[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Next Article in Journal
An AutoML-Powered Analysis Framework for Forest Fire Forecasting: Adapting to Climate Change Dynamics
Previous Article in Journal
Enhancements of Triethanolamine CO2 Absorption Rate and Degradation in the Presence of Nickel Nanoparticles Catalysts
Previous Article in Special Issue
Demand for Information for Wildland Fire Management
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Atmosphere
Volume 15
Issue 12
10.3390/atmos15121480
atmosphere-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Are Agroecosystem Services Under Threat? Examining the Influence of Climate Externalities on Ecosystem Stability

by
Temidayo Olowoyeye
1,*,
Gideon Abegunrin
2 and
Mariusz Sojka
1,*
1
Department of Land Improvement, Environmental Development and Spatial Management, Poznań University of Life Sciences, Piatkowska 94E, 60-649 Poznan, Poland
2
CABI, Nosworthy Way, Wallingford OX10 8DE, UK
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Atmosphere 2024, 15(12), 1480; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15121480
Submission received: 20 November 2024 / Revised: 7 December 2024 / Accepted: 9 December 2024 / Published: 11 December 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Weather and Climate Extremes: Observations, Modeling, and Impacts (2nd Edition))
Browse Figures
Figure 1
<p>Conceptual framework for the review synthesis.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>PRISMA flow diagram showing the process and shape of the systematic literature review.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Text analysis of selected articles.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Frequency of primary keywords.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Map showing the distribution of climate externalities research, highlighting regions with reported extreme climate threats to environmental stability based on papers included in the review.</p> ">
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study examines the impacts of climate-induced externalities on the stability of agroecosystems and the ecosystem services they provide. Using the PRISMA approach, we review literature published from 2015 to 2024. The study identifies how extreme weather events such as droughts, floods, heatwaves, and altered precipitation patterns disrupt the provisioning, regulating, and supporting services critical to food security, soil fertility, water purification, and biodiversity. Our findings show a continued increase in climate extremes, raising concerns about food security, environmental resilience, and socio-economic stability. It also reveals that regions dependent on rain-fed agriculture, such as parts of Africa, Asia, and the Mediterranean, are particularly vulnerable to these stressors. Adaptation strategies, including conservation agriculture, crop diversification, agroforestry, and improved water management, are identified as crucial for mitigating these impacts. This study emphasises the importance of proactive, policy-driven approaches to foster climate resilience, support agroecosystem productivity, and secure ecosystem services critical to human well-being and environmental health.

1. Introduction

Humankind is experiencing changes in the climatic system globally, with more changes to occur in the future [1]. According to the UN Environment Programme [2], this change is reputed to be one of the most significant environmental challenges. It is essential to bear in mind that no region of the world is spared from the effects of climate change, and its consequences are now more substantial than ever. As a result of anthropogenic climate change and natural climate variability, climate extremes can worsen, which vary in frequency, intensity, duration, and spatial extent [3]. Climate change occurs because of human (anthropogenic) and natural factors; some of the human factors are industrial activities leading to the burning of fossil fuels, also deforestation, agriculture, transportation, and waste management, while the natural causes include volcanic eruptions, ocean currents, natural greenhouse gas emissions, orbital changes, and wildfires. Climate extremes can be defined as abnormal, severe climatic states associated with meteorological conditions that can culminate in catastrophic events with consequential impacts on society and the ecosystem [3].
Apart from climate extremes, the world is plagued by other challenges, such as economic upheavals, inflation, global wars, and the outcome of the pandemic, which have consequences for food production. Agricultural production depends on ecosystem services, and this is in many facets, like soil structure and fertility, nutrient cycling, pollination, and pest control [4]. Ecosystem services are crucial to humans because they provide food, climate and disease regulation, freshwater, soil formation, aesthetic purposes, educational values, spiritual services, and other benefits [5]. They can be likened to the benefits of nature and natural ecosystems. The interaction between ecosystem services and agriculture has attracted the attention of agricultural ecologists, who have promoted agroecosystem services [6]. Agroecosystems combine producers, consumers, and decomposers that can independently enable complete material circulation and energy transformation [7]. They have the characteristics of both natural and artificial ecosystems, which can encourage agricultural production based on human and natural factors.
An agroecosystem is also part of the natural capital superintended by human activities with a simplification and selection of biodiversity to support ecosystem function by generating food, feed, timber, fibres, and other necessary products for commercial value [8,9]. Ecosystems shaped by agricultural practices provide critical ecosystem services that help maintain environmental stability and support human well-being. When managed for various benefits, agroecosystems have the potential to contribute to multiple sustainability aspects in climate, land, water, and biodiversity for food and hunger [10,11]. Consequentially, this research will explore the critical nature of the agroecosystem for ecological balance and human society.

