4.4 Article

Global Patterns of Crop Production Losses Associated with Droughts from 1983 to 2009

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY
卷 58, 期 6, 页码 1233-1244

出版社

AMER METEOROLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1175/JAMC-D-18-0174.1

关键词

Drought; Agriculture; Crop growth; Economic value

资金

  1. Environment Research and Technology Development Fund of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency [S-14]
  2. Joint Research Program of Arid Land Research Center, Tottori University [30F2001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Droughts represent an important type of climate extreme that reduces crop production and food security. Although this fact is well known, the global geographic pattern of drought-driven reductions in crop production is poorly characterized. As the incidence of relatively more severe droughts is expected to increase under climate change, understanding the vulnerability of crop production to droughts is a key research priority. Here, we estimate the production losses of maize, rice, soy, and wheat from 1983 to 2009 using empirical relationships among crop yields, a drought index, and annual precipitation. We find that approximately three-fourths of the global harvested areas-454 million hectares-experienced drought-induced yield losses over this period, and the cumulative production losses correspond to 166 billion U.S. dollars. Globally averaged, one drought event decreases agricultural gross domestic production by 0.8%, with varying magnitudes of impacts by country. Crop production systems display decreased vulnerability or increased resilience to drought according to increases in per capita gross domestic production (GDP) in the countries with extensive semiarid agricultural areas. These changes in vulnerability accompany technological improvements represented by per capita GDP increases. Our estimates of drought-induced economic losses in agricultural systems offer a sound basis for subsequent assessments of the costs of adaptation to droughts under climate change.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据