and for all three spatial scales of yield calibration data, we found that model skill is greatest where growing area is above 10-15 %. Thus information on area harvested would appear to be a priority for data collection efforts. These results are important for three reasons. First, understanding how different crop models rely on different characteristics of temperature, precipitation and crop yield data allows us to match the model type to the available data. Second, we can prioritize where improvements in climate and crop yield data should be directed. Third, as better climate and crop yield data becomes available, we can predict how crop model skill should improve

Improving the use of crop models for risk assessment and climate change adaptation

Crop models are used for an increasingly broad range of applications, with a commensurate proliferation of methods. Careful framing of research questions and development of targeted and appropriate methods are therefore increasingly important. In conjunction with the other authors in this special issue, we have developed a set of criteria for use of crop models in assessments of impacts, adaptation and risk. Our analysis drew on the other papers in this special issue, and on our experience in the UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 and the MACSUR, AgMIP and ISIMIP projects. The criteria were used to assess how improvements could be made to the framing of climate change risks, and to outline the good practice and new developments that are needed to improve risk assessment. Key areas of good practice include: i. the development, running and documentation of crop models, with attention given to issues of spatial scale and complexity; ii. the methods used to form crop-climate ensembles, which can be based on model skill and/or spread; iii. the methods used to assess adaptation, which need broadening to account for technological development and to reflect the full range options available. The analysis highlights the limitations of focussing only on projections of future impacts and adaptation options using pre-determined time slices. Whilst this long-standing approach may remain an essential component of risk assessments, we identify three further key components: 1. Working with stakeholders to identify the timing of risks. What are the key vulnerabilities of food systems and what does crop-climate modelling tell us about when those systems are at risk? 2. Use of multiple methods that critically assess the use of climate model output and avoid any presumption that analyses should begin and end with gridded output. 3. Increasing transparency and inter-comparability in risk assessments. Whilst studies frequently produce ranges that quantify uncertainty, the assumptions underlying these ranges are not always clear. We suggest that the contingency of results upon assumptions is made explicit via a common uncertainty reporting format; and/or that studies are assessed against a set of criteria, such as those presented in this paper

Setting the agenda: Climate change adaptation and mitigation for food systems in the developing world

New agricultural development pathways are required to meet climate change adaptation and mitigation needs in the food systems of low-income countries. A research and policy agenda is provided to indicate where innovation and new knowledge are needed. Adaptation requires identifying suitable crop varieties and livestock breeds, as well as building resilient farming and natural resources systems, institutions for famine and crop failure relief, and mechanisms for rapid learning by farmers. Mitigation requires transitioning to ‘low climate impact’ agriculture that reduces emissions while achieving food security, economic well-being and sustainability. Efficient interventions, incentives for large-scale shifts in practices, and monitoring systems are required. Integrated assessments of adaptation and mitigation are needed to better understand the synergies and trade-offs among outcomes

Influences of increasing temperature on Indian wheat: quantifying limits to predictability

As climate changes, temperatures will play an increasing role in determining crop yield. Both climate model error and lack of constrained physiological thresholds limit the predictability of yield. We used a perturbed-parameter climate model ensemble with two methods of bias-correction as input to a regional-scale wheat simulation model over India to examine future yields. This model configuration accounted for uncertainty in climate, planting date, optimization, temperature-induced changes in development rate and reproduction. It also accounts for lethal temperatures, which have been somewhat neglected to date. Using uncertainty decomposition, we found that fractional uncertainty due to temperature-driven processes in the crop model was on average larger than climate model uncertainty (0.56 versus 0.44), and that the crop model uncertainty is dominated by crop development. Simulations with the raw compared to the bias-corrected climate data did not agree on the impact on future wheat yield, nor its geographical distribution. However the method of bias-correction was not an important source of uncertainty. We conclude that bias-correction of climate model data and improved constraints on especially crop development are critical for robust impact predictions

Climate-driven spatial mismatches between British orchards and their pollinators: increased risks of pollination deficits

Understanding how climate change can affect crop-pollinator systems helps predict potential geographical mismatches between a crop and its pollinators, and therefore identify areas vulnerable to loss of pollination services. We examined the distribution of orchard species (apples, pears, plums and other top fruits) and their pollinators in Great Britain, for present and future climatic conditions projected for 2050 under the SRES A1B Emissions Scenario. We used a relative index of pollinator availability as a proxy for pollination service. At present there is a large spatial overlap between orchards and their pollinators, but predictions for 2050 revealed that the most suitable areas for orchards corresponded to low pollinator availability. However, we found that pollinator availability may persist in areas currently used for fruit production, but which are predicted to provide sub-optimal environmental suitability for orchard species in the future. Our results may be used to identify mitigation options to safeguard orchard production against the risk of pollination failure in Great Britain over the next 50 years; for instance choosing fruit tree varieties that are adapted to future climatic conditions, or boosting wild pollinators through improving landscape resources. Our approach can be readily applied to other regions and crop systems, and expanded to include different climatic scenarios