Review Context

The increasing frequency of global climate-related events has raised concerns for scientists and society [12]. Recent studies, such as Sun et al. [13], highlight that extreme temperatures have exceeded worst-case projections over the last two decades. How these climate challenges affect ecosystems is complex and often involves multiple extremes interacting with various ecosystem types. This review examines the growing threats that climate change and extreme weather events pose to ecosystem services within agroecosystems.
The primary research questions focus on understanding how specific climate extremes, such as droughts, floods, heatwaves, and altered rainfall patterns, impact agroecosystems. We will also explore how these impacts vary by region. Central to this investigation is the question: Are agroecosystems increasingly at risk due to the compounded effects of climate externalities?
Furthermore, this review aims to synthesise recent research to analyse the disruptions caused by climate extremes, looking at both the mechanisms through which these events impact agroecosystems and the varying degrees of their frequency and intensity. Beyond short-term effects, we also consider potential long-term consequences for agroecosystem services, particularly productivity, biodiversity, and overall ecosystem functionality. Lastly, it will explore effective adaptation measures, emphasising strategies that enhance resilience and foster sustainable practices within agroecosystems, addressing preventative and responsive approaches to mitigate these impacts. The conceptual framework of this study is shown in Figure 1 below.

2. Research Methodology

2.1. Database Search and Identification of Studies

This study employs a systematic review to explore the impact of climate externalities on environmental stability and ecosystem services, with a particular focus on agroecosystems. The systematic review methodology was selected for its ability to provide a comprehensive and unbiased synthesis of existing literature, enabling the identification of key trends, research gaps, and significant findings. Such an approach is essential when investigating complex environmental phenomena, where relevant evidence is often dispersed across multiple disciplines and sources.
We adopted the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to guide the review process and ensure methodological consistency. A thorough search was conducted using the ScienceDirect database, which was chosen for its extensive, open access, peer-reviewed scientific research collection. The search focused on literature published between 2015 and 2024, with data retrieved on 16 September 2024. The search strategy targeted studies on the nexus between climate extremes and agroecosystem services, using the following search string: “(“Climate extremes” OR “extreme weather” OR “climatic events” OR “Climate Change”) AND (“agroecosystem” OR “agricultural ecosystem”) AND (“environmental stability” OR “ecosystem resilience”) AND (“ecosystem service” OR “ecosystem services”)”. This search string was designed to capture relevant studies addressing the relationships between climate extremes, agroecosystems, and environmental stability, ensuring that the resulting body of literature would cover the key themes necessary to answer the research question. The table below (Table 1) shows the inclusion and exclusion requirements.

2.2. Screening and Selection of Publications

The initial search on the ScienceDirect database was carried out on September 16, and 6785 records were identified. The selection process, summarised in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 2), was carried out in phases. The screening process for retrieving the papers was performed in two stages. In the first phase, the records were streamlined by refining the search results based on article type, subject areas, language, and accessibility (open access), which reduced the number of records to 2060. These records were sorted by relevance, narrowing the pool to 975 for the second screening phase.
The second phase involved a more detailed assessment of eligibility. Titles, keywords, and abstracts were reviewed to ensure alignment with the study’s objectives, which led to the selection of 206 papers. Following a full-content review, the selection was finalised to 95 articles that met all inclusion criteria. Articles that did not fulfil these criteria were excluded from the final analysis.

