* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download S1-Meinke.pps
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
Heaven and Earth (book) wikipedia , lookup
Michael E. Mann wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
sustainable agricultural systems Actionable climate knowledge – from analysis to synthesis Experiences from 20 years of applied climate risk research in Australia Holger Meinke, Rohan Nelson, Roger Stone, Selvaraju, Aline de Holanda, Walter Baethgen Why focus on case studies from Australia? has long been at the forefront of applied climate research often regarded (rightly or wrongly) as a role model for the creation and maintenance of ‘actionable climate knowledge’ has one of the most variable climates in the world Why focus on case studies from Australia? has strong ENSO impact and vulnerable sectors with considerable scope to improve risk management climate change already a reality and not just a scenario public policy focus on self-reliance, resilience and societal benefits involves many agencies and many stakeholders (farmers, agribusiness, policy makers) Climate knowledge vs climate forecasting Climate knowledge is more that ENSO and more than just forecasting. Climate knowledge is the intelligent use of climate information. This includes knowledge about climate variability, climate change AND climate forecasting used such that it enhances resilience by increasing profits and reducing economic/environmental risks. sustainable agricultural systems Risk management The systematic process of identifying, analysing and responding to risk. It includes maximising the probability and consequences of positive and adverse events. (Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge) ‘It is our competitive advantage that we show courage after carefully deliberating our actions. Others, in contrast, are courageous from ignorance but hesitant upon reflection’. (Pericles’ Funeral Oration, 431 AD; Thucydides 2, 40, 3) sustainable agricultural systems Risks arise from variability Australian farmers are excellent risk managers. They run successful businesses within the world’s most variable climate and without subsidies. …it seems that the 21st century has a good chance of becoming ‘the climate century’, a century in which climate-related concerns will occupy significant attention of the next generations of policy makers… Mickey Glantz, 2003 sustainable agricultural systems Sources of variability Temporal and spatial weather (hail, frost); climate (at a range of temporal scales); soils (at a range of spatial scales); economic conditions (inputs, commodity prices); management External and internal either beyond manager’s control or consequence of management sustainable agricultural systems Example of Decision Types Key Stakeholder Frequency Logistics (eg. scheduling of planting / harvest operations) Farm Manager MJO, months Crop type, weather derivatives, insurance, herd management, irrigation scheduling, marketing Farm Manager, Agribusiness ENSO, season Crop sequence, fallow management, stocking rates, water allocation, insurance Farm Manager, Agribusiness, Policy Season to interannual Crop industry (grain or cotton; native versus improved pastures), rural versus off-farm investments Business Manager, Agribusiness, Policy Decadal (~ 10 yr) Agricultural industry (eg. crops, pastures, forestry, horticulture), investments Agribusiness, Policy Multi-decadal (10 – 20 yrs) Landuse, community impact and adaptation of current systems Policy Climate change ??? Three important steps to create climate knowledge 1. 2. 3. understanding rainfall (climate) variability (physical measure) understanding production variability (bio-physical measure) understanding farm income variability (economic measure) The first step: understanding rainfall JJA rainfall for Dalby, Queensland The first step: understanding rainfall JJA rainfall for Dalby, Queensland How good is the forecast? Skill vs Discriminatory Ability S quantifies agreement between observed and predicted values DA represents the additional knowledge about future states arising from the forecast system over and above the total variability of the prognostic variable Forcast skill and discriminatory ability, Dalby, Qld 1 LEPS p-values KW p-values p-value 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 JFM FMA MAM AMJ MJJ JJA JAS ASO SON OND NDJ 3-monthly period DJF The first step: understanding rainfall Discriminatory Ability of the 5phase SOI forecast system as quantified by KW p-values (KW is a measure of shift in distributions) sustainable agricultural systems The second step: understanding production impacts Simulation models for better risk management how do they work? are based on our component knowledge of science integrate many sources of variability account for management options what can they do? benchmark, assess and quantify potential, attainable, economically optimal and achieved yield or income overcome issues related to moral hazards and ground truthing sustainable agricultural systems WhopperCropper for on-farm decision making Yield (kg/ha) 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 Wheat 120 Wheat 190 Sorghum 120 Sorghum 190 Crop & PAWC (mm) WhopperCropper training and distribution is now through Nutrient Management Systems. www.apsru.gov.au/apsru/products/whopper sustainable agricultural systems Gross Margin (100$ per ha) GM($ per ha) SOI effect on gross margins 500 450 Wheat, Dalby, 150mm, 2/3 full, 15 June sowing, April/May SOI phase 400 350 300 Negative SOI Phase Positive SOI Phase 250 200 150 100 50 0 0N 0N Negative 25N 25N Negative 50N 100N 50N Negative 100N Negative 0N 0N Positive 25N 25N Positive AppliedN & SOI Phase Applied Nitrogen and SOI Phase 50N 50N Positive 100N 100N Positive sustainable agricultural systems Gross Margin (100$ per ha) GM($ per ha) SOI effect on gross margins 500 450 Wheat, Dalby, 150mm, 2/3 full, 15 June sowing, April/May SOI phase 400 350 300 Negative SOI Phase Positive SOI Phase 250 200 150 100 50 0 0N 0N Negative 25N 25N Negative 50N 100N 50N Negative 