Climatic Change

, Volume 81, Supplement 1, pp 123–143

Uncertainties in projected impacts of climate change on European agriculture and terrestrial ecosystems based on scenarios from regional climate models

  • J. E. Olesen
  • T. R. Carter
  • C. H. Díaz-Ambrona
  • S. Fronzek
  • T. Heidmann
  • T. Hickler
  • T. Holt
  • M. I. Minguez
  • P. Morales
  • J. P. Palutikof
  • M. Quemada
  • M. Ruiz-Ramos
  • G. H. Rubæk
  • F. Sau
  • B. Smith
  • M. T. Sykes
Article

Abstract

The uncertainties and sources of variation in projected impacts of climate change on agriculture and terrestrial ecosystems depend not only on the emission scenarios and climate models used for projecting future climates, but also on the impact models used, and the local soil and climatic conditions of the managed or unmanaged ecosystems under study. We addressed these uncertainties by applying different impact models at site, regional and continental scales, and by separating the variation in simulated relative changes in ecosystem performance into the different sources of uncertainty and variation using analyses of variance. The crop and ecosystem models used output from a range of global and regional climate models (GCMs and RCMs) projecting climate change over Europe between 1961–1990 and 2071–2100 under the IPCC SRES scenarios. The projected impacts on productivity of crops and ecosystems included the direct effects of increased CO2 concentration on photosynthesis. The variation in simulated results attributed to differences between the climate models were, in all cases, smaller than the variation attributed to either emission scenarios or local conditions. The methods used for applying the climate model outputs played a larger role than the choice of the GCM or RCM. The thermal suitability for grain maize cultivation in Europe was estimated to expand by 30–50% across all SRES emissions scenarios. Strong increases in net primary productivity (NPP) (35–54%) were projected in northern European ecosystems as a result of a longer growing season and higher CO2 concentrations. Changing water balance dominated the projected responses of southern European ecosystems, with NPP declining or increasing only slightly relative to present-day conditions. Both site and continental scale models showed large increases in yield of rain-fed winter wheat for northern Europe, with smaller increases or even decreases in southern Europe. Site-based, regional and continental scale models showed large spatial variations in the response of nitrate leaching from winter wheat cultivation to projected climate change due to strong interactions with soils and climate. The variation in simulated impacts was smaller between scenarios based on RCMs nested within the same GCM than between scenarios based on different GCMs or between emission scenarios.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexandrov V, Eitzinger J, Cajic V, Oberforster M (2002) Potential impact of climate change on selected agricultural crops in north–eastern Austria. Glob Chang Biol 8:372–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bunting AH, Dennett MD, Elston J, Speed CB (1982) Climate and crop distribution. In: Baxter K, Fowder L (eds) Food, nutrition and climate. Applied Science Publishers, London, pp43–74Google Scholar
  3. Carbone GJ, Kiechle W, Locke C, Mearns LO, McDaniel LO, Downtown MW (2003) Response of soybean and sorghum to varying spatial scales of climate change scenarios in the Southeastern United States. Clim Change 60:73–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carter TR, Porter JH, Parry ML (1991) Climatic warming and crop potential in Europe: prospects and uncertainties. Glob Environ Change 1:291–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Christensen JH, Carter TR, Rummukainen M, Amanatidis GT (2007) Evaluating the performance and utility of regional climate models: the PRUDENCE project. Clim Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9211-6 (this issue)
  6. Cramer W, Bondeau A, Woodward FI, Prentice IC, Betts RE, Brovkin V, Cox PM, Fisher V, Foley JA, Friend AD, Kucharik C, Lomas MR, Ramankutty N, Sitch S, Smith B, White A, Young-Molling C (2001) Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change: results from six dynamic global vegetation models. Glob Chang Biol 7:357–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fronzek S, Carter TR (2007) Assessing uncertainties in climate change impacts on resource potential for Europe based on projections from RCMs and GCMs. Clim Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9214-3 (this issue)
  8. Goudriaan J, Monteith JL (1990) A mathematical function for crop growth based on light interception and leaf area expansion. Ann Bot 66:695–701Google Scholar
  9. Groenendijk H (1989) Estimation of the waterholding-capacity of soils in Europe. The compilation of a soil dataset. Simulation Report CABO-TT nr. 19, Centre for Agrobiological Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands, p 22Google Scholar
