Evaluating Strategies for Adaptation to Climate Change in Grapevine Production-A Systematic Review.

Audrey Naulleau,Laurent Prévot,Christian Gary,Laure Hossard

doi:10.3389/fpls.2020.607859

Abstract

In many areas of the world, maintaining grapevine production will require adaptation to climate change. While rigorous evaluations of adaptation strategies provide decision makers with valuable insights, those that are published often overlook major constraints, ignore local adaptive capacity, and suffer from a compartmentalization of disciplines and scales. The objective of our study was to identify current knowledge of evaluation methods and their limitations, reported in the literature. We reviewed 111 papers that evaluate adaptation strategies in the main vineyards worldwide. Evaluation approaches are analyzed through key features (e.g., climate data sources, methodology, evaluation criteria) to discuss their ability to address climate change issues, and to identify promising outcomes for climate change adaptations. We highlight the fact that combining adaptation levers in the short and long term (location, vine training, irrigation, soil, and canopy management, etc.) enables local compromises to be reached between future water availability and grapevine productivity. The main findings of the paper are three-fold: (1) the evaluation of a combination of adaptation strategies provides better solutions for adapting to climate change; (2) multi-scale studies allow local constraints and opportunities to be considered; and (3) only a small number of studies have developed multi-scale and multi-lever approaches to quantify feasibility and effectiveness of adaptation. In addition, we found that climate data sources were not systematically clearly presented, and that climate uncertainty was hardly accounted for. Moreover, only a small number of studies have assessed the economic impacts of adaptation, especially at farm scale. We conclude that the development of methodologies to evaluate adaptation strategies, considering both complementary adaptations and scales, is essential if relevant information is to be provided to the decision-makers of the wine industry.

Highlights

Climate change adaptation is a key to the future of agriculture, a vulnerable economic sector that depends heavily on weather and climatic conditions
The focal research question is : how does the current body of literature on the evaluation of adaptation integrate the possible trade-off between adaptations, considering both time and space? To address this question, the present study investigates the current literature to determine the ways in which adaptation levers and scales can be integrated and evaluated, and in which integrative approaches may be further developed
We explicitly focus on the adaptation to water scarcity since: (1) water resources are projected to be strongly limited by an increase of water demand and a decrease of water availability under future climatic conditions (IPCC et al, 2015); (2) water availability and water management studies require spatial and temporal variations to be considered explicitly; and (3) we assume synergies and trade-offs to exist among the numerous adaptation levers proposed at different scales

Summary

Introduction

Climate change adaptation is a key to the future of agriculture, a vulnerable economic sector that depends heavily on weather and climatic conditions. The major trends identified are: a 50% increase of biomass production in an elevated CO2 environment (Bindi et al, 1996); a 3 to 4 days per decade advancement of the vegetative and reproductive cycle due to higher temperatures (Caffarra and Eccel, 2011); and a higher risk of water stress impacting yield in quantity and quality (Jones et al, 2005; Schultz, 2010; Mosedale et al, 2016; Van Leeuwen and Darriet, 2016) Among these three main factors (biomass increase, cycle advancement, and water stress), the latter is the most preoccupying, as water resources are vulnerable in most grape-producing areas, which are in Mediterranean climates (Medrano et al, 2015)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion