• Energy Research
• 2. Zero hunger close
• GB close
• CGIAR close

SUMMARYThis article discusses how decentralisation policies are enacted in the planning and implementation of natural resource management interventions in rural Ethiopia. A key element of decentralisation policy is the emphasis on greater participation by local communities. Drawing on qualitative research conducted with government staff and farmers, this paper illustrates how different actors perceive and implement national policy and how these actions affect the longer‐term sustainability of land management interventions. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The basins of the Indus and Ganges rivers cover 2.20 million km2 and are inhabited by more than a billion people. The region is under extreme pressures of population and poverty, unregulated utilization of the resources and low levels of productivity. The needs are: (1) development policies that are regionally differentiated to ensure resource sustainability and high productivity; (2) immediate development and implementation of policies for sound groundwater management and energy use; (3) improvement of the fragile food security and to broaden its base; and (4) policy changes to address land fragmentation and improved infrastructure. Meeting these needs will help to improve productivity, reduce rural poverty and improve overall human development.

Understanding the relationship between climate and crop productivity is a key component of projections of future food production, and hence assessments of food security. Climate models and crop yield datasets have errors, but the effects of these errors on regional scale crop models is not well categorized and understood. In this study we compare the effect of synthetic errors in temperature and precipitation observations on the hindcast skill of a process-based crop model and a statistical crop model. We find that errors in temperature data have a significantly stronger influence on both models than errors in precipitation. We also identify key differences in the responses of these models to different types of input data error. Statistical and process-based model responses differ depending on whether synthetic errors are overestimates or underestimates. We also investigate the impact of crop yield calibration data on model skill for both models, using datasets of yield at three different spatial scales. Whilst important for both models, the statistical model is more strongly influenced by crop yield scale than the process-based crop model. However, our results question the value of high resolution yield data for improving the skill of crop models; we find a focus on accuracy to be more likely to be valuable. For both crop models, and for all three spatial scales of yield calibration data, we found that model skill is greatest where growing area is above 10-15 %. Thus information on area harvested would appear to be a priority for data collection efforts. These results are important for three reasons. First, understanding how different crop models rely on different characteristics of temperature, precipitation and crop yield data allows us to match the model type to the available data. Second, we can prioritize where improvements in climate and crop yield data should be directed. Third, as better climate and crop yield data becomes available, we can predict how crop model skill should improve.

