Stanford research shows importance of European farmers adapting to climate change
New Stanford research reveals that farmers in Europe will see crop yields affected as global temperatures rise, but that adaptation can help slow the decline for some crops.
A newly published Stanford study indicates European wheat yields will drop more than 20 percent by 2040 due to global warming.
A new Stanford study finds that due to an average 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit of warming expected by 2040, yields of wheat and barley across Europe will drop more than 20 percent.
New Stanford research reveals that farmers in Europe will see crop yields affected as global temperatures rise, but that adaptation can help slow the decline for some crops.
For corn, the anticipated loss is roughly 10 percent, the research shows. Farmers of these crops have already seen yield growth slow down since 1980 as temperatures have risen, though other policy and economic factors have also played a role.
“The results clearly showed that modest amounts of climate change can have a big impact on yields of several crops in Europe,” said Stanford doctoral student Frances Moore, who conducted the research with David Lobell, an associate professor of environmental Earth system science.
Moore, a student in the Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, described the results as somewhat surprising because Europe is fairly cool. “So you might think it would benefit from moderate amounts of warming,” she said. “Our next step was to actually measure the potential of European farmers to adapt to these impacts.”
Moore and Lobell analyzed yield and profit records from thousands of farms between 1989 and 2009. These originated in the European Union’s annual Farmer Accountancy Data Network survey. Combining detailed climate records with the farm data, they were able to understand how yields and profits have changed over time. By comparing yields in warmer and cooler parts of Europe, they could predict how adaptation may help European farmers in the coming decades. Their research is detailed in the latest issue of the journal Nature Climate Change.
“By adaptation, we mean a range of options based on existing technologies, such as switching varieties of a crop, installing irrigation or growing a different crop, one better suited to warmer temperatures,” said Lobell, the associate director of the Center on Food Security and the Environment at Stanford. “These things have been talked about for a long time, but the novelty of this study was using past data to quantify the actual potential of adaptation to reduce climate change impacts. We find that in some cases adaptation could substantially reduce impacts, but in other cases the potential may be very limited with current technologies.”
According to the analysis, corn has the highest adaptation potential. Moore and Lobell predict that corn farmers can reduce yield losses by as much as 87 percent through long-term adaptation.
As Moore pointed out, three key areas of uncertainty make it difficult to predict the future of crop yields in Europe. Most scientists focus on the uncertainty around future climate conditions, but the Stanford team found that the biggest issues are often how quickly farmers in Europe will adapt to climate change (adaptation uncertainty) and how crop yields will respond to climate change (response uncertainty).
In future research, Moore and Lobell hope to focus on measuring how quickly farmers are adapting to changing temperatures.
“This paper has shown that crops in Europe are sensitive to warming and that adaptation can be important in reducing that impact,” Moore said. “The next question is how quickly farmers will use the available options for adapting. Europe has already seen a lot of warming, so we should expect to already see adaptation if farmers are quick to respond to climate signals.”
Laura Seaman is the communications and external relations manager for Stanford’s Center on Food Security and the Environment, a joint program of Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment.
===============================================================
I don’t know about European yield numbers, but in the United States, so far such claims of yield reduction have not come to pass. The trend is still upwards.
And, temperatures don’t seem to have much effect on corn yields above:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Moore and Lobell analyzed yield and profit records from thousands of farms between 1989 and 2009. These originated in the European Union’s annual Farmer Accountancy Data Network survey”
“Moore, a student in the Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, described the results as somewhat surprising because Europe is fairly cool. “So you might think it would benefit from moderate amounts of warming,” she said”
I’ve been forecasting the effects of global weather on crops and monitoring how that weather actually has effected those crops, week after week for over 2 decades. This includes corn and wheat.
Anthony posted 2 graphs that make it clear that corn, wheat and soybean yields have been going up during the past 50 years and how model temperature forecasts have shown no skill at all.
Craig Idso does a nice job explaining the positive effects of increasing CO2 on plants. Corn is a C4 plant and wheat is a C3 plant:
http://buythetruth.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/photosynthesis-and-co2-enrichment/
Somehow, this study has managed to manipulate data to come up with conclusions that make absolutely no sense.
There is a lot of fraud and dishonest science going on in the field of climate science but it is most blatant when applied in the world of plant science/agronomy/botany.
It’s one thing to be misleading or dishonest about the effects of CO2 on weather and climate but that’s sort of like telling just one(big).
However, when it comes to studies that conclude that increasing CO2 will harm plants, you are taking the best thing that every happened to the biosphere from atmospheric fertilization that is indisputable, based on the known law of photosynthesis and spinning it a 2nd, more devious lie.
This has got to stop. These people are getting money, work and other incentives that reward them for telling bigger and bigger lies.
They are destroying authentic science. When will they start being held accountable???
“Stanford research shows importance of European farmers adapting to climate change”
====================================
I predict that European farmers will universally ignore Stanford predictions.
Farmers need to be aware of an increase in summers with long periods of negative NAO through the rest of this solar downturn. A few cooler wet summers in a row like 2012 could put many out of business completely.
When it gets 3.5F warmer in mid century in Europe, a good mitigation would be to send Iowa farmers over to show how to grow corn (maize).
You don’t think it possible that Stanford researchers don’t know that ‘corn’ in Europe means wheat, oats or barley? Nah, I’m sure they got that covered…
http://agron-www.agron.iastate.edu/Courses/agron212/readings/corn_history.htm
Mike Maguire says:
May 22, 2014 at 3:52 pm
Good plot of C4 & C3 photosynthesis under different concentrations of CO2 in your link. Thanks.
Minnesotans For Global Warming has the right end of the stick! To the extent it exists, it is beneficent.