2.3. Content Analysis of Selected Publications

To ensure that the scope of the study was adequately represented and to minimise bias, we randomly selected ten (10) sub-keywords related to the primary keywords of the study, as shown in Table 2. The text analysis of the selected articles, as presented in Figure 3, revealed that all the primary and sub-keywords except for “habitat preservation” were mentioned in the literature. Furthermore, Figure 4 shows that 44% of the analysed journals focused on topics related to climate extremes and sub-keywords, while 22% focused on climate change and sub-keywords. In addition, 14% of the journals covered ecosystem services and sub-keywords, 11% focused on agroecosystems and sub-keywords, and 9% discussed environmental stability and sub-keywords. This distribution affirms that the selected journals comprehensively cover the subject matter and thus provide the necessary information to address the core objectives of the study. Also, the text analysis identified the top 20 most frequent terms across the selected articles, including drought, climate change, agroecosystem, biodiversity, resilience, global warming, and flooding, thus indicating the prominence of climate-related disruptions and their potential impacts on agroecosystem services.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Climate Externalities and Their Role in Agroecosystem Intrusions

Evidence from previous studies affirms that climate externalities have been affecting ecosystem services (see Table 3). However, the degree of these effects largely depends on the specific climatic stressors, such as temperature anomalies, extreme precipitation, and drought. These stressors influence the functioning of provisioning services, such as crop production, regulating services like water and carbon cycles, and supporting services related to nutrient cycling and biodiversity. The severity and intensity of the impacts vary depending on the climatic conditions and the resilience of the ecosystem. Climate externalities are unintended effects of climate change and climate extremes that impact ecosystems, particularly significantly influencing the structure of agriculture, the composition and functionality of their ecosystems, and essential services. According to [1], climate change has increased the frequency and severity of extreme events, making agroecosystems particularly vulnerable to these impacts by reducing crop productivity, decreasing soil organic carbon (SOC), altering suitable cropping areas, changing growth periods, and aggravating soil degradation [13,14]. In this section, we explore how these externalities interfere with agroecosystem services.
Table 3. Overview of findings on the impacts of climatic externalities on agroecosystems.
Table 3. Overview of findings on the impacts of climatic externalities on agroecosystems.
ES CategoryESAESs AffectedES IndicatorClimatic Externalities Key Impact FindingsSource(s)
Provisioning ServicesProductionCropland Vegetation (Wheat Grain)
Winter Wheat (Cereal Crops)
Potato (Tuber Crops)
Winter Wheat (Cereal Crops)
Sugarcane Fields		Yield
Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI)
Yield (Kg/ha)
Heat Stress Days (Tmax ≥ 30 °C)
Standard Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI)		Temperature and Precipitation Anomalies
Extreme Precipitation (Waterlogging)
Extreme Precipitation
Extreme Temperature
Drought		Temperature increases and variations in precipitation primarily lead to shortened growth periods and decreased yield.
