Browsing by Author "Eory, Vera"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology(Wiley, 2019-09-18) Sykes, Alasdair J.; Macleod, Michael; Eory, Vera; Rees, Robert M.; Payen, Florian; Myrgiotis, Vasilis; Williams, Mathew; Sohi, Saran; Hillier, Jon; Moran, Dominic; Manning, David A. C.; Goglio, Pietro; Seghetta, Michele; Williams, Adrian; Harris, Jim A.; Dondini, Marta; Walton, Jack; House, Joanna; Smith, PeteTo limit warming to well below 2°C, most scenario projections rely on greenhouse gas removal technologies (GGRTs); one such GGRT uses soil carbon sequestration (SCS) in agricultural land. In addition to their role in mitigating climate change, SCS practices play a role in delivering agroecosystem resilience, climate change adaptability, and food security. Environmental heterogeneity and differences in agricultural practices challenge the practical implementation of SCS, and our analysis addresses the associated knowledge gap. Previous assessments have focused on global potentials, but there is a need among policy makers to operationalise SCS. Here, we assess a range of practices already proposed to deliver SCS, and distil these into a subset of specific measures. We provide a multi‐disciplinary summary of the barriers and potential incentives toward practical implementation of these measures. First, we identify specific practices with potential for both a positive impact on SCS at farm level, and an uptake rate compatible with global impact. These focus on: a. optimising crop primary productivity (e.g. nutrient optimisation, pH management, irrigation) b. reducing soil disturbance and managing soil physical properties (e.g. improved rotations, minimum till) c. minimising deliberate removal of C or lateral transport via erosion processes (e.g. support measures, bare fallow reduction) d. addition of C produced outside the system (e.g. organic manure amendments, biochar addition) e. provision of additional C inputs within the cropping system (e.g. agroforestry, cover cropping) We then consider economic and non‐cost barriers and incentives for land managers implementing these measures, along with the potential externalised impacts of implementation. This offers a framework and reference point for holistic assessment of the impacts of SCS. Finally, we summarise and discuss the ability of extant scientific approaches to quantify the technical potential and externalities of SCS measures, and the barriers and incentives to their implementation in global agricultural systems.Item Open Access To what extent is climate change adaptation a novel challenge for agricultural modellers?(Elsevier, 2019-07-29) Kipling, Richard P.; Topp, Cairistiona F. E.; Bannink, André D.; Bartley, David J.; Blanco-Penedo, Isabel; Cortignani, Raffaele; del Prado, Agustín; Dono, Gabriele; Faverdin, Philippe; Graux, Anne Isabelle; Hutchings, Nicholas J.; Lauwers, Ludwig; Özkan Gülzari, Şeyda; Reidsma, Pytrik; Rolinski, Susanne; Ruiz-Ramos, Margarita; Sandars, Daniel L.; Sandor, Renata; Schönhart, Martin; Seddaiu, Giovanna; van Middelkoop, Jantine C.; Shrestha, Shailesh S.; Weindl, Isabelle; Eory, VeraModelling 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.