The intrinsic plasticity of farm businesses and their resilience to change. An Australian example.

This paper examines the idea that plasticity in farm management introduces resilience to change and allows farm businesses to perform when operating in highly variable environments. We also argue for the need to develop and apply more integrative assessments of farm performance that combine the use of modelling tools with deliberative processes involving farmers and researchers in a co-learning process, to more effectively identify and implement more productive and resilient farm businesses. In a plastic farming system, farm management is highly contingent on environmental conditions. In plastic farming systems farm managers constantly vary crops and inputs based on the availability of limited and variable resources (e.g. land, water, finances, labour, machinery, etc.), and signals from its operating environment (e.g. climate, markets), with the objective of maximising a number of, often competing, objectives (e.g. maximise profits, minimise risks, etc.). In contrast in more rigid farming systems farm management is more calendar driven and relatively fixed sequences of crops are regularly followed over time and across the farm. Here we describe the application of a whole farm simulation model to (i) compare, in silico, the sensitivity of two farming systems designs of contrasting levels of plasticity, operating in two contrasting environments, when exposed to a stressor in the form of climate change scenarios;(ii) investigate the presence of interactions and feedbacks at the field and farm levels capable of modifying the intensity and direction of the responses to climate signals; and (iii) discuss the need for the development and application of more integrative assessments in the analysis of impacts and adaptation options to climate change. In both environments, the more plastic farm management strategy had higher median profits and was less risky for the baseline and less intensive climate change scenarios (2030). However, for the more severe climate change scenarios (2070), the benefit of plastic strategies tended to disappear. These results suggest that, to a point, farming systems having higher levels of plasticity would enable farmers to more effectively respond to climate shifts, thus ensuring the economic viability of the farm business. Though, as the intensity of the stress increases (e.g. 2070 climate change scenario) more significant changes in the farming system might be required to adapt. We also found that in the case studies analysed here, most of the impacts from the climate change scenarios on farm profit and economic risk originated from important reductions in cropping intensity and changes in crop mix rather than from changes in the yields of individual crops. Changes in cropping intensity and crop mix were explained by the combination of reductions in the number of sowing opportunities around critical times in the cropping calendar, and to operational constraints at the whole farm level i.e. limited work capacity in an environment having fewer and more concentrated sowing opportunities. This indicates that indirect impacts from shifts in climate on farm operations can be more important than direct impacts from climate on the yield of individual crops. The results suggest that due to the complexity of farm businesses, impact assessments and opportunities for adaptation to climate change might also need to be pursued at higher integration levels than the crop or the field. We conclude that plasticity can be a desirable characteristic in farming systems operating in highly variable environments, and that integrated whole farm systems analyses of impacts and adaptation to climate change are required to identify important interactions between farm management decision rules, availability of resources, and farmer's preference.

The limit to wheat water-use efficiency in eastern Australia. II. Influence of rainfall patterns

We investigated the influence of rainfall patterns on the water-use efficiency of wheat in a transect between Horsham (36°S) and Emerald (23°S) in eastern Australia. Water-use efficiency was defined in terms of biomass and transpiration, WUEB/T, and grain yield and evapotranspiration, WUEY/ET. Our working hypothesis is that latitudinal trends in WUEY/ET of water-limited crops are the complex result of southward increasing WUEB/T and soil evaporation, and season-dependent trends in harvest index. Our approach included: (a) analysis of long-term records to establish latitudinal gradients of amount, seasonality, and size-structure of rainfall; and (b) modelling wheat development, growth, yield, water budget components, and derived variables including WUEB/T and WUEY/ET. Annual median rainfall declined from around 600 mm in northern locations to 380 mm in the south. Median seasonal rain (from sowing to harvest) doubled between Emerald and Horsham, whereas median off-season rainfall (harvest to sowing) ranged from 460 mm at Emerald to 156 mm at Horsham. The contribution of small events (≤ 5 mm) to seasonal rainfall was negligible at Emerald (median 15 mm) and substantial at Horsham (105 mm). Power law coefficients (τ), i.e. the slopes of the regression between size and number of events in a log-log scale, captured the latitudinal gradient characterised by an increasing dominance of small events from north to south during the growing season. Median modelled WUEB/T increased from 46 kg/ha.mm at Emerald to 73 kg/ha.mm at Horsham, in response to decreasing atmospheric demand. Median modelled soil evaporation during the growing season increased from 70 mm at Emerald to 172 mm at Horsham. This was explained by the size-structure of rainfall characterised with parameter τ, rather than by the total amount of rainfall. Median modelled harvest index ranged from 0.25 to 0.34 across locations, and had a season-dependent latitudinal pattern, i.e. it was greater in northern locations in dry seasons in association with wetter soil profiles at sowing. There was a season-dependent latitudinal pattern in modelled WUEY/ET. In drier seasons, high soil evaporation driven by a very strong dominance of small events, and lower harvest index override the putative advantage of low atmospheric demand and associated higher WUEB/T in southern locations, hence the significant southwards decrease in WUEY/ET. In wetter seasons, when large events contribute a significant proportion of seasonal rain, higher WUEB/T in southern locations may translate into high WUEY/ET. Linear boundary functions (French-Schultz type models) accounting for latitudinal gradients in its parameters, slope, and x-intercept, were fitted to scatter-plots of modelled yield v. evapotranspiration. The x-intercept of the model is re-interpreted in terms of rainfall size structure, and the slope or efficiency multiplier is described in terms of the radiation, temperature, and air humidity properties of the environment. Implications for crop management and breeding are discussed.

Climate savvy grazing (Developing improved grazing and related practices to assist beef production enterprises across northern Australia to adapt to a changing and more variable climate)

There is uncertainty over the potential changes to rainfall across northern Australia under climate change. Since rainfall is a key driver of pasture growth, cattle numbers and the resulting animal productivity and beef business profitability, the ability to anticipate possible management strategies within such uncertainty is crucial. The Climate Savvy Grazing project used existing research, expert knowledge and computer modelling to explore the best-bet management strategies within best, median and worse-case future climate scenarios. All three scenarios indicated changes to the environment and resources upon which the grazing industry of northern Australia depends. Well-adapted management strategies under a changing climate are very similar to best practice within current climatic conditions. Maintaining good land condition builds resource resilience, maximises opportunities under higher rainfall years and reduces the risk of degradation during drought and failed wet seasons. Matching stocking rate to the safe long-term carrying capacity of the land is essential; reducing stock numbers in response to poor seasons and conservatively increasing stock numbers in response to better seasons generally improves profitability and maintains land in good condition. Spelling over the summer growing season will improve land condition under a changing climate as it does under current conditions. Six regions were included within the project. Of these, the Victoria River District in the Northern Territory, Gulf country of Queensland and the Kimberley region of Western Australia had projections of similar or higher than current rainfall and the potential for carrying capacity to increase. The Alice Springs, Maranoa-Balonne and Fitzroy regions had projections of generally drying conditions and the greatest risk of reduced pasture growth and carrying capacity. Encouraging producers to consider and act on the risks, opportunities and management options inherent in climate change was a key goal of the project. More than 60,000 beef producers, advisors and stakeholders are now more aware of the management strategies which build resource resilience, and that resilience helps buffer against the effects of variable and changing climatic conditions. Over 700 producers have stated they have improved confidence, skills and knowledge to attempt new practices to build resilience. During the course of the project, more than 165 beef producers reported they have implemented changes to build resource and business resilience.