Climate change and future scenarios for palisade grass production in the state of São Paulo, Brazil

The objective of this work was to analyze future scenarios for palisade grass yield subjected to climate change for the state of São Paulo, Brazil. An empirical crop model was used to estimate yields, according to growing degree-days adjusted by one drought attenuation factor. Climate data from 1963 to 2009 of 23 meteorological stations were used for current climate conditions. Downscaled outputs of two general circulation models were used to project future climate for the 2013-2040 and 2043-2070 periods, considering two contrasting scenarios of temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration increase (high and low). Annual dry matter yield should be from 14 to 42% higher than the current one, depending on the evaluated scenario. Yield variation between seasons (seasonality) and years is expected to increase. The increase of dry matter accumulation will be higher in the rainy season than in the dry season, and this result is more evident for soils with low-water storage capacity. The results varied significantly between regions (60%). Despite their higher climate potential, warmer regions will probably have a lower increase in future forage production

Guidelines for Modeling and Reporting Health Effects of Climate Change Mitigation Actions

Background: Modeling suggests that climate change mitigation actions can have substantial human health benefits that accrue quickly and locally. Documenting the benefits can help drive more ambitious and health-protective climate change mitigation actions; however, documenting the adverse health effects can help to avoid them. Estimating the health effects of mitigation (HEM) actions can help policy makers prioritize investments based not only on mitigation potential but also on expected health benefits. To date, however, the wide range of incompatible approaches taken to developing and reporting HEM estimates has limited their comparability and usefulness to policymakers. Objective: The objective of this effort was to generate guidance for modeling studies on scoping, estimating, and reporting population health effects from climate change mitigation actions. Methods: An expert panel of HEM researchers was recruited to participate in developing guidance for conducting HEM studies. The primary literature and a synthesis of HEM studies were provided to the panel. Panel members then participated in a modified Delphi exercise to identify areas of consensus regarding HEM estimation. Finally, the panel met to review and discuss consensus findings, resolve remaining differences, and generate guidance regarding conducting HEM studies. Results: The panel generated a checklist of recommendations regarding stakeholder engagement: HEM modeling, including model structure, scope and scale, demographics, time horizons, counterfactuals, health response functions, and metrics; parameterization and reporting; approaches to uncertainty and sensitivity analysis; accounting for policy uptake; and discounting. Discussion: This checklist provides guidance for conducting and reporting HEM estimates to make them more comparable and useful for policymakers. Harmonization of HEM estimates has the potential to lead to advances in and improved synthesis of policy-relevant research that can inform evidence-based decision making and practice