Filters

2018 - 20192

More filters

2020 - 20212
Reset filters

Settings

Author: Weindl, I. Ă— End date: 2024 Ă— Start date: 2020 Ă— WGL Institute: ATB Ă— WGL Institute: PIK Ă—

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Modeling vegetation and carbon dynamics of managed grasslands at the global scale with LPJmL 3.6
    (Göttingen : Copernicus GmbH, 2018) Rolinski, S.; Müller, C.; Heinke, J.; Weindl, I.; Biewald, A.; Leon Bodirsky, B.; Bondeau, A.; Boons-Prins, E.R.; Bouwman, A.F.; Leffelaar, P.A.; Roller, J.A.T.; Schaphoff, S.; Thonicke, K.
    Grassland management affects the carbon fluxes of one-third of the global land area and is thus an important factor for the global carbon budget. Nonetheless, this aspect has been largely neglected or underrepresented in global carbon cycle models. We investigate four harvesting schemes for the managed grassland implementation of the dynamic global vegetation model (DGVM) Lund-Potsdam-Jena managed Land (LPJmL) that facilitate a better representation of actual management systems globally. We describe the model implementation and analyze simulation results with respect to harvest, net primary productivity and soil carbon content and by evaluating them against reported grass yields in Europe.We demonstrate the importance of accounting for differences in grassland management by assessing potential livestock grazing densities as well as the impacts of grazing, grazing intensities and mowing systems on soil carbon stocks. Grazing leads to soil carbon losses in polar or arid regions even at moderate livestock densities ( <0.4 livestock units per hectare-LSUha-1) but not in temperate regions even at much higher densities (0.4 to 1.2 LSUha-1). Applying LPJmL with the new grassland management options enables assessments of the global grassland production and its impact on the terrestrial biogeochemical cycles but requires a global data set on current grassland management.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    To what extent is climate change adaptation a novel challenge for agricultural modellers?
    (Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 2019) Kipling, R.P.; Topp, C.F.E.; Bannink, A.; Bartley, D.J.; Blanco-Penedo, I.; Cortignani, R.; del Prado, A.; Dono, G.; Faverdin, P.; Graux, A.-I.; Hutchings, N.J.; Lauwers, L.; Özkan Gülzari, Ş.; Reidsma, P.; Rolinski, S.; Ruiz-Ramos, M.; Sandars, D.L.; Sándor, R.; Schönhart, M.; Seddaiu, G.; van Middelkoop, J.; Shrestha, S.; Weindl, I.; Schönhart, M.; Seddaiu, G.; van Middelkoop, J.; Shrestha, S.; Weindl, I.; Eory, V.
    Modelling is key to adapting agriculture to climate change (CC), facilitating evaluation of the impacts and efficacy of adaptation measures, and the design of optimal strategies. Although there are many challenges to modelling agricultural CC adaptation, it is unclear whether these are novel or, whether adaptation merely adds new motivations to old challenges. Here, qualitative analysis of modellers’ views revealed three categories of challenge: Content, Use, and Capacity. Triangulation of findings with reviews of agricultural modelling and Climate Change Risk Assessment was then used to highlight challenges specific to modelling adaptation. These were refined through literature review, focussing attention on how the progressive nature of CC affects the role and impact of modelling. Specific challenges identified were: Scope of adaptations modelled, Information on future adaptation, Collaboration to tackle novel challenges, Optimisation under progressive change with thresholds, and Responsibility given the sensitivity of future outcomes to initial choices under progressive change. © 2019 The Authors