Waterlogging disasters severely affected sowing, seedling emergence, and crop growth in 2017.
Extreme precipitation events explained 38% of potato yield variations, showing a negative effect: each additional day of extreme precipitation decreased yield by 2085 kg/ha.
Heat stress days during flowering and early grain filling are projected to increase from 1.5 (1982–2006) to 2.1 (RCP2.6) and 3.6 (RCP8.5) by 2075–2099, with early wheat varieties facing more heat stress than late varieties today, especially in cooler spring locations with delayed phenological development.
Extreme warm and dry conditions in Guangxi caused water shortages, severely reducing sugarcane production and creating a market gap. At the same time, climate warming increased the likelihood of concurrent droughts, expanding drought-affected areas and limiting high yields, especially during the mature stage.		[15,16,17,18,19]
Regulating ServicesWater Security
Carbon Regulation
Carbon Sequestration		Environmental Flows
Water Supplies
Soil Carbon Dynamics
Mediterranean Grassland		Availability
Water Quality
POC (Particulate Organic Carbon)
DOC (Dissolved Organic Carbon)
Soil Aggregate Stability
Soil Organic Matter		Drought
High-Intensity Rainfall
Extreme Drought 		With extreme drought and precipitation events, there is a need for improved water security;
outlined integrative drought-preparation strategies for California and other water-limited regions that prioritise water security.
Rainfall intensity had a greater impact on DOC losses in subsurface runoff, with higher concentrations under unsaturated conditions. At the same time, POC dominated surface runoff, and its loss was mainly influenced by soil moisture, but rainfall intensity increased surface runoff and enhanced POC transport.
Drought during peak community activity (spring) caused immediate and prolonged soil structural destabilisation, disrupting C and N cycles and breaking down soil aggregates. This led to rapid organic matter mineralisation, turning the ecosystem from a carbon sink to a CO2 source.		[20,21,22,23]
Supporting ServicesSoil and Water Nutrient Cycling
Biodiversity
Soil Health and Biodiversity		Agricultural Lands
Soil Macrofauna
Mediterranean Croplands		Atrazine Runoff and Leaching
Taxonomic Richness
Soil Microbial Activity
Enzyme Activities
Soil Chemical Properties		High-Intensity Rainfall
Extreme Heat Event (EHT)
Warming
Drought		High-intensity rainfall led to 14.5 times × greater atrazine runoff losses at 24 h after spraying compared to 48 h, while leaching losses increased 1.7 times at 48 h, with atrazine levels exceeding acceptable standards for drinking and natural waters, indicating the potential for significant environmental contamination during extreme weather events.
Taxonomic richness and overall abundance of soil macrofauna decreased 18 days after the EHT, with ants, centipedes, and crickets declining while Enchytraeidae and earthworms increased, influenced significantly by soil water content.
Biochar amendment (20 t ha−1) in Mediterranean croplands during drought and increased soil temperature affected soil microbial community composition, enzyme activity, and soil chemistry. Biochar increased urease activity while reducing β-glucosidase and protease activities under climate manipulation. Both biochar and climate factors influence microbial functions, reinforcing nutrient cycling and soil biodiversity, which are critical to sustaining ecosystem services amid changing climatic conditions.		[24,25,26]

3.1.1. Provisioning Services

  • Influence of Climate Change
Meteorological factors, such as temperature, precipitation, and climate variation, are critical in shaping agricultural productivity [27,28]. Among these, drought poses one of the greatest threats from reduced precipitation, elevated temperatures, or both [29]. Droughts inflict severe economic losses on cropping systems worldwide, reducing yields and threatening food security [30]. For instance, global studies report that drought combined with extreme heat can reduce national cereal production by as much as 10% [31,32].
In China’s Guangxi region, drought has stunted sugarcane growth at key developmental stages, leading to declines in sugarcane and sucrose production [33]. The maturity, tillering, and seedling stages are particularly vulnerable to drought, reinforcing findings by Yuan et al. [34], who noted that drought and heatwaves in southern China significantly negatively impacted regional gross primary production (GPP) and crop yields. Similarly, the FAO [35] reported severe yield losses in Europe, with 26% and 30% reductions in wheat and potatoes in Germany due to extreme summer heat and dryness. In the US, nearly 96% of agricultural land in some western states, including Arizona, California, and Oregon, was severely affected by drought [36,37].
  • Crop Growth and Food Security
Rising temperatures and thermal stress, aggravated by climate change, directly affect crop growth and food security [38,39]. A study in the North China Plain highlighted that a temperature increase of 1 °C could reduce winter grain yields by 13% to 16%, a decline that could worsen to 42% to 44% with a 4 °C rise in temperature [14]. Given that this region produces 53.7% of China’s wheat and encompasses 40% of its arable land, these findings show the critical need for adaptive measures [40]. Extreme weather events also have devastating impacts; for example, Hurricane Ida caused USD 700 million in crop losses in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic regions of the US [41], while Cyclone Aila significantly impaired agricultural productivity in Bangladesh due to increased soil salinity, exacerbating socio-economic challenges [42].
  • Sustainability of Viticulture
The sustainability of viticulture, particularly in climate-sensitive regions, is increasingly threatened by climate change. Fraga et al. [43] highlighted that the quantity and quality of Portuguese wine production could be significantly compromised by warming temperatures and erratic precipitation patterns. Projections show that temperature increases in the western regions of Portugal could reduce grape acidity while increasing sugar content, impacting wine quality and style [44,45]. Meanwhile, although extreme rainfall is expected to decline, droughts in northeastern Portugal are anticipated to worsen, which could further jeopardise viticulture’s viability in this region [46].
  • Impacts on Animal Production and Health
Climate change also substantially risks livestock health and productivity, particularly dairy cows. Heat stress during extreme weather reduces milk production and compromises overall health and welfare [47]. Guzmán-Luna et al. [48] found that heat stress imposes biological strains on cows, including reduced immune function [49], increased incidence of clinical mastitis [50], and fertility challenges [51]. These disruptions to animal health and productivity highlight the broader challenges climate change poses to global food production systems.

3.1.2. Regulating Services

The interconnected relationship between agroecosystems and the environment is best illustrated through regulating services, which are essential in maintaining ecological stability and resource efficiency. Environmental incidents such as drought, flooding, and extreme temperatures disrupt these services by affecting carbon sequestration, water retention, and soil stability.
  • Water Use Efficiency and Carbon Sequestration
Extreme temperatures increase water demands [52], while drought and flooding directly impact water use efficiency (WUE) and crop carbon sequestration [53]. They observed that spring drought and summer floods negatively impact the WUE in wheat and maize, respectively. During the wheat season, carbon sequestration capacity is higher than in the maize season; however, spring drought reduces WUE in wheat, and summer flooding disrupts maize’s efficiency. Similarly, high rainfall intensity in Mediterranean regions erodes soil, diminishing its moisture-retention ability and threatening WUE in vineyards [54].
  • Photosynthesis and Soil Stability
Extreme temperatures accelerate growth rates in winter wheat [55], impair canopy development [56], and reduce photosynthesis [57]. They also affect the photosynthesis of vineyards during the growing seasons due to the closure of the stomata [58]. This disturbance disrupts climate regulation by increasing respiration rates, further impacting carbon sequestration [59]. Xiong et al. [60] found that flood–drought events diminish net photosynthetic rates, enzyme activity, and proline content in rice leaves, which collectively inhibit photosynthetic capacity, particularly during sensitive growth stages like tillering. Additionally, extreme storms and prolonged droughts increase dissolved and particulate organic carbon losses by altering soil hydrological connectivity [61]. Flood-induced runoff often transports larger particles, leading to a loss of particulate organic carbon (POC) and smaller soil particles, which reduces soil stability [62,63,64].
  • Soil Structure and Carbon Losses
Drought-induced soil structural instability disrupts carbon storage by breaking down soil macroaggregates, which increases bulk density and reduces porosity [65]. This disintegration exposes organic matter previously protected within these aggregates, making it accessible for microbial decomposition [66]. Borken and Matzner [67] describe how soil contraction during drought releases sequestered organic matter, exacerbating carbon loss. Quintana et al. [68] further confirm that drought and post-drought conditions significantly weaken soil structure, reducing carbon attached to macroaggregates. Such structural changes in soil profoundly affect soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics and the soil’s long-term carbon sequestration potential [69,70].

