Modelling Climate Change Impact on European Agriculture: Does the Choice of Global Circulation Model Matter?

Resource /Energy Economics and Policy,

Can the cropping systems of the Nile basin be adapted to climate change?

Climate change poses a fundamental threat to agriculture within the Nile basin due to the magnitude of projected impacts and low adaptive capacity. So far, climate change impacts on agriculture for the basin have mostly been assessed for single-cropping systems, which may bias the results considering that the basin is dominated by different cropping systems, with about one-third of the crop area under double cropping. In this study, we simulate single- and double-cropping systems in the Nile basin and assess the climate change impacts on different cropping systems under two scenarios, i.e. “no adaptation” and “adaptation to a late-maturing cultivar”. We find that the mean crop yields of maize, soybean and wheat decrease with future warming without cultivar adaptation. We attribute this to the shortening of the growing season due to increased temperature. The decrease is stronger in all single-cropping systems (12.6–45.5%) than in double-cropping systems (5.9–26.6%). The relative magnitude of yield reduction varies spatially with the greatest reduction in the northern part of the basin experiencing the strongest warming. In a scenario with cultivar adaptation, mean crop yields show a stronger increase in double-cropping systems (14.4–35.2%) than single-cropping systems (8.3–13.7%). In this scenario, farmers could possibly benefit from increasing cropping intensities while adapting to late-maturing cultivars. This study underscores the importance of accounting for multiple-cropping systems in agricultural assessments under climate change within the Nile basin

An agricultural survey for more than 9,500 African households

Surveys for more than 9,500 households were conducted in the growing seasons 2002/2003 or 2003/2004 in eleven African countries: Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ghana, Niger and Senegal in western Africa; Egypt in northern Africa; Ethiopia and Kenya in eastern Africa; South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe in southern Africa. Households were chosen randomly in districts that are representative for key agro-climatic zones and farming systems. The data set specifies farming systems characteristics that can help inform about the importance of each system for a country’s agricultural production and its ability to cope with short- and long-term climate changes or extreme weather events. Further it informs about the location of smallholders and vulnerable systems and permits benchmarking agricultural systems characteristics.Bill and Melinda Gates foundation funded project LiveGaps.http://www.nature.com/sdatahb2016Agricultural Economics, Extension and Rural Developmen

Multiple cropping systems of the world and the potential for increasing cropping intensity

Multiple cropping, defined as harvesting more than once a year, is a widespread land management strategy in tropical and subtropical agriculture. It is a way of intensifying agricultural production and diversifying the crop mix for economic and environmental benefits. Here we present the first global gridded data set of multiple cropping systems and quantify the physical area of more than 200 systems, the global multiple cropping area and the potential for increasing cropping intensity. We use national and sub-national data on monthly crop-specific growing areas around the year 2000 (1998–2002) for 26 crop groups, global cropland extent and crop harvested areas to identify sequential cropping systems of two or three crops with non-overlapping growing seasons. We find multiple cropping systems on 135 million hectares (12% of global cropland) with 85 million hectares in irrigated agriculture. 34%, 13% and 10% of the rice, wheat and maize area, respectively are under multiple cropping, demonstrating the importance of such cropping systems for cereal production. Harvesting currently single cropped areas a second time could increase global harvested areas by 87–395 million hectares, which is about 45% lower than previous estimates. Some scenarios of intensification indicate that it could be enough land to avoid expanding physical cropland into other land uses but attainable intensification will depend on the local context and the crop yields attainable in the second cycle and its related environmental costs. © 2020 The Author(s

Farm diversification strategies, dietary diversity and farm size: results from a cross-country sample in South and Southeast Asia

