Search

European farming systems are challenged by an increasing global population, income growth, dietary changes and last, but not least, by a changing climate threatening future harvests, especially through increased frequency and severity of extreme events such as drought and heat waves. Therefore, there is a clear need to sustainably intensify and effectively adapt agricultural systems to climate change. Yet, increase in food production and adaptation are just two of many claims on agriculture, which is also supposed to meet growing demands on feed, fibre and fuel and to play a key role in mitigating climate change. The multiple claims on ecosystem services expected from agri-ecological systems call for an integrated assessment and modelling (IAM) of agricultural systems to adequately evaluate the multiple dimensions of the potential impacts as well as promising adaptation and mitigation options. This includes agriculture's responses to global change in the context of other sustainability aspects. Biophysical and socioeconomic analyses need to be integrated across different disciplines and spatiotemporal scales. In recent years the agricultural systems modelling community has made great efforts to use harmonized climate change, socio-economic and agricultural development scenarios and run them through a chain of models, e.g. by selected ensembles of biophysical and economic models at multiple scales, from farm to global. In phase 2 (2015-17) the European MACSUR knowledge hub has put its main focus on the regional (sub-national) level in the EU, with due consideration of the whole farm context. The aim of this paper is to compare three regional cases from the pool of MACSUR case studies across Europe, i.e. North Savo region in Finland, the Mostviertel region in Austria and the Oristanese region in Sardinia (Italy) representing different European farming systems along a north-south climatic gradient in Europe. These case studies represent a sample of some prominent farming systems, though only a fraction of a much larger diversity of farming and environmental conditions prevailing in Europe. We describe how adaptation options are analysed within an integrated set of linked models or model outputs combining information from different spatial scales, i.e. from region-specific crop, animal and farm level models to an analysis at regional and national level changes in agriculture and food production. First results show that adaptation to climate change affects agricultural production and farm income very differently. For some regions, e.g. in Finland there are both negative and positive effects while for the Sardinian case study adaptation to climate change have negative effects on farm income. Biophysical models, especially crop simulation models are first applied to analyse climate change impacts on yield, water use, biomass etc. and provide the outputs (i.e. delta changes) as input to economic models that contain the regional specificities of the case studies. Likewise, biophysical models are applied to analyse effects of various adaptation and mitigation options to provide information on effects of management changes on reducing damage/loss or taking opportunities from climate (adaptation) or reducing greenhouse gas emissions (mitigation). The economic models analyse economic impacts, for example the viability of management changes at farm and regional scales. Farm and regional scale economic models, backed by more detailed data and regional expert knowledge, can supply better representations of developments in each of the regions than this could be done by larger-scale (e.g. EU-wide or global) models. Sector or national economy-wide models are less specific in technical changes in agriculture, productivity changes, or in its use of inputs, due to higher level of aggregation. Nevertheless the market level view offered by sector models put the farm level changes and adaptations in a wider global context. Agricultural markets are highly integrated globally and the analyses for the case study regions also require information on global and European market developments. For example, significant changes in food demand due to changes in tastes and preferences, including aspects of climate change mitigation, may imply major changes for regional production structures. In MACSUR, this information – although not fully implemented in the case studies yet – is provided by the economic agricultural sector model CAPRI. The main strength of CAPRI in this context is that it is a global model with European focus. As such CAPRI can capture global developments and translate them to the regional level in the EU. The coupled analysis using global, EU and national level models side by side with farm level models provides unique results and much more insights on future possibilities and challenges for farmers and the food chain, than separating and restricting the analyses to either low or high aggregation level analyses. Market and policy changes often dominate longer term climate change considerations in the decision making of food chain actors, even if unfavourable weather events have become more common in recent years. Socio-economic scenarios from global to national and regional levels are needed to put adaptation and mitigation strategies in a wider context. Models, especially those that are able to accommodate biophysical, economic and policy changes are needed to show the value added from adaptations to climate change. Benefits and costs of mitigation strategies may be highly dependent on market developments. The current integrated assessment and modelling approach of MACSUR focusses on adaptation scenarios. It will be extended for the analysis and impact of mitigation policies in a later phase.

