Publications

Grasslands are at risk of degradation due to unsustainable management practices and climate change. Here, we review the principal soil quality indicators (SQIs) to evaluate the sustainability of different grassland management practices globally. We discuss the importance of SQI assessment and the Soil Quality Minimum Dataset (MDS) specifically in the context of grasslands. We then review two potential solutions, the first of which is adopting grazing management, whereby sustainable grazing management plans (GMPs) offer great potential. The other solution is the development and adoption of novel grassland species, which may improve either drought resistance or infiltration rates, erosion and flooding. Sustainable grassland soil management can promote ecosystem service delivery and improve the resilience of the entire grassland ecosystem to anthropogenic change.

To keep global warming possibly below 1.5 ᵒC and mitigate adverse effects of climate change, agriculture, like all other sectors, will have to contribute to efforts in achieving net negative emissions by the end of the century. Cost-efficient distribution of mitigation across regions and economic sectors is typically calculated using a global uniform carbon price in climate stabilization scenarios. However, in reality such a carbon price would substantially affect food availability. Here, we assess the implications of climate change mitigation in the land use sector for agricultural production and food security using an integrated partial equilibrium modelling framework and explore ways of relaxing the competition between mitigation in agriculture and food availability. Using a scenario that limits global warming cost-efficiently across sectors to 1.5 ᵒC, results indicate global food calorie losses ranging from 110 to 285 kcal per capita and day in 2050 depending on the applied demand elasticities. This could translate into a rise in undernourishment of 80 to 300 million people in 2050. Less ambitious GHG mitigation in the land use sector reduces the associated food security impact significantly, however the 1.5 ᵒC target would not be achieved without additional reductions outside the land use sector. Efficiency of greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation will also depend on the level of participation globally. Our results show that if non-Annex I countries decide not to contribute to mitigation action while other parties pursue their mitigation efforts to reach the global climate target, food security impacts in these non-Annex I countries will be higher than if they participate in a global agreement, as inefficient mitigation increases agricultural production costs and therefore food prices. Land-rich countries with a high proportion of emissions from land use change, such as Brazil, could reduce emissions with only a marginal effect on food availability. In contrast, agricultural mitigation in high population (density) countries, such as China and India, would lead to substantial food calorie loss without a major contribution to global GHG mitigation. Increasing soil carbon sequestration on agricultural land would allow reducing the implied calorie loss by 65% when sticking to the initially estimated land use mitigation requirements, thereby limiting the impact on undernourishment to 20 - 75 million people, and storing significant amounts of carbon in soils.

<p>Culture and mindset can be barriers to transitions to agro-ecological farming systems. Farmers, institutions, authorities, businesses and other actors in value chains often rely on familiarity with existing approaches and experience-based outputs. Resistance to change, unproven approaches, or inertia in changing position, inhibits uptake of new ideas and practices.</p>\n\n<p>Findings from the H2020 UNISECO project show the benefits of partnerships of public, private, research and civil society sectors in sharing knowledge and addressing barriers to agro-ecological transition of culture and mindset. An example of an effective forum that facilitates effective sharing of knowledge is the North-East Scotland Agriculture Advisory Group (NESAAG), UK. </p>\n\n<p>A long-term outcome of the operation of such forums can be the acceptance of their benefits as actors in their own right in which participants co-construct approaches that are recognised as taking account of the interests of all sectors.  </p>

Abstract Despite research into the response of ammonia (NH 3 ) volatilization in farmland to various meteorological factors, the potential impact of future climate change on NH 3 volatilization is not fully understood. Based on a database consisting of 1063 observations across China, nonlinear NH 3 models considering crop type, meteorological, soil and management variables were established via four machine learning methods, including support vector machine, multi‐layer perceptron, gradient boosting machine and random forest (RF). The RF model had the highest R 2 of 0.76 and the lowest RMSE of 0.82 kg NH 3 ‐N ha − 1 , showing the best simulation capability. Results of model importance indicated that NH 3 volatilization was mainly controlled by total input of N fertilizer, followed by meteorological factors, human managements and soil characteristics. The NH 3 emissions of China's cereal production (paddy rice, wheat and maize) in 2018 was estimated to be 3.3 Mt NH 3 ‐N. By 2050, NH 3 volatilization will increase by 23.1−32.0% under different climate change scenarios (Representative Concentration Pathways, RCPs), and climate change will have the greatest impact on NH 3 volatilization in the Yangtze river agro‐region of China due to high warming effects. However, the potential increase in NH 3 volatilization under future climate change can be mitigated by 26.1−47.5% through various N fertilizer management optimization options.