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.

/pdf/assessing-agricultural-risks-of-climate-change-in-the-21st-4f6wucb9x8.pdf

Assessing agricultural risks of climate change in the 21st century in a global gridded crop model intercomparison

Crop models are essential tools for assessing the threat of climate change to local and global food production(1). Present models used to predict wheat grain yield are highly uncertain when simulating how crops respond to temperature(2). Here we systematically tested 30 different wheat crop models of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project against field experiments in which growing season mean temperatures ranged from 15 degrees C to 32 degrees C, including experiments with artificial heating. Many models simulated yields well, but were less accurate at higher temperatures. The model ensemble median was consistently more accurate in simulating the crop temperature response than any single model, regardless of the input information used. Extrapolating the model ensemble temperature response indicates that warming is already slowing yield gains at a majority of wheat-growing locations. Global wheat production is estimated to fall by 6% for each degrees C of further temperature increase and become more variable over space and time.

Rising Temperatures Reduce Global Wheat Production

Abiotic stresses are one of the major constraints to crop production and food security worldwide. The situation has aggravated due to the drastic and rapid changes in global climate. Heat and drought stress are undoubtedly the two most important stresses having huge impact on growth and productivity of the crops. It is very important to understand the physiological, biochemical and ecological interventions related to these stresses for better management. A wide range of plant responses to these stresses could be generalized into morphological, physiological and biochemical responses. Interestingly, this review provides a detailed account of plant responses to heat and drought stresses with special focus on highlighting the commonalities and differences. Crop growth and yields are negatively affected by sub-optimal water supply and abnormal temperatures due to physical damages, physiological disruptions and biochemical changes. Both these stresses have multi-lateral impacts and therefore, complex in mechanistic action. A better understanding of plant responses to these stresses has pragmatic implication for remedies and management. A comprehensive account of conventional as well as modern approaches to deal with heat and drought stresses have also been presented here. A side-by-side critical discussion on salient responses and management strategies for these two important abiotic stresses provides a unique insight into the phenomena. A holistic approach taking into account the different management options to deal with heat and drought stress simultaneously could be a win-win approach in future.

/pdf/crop-production-under-drought-and-heat-stress-plant-4citjxbeya.pdf

Crop Production under Drought and Heat Stress: Plant Responses and Management Options

Many definitions of food security exist, and these have been the subject of much debate. As early as 1992, Maxwell and Smith (1992) reviewed more than 180 items discussing concepts and definitions, and more definitions have been formulated since (DEFRA, 2006). Whereas many earlier definitions centered on food production, more recent definitions highlight access to food, in keeping with the 1996 World Food Summit definition (FAO, 1996) that food security is met when “all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.” Worldwide attention on food access was given impetus by the food “price spike” in 2007–2008, triggered by a complex set of long- and short-term factors (FAO, 2009b; von Braun and Torero, 2009). FAO concluded, “provisional estimates show that, in 2007, 75 million more people were added to the total number of undernourished relative to 2003–05” (FAO, 2008); this is arguably a low-end estimate (Headey and Fan, 2010). More than enough food is currently produced per capita to feed the global population, yet about 870 million people remained hungry in the period from 2010 to 2012 (FAO et al., 2012). The questions for this chapter are how far climate and its change affect current food production systems and food security and the extent to which they will do so in the future (Figure 7-1).

Food security and food production systems

Urban expansion often occurs on croplands. However, there is little scientific understanding of how global patterns of future urban expansion will affect the world's cultivated areas. Here, we combine spatially explicit projections of urban expansion with datasets on global croplands and crop yields. Our results show that urban expansion will result in a 1.8-2.4% loss of global croplands by 2030, with substantial regional disparities. About 80% of global cropland loss from urban expansion will take place in Asia and Africa. In both Asia and Africa, much of the cropland that will be lost is more than twice as productive as national averages. Asia will experience the highest absolute loss in cropland, whereas African countries will experience the highest percentage loss of cropland. Globally, the croplands that are likely to be lost were responsible for 3-4% of worldwide crop production in 2000. Urban expansion is expected to take place on cropland that is 1.77 times more productive than the global average. The loss of cropland is likely to be accompanied by other sustainability risks and threatens livelihoods, with diverging characteristics for different megaurban regions. Governance of urban area expansion thus emerges as a key area for securing livelihoods in the agrarian economies of the Global South.

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/114/34/8939.full.pdf

Future urban land expansion and implications for global croplands.

A comprehensive summary of studies that simulate climate change impacts on agriculture are now reported in a meta-analysis. Findings suggest that, without measures to adapt to changing conditions, aggregate yield losses should be expected for wheat, rice and maize in temperate and tropical growing regions even under relatively moderate levels of local warming.

/pdf/a-meta-analysis-of-crop-yield-under-climate-change-and-xjo72cxugr.pdf

A meta-analysis of crop yield under climate change and adaptation

Chapter 7: Food Security and Food Production Systems

Since 1990 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has produced five Assessment Reports (ARs), in which agriculture as the production of food for humans via crops and livestock have featured in one form or another. A constructed data base of the ca. 2,100 cited experiments and simulations in the five ARs were analysed with respect to impacts on yields via crop type, region and whether or not adaptation was included. Quantitative data on impacts and adaptation in livestock farming have been extremely scarce in the ARs. The main conclusions from impact and adaptation are that crop yields will decline but that responses have large statistical variation. Mitigation assessments in the ARs have used both bottom-up and top-down methods but need better to link emissions and their mitigation with food production and security. Relevant policy options have become broader in later ARs and included more of the social and non-production aspects of food security. Our overall conclusion is that agriculture and food security, which are two of the most central, critical and imminent issues in climate change, have been dealt with in an unfocussed and inconsistent manner between the IPCC five ARs. This is partly a result of agriculture spanning two IPCC working groups but also the very strong focus on projections from computer crop simulation modelling. For the future, we suggest a need to examine interactions between themes such as crop resource use efficiencies and to include all production and non-production aspects of food security in future roles for integrated assessment models.

SM Howden

Papers

A meta-analysis of crop yield under climate change and adaptation

Chapter 7: Food Security and Food Production Systems

Invited Review: IPCC, Agriculture and Food - A Case of Shifting Cultivation and History.