*4.3.1 Biophysical impacts on crop production*

Due to enhanced evapotranspiration, driven by higher temperatures, many regions will experience a moisture deficit despite higher (but variable) amounts of precipitation. Water stress during critical times for plants (e.g., flowering) is especially harmful and would affect plant growth and productivity. Yield responses are sensitive to climatic change and location and tend to reduce the beneficial effects stemming from elevated carbon dioxide (CO2) levels [23]. Details of changes in yields of selected crops in Canada (applicable to the Prairie Region) are presented in **Table 2**.

Estimates of future yields under climate change have been variable depending on the climate model used, location, and global warming levels. Another uncertainty is created by the positive effect of higher level of CO2 in the future. A study by [23] has reported an increase in the yields of canola and wheat with increase in global warming, while maize (corn) yield was simulated to increase or slightly decrease depending on the characteristics of the currently grown cultivar and differences among the crop models. The same study also indicated that future warming accompanied by increased CO2 concentration would remain beneficial to crop yields at the global warming level of 2.0°C for Canada.

Agriculture in the Prairie Region could benefit from warmer and longer growing seasons and a warmer winter. Climate change may also bring opportunities, which could increase productivity and allow cultivation of new and potentially more profitable crops and tree species. A study [27] has indicated that under the projected changes in climate, area allocated to wheat will continue to decrease into the future by 2.7–4.6% in various soil zones, while the area left to summer fallow is projected to increase. The choice of wheat is preferred over pulses, feed, and forages, while the choice of specialty oilseeds (flaxseed, mustard seed, and canary seed) is projected to become preferred over wheat in the future. Change in crop mix has been suggested [28], but it still will be dominated by wheat, barley, and canola. Producers under the changed climate may also introduce some new crops, such as:

Pulse crops: Pulse area is likely to increase in the drier, more arid growing environments that are expected in 2050.

Soybeans: The transition to larger soybean area in the prairies is already underway with former marginal areas in southern Manitoba and Saskatchewan now growing the crop in a regular rotation.

Corn: The movement of corn is also underway to parts of southern Manitoba and southern Alberta, but the transition is expected to take a longer time than


*DSSAT is the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer. For details, see [24].*

*Source: Adapted from [25].*

*\* DayCent is a daily time series biogeochemical model used in agroecosystems to simulate fluxes of carbon and nitrogen between the atmosphere, vegetation, and soil and is a daily version of the CENTURY biogeochemical model. For details, see [26].*

#### **Table 2.**

*Projected future changes in crop yield under rain-fed conditions with and without carbon dioxide fertigation.*

soybeans. Corn will also be limited by the dryness in parts of the southern prairies. Corn has large moisture requirements to produce economically attractive yields.

Sorghum and millet: Sorghum and millet are two possible crops to move into the drier areas of the prairies in 2050. These crops represent a possible feed grain for the driest areas, but sensitivity to frost will limit area even with increased growing season [25].

Negative impacts may result from changes in the timing of precipitation, increased risk of droughts and associated pests, and excessive moisture. Because of these positive and negative factors, crop yields will vary from region to region.

### *4.3.2 Livestock production*

Temperature is considered the most important bioclimatic factor for livestock [29]. Warmer temperatures may create benefits and challenges to livestock operation in the Prairie Region [30]. The major benefit would be through higher winter temperatures, which would lower feed requirements, increase survival of the young, and reduce energy costs [31]. Hot environment impairs production (growth, meat and milk yield and quality, egg yield, weight, and quality) and reproductive performance, metabolic and health status, and immune response [32]. However, these changes would also produce challenges for livestock producers in the form of new pests and diseases for animals, and alien species for grasslands and pastures. The warming climate would bring challenges during summer months, when heat waves can kill animals, particularly chickens [33]. Heat stress can also affect the productivity of dairy animals, the meat quality for beef animals, and reproduction (particularly for dairy animals). In some areas, the process of desertification may

**125**

*Resiliency of Prairie Agriculture to Climate Change DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.87098*

ability of agro-pastoral and pastoral systems.

*4.3.3 Socio-economic effect of extreme events on agriculture*

whereas others indicate positive and large impacts.

\$4.1 billion annually (based on the estimation model and scenario).