La production animale est une source essentielle de revenus et d'émissions de gaz à effet de serre (GES) agricoles en Colombie, au Brésil, en Argentine, au Costa Rica, en Uruguay, au Mexique et au Pérou. Plusieurs options de gestion et technologiques, avec un potentiel d'atténuation du méthane entérique, ont été évaluées et leur mise à l'échelle devrait contribuer à la réalisation des objectifs de réduction des émissions de GES. Pourtant, l'adoption généralisée d'options d'atténuation prometteuses reste limitée, ce qui soulève des questions quant à savoir si les objectifs de réduction des émissions envisagés sont réalisables. À l'aide de données générées localement, nous explorons les potentiels d'atténuation des technologies et des pratiques de gestion actuellement proposées pour atténuer les émissions de méthane entérique, pour les systèmes de production bovine dans les pays d'Amérique latine les plus émetteurs. Nous discutons ensuite des obstacles à l'adoption d'innovations qui réduisent considérablement les émissions de méthane entérique d'origine bovine et des changements majeurs dans les politiques et les pratiques qui sont nécessaires pour relever les ambitions nationales dans les pays à forte émission. En utilisant la science la plus récente et la pensée actuelle, nous fournissons notre point de vue sur une approche inclusive et ré-imaginons comment les secteurs universitaire, de la recherche, des affaires et des politiques publiques peuvent soutenir et encourager les changements nécessaires pour élever le niveau d'ambition et atteindre les objectifs de développement durable en envisageant des actions allant de la ferme à l'échelle nationale. La producción ganadera es una fuente fundamental de ingresos y emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero (GEI) agrícolas en Colombia, Brasil, Argentina, Costa Rica, Uruguay, México y Perú. Se han evaluado varias opciones de gestión y tecnológicas, con potencial de mitigación de metano entérico, y se prevé que su escalado contribuya al logro de los objetivos de reducción de emisiones de GEI. Sin embargo, la adopción generalizada de opciones de mitigación prometedoras sigue siendo limitada, lo que plantea dudas sobre si los objetivos de reducción de emisiones previstos son alcanzables. Utilizando datos generados localmente, exploramos los potenciales de mitigación de las tecnologías y prácticas de manejo actualmente propuestas para mitigar las emisiones de metano entérico, para los sistemas de producción ganadera en los países de mayor emisión de América Latina. Luego discutimos las barreras para adoptar innovaciones que reduzcan significativamente las emisiones de metano entérico en el ganado y los cambios importantes en las políticas y prácticas que se necesitan para aumentar las ambiciones nacionales en los países con altas emisiones. Utilizando la ciencia más reciente y el pensamiento actual, brindamos nuestra perspectiva sobre un enfoque inclusivo y reimaginamos cómo los sectores académico, de investigación, empresarial y de políticas públicas pueden apoyar e incentivar los cambios necesarios para elevar el nivel de ambición y alcanzar los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible considerando acciones desde la granja hasta la escala nacional. Livestock production is a pivotal source of income and agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Colombia, Brazil, Argentina, Costa Rica, Uruguay, Mexico and Peru. Several management and technological options, with enteric methane mitigation potential, have been evaluated and their scaling is anticipated to contribute towards achieving GHG emission reduction targets. Yet, widespread adoption of promising mitigation options remains limited, raising questions as to whether envisaged emission reduction targets are achievable. Using locally generated data, we explore the mitigation potentials of technologies and management practices currently proposed to mitigate enteric methane emissions, for cattle production systems in the higher emitting countries of Latin America. We then discuss barriers for adopting innovations that significantly reduce cattle-based enteric methane emissions and the major shifts in policy and practice that are needed to raise national ambitions in the high emitting countries. Using the latest science and current thinking, we provide our perspective on an inclusive approach and re-imagine how the academic, research, business and public policy sectors can support and incentivize the changes needed to raise the level of ambition and achieve sustainable development goals considering actions all the way from the farm to the national scale. الإنتاج الحيواني هو مصدر محوري للدخل وانبعاثات غازات الدفيئة الزراعية في كولومبيا والبرازيل والأرجنتين وكوستاريكا وأوروغواي والمكسيك وبيرو. تم تقييم العديد من خيارات الإدارة والخيارات التكنولوجية، مع إمكانية تخفيف الميثان المعوي، ومن المتوقع أن يساهم قياسها في تحقيق أهداف خفض انبعاثات غازات الدفيئة. ومع ذلك، لا يزال الاعتماد الواسع النطاق لخيارات التخفيف الواعدة محدودًا، مما يثير تساؤلات حول ما إذا كانت أهداف خفض الانبعاثات المتوخاة قابلة للتحقيق. باستخدام البيانات التي تم إنشاؤها محليًا، نستكشف إمكانات التخفيف من التقنيات وممارسات الإدارة المقترحة حاليًا للتخفيف من انبعاثات الميثان المعوية، لأنظمة إنتاج الماشية في البلدان ذات الانبعاثات الأعلى في أمريكا اللاتينية. ثم نناقش العوائق التي تحول دون اعتماد الابتكارات التي تقلل بشكل كبير من انبعاثات الميثان المعوي القائم على الماشية والتحولات الرئيسية في السياسات والممارسات اللازمة لرفع الطموحات الوطنية في البلدان ذات الانبعاثات العالية. باستخدام أحدث العلوم والتفكير الحالي، نقدم وجهة نظرنا حول نهج شامل ونعيد تصور كيف يمكن للقطاعات الأكاديمية والبحثية وقطاع الأعمال والسياسة العامة دعم وتحفيز التغييرات اللازمة لرفع مستوى الطموح وتحقيق أهداف التنمية المستدامة مع الأخذ في الاعتبار الإجراءات على طول الطريق من المزرعة إلى النطاق الوطني.

