Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWatson, J
dc.contributor.authorChallinor, AJ
dc.contributor.authorFricker, Thomas E.
dc.contributor.authorFerro, Christopher A.T.
dc.date.accessioned2016-02-16T15:39:51Z
dc.date.issued2014-10-15
dc.description.abstractUnderstanding 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.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNERC EQUIP projecten_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEuropean MACSUR Knowledge Huben_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 132, Iss. 1, pp. 93 - 109en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10584-014-1264-3
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/19898
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherSpringer Verlag (Germany)en_GB
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.springer.com/-/3/eb11057dfff946978617727624e464e1en_GB
dc.rightsCopyright © The Author(s) 2014. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.en_GB
dc.titleComparing the effects of calibration and climate errors on a statistical crop model and a process-based crop modelen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2016-02-16T15:39:51Z
dc.identifier.issn0165-0009
dc.descriptionPublisheden_GB
dc.descriptionArticleen_GB
dc.identifier.eissn1573-1480
dc.identifier.journalClimatic Changeen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record