Extreme events can have devastating impacts on crop yields and through these on the rest of the regional and national economy. The Prairie Region (in fact other parts of Canada as well) experienced a major back-to-back drought during 2001 and 2002. Estimated impacts of these droughts [34] indicate that crop yields were as little as half of average yields during normal or more suitable growing conditions. Repercussions of these droughts were severe and far-reaching, including: (1) Agricultural production levels, through crop production losses, were devastating for a wide variety of crops across the Prairie Region, particularly in 2001. Total value of production dropped an estimated \$3 billion for the 2001 and 2002 drought years, with the largest loss in 2002 at more than \$2.2 billion. (2) The Gross Domestic Product fell some \$4.5 billion for 2001 and 2002, again with the larger loss in 2002 at more than \$3.1 billion. (3) Employment losses exceeded 27,883 jobs, including nearly 17,803 jobs in 2002. (4) Net farm income was negative or zero for several provinces for the first time in 25 years. (5) Livestock production was especially difficult due to the widespread scarcity of feed and water. Many producers culled their herd after the first year of the drought. (6) Water supplies that were previously reliable were negatively affected, and several failed to meet the requirements. (7) Multisector effects were associated with the 2001–2002 drought, unlike many previous droughts that affected single to relatively few sectors. Impacts were felt in areas as wide-ranging as agricultural production and processing, water supplies, recreation, tourism, health, hydroelectric production, transportation, and forestry. (8) Long-lasting impacts included soil and other damage by wind erosion, deterioration of grasslands, and herd reductions. (9) Several government response and safety net programs partially offset negative socio-economic impacts of the 2001 and 2002 drought years [34]. In the future, drought frequency has been predicted to

reduce the carrying capacity of rangelands (as suggested by [34]) and the buffering

Results from studies on the economic impacts of climate change on prairie agriculture are highly variable from region to region and from study to study. Some studies suggest that overall economic consequences will be negative and small,

Socio-economic impacts of climate change-induced changes have been estimated to be positive. A Manitoba study [35] estimated that changes in crop revenues under current economic/technological conditions will range from a 7% loss in Alberta under one scenario to an 8% increase in Saskatchewan under a slightly different scenario. Manitoba, the least water-deficient province, has been projected to benefit from warming as producers shift to higher value crops, resulting in an increased gross margin of more than 50%. Many studies have predicted increased land values in the Prairie Region under climate change. Similarly, for Saskatchewan, a study [36] reported that climate change is beneficial for Canadian Prairie agriculture except for some southeast regions of Alberta. Comparing the results from direct impacts of climate and price changes on land value with the results from indirect impacts through area response estimation reveals that direct impacts would increase land values by 31%. Ayouqi and Vercammen [37] have suggested similar results, who applied three different climate change scenarios. They reported that except for the north part of Saskatchewan and the west part of Alberta in the medium climate change scenario, all other cases show increase in the farmland value. In fact, the farmlands of Canadian Prairies were estimated to gain a value between \$1.14 and

*Climate Change and Agriculture*

**Crop Model\* Global warming level** 

**in °C**

Canola DayCent 1.5 1.5 −2.8

Wheat DayCent 1.5 1.9 −2.3

*DSSAT is the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer. For details, see [24].*

DSSAT 1.5 6.1 −1.0

DSSAT 1.5 6.1 2.1

DayCent 1.5 −0.7 −1.5

DSSAT 1.5 3.0 1.2

**Yield increase percentage of 2006–2015 mean**

> **Without CO2 fertigation**

**With CO2 fertigation**

3.0 2.4 −13.4

3.0 7.7 −15.5

3.0 4.6 −11.3

3.0 22.8 1.8

3.0 −5.6 −9.0

3.0 −4.8 −11.8

soybeans. Corn will also be limited by the dryness in parts of the southern prairies. Corn has large moisture requirements to produce economically attractive yields. Sorghum and millet: Sorghum and millet are two possible crops to move into the drier areas of the prairies in 2050. These crops represent a possible feed grain for the driest areas, but sensitivity to frost will limit area even with increased growing

*Projected future changes in crop yield under rain-fed conditions with and without carbon dioxide fertigation.*

*DayCent is a daily time series biogeochemical model used in agroecosystems to simulate fluxes of carbon and nitrogen between the atmosphere, vegetation, and soil and is a daily version of the CENTURY biogeochemical model. For* 

Negative impacts may result from changes in the timing of precipitation, increased risk of droughts and associated pests, and excessive moisture. Because of these positive and negative factors, crop yields will vary from region to region.

Temperature is considered the most important bioclimatic factor for livestock [29]. Warmer temperatures may create benefits and challenges to livestock operation in the Prairie Region [30]. The major benefit would be through higher winter temperatures, which would lower feed requirements, increase survival of the young, and reduce energy costs [31]. Hot environment impairs production (growth, meat and milk yield and quality, egg yield, weight, and quality) and reproductive performance, metabolic and health status, and immune response [32]. However, these changes would also produce challenges for livestock producers in the form of new pests and diseases for animals, and alien species for grasslands and pastures. The warming climate would bring challenges during summer months, when heat waves can kill animals, particularly chickens [33]. Heat stress can also affect the productivity of dairy animals, the meat quality for beef animals, and reproduction (particularly for dairy animals). In some areas, the process of desertification may

**124**

season [25].

Maize (Corn)

*details, see [26].*

**Table 2.**

*\**

*Source: Adapted from [25].*

*4.3.2 Livestock production*

reduce the carrying capacity of rangelands (as suggested by [34]) and the buffering ability of agro-pastoral and pastoral systems.
