Climate
Paragraphs

Prevailing opinion assigns the Tibetan Plateau a crucial role in shaping Asian climate, primarily by heating of the atmosphere over Tibet during spring and summer. Accordingly, the growth of the plateau in geologic time should have written a signature on Asian paleoclimate. Recent work on Asian climate, however, challenges some of these views. The high Tibetan Plateau may affect the South Asian monsoon less by heating the overlying atmosphere than by simply acting as an obstacle to southward flow of cool, dry air. The East Asian "monsoon" seems to share little in common with most monsoons, and its dynamics may be affected most by Tibet's lying in the path of the subtropical jet stream. Although the growing plateau surely altered Asian climate during Cenozoic time, the emerging view of its role in present-day climate opens new challenges for interpreting observations of both paleoclimate and modern climate.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences
Authors
David S. Battisti
Paragraphs

This paper aims to demonstrate the relationships between ENSO and rice production of Jiangxi province in order to identify the reason that ENSO might have little effect on Chinese rice production. Using a data set with measures of Jiangxi's climate and rice production, we find the reason that during 1985 and 2004 ENSO's well correlated with rainfall did not promote Chinese rice production. First, the largest effects of ENSO mostly occur in the months when there is no rice in the field. Second, there is almost no temperature effect. Finally, the monthly distribution of rainfall is almost the same in ENSO and neutral years because the largest effects are during months when there is the least rain. In addition, due to the high irrigation share and reliable and effective irrigation facilities of cultivated land, China's rice production is less climate-sensitive.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Journal of Geographcial Sciences
Authors
Rosamond L. Naylor
Walter P. Falcon
Marshall Burke
Scott Rozelle
David S. Battisti
Paragraphs

Deforestation is a main driver of climate change and biodiversity loss. An incentive mechanism to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) is being negotiated under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Here we use the best available global datasets on terrestrial biodiversity and carbon storage to map and investigate potential synergies between carbon and biodiversity-oriented conservation. A strong association (rS= 0.82) between carbon stocks and species richness suggests such synergies would be high, but unevenly distributed. Many areas of high value for biodiversity could be protected by carbon-based conservation, while others could benefit from complementary funding arising from their carbon content. Some high-biodiversity regions, however, would not benefit from carbon-focused conservation, and could become under increased pressure if REDD is implemented. Our results suggest that additional gains for biodiversity conservation are possible, without compromising the effectiveness for climate change mitigation, if REDD takes biodiversity distribution into account.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Conservation Letters
Authors
Holly Gibbs
Paragraphs

Roughly a billion people around the world continue to live in state of chronic hunger and food insecurity. Unfortunately, efforts to improve their livelihoods must now unfold in the context of a rapidly changing climate, in which warming temperatures and changing rainfall regimes could threaten the basic productivity of the agricultural systems on which most of the world's poor directly depend. But whether climate change represents a minor impediment or an existential threat to development is an area of substantial controversy, with different conclusions wrought from different methodologies and based on different data.

This book aims to resolve some of the controversy by exploring and comparing the different methodologies and data that scientists use to understand climate's effects on food security. It explains the nature of the climate threat, the ways in which crops and farmers might respond, and the potential role for public and private investment to help agriculture adapt to a warmer world. This broader understanding should prove useful to both scientists charged with quantifying climate threats, and policy-makers responsible for crucial decisions about how to respond. The book is especially suitable as a companion to an interdisciplinary undergraduate or graduate level class.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Springer
Authors
David Lobell
Marshall Burke
Number
978-90-481-2952-2
Authors
David Lobell
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

David Lobell will be giving two talks this week at the AGU fall meeting:

Towards accurate models of global crop-climate interactions

This talk will provide a brief overview of the major links between climate and crops that are most in need of representation in global models. The talk will then focus on one of the key links - the effect of climate variation on crop productivity across a range of cropping systems and regions. I will present some recent work to use historical datasets to build statistical models at the scale of individual countries. The effects of different datasets and modeling assumption will be explored, to identify areas where statistical models provide robust representation of crop responses to climate. A sample application of these models - estimating the net regional and global impacts of recent trends in climate - will be presented.