  10. Hansen S, Jensen HE, Nielsen NE, Svendsen H (1991) Simulation of nitrogen dynamics and biomass production in winter wheat using the Danish simulation model DAISY. Fertil Res 27:245–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harrison PA, Butterfield RE, Gawith MJ (1995) Effects on winter wheat, sunflower and grassland in Europe. In: Harrison PA, Butterfield RE, Downing TE (eds) Climate change and agriculture in Europe. Research Report No. 9. Environmental Change Unit, University of Oxford, pp330–385Google Scholar
  12. Hickler T, Prentice IC, Smith B, Sykes MT (2004) Simulating the effects of elevated CO2 on productivity at the Duke Forest FACE experiment: a test of the dynamic global vegetation model LPJ. Towards an integrated ecology through mechanistic modelling of ecosystem structure and functioning. Doctoral Thesis, Lund University, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  13. Jacob D, Bärring L, Christensen OB, Christensen JH, Castro M de, Déqué M, Giorgi F, Hagemann S, Hirschi M, Jones R, Kjellström E, Lenderink G, Rockel B, Sánchez E, Schär C, Seneviratne SI, Somot S, van Ulden A, van den Hurk B (2007) An inter-comparison of regional climate models for Europe: model performance in present-day climate. Clim Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9213-4 (this issue)
  14. Jamieson PD, Porter JR, Goudriaan J, Ritchie JT, van Keulen H, Stol W (1998) A comparison of the models AFRCWHEAT2, CERES-Wheat, Sirius, SUCROS2 and SWHEAT with measurements from wheat grown under drought. Field Crops Res 55:23–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones CA, Kiniry JR (1986) CERES-maize. A simulation model of maize growth and development. Texas A&M University Press, College Station, TXGoogle Scholar
  16. Kauppi P, Posch M (1988) A case study of the effects of CO2-induced climatic warming on forest growth and the forest sector: A. Productivity reactions of northern boreal forests. In: Parry ML, Carter TR, Konijn NT (eds) The impact of climatic variations on agriculture, vol 1, assessments in cool temperate and cold regions. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 183–195Google Scholar
  17. Kenny GJ, Harrison PA, Olesen JE, Parry ML (1993) The effects of climate change on land suitability of grain maize, winter wheat and cauliflower in Europe. Eur J Agron 2:325–338Google Scholar
  18. Klein Tank AMG et al (2002) Daily dataset of 20th-century surface air temperature and precipitation series for the European Climate Assessment. Int J Climatol 22:1441–1453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Long SP, Ainsworth EA, Rogers A, Ort DR (2004) Rising atmospheric carbon dioxied: plants FACE the future. Annual Review of Plant Biology 55:591–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McGuire AD, Sitch S, Clein JS (2001) Carbon balance of the terrestrial biosphere in the twentieh century: analyses of CO2, climate and land use effects with four process-based ecosystem models. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 15:183–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mearns LO, Easterling W, Hays C (2001) Comparison of agricultural impacts of climate change calculated from high and low resolution climate model scenarios. Part I: the uncertainty due to spatial scale. Clim Change 51:131–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mearns LO, Giorgi F, McDaniel L, Shields C (2003) Climate scenarios for the Southeastern U.S. based on GCM and regional model simulations. Clim Change 60:7–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mínguez MI, Iglesias A (1996) Perspectives of future crop water requirements in Spain: the case of maize as a reference crop. In: Angelakis A, Issar AS (ed) Diachronic climatic changes impacts on water resources with emphasis on the Mediterranean Region. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 301–317Google Scholar
  24. Mínguez MI, Ruiz-Ramos M, Díaz-Ambrona CH, Quemada M, Sau F (2007) First-order impacts on winter and summer crops assessed with various high-resolution climate models in the Iberian Peninsula. Clim Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9223-2 (this issue)
  25. Nakicenovic N, Alcamo J, Davis G, de Vries B, Fenhann J, Gaffin S, Gregory K, Grübler A, Jung TY, Kram T, Emilio la Rovere E, Michaelis L, Mori S, Morita T, Pepper W, Pitcher H, Price L, Riahi K, Roehrl A, Rogner H-H, Sankovski A, Schlesinger ME, Shukla PR, Smith S, Swart RJ, van Rooyen S, Victor N, Dadi Z (2000) Emissions Scenarios. A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  26. New M, Hulme M, Jones PD (1999) Representing twentieth century space–time climate variability. Part 1: development of a 1961–90 mean monthly terrestrial climatology. J Clim 12:829–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. New M, Hulme M, Jones PD (2000) Representing twentieth century space–time climate variability. Part 2: development of 1901–96 monthly grids of terrestrial surface climate. J Clim 13:2217–2238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. O’Brien K, Sygna L, Haugen JE (2004) Vulnerable or resilient? A multi-scale assessment of climate impacts and vulnerability in Norway. Clim Change 64:193–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Olesen JE, Jensen T, Petersen J (2000) Sensitivity of field-scale winter wheat production in Denmark to climate variability and climate change. Clim Res 15:221–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Olesen JE, Rubæk G, Heidmann T, Hansen S, Børgesen CD (2004) Effect of climate change on greenhouse gas emission from arable crop rotations. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 70:147–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Palutikof JP, Goodess CM, Guo X (1994) Climate change, potential evapotranspiration and moisture availability in the Mediterranean Basin. Int J Climatol 14:853–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Petersen CÅ (2005) Oversigt over Landsforsøgene. Forsøg og undersøgelser i de landøkonomiske foreninger. Dansk Landbrugsrådgivning, Skejby, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  33. Quemada M, Tajadura N (2001) Validation of CERES-wheat and CERES-barley under Mediterranean conditions. II International Symposium on modelling Cropping Systems, Florence, Italy, pp 77–78Google Scholar
  34. Ritchie JT, Otter S (1985) Description and performance of CERES-Wheat: a user-oriented wheat yield model. In: Serv NTI (ed) ARS wheat yield project, vol ARS-38. National Technology Information Service, Springfield, MO, pp 159–175Google Scholar
  35. Ruosteenoja K, Tuomenvirta H, Jylhä K (2007) GCM-based regional temperature and precipitation change estimates for Europe under four SRES scenarios applying a super-ensemble pattern-scaling method. Clim Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9222-3 (this issue)
  36. SAS Institute (1996) SAS/STAT software: changes and enhancements through release 6.11. Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  37. Schröter D, Cramer W, Leemans R, Prentice IC, Araujo MB, Arnell NW, Bondeau A, Bugmann H, Carter TR, Gracia CA, de la Vega-Leinert AC, Erhard M, Ewert F, Glendining M, House JI, Kankaanpaa S, Klein RJT, Lavorel S, Lindner M, Metzger MJ, Meyer J, Mitchell TD, Reginster I, Rounsevell M, Sabate S, Sitch S, Smith B, Smith J, Smith P, Sykes MT, Thonicke K, Thuiller W, Tuck G, Zaehle S, Zierl B (2005) Ecosystem service supply and vulnerability to global change in Europe. Science 310:1333–1337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Semenov MA, Wolf J, Evans LG, Eckersten H, Iglesias A (1996) Comparison of wheat simulation models under climate change. II. Application of climate change scenarios. Clim Res 7:271–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sitch S, Smith B, Prentice IC, Arneth A, Bondeau A, Cramer W, Kaplan JO, Levis S, Lucht W, Sykes MT, Thonicke K, Venevsky S (2003) Evaluation of ecosystem dynamics, plant geography and terrestrial carbon cycling in the LPJ Dynamic Global vegetation model. Glob Chang Biol 9:161–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith B, Prentice IC, Sykes MT (2001) Representation of vegetation dynamics in modelling of European ecosystems: comparison of two contrasting approaches. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 10:621–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tsuji GY, Uehara G, Balas SE (1994) Decision support system for agrotechnology transfer, ver. 3. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, USAGoogle Scholar
  42. Tsvetsinskaya EA, Mearns LO, Mavromatis T, Gao W, McDaniel L, Downtown MW (2003) The effect of spatial scale of climatic change scenarios on simulated maize, winter wheat, and rice production in the Southeastern United States. Clim Change 60:37–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van Ittersum MK, Howden SM, Asseng S (2003) Sensitivity of productivity and deep drainage of wheat cropping systems in a Mediterranean environment to changes in CO2, temperature and precipitation. Agric Ecosyst Environ 97:255–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wassenaar T, Lagacherie P, Legros J-P, Rounsevell MDA (1999) Modelling wheat yield response to soil and climate variability and the regional scale. Clim Res 11:209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. E. Olesen
    • 1
  • T. R. Carter
    • 2
  • C. H. Díaz-Ambrona
    • 3
  • S. Fronzek
    • 2
  • T. Heidmann
    • 1
  • T. Hickler
    • 4
  • T. Holt
    • 5
  • M. I. Minguez
    • 3
  • P. Morales
    • 4
  • J. P. Palutikof
    • 6
  • M. Quemada
    • 3
  • M. Ruiz-Ramos
    • 3
  • G. H. Rubæk
    • 1
  • F. Sau
    • 7
  • B. Smith
    • 4
  • M. T. Sykes
    • 4
  1. 1.Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Department of AgroecologyResearch Centre FoulumTjeleDenmark
  2. 2.Finnish Environment InstituteHelsinkiFinland
  3. 3.Depto. de Producción VegetalUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain
  4. 4.Centre for Geobiosphere Science, Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystems AnalysisLund UniversityLundSweden
  5. 5.Climatic Research UnitUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  6. 6.Hadley Centre, Met OfficeExeterUK
  7. 7.Depto. de Biologia VegetalUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations