Search

Extreme events, such as those caused by climate change, economic or geopolitical shocks, and pest or disease epidemics, threaten global food security. The complexity of causation, as well as the myriad ways that an event, or a sequence of events, creates cascading and systemic impacts, poses significant challenges to food systems research and policy alike. To identify priority food security risks and research opportunities, we asked experts from a range of fields and geographies to describe key threats to global food security over the next two decades and to suggest key research questions and gaps on this topic. Here, we present a prioritization of threats to global food security from extreme events, as well as emerging research questions that highlight the conceptual and practical challenges that exist in designing, adopting, and governing resilient food systems. We hope that these findings help in directing research funding and resources toward food system transformations needed to help society tackle major food system risks and food insecurity under extreme events.

Future climate scenarios are predicting considerable threats to sustainable maize production in arid and semi-arid regions. These adverse impacts can be minimized by adopting modern agricultural tools to assess and develop successful adaptation practices. A multi-model approach (climate and crop) was used to assess the impacts and uncertainties of climate change on maize crop. An extensive field study was conducted to explore the temporal thermal variations on maize hybrids grown at farmer’s fields for ten sowing dates during two consecutive growing years. Data about phenology, morphology, biomass development, and yield were recorded by adopting standard procedures and protocols. The CSM-CERES, APSIM, and CSM-IXIM-Maize models were calibrated and evaluated. Five GCMs among 29 were selected based on classification into different groups and uncertainty to predict climatic changes in the future. The results predicted that there would be a rise in temperature (1.57–3.29 °C) during the maize growing season in five General Circulation Models (GCMs) by using RCP 8.5 scenarios for the mid-century (2040–2069) as compared with the baseline (1980–2015). The CERES-Maize and APSIM-Maize model showed lower root mean square error values (2.78 and 5.41), higher d-index (0.85 and 0.87) along reliable R2 (0.89 and 0.89), respectively for days to anthesis and maturity, while the CSM-IXIM-Maize model performed well for growth parameters (leaf area index, total dry matter) and yield with reasonably good statistical indices. The CSM-IXIM-Maize model performed well for all hybrids during both years whereas climate models, NorESM1-M and IPSL-CM5A-MR, showed less uncertain results for climate change impacts. Maize models along GCMs predicted a reduction in yield (8–55%) than baseline. Maize crop may face a high yield decline that could be overcome by modifying the sowing dates and fertilizer (fertigation) and heat and drought-tolerant hybrids.

Potential climate-related impacts on future crop yield are a major societal concern. Previous projections of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project’s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison based on the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 identified substantial climate impacts on all major crops, but associated uncertainties were substantial. Here we report new twenty-first-century projections using ensembles of latest-generation crop and climate models. Results suggest markedly more pessimistic yield responses for maize, soybean and rice compared to the original ensemble. Mean end-of-century maize productivity is shifted from +5% to −6% (SSP126) and from +1% to −24% (SSP585)—explained by warmer climate projections and improved crop model sensitivities. In contrast, wheat shows stronger gains (+9% shifted to +18%, SSP585), linked to higher CO2 concentrations and expanded high-latitude gains. The ‘emergence’ of climate impacts consistently occurs earlier in the new projections—before 2040 for several main producing regions. While future yield estimates remain uncertain, these results suggest that major breadbasket regions will face distinct anthropogenic climatic risks sooner than previously anticipated.

The main aim of the current study was to present the abilities of widely used crop models to simulate four different field crops (winter wheat, spring barley, silage maize and winter oilseed rape). The 13 models were tested under Central European conditions represented by three locations in the Czech Republic, selected using temperature and precipitation gradients for the target crops in this region. Based on observed crop phenology and yield from 1991 to 2010, performances of individual models and their ensemble were analyzed. Modelling of anthesis and maturity was generally best simulated by the ensemble median (EnsMED) compared to the ensemble mean and individual models. The yield was better simulated by the best models than estimated by an ensemble. Higher accuracy was achieved for spring crops, with the best results for silage maize, while the lowest accuracy was for winter oilseed rape according to the index of agreement (IA). Based on EnsMED, the root mean square errors (RMSEs) for yield was 1365 kg/ha for winter wheat, 1105 kg/ha for spring barley, 1861 kg/ha for silage maize and 969 kg/ha for winter oilseed rape. The AQUACROP and EPIC models performed best in terms of spread around the line of best fit (RMSE, IA). In some cases, the individual models failed. For crop rotation simulations, only models with reasonable accuracy (i.e. without failures) across all included crops within the target environment should be selected. Application crop models ensemble is one way to increase the accuracy of predictions, but lower variability of ensemble outputs was confirmed.

