Multiple-pollutant cost-effectiveness of greenhouse gas mitigation measures in the UK agriculture
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 27, S. 55-67
ISSN: 1462-9011
6 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 27, S. 55-67
ISSN: 1462-9011
In: Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, Band 111, S. 112-120
Funding Information: This modeling study was a joint effort of the Models4Pastures project within the framework of FACCE-JPI. Lutz Merbold and Kathrin Fuchs acknowledge funding received for the Swiss contribution to Models4Pastures (FACCE-JPI project, SNSF funded contract: 40FA40_154245/1) and for the Doc. Mobility fellowship (SNSF funded project: P1EZP2_172121). Lutz Merbold further acknowledges the support received for CGIAR Fund Council, Australia (ACIAR), Irish Aid, the European Union, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Switzerland, UK, USAID, and Thailand for funding to the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) as well as for the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock. The NZ contributors acknowledge funding from the New Zealand Government Ministry of Primary Industries to support the aims of the Livestock Research Group of the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases and from AgResearch's Strategic Science Investment Fund (the Forages for Reduced Nitrate Leaching (FRNL) research program). The UK partners acknowledge funding by DEFRA and the RCUK projects: N-Circle (BB/N013484/1), UGRASS (NE/M016900/1), and GREENHOUSE (NE/K002589/1). R.M. Rees and C.F.E. Topp also received funding from the Scottish Government Strategic Research Programme. Lorenzo Brilli, Camilla Dibari, and Marco Bindi received funding from the Italian Ministry of Agricultural Food and Forestry Policies (MiPAAF). The FR partners acknowledge funding from CN-MIP project funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR-13-JFAC-0001) and from ADEME (no. 12-60-C0023). Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL Funding Information: This modeling study was a joint effort of the Models4Pastures project within the framework of FACCE‐JPI. Lutz Merbold and Kathrin Fuchs acknowledge funding received for the Swiss contribution to Models4Pastures (FACCE‐JPI project, SNSF funded contract: 40FA40_154245/1) and for the Doc. Mobility fellowship (SNSF funded project: P1EZP2_172121). Lutz Merbold further acknowledges the support received for CGIAR Fund Council, Australia (ACIAR), Irish Aid, the European Union, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Switzerland, UK, USAID, and Thailand for funding to the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) as well as for the CGIAR Research Program on Livestock. The NZ contributors acknowledge funding from the New Zealand Government Ministry of Primary Industries to support the aims of the Livestock Research Group of the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases and from AgResearch's Strategic Science Investment Fund (the Forages for Reduced Nitrate Leaching (FRNL) research program). The UK partners acknowledge funding by DEFRA and the RCUK projects: N‐Circle (BB/N013484/1), UGRASS (NE/M016900/1), and GREENHOUSE (NE/K002589/1). R.M. Rees and C.F.E. Topp also received funding from the Scottish Government Strategic Research Programme. Lorenzo Brilli, Camilla Dibari, and Marco Bindi received funding from the Italian Ministry of Agricultural Food and Forestry Policies (MiPAAF). The FR partners acknowledge funding from CN‐MIP project funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR‐13‐JFAC‐0001) and from ADEME (no. 12‐60‐C0023). Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL Publisher Copyright: ©2020. The Authors. Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF
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