Stakeholder perspectives for switching from rainfed to irrigated cropping systems at high latitudes
In: Land use policy: the international journal covering all aspects of land use, Band 42, S. 586-593
ISSN: 0264-8377
14 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Land use policy: the international journal covering all aspects of land use, Band 42, S. 586-593
ISSN: 0264-8377
In: European Journal of Futures Research, Band 12, Heft 1
ISSN: 2195-2248
AbstractIn Finland, agriculture is practiced in variable growing conditions that are further challenged by climate change and under external pressure caused by international competition, changing consumer preferences and demands, and the renewal of the European Union Common Agriculture Policy and Paris Agreement climate targets. Futures studies in agriculture have focused on scenario building with expert panels, though usually without farmers' involvement. This study focuses on farmers' views of shaping the future of Finnish agriculture. It builds on the disaggregative Delphi method and combines interviews and a representative survey of Finnish farmers. The study is based on a bottom-up process in which a farmer panel of 20 farms defined their views of the future in a semi-structured thematic interview. The views were turned into statements in a structured survey sent to the second panel, which comprised all Finnish farmers who had received agricultural subsidies in 2016, with 4401 respondents. The results were analyzed using quantitative factor analysis, which produced five future images for Finnish agriculture. The images were shown to the original farmer panel for reflection. They considered the probability of each future image and their own role in it. Technology solves as a future image was most favored by farmers, followed by Ecological and specializing small-scale production image. Business-as-usual was the least likely future images according to the interviewed farmers. This paper describes the process and discusses both methodological benefits and pitfalls, as well as farmers' future views of the forthcoming decades.
In: Land use policy: the international journal covering all aspects of land use, Band 71, S. 49-59
ISSN: 0264-8377
In: Land use policy: the international journal covering all aspects of land use, Band 99, S. 104991
ISSN: 0264-8377
In: Land use policy: the international journal covering all aspects of land use, Band 88, S. 104104
ISSN: 0264-8377
Recent studies assessing agricultural policies, including the EU's Agri-Environment Scheme, have shown that these have been successful in attaining some environmental goals. In Finland, however, the economic situation of farms has dramatically fallen and hence, the actions do not result in social acceptability. Sustainable intensification is a means to combine the three dimensions of sustainability: environmental, economic and social. Here we introduce a novel land use optimization and planning tool for the sustainable intensification of high-latitude agricultural systems. The main rationale for the development of the tool was to achieve a systematic and comprehensive conception for land allocation across Finland, where field parcels vary substantially in their conditions. The developed tool has a three-step scoring system based on seven physical characteristics (parcel size, shape, slope, distance to the farm center and waterways, soil type and logistic advantages) and the productivity of field parcels. The productivity estimates are based on vegetation indices derived from optical satellite data. The tool allocates virtually all >1 million field parcels in Finland either to sustainable intensification, extensification or afforestation. The tool is dynamic in the sense that its boundary values for land allocation can be fixed according to changes in social targets and supporting policies. Additionally, it can be applied year after year by acknowledging new available data, e.g., on vegetation indices and field parcel rearrangements between farms. Furthermore, it can be applied to all farm types and across Finland. It is a tool for land use planning, implementation and monitoring, but its thorough implementation calls for further development of policy instruments, which are currently more supportive towards land sharing than land sparing activities. ; Peer reviewed
BASE
Identifying crop loss at field parcel scale using satellite images is challenging: first, crop loss is caused by many factors during the growing season; second, reliable reference data about crop loss are lacking; third, there are many ways to define crop loss. This study investigates the feasibility of using satellite images to train machine learning (ML) models to classify agricultural field parcels into those with and without crop loss. The reference data for this study was provided by Finnish Food Authority (FFA) containing crop loss information of approximately 1.4 million field parcels in Finland covering about 3.5 million ha from 2000 to 2015. This reference data was combined with Normalised Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) derived from Landsat 7 images, in which more than 80% of the possible data are missing. Despite the hard problem with extremely noisy data, among the four ML models we tested, random forest (with mean imputation and missing value indicators) achieved the average AUC (area under the ROC curve) of 0.688±0.059 over all 16 years with the range [0.602, 0.795] in identifying new crop-loss fields based on reference fields of the same year. To our knowledge, this is one of the first large scale benchmark study of using machine learning for crop loss classification at field parcel scale. The classification setting and trained models have numerous potential applications, for example, allowing government agencies or insurance companies to verify crop-loss claims by farmers and realise efficient agricultural monitoring.
