Agricultural lands occupy 37% of the earth's land surface. Agriculture accounts for 52 and 84% of global anthropogenic methane and nitrous oxide emissions. Agricultural soils may also act as a sink or source for CO 2 , but the net flux is small. Many agricultural practices can potentially mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the most prominent of which are improved cropland and grazing land management and restoration of degraded lands and cultivated organic soils. Lower, but still significant mitigation potential is provided by water and rice management, set-aside, land use change and agroforestry, livestock management and manure management. The global technical mitigation potential from agriculture (excluding fossil fuel offsets from biomass) by 2030, considering all gases, is estimated to be approximately 5500-6000 Mt CO 2 -eq. yr K1 , with economic potentials of approximately 1500-1600, 2500-2700 and 4000-4300 Mt CO 2 -eq. yr K1 at carbon prices of up to 20, up to 50 and up to 100 US$ t CO 2 -eq. K1 , respectively. In addition, GHG emissions could be reduced by substitution of fossil fuels for energy production by agricultural feedstocks (e.g. crop residues, dung and dedicated energy crops). The economic mitigation potential of biomass energy from agriculture is estimated to be 640, 2240 and 16 000 Mt CO 2 -eq. yr K1 at 0-20, 0-50 and 0-100 US$ t CO 2 -eq. K1 , respectively.

No abstract

Agriculture and forestry will be particularly sensitive to changes in mean climate and climate variability in the northern and southern regions of Europe. Agriculture may be positively affected by climate change in the northern areas through the introduction of new crop species and varieties, higher crop production and expansion of suitable areas for crop cultivation. The disadvantages may be determined by an increase in need for plant protection, risk of nutrient leaching and accelerated breakdown of soil organic matter. In the southern areas the benefits of the projected climate change will be limited, while the disadvantages will be predominant. The increased water use efficiency caused by increasing CO 2 will compensate for some of the negative effects of increasing water limitation and extreme weather events, but lower harvestable yields, higher yield variability and reduction in suitable areas of traditional crops are expected for these areas. Forestry in the Mediterranean region may be mainly affected by increases in drought and forest fires. In northern Europe, the increased precipitation is expected to be large enough to compensate for the increased evapotranspiration. On the other hand, however, increased precipitation, cloudiness and rain days and the reduced duration of snow cover and soil frost may negatively affect forest work and timber logging determining lower profitability of forest production and a decrease in recreational possibilities. Adaptation management strategies should be introduced, as effective tools, to reduce the negative impacts of climate change on agricultural and forestry sectors.Climatic Change (2005) 70: 117-135 c Springer 2005

No abstract

In this paper, we use the Rothamsted Carbon Model to estimate how cropland mineral soil carbon stocks are likely to change under future climate, and how agricultural management might influence these stocks in the future. The model was run for croplands occurring on mineral soils in European Russia and the Ukraine, representing 74 Mha of cropland in Russia and 31 Mha in the Ukraine. The model used climate data from the HadCM3 climate model, forced by four Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) emission scenarios representing various degrees of globalization and emphasis on economic vs. environmental considerations. Three land use scenarios were examined, business as usual (BAU) management, optimal management (OPT) to maximize profit, and soil sustainability (SUS) in which profit was maximized within the constraint that soil carbon must either remain stable or increase. Our findings suggest that soil organic carbon (SOC) will be lost under all climate scenarios, but less is lost under the climate scenarios where environmental considerations are placed higher than purely economic considerations (IPCC B1 and B2 scenarios) compared with the climate associated with emissions resulting from the global free market scenario (IPCC A1FI scenario). More SOC is lost towards the end of the study period. Optimal management is able to reduce this loss of SOC, by up to 44% compared with business as usual management. The soil sustainability scenario could be run only for a limited area, but in that area was shown to increase SOC stocks under three climate scenarios, compared with a loss of SOC under business as usual management in the same area. Improved agricultural soil management will have a significant role to play in the adaptation to, and mitigation of, climate change in this region. Further, our results suggest that this adaptation could be realized without damaging profitability for the farmers, a key criteria affecting whether optimal management can be achieved in reality.