The main aim of the current study was to present the abilities of widely used crop models to simulate four different field crops (winter wheat, spring barley, silage maize and winter oilseed rape). The 13 models were tested under Central European conditions represented by three locations in the Czech Republic, selected using temperature and precipitation gradients for the target crops in this region. Based on observed crop phenology and yield from 1991 to 2010, performances of individual models and their ensemble were analyzed. Modelling of anthesis and maturity was generally best simulated by the ensemble median (EnsMED) compared to the ensemble mean and individual models. The yield was better simulated by the best models than estimated by an ensemble. Higher accuracy was achieved for spring crops, with the best results for silage maize, while the lowest accuracy was for winter oilseed rape according to the index of agreement (IA). Based on EnsMED, the root mean square errors (RMSEs) for yield was 1365 kg/ha for winter wheat, 1105 kg/ha for spring barley, 1861 kg/ha for silage maize and 969 kg/ha for winter oilseed rape. The AQUACROP and EPIC models performed best in terms of spread around the line of best fit (RMSE, IA). In some cases, the individual models failed. For crop rotation simulations, only models with reasonable accuracy (i.e. without failures) across all included crops within the target environment should be selected. Application crop models ensemble is one way to increase the accuracy of predictions, but lower variability of ensemble outputs was confirmed., info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

The combination of advances in knowledge, technology, changes in consumer preference and low cost of manufacturing is accelerating the next technology revolution in crop, livestock and fish production systems. This will have major implications for how, where and by whom food will be produced in the future. This next technology revolution could benefit the producer through substantial improvements in resource use and profitability, but also the environment through reduced externalities. The consumer will ultimately benefit through more nutritious, safe and affordable food diversity, which in turn will also contribute to the acceleration of the next technology. It will create new opportunities in achieving progress towards many of the Sustainable Development Goals, but it will require early recognition of trends and impact, public research and policy guidance to avoid negative trade-offs. Unfortunately, the quantitative predictability of future impacts will remain low and uncertain, while new chocks with unexpected consequences will continue to interrupt current and future outcomes. However, there is a continuing need for improving the predictability of shocks to future food systems especially for ex-ante assessment for policy and planning.

A multi-model inter-comparison study was conducted to evaluate the performance of ten potato crop models to accurately predict potato yield in response to elevated CO2 (Ce) when calibrated with ambient CO2 data (Ca). Experimental data from seven open-top chambers (OTC) and free-air−CO2-enrichment (FACE) facilities across continental Europe were used. Model ensemble percent errors averaged over all datasets for simulated yields were 26.5 % for Ca and 27.2 % Ce data. Metrics such as Wilmott’s index of agreement (IA) and root mean square relative error (RMSRE) ranged broadly among individual models and locations, such that four of the ten models outperformed the median or mean of the ensemble for about half of the Ce datasets. These top performing models were representative of three different model structural groups, including radiation use efficiency, transpiration efficiency, or leaf-level based approaches. Relative response to an increase in CO2 was more accurately modeled than absolute yield responses when averaged across all locations, and within 3.3 kg ppm−1 (or 5%) of observed values. Specific targets in the model structure needed for improvement were not identified due to large and inconsistent variation in the accuracy of yield predictions across locations. However, models with the lowest calibration errors tended to be top performers for Ce predictions as well. Such results suggest calibration is at least as important as model structure. Where possible, modelers using potato models to estimate Ce responses should use Ce calibration data to improve confidence in such predictions.