100N Negative 0N 0N Positive 25N 25N Positive AppliedN & SOI Phase Applied Nitrogen and SOI Phase 50N 50N Positive 100N 100N Positive sustainable agricultural systems Using field/farm scale models Tactical risk management (which crop to grow when and how) Optimising resource use (how much water / nitrogen to use when and where) Estimating crop value (benchmarking, forward selling, insurance) Determine enterprise mix (rotation planning) sustainable agricultural systems Regional Commodity Models (RCM) Predicted sorghum shire yield for the 2004/2005 season, ranked relative to all years (1901-2003) July 2001 July 2002 Legend: 0-10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50-60% 60-70% 70-80% 80-90% 90-100% No data NT Legend: 0-10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-40% 40-50% 50-60% 60-70% 70-80% 80-90% 90-100% No data NT # Emerald WA WA Rom a # Dalby # Goondi wi ndi # SA SA NSW (a) VIC TAS NSW (b) VIC TAS Probabilities of exceeding long-term median wheat yields for every wheat producing shire (= district) in Australia issued in July 2001 and July 2002, respectively. Chance of exceeding median pasture growth for NSW, April to June 2005 sustainable agricultural systems Using regional models Marketing decisions (hedging, contract negotiations, logistics) Value chain issues (quality fluctuations, export vs domestic use, milling operations) Anticipating resource use (water allocations, nitrogen or seed demand, storage capacity) 0.5 0.0 ? -0.5 -1.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 ? -0.5 -1.0 1992 1985 1978 1971 1964 1957 1950 1943 1936 1929 1922 1915 1908 1901 -1.5 1998 1995 1992 1989 1986 1983 1980 1977 1974 1971 1968 1965 1962 1959 -1.5 5-year running mean - Wentworth, 1884 to 1998 1894 Standard Deviations from the mean 1.0 1956 Simulated Wheat Yield 1890+ 1.5 5-year running mean - Wentworth, 1950 to 1998 1950 When is a drought a drought? 1.5 1953 Simulated Wheat Yield 1950+ Standard Deviations from the mean sustainable agricultural systems sustainable agricultural systems Using models for public and private policy decisions When is a drought a drought (Exceptional circumstances, drought relief, structural adjustments etc). Investment / disinvestment (portfolio balance; cotton, grain or pastures) Structural adjustment (diversification, industry mix eg. sugar industry) The policy relevance gap 1. 2. 3. no policy mechanisms for influencing rainfall (step 1), few policy options to affect crop or pasture yields (step 2), but strong community demand for policies to anticipate and moderate the effects of climate variability on farm incomes (step 3). The third step ( ‘the big stumble’): making science relevant Drought “The defining feature of drought is its impact on human activity – it is essentially socially constructed. It is about the mismatch between the availability of water and the uses to which human communities wish to put it.” Linda Courtenay Botterill 2003 Exposure to risk does not equal vulnerability Climate is often ‘important but not urgent’ Many problems are the result of applying narrow, specialised knowledge to complex systems Modern science has been described as ‘islands of understanding in oceans of ignorance’ Scientists and practitioners need to work together to produce trustworthy knowledge that combines scientific excellence with social relevance Hayman (2001); Lowe (2001) The multiple dimensions of vulnerability Human Carney, 1998; Ellis, 2000 Financial Social Exposure to risk does not equal vulnerability Physical Natural Vulnerability of Australian agriculture: Exposure vs Coping Capacity 10% (most extreme) 10 to 25% (extreme) below 25% (least extreme) (Nelson et al. 2005) Vulnerability includes exposure to climate risk exposure to other sources of risk capacity of rural households to cope with risk Why is coping capacity so important? Farming systems have evolved to effectively manage the risks of farming in a highly variable climates – without science intervention. While climate synthesis tools might have contributed to the development of more effective on-farm risk management, there is little or no connection to policy. Why is coping capacity so important? Greater diversity of income sources facilitates substitution between activities and assets in response to shocks such as drought. Policies that enhance diversity of farm income include investment in production, transport and marketing infrastructure, education and training, regional development, and policies that impact on the cost and availability of rural credit. Why is coping capacity so important? We need to distinguish the effects of climate from other sources of income risk. Without a capacity to distinguish between sources of income variability, policies directed toward reducing the impact of climate risk may inadvertently reduce incentives to better manage other sources of risk. A tool for bridging the policy relevance gap The Agricultural Farm Income Risk Model (AgFIRM) combines regional, biophysical models of Australian crop and pasture yield with an econometric model of farm incomes. AgFIRM simulates regional impacts of climate variability on farm incomes. 2002/3 2002-03 Forecasting farm incomes 2001/2 2001-02 1982/3 Probability of exceeding median farm income 1982-83 (Nelson et al. 2005) 2002-03 2001-02 Better drought assistance Probability of 1-in-20 worst farm income 1982-83 1982-83 (Nelson et al. 2005) Tools for bridging the policy relevance gap Policies aimed at increasing the capacity of rural communities to cope with climate risk need to be informed by measures of the multiple socioeconomic dimensions of resilience. Current emphasis on rainfall and production variability only informs policy makers of the exposure to drought, for which there is no policy solution. Public versus private policy development Risk managers must decide which risks should be retained and managed adaptively and which risks should be shared through risk sharing contracts. It requires financial markets to device and price risk sharing contracts in a manner that create benefits for all