South and Southeast Asia host almost half of the world's undernourished people. Food and agricultural systems in these regions are highly dependent on the production and consumption of staple cereals such as rice, maize and wheat. More diverse farming systems can potentially improve rural people's nutrition, while reducing the environmental impact of agriculture. Yet, it remains uncertain whether farm diversification is always the most suitable and viable strategy for all types of smallholder farms. We use generalised linear regression models to analyse the farm diversification strategies of 4772 rural households in Cambodia, India, Lao PDR and Vietnam. Our analysis is twofold and focuses first on drivers of farm diversification, and second, on the impacts of farm diversification and other livelihood strategies on dietary diversity. We find that (1) farm diversification is significantly influenced by environmental and climate variables, including rainfall patterns, as well as household and farm characteristics such as farm size and education level; and (2) farm diversification, market orientation and off-farm income generation are all strategies that can improve household and individual dietary diversity. However, their relative effects resulted influenced by farm size. Specifically, the positive effect of farm diversification on dietary diversity was larger for smaller farms, while it decreased for farms of larger size that may improve their diet more by increasing their engagement in off-farm activities and markets. These findings highlight that characteristics such as farm size can represent substantial determinants in production and consumption decisions, suggesting the importance of understanding and considering the type of farm and the situational context of analysis when targeting interventions for improving smallholder farm livelihoods

Chapter 5: Food Security

The current food system (production, transport, processing, packaging, storage, retail, consumption, loss and waste) feeds the great majority of world population and supports the livelihoods of over 1 billion people. Since 1961, food supply per capita has increased more than 30%, accompanied by greater use of nitrogen fertilisers (increase of about 800%) and water resources for irrigation (increase of more than 100%). However, an estimated 821 million people are currently undernourished, 151 million children under five are stunted, 613 million women and girls aged 15 to 49 suffer from iron deficiency, and 2 billion adults are overweight or obese. The food system is under pressure from non-climate stressors (e.g., population and income growth, demand for animal-sourced products), and from climate change. These climate and non-climate stresses are impacting the four pillars of food security (availability, access, utilisation, and stability)

Making the most of imperfect data: A critical evaluation of standard information collected in farm household surveys

Household surveys are one of the most commonly used tools for generating insight into rural communities. Despite their prevalence, few studies comprehensively evaluate the quality of data derived from farm household surveys. We critically evaluated a series of standard reported values and indicators that are captured in multiple farm household surveys, and then quantified their credibility, consistency and, thus, their reliability. Surprisingly, even variables which might be considered ‘easy to estimate’ had instances of non-credible observations. In addition, measurements of maize yields and land owned were found to be less reliable than other stationary variables. This lack of reliability has implications for monitoring food security status, poverty status and the land productivity of households. Despite this rather bleak picture, our analysis also shows that if the same farm households are followed over time, the sample sizes needed to detect substantial changes are in the order of hundreds of surveys, and not in the thousands. Our research highlights the value of targeted and systematised household surveys and the importance of ongoing efforts to improve data quality. Improvements must be based on the foundations of robust survey design, transparency of experimental design and effective training. The quality and usability of such data can be further enhanced by improving coordination between agencies, incorporating mixed modes of data collection and continuing systematic validation programmes

The true cost of food: a preliminary assessment

Ensuring sustainable food systems requires vastly reducing their environmental and health costs while making healthy and sustainable food affordable to all. One of the central problems of current food systems is that many of the costs of harmful foods are externalized, i.e., are not reflected in market prices. At the same time, the benefits of healthful foods are not appreciated. Due to externalities, sustainable and healthy food is often less affordable to consumers and less profitable for businesses than unsustainable and unhealthy food. Externalities and other market failures lead to unintended consequences for present and future generations, destroying nature and perpetuating social injustices such as underpay for workers, food insecurity, illness, premature death and other harms. We urgently need to address the fundamental causes of these problems. This chapter sets out the results of an analysis to determine the current cost of externalities in food systems and the potential impact of a shift in diets to more healthy and sustainable production and consumption patterns. The current externalities were estimated to be almost double (19.8 trillion USD) the current total global food consumption (9 trillion USD). These externalities accrue from 7 trillion USD (range 4–11) in environmental costs, 11 trillion USD (range 3–39) in costs to human life and 1 trillion USD (range 0.2–1.7) in economic costs. This means that food is roughly a third cheaper than it would be if these externalities were included. More studies are needed to quantify the costs and benefits of food systems that would support a global shift to more sustainable and healthy diets. However, the evidence presented in this chapter points to the urgent need for a system reset to account for these ‘hidden costs’ in food systems and calls for bold actions to redefine the incentives for producing and consuming healthier and more sustainable diets. The first step to correct for these ‘hidden costs’ is to redefine the value of food through true-cost accounting (TCA) so as to address externalities and other market failures. TCA reveals the true value of food by making the benefits of affordable and healthy food visible and revealing the costs of damage to the environment and human health 3