418
years. Irrigation may also induce meso-scale circulations that recycle the evapotranspiration water for more downwind precipitation and streamflow, or reduce
atmospheric moisture convergence for overall less regional rainfall; these impacts
may differ substantially by region through land–atmosphere feedbacks.
Attempts to mitigate or respond to changing climate conditions may have farreaching, often unrecognized consequences that feedback into the climate and cause
further changes. It is therefore insufficient to look at projected climate uncoupled
from regional FEW systems.
Recent efforts to model effects of agricultural landscapes and irrigation practices
on regional climate and vice versa have not included system feedbacks, dynamic
crop phenology (especially growing stages susceptible to climate stresses), and
water management practices.
FEW system models should account for these interactions by coupling regional
climate, agroecosystem, watershed, and groundwater models to address key questions such as: At what spatiotemporal scales will weather extremes, climate anomalies, or climate changes significantly impact the resilience of regional FEW systems,
and, conversely, at what scales can they be notably affected by land use changes
resulting from adaptation and mitigation strategies?
Key Points
• This chapter presents the state-of-the-art and challenges ahead in the development of integrated modeling tools to support the analysis of food, energy, and
water systems (FEWS). A focus is placed on interdisciplinary mathematical
modeling toward integrated planning and identification/evaluation of trade-offs
and synergies in developing such systems.
• A fundamental challenge in the management of FEW systems is that, although
these systems are tightly linked, the decisions about them are often made independently by decision-makers focusing on each system in isolation or with only
minimal consideration of the other systems. Similarly, modeling in support of
these decisions is also frequently focused on single systems with only minimal
consideration of the other systems.
• A number of modeling platforms have been developed to support the assessment
of food, energy, and water systems under different economic and environmental
conditions and to support resource development policies. Typically, however,
such models are designed for different purposes, and linkages between the
F-E-W systems are limited.
• Continued challenges for integrated modeling in this emerging field are identifying and address shared needs of FEW systems stakeholders, facilitating tailored
analyses over different geographical regions, computing in varying spatial and
temporal scales, improving system efficiencies and addressing FEW system
vulnerabilities and resilience to human and natural stressors.
Discussion Points and Exercises
1. Discuss some of the limitations of existing FEW system modeling approaches.
2. Highlight a few differences between sector-centric and integrated FEW systems
modeling approaches.
F. R. Miralles-Wilhelm
years. Irrigation may also induce meso-scale circulations that recycle the evapotranspiration water for more downwind precipitation and streamflow, or reduce
atmospheric moisture convergence for overall less regional rainfall; these impacts
may differ substantially by region through land–atmosphere feedbacks.
Attempts to mitigate or respond to changing climate conditions may have farreaching, often unrecognized consequences that feedback into the climate and cause
further changes. It is therefore insufficient to look at projected climate uncoupled
from regional FEW systems.
Recent efforts to model effects of agricultural landscapes and irrigation practices
on regional climate and vice versa have not included system feedbacks, dynamic
crop phenology (especially growing stages susceptible to climate stresses), and
water management practices.
FEW system models should account for these interactions by coupling regional
climate, agroecosystem, watershed, and groundwater models to address key questions such as: At what spatiotemporal scales will weather extremes, climate anomalies, or climate changes significantly impact the resilience of regional FEW systems,
and, conversely, at what scales can they be notably affected by land use changes
resulting from adaptation and mitigation strategies?
Key Points
• This chapter presents the state-of-the-art and challenges ahead in the development of integrated modeling tools to support the analysis of food, energy, and
water systems (FEWS). A focus is placed on interdisciplinary mathematical
modeling toward integrated planning and identification/evaluation of trade-offs
and synergies in developing such systems.
• A fundamental challenge in the management of FEW systems is that, although
these systems are tightly linked, the decisions about them are often made independently by decision-makers focusing on each system in isolation or with only
minimal consideration of the other systems. Similarly, modeling in support of
these decisions is also frequently focused on single systems with only minimal
consideration of the other systems.
• A number of modeling platforms have been developed to support the assessment
of food, energy, and water systems under different economic and environmental
conditions and to support resource development policies. Typically, however,
such models are designed for different purposes, and linkages between the
F-E-W systems are limited.
• Continued challenges for integrated modeling in this emerging field are identifying and address shared needs of FEW systems stakeholders, facilitating tailored
analyses over different geographical regions, computing in varying spatial and
temporal scales, improving system efficiencies and addressing FEW system
vulnerabilities and resilience to human and natural stressors.
Discussion Points and Exercises
1. Discuss some of the limitations of existing FEW system modeling approaches.
2. Highlight a few differences between sector-centric and integrated FEW systems
modeling approaches.
F. R. Miralles-Wilhelm