Coupling technological advances with sociocultural and policy changes can transform agri-food systems to address pressing climate, economic, environmental, health and social challenges. An international expert panel reports on options to induce contextualized combinations of innovations that can balance multiple goals.

The first decade of the new millennium saw a boom in rubber prices. This led to rapid and widespread land conversion to monoculture rubber plantations in continental SE Asia, where natural rubber production has increased >50% since 2000. Here, we analyze the subsequent spread of rubber between 2005 and 2010 in combination with environmental data and reports on rubber plantation performance. We show that rubber has been planted into increasingly sub-optimal environments. Currently, 72% of plantation area is in environmentally marginal zones where reduced yields are likely. An estimated 57% of the area is susceptible to insufficient water availability, erosion, frost, or wind damage, all of which may make long-term rubber production unsustainable. In 2013 typhoons destroyed plantations worth US$ >250 million in Vietnam alone, and future climate change is likely to lead to a net exacerbation of environmental marginality for both current and predicted future rubber plantation area. New rubber plantations are also frequently placed on lands that are important for biodiversity conservation and ecological functions. For example, between 2005 and 2010 >2500 km(2) of natural tree cover and 610 km(2) of protected areas were converted to plantations. Overall, expansion into marginal areas creates potential for loss-loss scenarios: clearing of high-biodiversity value land for economically unsustainable plantations that are poorly adapted to local conditions and alter landscape functions (e.g. hydrology, erosion) - ultimately compromising livelihoods, particularly when rubber prices fall. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Asseng, S. et al. Crop models are essential tools for assessing the threat of climate change to local and global food production1. Present models used to predict wheat grain yield are highly uncertain when simulating how crops respond to temperature2. Here we systematically tested 30 different wheat crop models of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project against field experiments in which growing season mean temperatures ranged from 15 °C to 32 °C, including experiments with artificial heating. Many models simulated yields well, but were less accurate at higher temperatures. The model ensemble median was consistently more accurate in simulating the crop temperature response than any single model, regardless of the input information used. Extrapolating the model ensemble temperature response indicates that warming is already slowing yield gains at a majority of wheat-growing locations. Global wheat production is estimated to fall by 6% for each °C of further temperature increase and become more variable over space and time. We thank the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project and its leaders C. Rosenzweig from NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University (USA), J. Jones from University of Florida (USA), J. Hatfield from United States Department of Agriculture (USA) and J. Antle from Oregon State University (USA) for support. We also thank M. Lopez from CIMMYT (Turkey), M. Usman Bashir from University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (Pakistan), S. Soufizadeh from Shahid Beheshti University (Iran), and J. Lorgeou and J-C. Deswarte from ARVALIS—Institut du Végétal (France) for assistance with selecting key locations and quantifying regional crop cultivars, anthesis and maturity dates and R. Raymundo for assistance with GIS. S.A. and D.C. received financial support from the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). C.S. was funded through USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture award 32011-68002-30191. C.M. received financial support from the KULUNDA project (01LL0905L) and the FACCE MACSUR project (031A103B) funded through the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). F.E. received support from the FACCE MACSUR project (031A103B) funded through the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (2812ERA115) and E.E.R. was funded through the German Science Foundation (project EW 119/5-1). M.J. and J.E.O. were funded through the FACCE MACSUR project by the Danish Strategic Research Council. K.C.K. and C.N. were funded by the FACCE MACSUR project through the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL). F.T., T.P. and R.P.R. received financial support from FACCE MACSUR project funded through the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MMM); F.T. was also funded through National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 41071030). C.B. was funded through the Helmholtz project ‘REKLIM—Regional Climate Change: Causes and Effects’ Topic 9: ‘Climate Change and Air Quality’. M.P.R. and P.D.A. received funding from the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security (CCAFS). G.O’L. was funded through the Australian Grains Research and Development Corporation and the Department of Environment and Primary Industries Victoria, Australia. R.C.I. was funded by Texas AgriLife Research, Texas A&M University. E.W. and Z.Z. were funded by CSIRO and the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) through the research project ‘Advancing crop yield while reducing the use of water and nitrogen’ and by the CSIRO-MoE PhD Research Program. Peer reviewed