In order to overcome the rigorous thematic orientation during the first phase of MACSUR with three groups organized according to academic fields, a new structure was developed for MACSUR2. In cross cutting activities topics were identified that required the interaction and collaboration of researchers from a range of different scientific disciplines. During the second phase of MACSUR new groups of researchers came on board. This made it possible to extend the number of regional case studies. In some larger countries like Italy, Poland und UK more than one group were working on different regions. An overview was presented at the workshop for policymakers in Brussels in May 2016.

Priorities in addressing research gaps and challenges should follow the order of im­por­tance, which in itself would be a matter of defining goals and metrics of importance, e.g. the extent, impact and likelihood of occurrence. For improving assessments of cli­mate change impacts on agriculture for achieving food security and other sustainable develop­ment goals across the European continent, the most important research gaps and challen­ges appear to be the agreement on goals with a wide range of stakeholders from policy, science, producers and society, better reflection of political and societal prefer­ences in the modelling process, and the reflection of economic decisions in farm manage­ment within models. These and other challenges could be approached in phase 3 of MACSUR.

Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of grassland models in Europe and Israel. MACSUR Conference 2015

MACSUR — Modelling European Agriculture with Climate Change for Food Security — is a knowledge hub that was formally created in June 2012 as a European scientific network. The strategic aim of the knowledge hub is to create a coordinated and globally visible network of European researchers and research groups, with intra- and interdisciplinary interaction and shared expertise creating synergies for the development of scientific resources (data, models, methods) to model the impacts of climate change on agriculture and related issues. This objective encompasses a wide range of political and sociological aspects, as well as the technical development of modelling capacity through impact assessments at different scales and assessing uncertainties in model outcomes. We achieve this through model intercomparisons and model improvements, harmonization and exchange of data sets, training in the selection and use of models, assessment of benefits of ensemble modelling, and cross-disciplinary linkages of models and tools. The project engages with a diverse range of stakeholder groups and to support the development of resources for capacity building of individuals and countries. Commensurate with this broad challenge, a network of currently 300 scientists (measured by the number of individuals on the central e-mail list) from 18 countries evolved from the original set of research groups selected by FACCE. In the spirit of creating and maintaining a network for intra- and interdisciplinary knowledge exchange, network activities focused on meetings of researchers for sharing expertise and, depending on group resources (both financial and personnel), development of collaborative research activities. The outcome of these activities is the enhanced knowledge of the individual researchers within the network, contributions to conference presentations and scholarly papers, input to stakeholders and the general public, organised courses for students, junior and senior scientists. The most visible outcome are the scientific results of the network activities, represented in the contributions of MACSUR members to the impressive number of more than 200 collaborative papers in peer-reviewed publications. Here, we present a selection of overview and cross-disciplinary papers which include contributions from MACSUR members. It highlights the major scientific challenges addressed, and the methodological solutions and insights obtained. Over and above these highlights, major achievements have been reached regarding data collection, data processing, evaluation, model testing, modelling assessments of the effects of agriculture on ecosystem services, policy, and development of scenarios. Details on these achievements in the context of MACSUR can be found in our online publication FACCE MACSUR Reports at http://ojs.macsur.eu.

FACCE MACSUR comprises many different groups whose work contribute to improving the European capacity of modelling agriculture with climate change and providing an assess­ment of these impacts for stakeholders. Some groups work on methodological issues in a single discipline, others work on cross-disciplinary concepts. The meeting provided an opportunity for the members of the groups to meet for intensive discussions and exchange of ideas, which is not as easily done in phone or video conferences. Various groups also met with each other to agree on work plans and common settings for research. Overall, 105 researchers attended the workshops. For coordinating work with the global program AgMIP, AgMIP's principle investigator John Antle attended the meeting and, meeting in a video call, coordination teams of MACSUR and AgMIP agreed to continue the successful collaboration in the future. Major overarching outcomes of the meetings were agreements on policy and climate scenarios recommended to be used within MACSUR, development of an approach to quantify effects of extreme climatic events on socio-economic indicators, and closer collaboration among several groups at the level of regional case studies.

The mid-term meeting was held in Sassari, Sardinia, 1-4 April 2014. The meeting was attended by 120 researchers and stakeholders from 16 countries (Fig. 1). After a day of looking back on the achievements during the first two years and presenting results to stakeholders, researchers focused on fine-tuning the planning of remaining work for the project till May 2015 and preparations for a follow-up project (MACSUR2) till May 2017. On an excursion, scientists and stakeholders visited farms in the Oristano region, one of the regional case studies of MACSUR. The meeting was a unique opportunity in this pan-European project for discussing in person common issues with and among stakeholders of different regions and how to approach the impact of climate change to producing food in Europe in a world with a growing population. A report in La Nueva Sardegna highlighted the conference.