BASE
Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Hiremath et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. ; Identifying crop loss at field parcel scale using satellite images is challenging: first, crop loss is caused by many factors during the growing season; second, reliable reference data about crop loss are lacking; third, there are many ways to define crop loss. This study investigates the feasibility of using satellite images to train machine learning (ML) models to classify agricultural field parcels into those with and without crop loss. The reference data for this study was provided by Finnish Food Authority (FFA) containing crop loss information of approximately 1.4 million field parcels in Finland covering about 3.5 million ha from 2000 to 2015. This reference data was combined with Normalised Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) derived from Landsat 7 images, in which more than 80% of the possible data are missing. Despite the hard problem with extremely noisy data, among the four ML models we tested, random forest (with mean imputation and missing value indicators) achieved the average AUC (area under the ROC curve) of 0.688±0.059 over all 16 years with the range [0.602, 0.795] in identifying new crop-loss fields based on reference fields of the same year. To our knowledge, this is one of the first large scale benchmark study of using machine learning for crop loss classification at field parcel scale. The classification setting and trained models have numerous potential applications, for example, allowing government agencies or insurance companies to verify crop-loss claims by farmers and realise efficient agricultural monitoring. ; Peer reviewed
BASE
International audience ; Europe accounts for around 20% of the global cereal production and is a net exporter of ca. 15% of that production. Increasing global demand for cereals justifies questions as to where and by how much Europe's production can be increased to meet future global market demands, and how much additional nitrogen (N) crops would require. The latter is important as environmental concern and legislation are equally important as production aims in Europe. Here, we used a country-by-country, bottom-up approach to establish statistical estimates of actual grain yield, and compare these to modelled estimates of potential yields for either irrigated or rainfed conditions. In this way, we identified the yield gaps and the opportunities for increased cereal production for wheat, barley and maize, which represent 90% of the cereals grown in Europe. The combined mean annual yield gap of wheat, barley, maize was 239 Mt, or 42% of the yield potential. The national yield gaps ranged between 10 and 70%, with small gaps in many north-western European countries, and large gaps in eastern and south-western Europe. Yield gaps for rainfed and irrigated maize were consistently lower than those of wheat and barley. If the yield gaps of maize, wheat and barley would be reduced from 42% to 20% of potential yields, this would increase annual cereal production by 128 Mt (39%). Potential for higher cereal production exists predominantly in Eastern Europe, and half of Europe's potential increase is located in Ukraine, Romania and Poland. Unlocking the identified potential for production growth requires a substantial increase of the crop N uptake of 4.8 Mt. Across Europe, the average N uptake gaps, to achieve 80% of the yield potential, were 87, 77 and 43 kg N ha(-1) for wheat, barley and maize, respectively. Emphasis on increasing the N use efficiency is necessary to minimize the need for additional N inputs. Whether yield gap reduction is desirable and feasible is a matter of balancing Europe's role in global food ...
BASE
International audience ; Europe accounts for around 20% of the global cereal production and is a net exporter of ca. 15% of that production. Increasing global demand for cereals justifies questions as to where and by how much Europe's production can be increased to meet future global market demands, and how much additional nitrogen (N) crops would require. The latter is important as environmental concern and legislation are equally important as production aims in Europe. Here, we used a country-by-country, bottom-up approach to establish statistical estimates of actual grain yield, and compare these to modelled estimates of potential yields for either irrigated or rainfed conditions. In this way, we identified the yield gaps and the opportunities for increased cereal production for wheat, barley and maize, which represent 90% of the cereals grown in Europe. The combined mean annual yield gap of wheat, barley, maize was 239 Mt, or 42% of the yield potential. The national yield gaps ranged between 10 and 70%, with small gaps in many north-western European countries, and large gaps in eastern and south-western Europe. Yield gaps for rainfed and irrigated maize were consistently lower than those of wheat and barley. If the yield gaps of maize, wheat and barley would be reduced from 42% to 20% of potential yields, this would increase annual cereal production by 128 Mt (39%). Potential for higher cereal production exists predominantly in Eastern Europe, and half of Europe's potential increase is located in Ukraine, Romania and Poland. Unlocking the identified potential for production growth requires a substantial increase of the crop N uptake of 4.8 Mt. Across Europe, the average N uptake gaps, to achieve 80% of the yield potential, were 87, 77 and 43 kg N ha(-1) for wheat, barley and maize, respectively. Emphasis on increasing the N use efficiency is necessary to minimize the need for additional N inputs. Whether yield gap reduction is desirable and feasible is a matter of balancing Europe's role in global food security, farm economic objectives and environmental targets.
