Joint Programming Initiative
— ERAnet Coordination and Support Action
• fundingfor JPI governingboard, scretariat, scientificadvisoryboard, JPI meetings
Assessing and raisingbiological resource use efficiency
Food
Security
Responding to a globally increasedfooddemand
Building resilience in agricultural systems adaptation
FACCE JPI
Agrimitigation
Climate culture Change
Operating within GHG, energy & contaminants limits

Governing Board
(21 countries) elects
Scientific Advisory Board
(12 members)
Knowledge Hubs
Stakeholder Advisory
Board
Stakeholder Consultation
Scientific Research
Agenda
Core Research Themes
1.
Integrated assessment of food security
2.
Sustainable intensification
3.
Tradeoffs with ecosystem services
4.
Adaptation to climate change
5.
GHG mitigation
FACCE JPI Secretariat supports GB &
SAB
Implementation

FACCE-JPI Knowledge Hub
1. Integrated assessment of food security
2. Sustainable intensification
3. Tradeoffs with ecosystem services
4. Adaptation to climate change
5. GHG mitigation

• An instrument building on the concept of
“Networks of excellence”
• Brings together research groups that already have funding in an thematic area
• The support given can be coordination costs, travel expenses and thematic workshops. Countries may choose to support research and/or mobility
.

MACSUR — Modelling European AgriculturewithClimate Change for Food Security
• Detailed climate change risk assessment for
European agriculture: how will climate variability and change affect regional farming systems in near and far future?
• What are the risks and the opportunities for
European agriculture and food security?
• An ensemble of crop and livestock models will be benchmarked, inter-compared and coupled to both climatic and economic models in collaboration with the international project AgMIP.

16 countries
•Austria
•Belgium
•Czech Rep.
•Denmark
•Estonia
•Finland
•France
•Germany
•Israel
•Italy
•The Netherlands
•Norway
•Poland
•Romania
•Spain
•Sweden
•UK
© EuroGeographics for the administrative boundaries

• Project started 1 June, 2012; runs 3 yrs
• individual partners start June–August 2012
• Kickoff-Workshop
— 15/16 October 2012, Berlin

• Coordination & Cross-cutting (Hub)
— Martin Banse (vTI), Richard Tiffin (U Reading)
• Crop modelling (CropM)
— Frank Ewert (U Bonn), Raimund Rötter (MTT)
• Socio-economic modelling (TradeM)
— Floor Brouwer (U Wageningen), Franz Sinabell (WIFO)
• Livestock modelling (LiveM)
— Michael Abberton (Aberystwyth U), JAC Me ij s (U Wageningen)

Coordination of Knowledge Hub
CropM
TradeM
LiveM
Cross-cutting activities
Science excellence
Network activity
Capacity building

Coordination of Knowledge Hub
CropM
TradeM
LiveM
Cross-cutting activities
Science excellence
Network activity
Capacity building

Coordination of Knowledge Hub
CropM
TradeM
LiveM
Cross-cutting activities
Science excellence
Network activity
Capacity building

Coordination of Knowledge Hub
CropM
TradeM
LiveM
Cross-cutting activities
Science excellence
Network activity
Capacity building

WP1 Model intercomparison (develop protocols; extend sites, crops)
WP2 Model improvements through generating and compiling data
WP3 Scaling methods and model linking
WP4 Scenario development and impact uncertainty analysis
WP5 Capacity building
WP6 Case studies on impact assessment (cross cutting theme)
Christian Kersebaum (DE)
Marco Bindi (IT)
JørgenOlesen (DK)
MirekTrnka (CZ)
Frank Ewert (DE),Sander
Janssen (NL),Martin van
Ittersum (NL)
Reimund Rötter (FI), Daniel
Wallach (FR), M Semenov (UK),
Mike Rivington (UK)
John R Porter (DK)
Jan Verhagen (NL)
Derek Stewart (UK)

WP1 Existing tools, data, and models Waldemar Bojar (PL)
WP2 Improved tools, data, and models ØyvindHoveid (NO)
Gabriele Dono (IT) WP3 Cross-cutting issues in regional pilot studies
WP4 Capacity building Katharina Helming (DE)

WP1 Building and exploring datasets and climate models on climate change in relation to livestock and grassland
WP2 Modelintercomparisonon climatechange in relation to livestock and grassland
WP3 Improvingtheassessment of climatechangeimpact on livestock and grassland at farmlevel
WP4 Contribution to crosscuttingactivitieswithintegratedst udies at regional level
Jacqui Matthews (UK)
Gianni Bellocchi (FR)
Nicholas Hutchings (UK)
Tommy Dalgaard (DK)

WP1 Facilitation of regional pilot studies
WP2 Capacity building across models and themes
WP3 Coordination of research agenda and international collaboration
Richard Tiffin (UK)
Martin Banse (DE)
Martin Banse (DE)

CropM
1
2
2
3
2
LiveM
1
0 Scenarios defining boundary conditions for all themes
• climate change, land use, CAP strategies
• level of uncertainty acceptable to stakeholders
TradeM
1
0
1 Inventory of data sets and models; benchmarking and improvement of models; ensemble model runs
2 Advancement across two themes tested on methodological case studies
3 Questions of impact answered by regional pilot studies (linked to stakeholders) across three themes

• How does European agriculture adapt to climate change and what are its impacts on food security?
• How does CAP contribute to increasing food security?
• What are the effects of competing demands of land use on food security?

• crop rotations
• integration across themes
• micro (plot) to macro (market) levels
• diversity in soil, climate, and systems
• training of integrative modellers
• knowledge exchange & international collaboration
AgMIP
MultiSward
AgTrials
FoodSecure CCAFS
AnimalChange

• farm-level models, diverse approaches
— FAMOS, MODAM, mathematical farm investment models
• regional and national models
— optimization of investment, resource use, or food security
• international and global models
— international trade and policies
• sector models (farm-EU-global)

CropM
1
2
2
3
TradeM
1
2
LiveM
1
1 Each theme advances existing methodology by benchmarking and improvement of models using common data sets and scenarios.
2 Advancement across two themes is tested on methodological case studies.
3 Advancement across three themes is achieved by regional pilot
studies (linked to stakeholders) to answer questions of impact.

• build on good modules of existing models
• increase number of farm types
• use stochastic methods to reflect food production and climate
• bottom-up variability
• top-down boundary conditions
• no detailed all-purpose model possible

Sharing of scenarios, protocols, and data
— AgMIP
— AgTrials
— FoodSecure
— AnimalChange
— MultiSward
— CCAFS
MACSUR emphasizes
• crop rotations
• integration across themes
• micro and macro levels
• European diversity in soil, climate, and systems.
• knowledge exchange & collaboration
• training of integrative modellers