Grassland models are valuable tools to test hypotheses on grassland ecosystem functioning. In the frame of FACCE MACSUR LiveM, a model intercomparison was conducted using a dataset from an observational and experimental network of nine multi-year grassland sites spread across Europe (France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, The Netherlands, and United Kingdom) and Israel, and a suite of nine models to understand grassland functioning in the region. Grassland-specific approaches were compared to approaches mainly conceived to simulate crops and plant functional types. Model evaluation against actual measurements was performed before and after model calibration. The calibrated models were used to analyze their sensitivity to independent variations of temperature, precipitation and [CO2]. The results show to which extent calibration can accommodate model discrepancies. The sensitivity of simulated gross primary production to [CO2] and temperature is an important outcome, considering the fundamental effect of rising temperature and [CO2] on the C cycling of terrestrial ecosystems in the Euro-Mediterranean region. Overall, alternative models exhibit a different sensitivity to climate change factors, with different performances over different conditions. Explained by the basic processes of each model and also induced by different calibration methods, this difference is indicative that more models can be complementary and deliver greater insights than if they were applied individually.

MACSUR comprises 18 regional case studies for analysing the effects of climate change on agriculture with integrated inter-disciplinary models. Three case studies in Finland, Austria, and Italy have been selected as pilot studies because of their advancement in integration and representation of European farming systems and regions.

MACSUR's foremost charge is improving the methodology for integrative inter-disciplinary modelling of European agriculture. In addition to technical changes, improvements include the involvement of stakeholders for setting research priorities, scenarios (if-then evaluations), and model parameters to more realistic or region-specific values. The Knowledge Hub currently brings together 300 members from 18 countries and has generated 300 scientific papers, over 500 presentations and 20 workshops and conferences within the first three years. Scientific results are communicated in conferences and workshops, where policymakers take part by invitation or because of professional interest. These events also provide opportunities for direct dialogues between policy­makers and scientists. The primary form of output of the research network is scientific publications that are cited in policy documents by relevant administrative depart­ments, ministries, intergovern­mental agencies, and directorate-generals, and non-governmental interest groups. MACSUR members also contribute directly to policy documents as authors, e.g. the EEA's indicator report on CC impacts or the IPCC's 5th assessment report's chapter on food security.

FACCE MACSUR has indicated a possible extension of funding by two years until May 2017 (phase 2). For phase 2, hub and theme coordinators suggest the following main activities, that will be discussed during the remainder of the meeting and in the coming months: Evolution, upscaling, and transfer of knowledge gained in regional case studies; Assessment of additional scenarios of socio-economic and climate trends; Further development of an interdisciplinary scientific community; Extending scaling methods for crop models to the European and global scale; Intensification of feed quality and animal health modelling with climate change; Economic models from farm to global level capable of reflecting climate change.

Uncertainty in simulating biomass yield and carbon-water fluxes from Euro-Mediterranean grasslands under climate changes. International Livestock Modelling and Research Colloquium

Dissemination of FACCE MACSUR will operate in a tiered manner to the scientific community, funding agencies, decision makers in policy and agri-food businesses, and the general public. Efforts by the MACSUR hub level are targeted at the supra-national level, while individual institutions target regional and national stakeholders. The dissemination approaches will include multiple and various methods of information distribution including • scientific papers and presentations,• conferences, congresses, workshops, and courses targeted to specific stakeholders,• a fully developed and interactive website,• regular newsletters,• flyers,• alignment of methodologies and protocols with other research networks or projects. Dissemination is both passive (web site, publications) and active (flyers, presentations, workshops held jointly with other projects or organizations, Twitter).

Datasets from Germany and the United Kingdom containing information on geographic (European Union 27 countries), climatic, meteorological, host and infectious agents’ parameters (figure 2) have been completed and are now available for preliminary analysis relating to data quality and consistency. Data set information will continue to be added over the next 12 months.