stakeholders involved, a process that has only just begun in Australia. sustainable agricultural systems Real options, insurance and other financial products retained risks shared risks Farm Reinsurer Community Weather/ climate derivatives Business Insurer Financial Derivatives courtesy of Greg Hertzler, Uni of WA Climate knowledge or seasonal rainfall forecasting? Applied climate knowledge is generated by synthesising scientific insights across disciplinary boundaries, often through the use of models and always jointly with stakeholders. Climate risk management in rural industries is not solely the responsibility of farmers. Likewise, it is not the role of Governments to absorb these risks. Risk managers, policy makers and private sector companies all play important roles in this process. The case for institutional realignment Rainfall and production are not what policy makers are interested in. They are interested in the social and economic wellbeing of rural communities. Analytical support for drought policy that focuses on exposure to climate risk is largely irrelevant climate variability cannot be altered by policy in the short term. Failures and risks The artificial division of climate variability and climate change gets in the way of better decision making. The focus of the climate change community on mitigation bears the danger of overlooking some obvious and immediate adaptation strategies that should from part of any sound climate risk management approach. Failures and risks A problem rather than a disciplinary focus will require some scientists to stop doing what comes naturally (addressing simple issues such as rainfall variability, with increasingly complex analytical tools). Instead, they need to take a broader perspective to addresses not only exposure to risk, but also the people’s ability to cope and the system’s ability to bounce back after times of stress (resilience) Other impediments institutional and disciplinary fragmentation prevails difficult to ‘gain simplicity on the far side of complexity’ R&D funding agencies reluctant to resource genuinely multi-disciplinary, cross institutional projects Some suggestions public / private partnership models need to be explored further in order to ‘mainstream’ climate risk management public / private policy concerns need to be explicitly addressed communicate climate risk management knowledge through functional, existing communication networks of farmers and other landholders First key lesson from several decades of experience Climate knowledge needs to deliver true societal benefits. We need to expand the systems boundaries and fully explore the scientific and socio-economic tensions and interactions - the system is bigger than most of us thought. We need to include the socio-economic dimensions important to rural communities and policy makers, but without abandoning science. We need to achieve true integration of disciplinary knowledge, rather than focusing on certain aspects of the system at the exclusion of others. Second key lesson from several decades of experience True integration without abandoning science takes real resourcing. The capacity to think and act beyond disciplinary boundaries is rare and difficult to nurture in the established institutional context. Existing institutional arrangements often act as a disincentive to true integration. Strong leadership is required to induce cultural change in established institutional arrangements. sustainable agricultural systems Modelling for a purpose Climate Warning Adapt TEMPORAL now field Mitigate farm enterprise future SPATIAL catchment region state ECONOMICAL business industry sector sustainable agricultural systems Modelling for a purpose Value of adaptation to the grain industry PROBABILITY 0.25 0.2 “Increased efficiencies have outweighed all expenditure involved. The costs of tackling climate change are clearly lower than many feared. This is a manageable problem.” 0.15 Lord Browne, CEO of BP, announcing that BP had reached it’s target of reduce carbon emissions to 10% below 1990 levels eight years ahead of schedule 0.1 0.05 0 Values in Millions The Economist, 9 Oct 2004 Failures and risks Why do institutional arrangements need to be realigned in order to implement advances in climate risk management policy? 1. Rainfall and production are not what policy makers are ultimately interested in. They are interested in the social and economic wellbeing of rural communities. There should be a natural evolution from analytical support at certain scales to synthesis tools that integrate the analysis of rainfall right through production, farm incomes and sustainability indicators. So far, institutional and funding structures have largely prevented this from happening in Australia, and probably anywhere else. Policy options for managing climate variability income smoothing and price stabilisation emergency relief undermines self reliance enhanced diversity of income sources investment in infrastructure human and social capital outsourcing risk enhances self reliance (Nelson et al. 2005) Public versus private policy development Underpinned and informed by quantitative systems analysis, such policy development should go hand-inhand with the establishment of novel financial risk management tools such as ‘real options’ (a right, but not the obligation, to take action). Real options are property rights created by investments. The case for institutional realignment Institutional and funding structures have largely prevented this from happening in Australia, and probably anywhere else. There should be a natural evolution from analytical support at certain scales to synthesis tools that integrate the analysis of climate right through production, farm incomes and sustainability indicators. Failures and risks Climate science and agricultural systems science has to become more policy relevant. To some extent this has happened with climate change research. Not so with climate variability research that must also inform policy development to assist stakeholders to better cope and adapt.