Assessing the future of crop yield variability in the United States with downscaled climate projections

One aspect of climate change of particular concern to farmers and food markets is the potential for increased year-to-year variability in crop yields. Recent episodes of food price increases following the Australian drought or Russian heat wave have heightened this concern. Downscaled climate projections that properly capture the magnitude of daily and interannual variability of weather can be useful for projecting future yield variability. Here we examine the potential magnitude and cause of changes in variability of corn yields in the United States up to 2050. Using downscaled climate projections from multiple models, we estimate a distribution of changes in mean and variability of growing season average temperature and precipitation. These projections are then fed into a model of maize yield that explicitly factors in the effect of extremely warm days. Changes in yield variability can result from a shift in mean temperatures coupled with a nonlinear crop response, a shift in climate variability, or a combination of the two. The results are decomposed into these different causes, with implications for future research to reduce uncertainties in projections of future yield variability.

Hero Image
lobell
All News button
1

This meeting is the third in a series of consultations between agricultural scientists (in particular those interested in the conservation and use of crop diversity in plant improvement) and climate scientists on how to adapt agriculture to climate change. The first meeting, also held at Bellagio (3-7 September 2007), looked at the Conservation and Use of Global Crop Genetic Resources in the Face of Climate Change. It identified three major challenges facing the adaptation process: collecting crop diversity before it disappears, using it to breed better adapted crops, and informing key players of the increased need for the conservation and effective use of crop genetic resources in the face of climate change.

The second meeting, held at Stanford University on 16-18 June 2009, looked more specifically at breeding, and in particular at Climate Extremes and Crop Adaptation. Among other things, it recommended that efforts to develop heat tolerant varieties of the major cereals be intensified, and that greater investments be made in genotyping and phenotyping the variation already held in genebanks, and in collecting remaining diversity.

This third meeting in the series, and second at Bellagio, focused on a specific area of intersection between the ground covered by the previous consultations: the role of plants that are closely related to crops but are not themselves cultivated (crop wild relatives, or CWRs for short) in breeding varieties better adapted to future climates. The following questions were asked:

1) What is the evidence for the value of wild relatives in breeding for tolerance to abiotic and biotic stresses in general, and heat and drought tolerance in particular? Are there specific crops where we can anticipate that the collecting and or use of crop wild relatives will be of particular importance in the context of climate change?

2) What are the most useful techniques for identifying gaps in collections of crop wild relatives, what are the areas and populations most threatened by climate change, and areas and populations most likely to yield materials with traits of interest to breeders (especially drought and heat resistance)? And what R&D is needed to improve these techniques or create new, more effective ones?

3) In what form would breeders ideally want genebanks to provide them with crop wild relatives material? What specific changes in the current way genebanks and breeders do business and interact will be necessary to make this happen? What options exist to sustainably finance efforts to collect, conserve and use crop wild relatives, and to expand pre-breeding efforts?

Three specific goals for the proposed meeting. The first is to inform a strategic plan being developed by the Global Crop Diversity Trust, the Millennium Genebank, Bioversity International and the CGIAR Centres to ensure the ex situ conservation of priority crop wild relatives and their long-term availability and use in climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts. The second will be broader set of policy briefs for the crop development community, and the third will be a series of publications that summarize the work leading up to and resulting from the meeting.

Rockefeller Conference Center
Bellagio, Italy

Conferences
Paragraphs

Predicting the potential effects of climate change on crop yields requires a model of how crops respond to weather. As predictions from different models often disagree, understanding the sources of this divergence is central to building a more robust picture of climate change's likely impacts. A common approach is to use statistical models trained on historical yields and some simplified measurements of weather, such as growing season average temperature and precipitation. Although the general strengths and weaknesses of statistical models are widely understood, there has been little systematic evaluation of their performance relative to other methods. Here we use a perfect model approach to examine the ability of statistical models to predict yield responses to changes in mean temperature and precipitation, as simulated by a process-based crop model. The CERES-Maize model was first used to simulate historical maize yield variability at nearly 200 sites in Sub-Saharan Africa, as well as the impacts of hypothetical future scenarios of 2◦C warming and 20% precipitation reduction. Statistical models of three types (time series, panel, and cross-sectional models) were then trained on the simulated historical variability and used to predict the responses to the future climate changes. The agreement between the process-based and statistical models' predictions was then assessed as a measure of how well statistical models can capture crop responses to warming or precipitation changes. The performance of statistical models differed by climate variable and spatial scale, with time-series statistical models ably reproducing site-specific yield response to precipitation change, but performing less well for temperature responses. In contrast, statistical models that relied on information from multiple sites, namely panel and cross-sectional models, were better at predicting responses to temperature change than precipitation change. The models based on multiple sites were also much less sensitive to the length of historical period used for training. For all three statistical approaches, the performance improved when individual sites were first aggregated to country-level averages. Results suggest that statistical models, as compared to CERES-Maize, represent a useful if imperfect tool for projecting future yield responses, with their usefulness higher at broader spatial scales. It is also at these broader scales that climate projections are most available and reliable, and therefore statistical models are likely to continue to play an important role in anticipating future impacts of climate change.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
Authors
David Lobell
Marshall Burke
Authors
Holly Gibbs
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Global agricultural expansion cut a wide swath through tropical forests during the 1980s and 1990s. More than half a million square miles of new farmland - an area roughly the size of Alaska - was created in the developing world between 1980 and 2000, of which over 80 percent was carved out of tropical forests, according to Stanford researcher Holly Gibbs.