In the MACSUR project, there are several grassland models in use that were designed for and adjusted with data from different climatic regions. To be able to run these modelsfor a wide geographical range, there is a need to validate and calibrate them on the same basis.Therefore, a high-quality dataset is needed, which includes a wide range of climatic conditions, management systems and other variables. Through this search 23 grassland related institutes from eleven countries were found and contacted, where 12 of them responded to the request. Nine institutes from cooler (e.g. Finland) and warmer regions (e.g. Israel) are now willing to provide their experimental data. One contributor is even planning to join the project bringing its own grassland model.These new grassland datasets cover in addition to already available ones (Fig. 1) a wide range of climatic regions for a substantiated calibration and validation of the models. Data supplied by the institutes have been checked for internal consistency and cast into a common format. The data have been passed on to WP L2 (Model intercomparison on climate change in relation to livestock and grassland).

The workshop was called to define an overarching question to be answered by all Regional Pilot Studies and to select from the existing studies those that fit best to the aims of MACSUR. The question that evolved from the discussions is “What would be the different contributions of different European adaptation strategies to ensure global food security until 2050 at different scales (farm to EU) while keeping the GHG targets?” Workshop participants agreed to use the newest climate simulations related to Representative Concentration Pathways that were also used by the AgMIP and ISI-MIP projects. There was also agreement to use a subset of the AgMIP scenarios (S2-S6) for impact assessments, with AgMIP scenario S1 as the reference scenario, for details see Table 3 below. The selection of Regional Pilot Studies was discussed separately for European Grand Regions, but there was no concluding decision taken. The Project Steering Committee will finally decide on showcase studies at a meeting in the first week of July based on characterisations sent in by interested members. Questionnaires for characterising the Regional Pilot Studies will be sent by the Hub to the regional contact persons mentioned in Table 2 to fill in. The characterization list can be extended. The questionnaires should be filled in by the end of June. Stakeholder meetings are planned for October 2013 in each region where preliminary/sample outputs of the regional pilot studies should be presented. Results will be presented at the mid-term meeting in April 2014. The last year of MACSUR is then available to improve the studies.The geographic extent of the Regional Pilot Studies is approximately county level – representing the area of the studies they are based on. The Regional Pilot Studies will be linked within the grand regions (northern, central, southern Europe) by consistent regional and continental Representative Agricultural Pathways (RAP). These regional RAPs will feed into the RAP process underway at AgMIP. Through the common RAPs the Regional Pilot Studies will reflect the common challenges of the greater region and by having several Regional Pilot Studies the diversity of the environment, farming systems, and political systems is represented. The workshop was a first step into further planning and performing the Regional Pilot Studies that will fine-tune the results of the workshop.

This document is intended to aid in the development of regional Representative Agricultural Pathways in Europe for use in MACSUR case studies, especially the regional pilot studies. We present overviews of existing characterisations of RCPs, SSPs, SPAs, RAPs and more detailed descriptions of the scenarios and assumptions relevant for MACSUR.

The FACCE MACSUR kickoff meeting took place 15-16 October 2012 in Berlin, Germany. The date for the meeting was moved from July to October to accommodate the participation of most institutions involved in MACSUR in a sufficiently large meeting place. One hundred and forty-five persons participated in the event. The meeting was organized as a workshop to allow for expanded time for interaction among the participants of the 73 involved institutions. The keynote lectures by Tim Benton (Global Food Security and University of Leeds) and Tim Carter (Finnish Environment Institute – SYKE) set the background by describing the need for assessing future impacts on food security and how to deal with the uncertainty associated with data, models, and projections. In parallel sessions participants discussed the organization of the work in the project and in each Theme, common approaches to answering the questions, selection of scenarios, involvement of stakeholders, and how the results will be presented. The results of the four cross-cutting workshops are documented in separate reports (M-H3.3.1 through M-H3.3.4) and serve as the starting point for more detailed planning over the following months. A post-hoc survey filled in by 75 attendees showed that the workshop had answered many organizational issues. But since the project has only started, many more issues must be discussed and clarified in the coming months, the survey showed. Overall, two thirds of the participants were satisfied with the organization oft he workshop.

The major final products will be a congress aimed at political stakeholders in May 2015 in Brussels with a provisional date of 6./7. May 2015, a scientific conference at the end of January 2015, and a book/special issue summarizing the research results. Most research results should be available by the end of November for the first draft of the book/special issue.

