Thông tin tài nguyên

Climate smart agriculture and global food-crop production

pmc-PMC7190105.pdf · Phiên bản 1 · 19 trang

18
Bản gốc
Trang 18 · Đoạn 49Vị trí nguồn

61. Jones CD, Hughes JK, Bellouin N, Hardiman SC, Jones GS, Knight J, et al. The HadGEM2-ES Imple- mentation of CMIP5 Centennial Simulations. Geosci Model Dev [Internet]. 2011; 4(3):543–70. Available from: isi:000295379500001 62. A Ainsworth E, Beier C, Calfapietra C, Ceulemans R, Durand-Tardif M, Farquhar G, et al. Next genera- tion of elevated [CO2] experiments with crops: A critical investment for feeding the future world. Plant Cell Environ. 2008; 31:1317–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2008.01841.x PMID: 18518914 63. Sharkey TD, Bernacchi CJ, Farquhar GD, Singsaas EL. Fitting photosynthetic carbon dioxide response curves for C3 leaves. Plant, Cell Environ. 2007; 30(9):1035–40. 64. Lipper L, McCarthy B, Zilberman D, Asfaw S, Branca G, editors. Climate smart agriculture: building resilience to climate change. Rome, Italy: FAO; 2018. 65. Bewket W. Soil and water conservation intervention with conventional technologies in northwestern highlands of Ethiopia: Acceptance and adoption by farmers. Land use policy [Internet]. 2007 Apr; 24 (2):404–16. Available from: isi:000245577000011 66. Enfors EI, Gordon LJ. Dealing with drought: The challenge of using water system technologies to break dryland poverty traps. Glob Environ Chang Policy Dimens [Internet]. 2008 Oct; 18(4):607–16. Available from: isi:000261989400008 67. Shiferaw BA, Okello J, Reddy R V. Adoption and adaptation of natural resource management innova- tions in smallholder agriculture: Reflections on key lessons and best practices. Environ Dev Sustain. 2009; 11(3):601–19.

Trang 18 · Đoạn 50Vị trí nguồn

68. Teklewold H, Kohlin G. Risk preferences as determinants of soil conservation decisions in Ethiopia. J Soil Water Conserv [Internet]. 2011 Mar; 66(2):87–96. Available from: isi:000288588500006 69. O’Neill BC, Kriegler E, Ebi KL, Kemp-Benedict E, Riahi K, Rothman DS, et al. The roads ahead: Narra- tives for shared socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century. Glob Environ Chang [Internet]. 2017; 42:169–80. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0959378015000060 70. O’Neill BC, Kriegler E, Riahi K, Ebi KL, Hallegatte S, Carter TR, et al. A new scenario framework for cli- mate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Clim Change [Internet]. 2014 Feb; 122(3):387–400. Available from: isi:000330989300004 71. Watts MJ. Resilience as a Way of Life: Biopolitical Security, Catastrophism, and the Food–Climate Change Question. In: Chen N, Sharp L, editors. Bioinsecurity and Vulnerability. SAR Press; 2014. p. 145–72. 72. Levine S. Assessing resilience: why quantification misses the point. 2014 [cited 2017 Nov 9]; Available from: http://www.odi.org.uk/hpg 73. Smith P, Bustamante M, Ahammad H, Clark H, Dong H, Elsiddig EA, et al. Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU). In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Sey- both K, et al., editors. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cam-

Trang 18 · Đoạn 51Vị trí nguồn

bridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press; 2015. 74. Wollenberg E, Richards M, Smith P, Havlı´k P, Obersteiner M, Tubiello FN, et al. Reducing emissions from agriculture to meet the 2˚C target. Glob Chang Biol [Internet]. 2016 Dec; 22(12):3859–64. Avail- able from: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13340 PMID: 27185416 75. Porter ME, Kramer MR. The Big Idea: Creating Shared Value. Harv Bus Rev. 2011; 89:2–17. 76. De Pinto A, Li M, Haruna A, Hyman GG, Martinez MAL, Creamer B, et al. Low Emission Development Strategies in Agriculture. An Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Uses (AFOLU) Perspective. World Dev [Internet]. 2016; 87:180–203. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/ S0305750X16304041 77. Gockowski J, Sonwa D. Cocoa intensification scenarios and their predicted impact on CO 2 emissions, biodiversity conservation, and rural livelihoods in the Guinea rain forest of West Africa. Environ Manage. 2011; 48(2):307–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9602-3 PMID: 21191791 78. Borlaug NE. Contributions of conventional plant breeding to food production. Science (80-). 1983; (219):689–93. 79. Barbier EB, Burgess JC. The Economics of Tropical Forest Land Use Options. Land Econ [Internet]. 1997 Feb 7; 73(2):174–95. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3147281 80. Rudel TK, Schneider L, Uriarte M, Turner BL, DeFries R, Lawrence D, et al. Agricultural intensification and changes in cultivated areas, 1970–2005. Proc Natl Acad Sci [Internet]. 2009 Dec 8; 106(49):20675

Trang 18 · Đoạn 52Vị trí nguồn

LP– 20680. Available from: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/49/20675.abstract 81. Wiebe KD, Sulser TB, Pacheco P, De Pinto A, Mason-D’Croz D, Dermawan A, et al. The palm oil dilemma: Policy tensions among higher productivity, rising demand, and deforestation. Washington D. C.; 2019. PLOS ONE Climate smart agriculture and global food-crop production PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231764 April 29, 2020 18 / 19