BASE
Europe accounts for around 20% of the global cereal production and is a net exporter of ca. 15% of that production. Increasing global demand for cereals justifies questions as to where and by how much Europe's production can be increased to meet future global market demands, and how much additional nitrogen (N) crops would require. The latter is important as environmental concern and legislation are equally important as production aims in Europe. Here, we used a country-by-country, bottom-up approach to establish statistical estimates of actual grain yield, and compare these to modelled estimates of potential yields for either irrigated or rainfed conditions. In this way, we identified the yield gaps and the opportunities for increased cereal production for wheat, barley and maize, which represent 90% of the cereals grown in Europe. The combined mean annual yield gap of wheat, barley, maize was 239 Mt, or 42% of the yield potential. The national yield gaps ranged between 10 and 70%, with small gaps in many north-western European countries, and large gaps in eastern and south-western Europe. Yield gaps for rainfed and irrigated maize were consistently lower than those of wheat and barley. If the yield gaps of maize, wheat and barley would be reduced from 42% to 20% of potential yields, this would increase annual cereal production by 128 Mt (39%). Potential for higher cereal production exists predominantly in Eastern Europe, and half of Europe's potential increase is located in Ukraine, Romania and Poland. Unlocking the identified potential for production growth requires a substantial increase of the crop N uptake of 4.8 Mt. Across Europe, the average N uptake gaps, to achieve 80% of the yield potential, were 87, 77 and 43 kg N ha−1 for wheat, barley and maize, respectively. Emphasis on increasing the N use efficiency is necessary to minimize the need for additional N inputs. Whether yield gap reduction is desirable and feasible is a matter of balancing Europe's role in global food security, farm economic objectives and environmental targets. ; publishedVersion
BASE
peer-reviewed ; Europe accounts for around 20% of the global cereal production and is a net exporter of ca. 15% of that production. Increasing global demand for cereals justifies questions as to where and by how much Europe's production can be increased to meet future global market demands, and how much additional nitrogen (N) crops would require. The latter is important as environmental concern and legislation are equally important as production aims in Europe. Here, we used a country-by-country, bottom-up approach to establish statistical estimates of actual grain yield, and compare these to modelled estimates of potential yields for either irrigated or rainfed conditions. In this way, we identified the yield gaps and the opportunities for increased cereal production for wheat, barley and maize, which represent 90% of the cereals grown in Europe. The combined mean annual yield gap of wheat, barley, maize was 239 Mt, or 42% of the yield potential. The national yield gaps ranged between 10 and 70%, with small gaps in many north-western European countries, and large gaps in eastern and south-western Europe. Yield gaps for rainfed and irrigated maize were consistently lower than those of wheat and barley. If the yield gaps of maize, wheat and barley would be reduced from 42% to 20% of potential yields, this would increase annual cereal production by 128 Mt (39%). Potential for higher cereal production exists predominantly in Eastern Europe, and half of Europe's potential increase is located in Ukraine, Romania and Poland. Unlocking the identified potential for production growth requires a substantial increase of the crop N uptake of 4.8 Mt. Across Europe, the average N uptake gaps, to achieve 80% of the yield potential, were 87, 77 and 43 kg N ha−1 for wheat, barley and maize, respectively. Emphasis on increasing the N use efficiency is necessary to minimize the need for additional N inputs. Whether yield gap reduction is desirable and feasible is a matter of balancing Europe's role in global food security, farm economic objectives and environmental targets. ; We received financial contributions from the strategic investment funds (IPOP) of Wageningen University & Research, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, MACSUR under EU FACCE-JPI which was funded through several national contributions, and TempAg (http://tempag.net/).