Modelling of climate effects on agriculture and food security at the European scale requires a harmonized spatially, explicit database of European land use. It can be used for scaling results of point models to an area. A recent review of land cover maps focused on the global scale (Köchy, 2010). European land use as a subset of global land use is contained in the product GlobCover representing the year 2009 with a resolution of 0.3 km. A European product is the CORINE data set with a resolution of 100 m and a minimum mapping unit of 25 ha representing the year 2006 (version 16, European Environmental Agency, 2012). For scaling the results obtained for individual points to larger regions one needs fine-grained maps using the same categories as represented by the sample points. The CORINE map of pasture cover (Fig. 1) has the advantage of being very fine-grained and the classification being supervised. The visual differences to coarser maps of cover matched to census (Fig. 4), however, indicate, that none of the existing maps is reflecting reality perfectly. Since MACSUR will likely work with official national statistics it may be preferable to use one of the census-calibrated maps. For a better match, official EU spatial reporting schemes may be used at a grain that ensures data privacy of the land owners.

Global estimates of soil organic carbon stocks have been produced in the past to support the calculation of potential emissions of CO2 from the soil under scenarios of change land use/cover and climatic conditions (IPCC, 2006), but very few global estimates are presented as spatial data. For global spatial layers on soil parameters, the most recent and complete dataset is available as the Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD) (Fisher et al., 2008).The HWSD represents a step forward towards a spatially more detailed and thematically more refined set of global soil data. During the evaluation of the data for generating estimates of global SOC stocks Version 1.1 of the HWSD revealed also some rough edges. Consequential are the values of bulk density attributed to soils high in organic carbon. In the evaluation the database was completed and suitable substitutions for bulk density for soil high in organic carbon were investigated. For the amended data the global SOC stock to 100cm soil depth is estimated at 1, 417 Pg C, although this estimate very much dependent on the ancillary data used. The amended HWSD was compared to data from 4 other global data sets on SOC stocks. The comparative evaluation has demonstrated that bulk density is the most important factor for estimating SOC stocks and mainly responsible for the differences between estimates. Moist affected from the variability in bulk density are SOC stocks in areas with soils which are high in organic carbon., JRC.H.5-Land Resources Management

Variation in the competitive ability of plant species is suggested to determine their persistence and abundance in communities. In this study, we examine competition between grasses and woody plants, a phenomenon that occurs word-wide in savannas and along the margins between grasslands and forests. Specifically, we quantified the per- gram competitive effects of grasses and woody plants in native mixed-grass prairie by manipulating the natural vegetation. We separated the competitive effects of grasses, shrubs, and intact vegetation using selective herbicides to create four competition treatments: no neighbours (NN), no shrubs (NS), no grasses (NG), and all neighbours (AN). Competition treatments were applied to 2m x 2m experimental plots located in either prairie- or shrub- dominated habitats. Herbicides were applied starting one year prior to the study to create the four competition treatments. The effects of grasses and shrubs on resource availability (light, water, nitrogen) and the growth of two transplant species, Bouteloua gracilis, a perennial tussock grass, and Elaeagnus commutata, a common shrub, were measured over two growing seasons. Resource availability (i.e. light, soil moisture, soil available nitrogen) was two- to tenfold higher in no neighbour (NN) plots than in vegetated plots (NS, NG, AN). Both grasses and shrubs reduced resource levels to about the same extent. Light penetration declined linearly with increasing grass or shrub biomass, to a minimum of about 30% incident light at 500 g/m² neighbour shoot mass. Soil resources (i.e. water, nitrogen) did not decline with increasing neighbour shoot or root mass for either grasses or shrubs. Thus, for soil resources, the presence of neighbours was more important than their mass (i.e. abundance). Transplant growth did not decline with increasing neighbour biomass; the only exception to this pattern was a linear decline in Bouteloua growth with increasing neighbour shoot mass in plots containing only shrubs (NG). Competition was equally intense in prairie-dominated and shrub-dominated habitats for transplants of Bouteloua, but was less intense in shrub-dominated habitats for the shrub Elaeagnus. These results raise the interesting possibility that variation in the persistence and abundance of plants in communities is more strongly controlled by variation in competitive effects than by differences in competitive response ability.