"This has huge implications for global warming, if we continue to expand our farmland into tropical forests at that rate," said Gibbs, a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Environmental Earth System Science and in the Program on Food Security and the Environment, who led the study.

Gibbs and colleagues at several other universities analyzed Landsat satellite data and images from the United Nations to reach their conclusions. Theirs is the first study to map and quantify what types of land have been replaced by the immense area of new farmland developed across the tropical forest belt during the 1980s and 1990s.

While this huge increase was happening within the tropics, agricultural land in the non-tropical countries actually decreased in area.

The study was published this week in the online Early Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that to keep pace with increasing demand, global agricultural production will have to keep increasing, possibly even doubling by 2050. That would likely lead to millions of additional acres of tropical forest being felled over the next 40 years.

Direct impact on carbon released into atmosphere

"Every million acres of forest that is cut releases the same amount of carbon into the atmosphere as 40 million cars do in a year," Gibbs said.

Most of the carbon released comes from burning the forests, but even if the trees are simply cast aside, the bulk of the carbon from the plants makes its way into the atmosphere during decomposition, she said.

Gibbs and her colleagues found that about 55 percent of the tropical forests that had been cut between 1980 and 2000 were intact forests and another 28 percent were forests that had experienced some degradation, such as some small-scale farming, logging or gathering of wood and brush for cooking or heating fuel.

"The tropical forests store more than 340 billion tons of carbon, which is 40 times the total current worldwide annual fossil fuel emissions," Gibbs said. "If we continue cutting down these forests, there is a huge potential to further contribute to climate change."

The increasing demand for agricultural production stems in part from the ever-growing number of people on the planet, who all want to eat. Additionally, members of the growing middle class in emerging economies such as China and India are showing interest in eating more meat, which further intensifies demand. And incentives to grow crops for biofuel production have increased.

But Gibbs and her colleagues also observed some encouraging signs. The patterns of change in the locations they analyzed made it clear that during the 1990s, less of the deforestation was done by small family farms than was the case in the 1980s and more was done by large, corporate-run farms. Big agribusiness tends to be more responsive to global economic signals as well as pressure campaigns from advocacy organizations and consumer groups than individual small farmers.

In Brazil, where a pattern had developed of expanding soy production by direct forest clearing and by pushing cattle ranching off pastureland and into forested areas, a campaign by Greenpeace and others resulted in agreements by key companies to rein in their expansion. Instead, they worked to increase production on land already in agricultural use.

'Seeing positive changes'

"These farmers effectively increased the yield of soy on existing lands and they have also increased the head of cattle per acre by a factor of five or six," Gibbs said. "It is exciting that we are starting to see how responsive industry can be to consumer demands. We really are seeing positive changes in this area."

Along with wiser use of land already cleared, Gibbs said, improvements in technology and advances in yield intensification also could slow the expansion of farming into the forests.

Other studies that analyzed land use changes between 2000 and 2007 have shown that the pace of cutting down the tropical forests has begun to slow in some regions.

But as long as the human population on the planet continues to grow, the pressure to put food on the table, feed in the barnyard and fuel in the gas tank will continue to grow, too.

"It is critical that we focus our efforts on reducing rates of deforestation while at the same time restoring degraded lands and improving land management across the tropics," Gibbs said. "The good news is that pressure from consumer groups and nongovernmental organizations combined with international climate agreements could provide a real opportunity to shift the tide in favor of forest conservation rather than farmland expansion."

In addition to her position at the Department of Environmental Earth System Science and the Program on Food Security and the Environment, Gibbs is affiliated with Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment. Jon Foley, a professor of ecology, evolution and behavior, and director of the Institute on the Environment at the University of Minnesota, was Gibbs' PhD adviser when the research was begun. He is a coauthor of the paper.

Initial funding for the project was provided by NASA. Gibbs is currently funded by a David H. Smith Conservation Research Fellowship.

 

Hero Image
amazon2
All News button
1
Subscribe to Climate