BASE
In: Schils , R , Olesen , J E , Kersebaum , K C , Rijk , B , Oberforster , M , Kalyada , V , Khitrykau , M , Gobin , A , Kirchev , H , Manolova , V , Manolov , I , Trnka , M , Hlavinka , P , Paluoso , T , Peltonen-Sainio , P , Jauhiainen , L , Lorgeou , J , Marrou , H , Danalatos , N , Archontoulis , S , Fodor , N , Spink , J , Roggero , P P , Bassu , S , Pulina , A , Seehusen , T , Uhlen , A K , Żyłowska , K , Nieróbca , A , Kozyra , J , Silva , J V , Maçãs , B M , Coutinho , J , Ion , V , Takáč , J , Mínguez , M I , Eckersten , H , Levy , L , Herrera , J M , Hiltbrunner , J , Kryvobok , O , Kryvoshein , O , Sylvester-Bradley , R , Kindred , D , Topp , C F E , Boogaard , H , de Groot , H , Lesschen , J P , van Bussel , L , Wolf , J , Zijlstra , M , van Loon , M P & van Ittersum , M K 2018 , ' Cereal yield gaps across Europe ' , European Journal of Agronomy , vol. 101 , pp. 109-120 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2018.09.003
Europe accounts for around 20% of the global cereal production and is a net exporter of ca. 15% of that production. Increasing global demand for cereals justifies questions as to where and by how much Europe's production can be increased to meet future global market demands, and how much additional nitrogen (N) crops would require. The latter is important as environmental concern and legislation are equally important as production aims in Europe. Here, we used a country-by-country, bottom-up approach to establish statistical estimates of actual grain yield, and compare these to modelled estimates of potential yields for either irrigated or rainfed conditions. In this way, we identified the yield gaps and the opportunities for increased cereal production for wheat, barley and maize, which represent 90% of the cereals grown in Europe. The combined mean annual yield gap of wheat, barley, maize was 239 Mt, or 42% of the yield potential. The national yield gaps ranged between 10 and 70%, with small gaps in many north-western European countries, and large gaps in eastern and south-western Europe. Yield gaps for rainfed and irrigated maize were consistently lower than those of wheat and barley. If the yield gaps of maize, wheat and barley would be reduced from 42% to 20% of potential yields, this would increase annual cereal production by 128 Mt (39%). Potential for higher cereal production exists predominantly in Eastern Europe, and half of Europe's potential increase is located in Ukraine, Romania and Poland. Unlocking the identified potential for production growth requires a substantial increase of the crop N uptake of 4.8 Mt. Across Europe, the average N uptake gaps, to achieve 80% of the yield potential, were 87, 77 and 43 kg N ha −1 for wheat, barley and maize, respectively. Emphasis on increasing the N use efficiency is necessary to minimize the need for additional N inputs. Whether yield gap reduction is desirable and feasible is a matter of balancing Europe's role in global food security, farm economic objectives and environmental targets.
BASE
In: European Journal of Agronomy (101), 109-120. (2018)
Europe accounts for around 20% of the global cereal production and is a net exporter of ca. 15% of that production. Increasing global demand for cereals justifies questions as to where and by how much Europe's production can be increased to meet future global market demands, and how much additional nitrogen (N) crops would require. The latter is important as environmental concern and legislation are equally important as production aims in Europe. Here, we used a country-by-country, bottom-up approach to establish statistical estimates of actual grain yield, and compare these to modelled estimates of potential yields for either irrigated or rainfed conditions. In this way, we identified the yield gaps and the opportunities for increased cereal production for wheat, barley and maize, which represent 90% of the cereals grown in Europe. The combined mean annual yield gap of wheat, barley, maize was 239 Mt, or 42% of the yield potential. The national yield gaps ranged between 10 and 70%, with small gaps in many north-western European countries, and large gaps in eastern and south-western Europe. Yield gaps for rainfed and irrigated maize were consistently lower than those of wheat and barley. If the yield gaps of maize, wheat and barley would be reduced from 42% to 20% of potential yields, this would increase annual cereal production by 128 Mt (39%). Potential for higher cereal production exists predominantly in Eastern Europe, and half of Europe's potential increase is located in Ukraine, Romania and Poland. Unlocking the identified potential for production growth requires a substantial increase of the crop N uptake of 4.8 Mt. Across Europe, the average N uptake gaps, to achieve 80% of the yield potential, were 87, 77 and 43 kg N ha(-1) for wheat, barley and maize, respectively. Emphasis on increasing the N use efficiency is necessary to minimize the need for additional N inputs. Whether yield gap reduction is desirable and feasible is a matter of balancing Europe's role in global food security, farm economic objectives and environmental targets.
BASE