3.1.3. Supporting Services

Soil microbes and fertility are foundational supporting services critical to maintaining soil structure, nutrient cycling, and overall health within agroecosystems. These services strengthen agricultural productivity by enabling crop growth and sustaining soil ecosystems. However, climate extremes such as drought and flooding (or a combination of the two) threaten soil stability and fertility, especially in vulnerable regions like the Mediterranean basin, where steep slopes are particularly prone to erosion and degradation [71].
  • Soil Health
Extreme temperature amplifies crops’ vulnerability to diseases and pest infestation [72], while glooding–drying (FD) cycles disrupt soil by breaking down soil aggregates, exposing previously protected organic matter to microbial activity [73]. These cycles alter the soil’s redox conditions, with significant implications for greenhouse gas emissions, specifically N2O, CH4;, and CO2. Agricultural soils, which generally lack the interception capacity of forested soils, are particularly susceptible to saturation during these FD events, leading to a faster decrease in soil moisture [74]; researchers opined regarding the critical influence of FD conditions on crop viability on reducing the WHC (water holding capacity) of soil moisture content by 100% within ten days under FD conditions. For instance, Huang et al. [75] indicated that a preceding drought can reduce the root growth in rice during subsequent flooding, an antagonistic effect also noted by [76], where prior drought intensifies flooding-induced photosynthetic inhibition. Studies by Joshi et al. [77] confirm simultaneous declines in carbon assimilation, stomatal conductance, and photosynthetic capacity under progressive soil drought.
  • Soil Moisture and Root Growth
Extreme precipitation presents additional challenges to agroecosystems, leading to direct physical damage and complicating processes associated with excess moisture, such as flooding and waterlogging [78]. Chen et al. [15] showed that continuous rainfall exceeding 5 mm daily causes flooding, resulting in high-level soil moisture that triggers a waterlogging disaster that severely affects sowing and damages the seedling emergence of winter wheat in China. The compounded effect of drought–flood events has severely disrupted the supporting systems within agroecosystems. Experimental studies by Huang et al. [75] prove the complex interactions of drought and flooding, where DF events negatively impact root growth, yield components [79], photosynthesis [76], and endogenous hormone levels [80]. Also, increased drought lowers soil moisture content [81] and hinders seed germination, root development, and nutrient uptake [82]. These effects exhibit unique antagonistic dynamics rather than being merely cumulative. Also, severe drought in the initial stages of DF events exacerbated flood-induced root damage, significantly decreasing root activity indicators like bleeding intensity, root length, surface area, and volume—all vital for water uptake in rice.

3.2. Region-Specific Climate Extremes and Threats to Environmental Stability

The frequency of climate externalities by region (see Figure 5) affirms significant variation in the geographic representation of climate research, revealing both concentrated areas of study and potential inadequacy. Asia and Europe, with frequencies of 30 and 26, respectively, emerge as focal points, possibly reflecting either a higher incidence of documented climate impacts or a larger body of research on these effects. Africa ranks third, with a frequency of 16, reflecting a substantial, though comparatively smaller, research focus that may signal areas needing further examination to address climate vulnerabilities. Lower research frequencies in Oceania (10), South America (8), and North America (6) indicate a potential research gap that could hinder our understanding of climate impacts in these regions.
On the other hand, climate change impacts vary significantly across regions, manifesting as unique environmental threats, destabilising ecosystems and posing risks to human livelihoods. Mirzabaev et al. [83] examined the potential impacts of climate change on global food security, focusing on how extreme weather events such as droughts, flooding, and warming temperatures affect agricultural productivity and nutritional access. Criteria included the number of people at risk of hunger or malnutrition due to climate factors through effects like income reduction, imbalances in food distribution, and lower nutrient content in crops. These challenges outlined the need for strategies to enhance resilience in food systems globally. This section reviews climate extremes across regions and examines their socio-economic implications.

3.2.1. North and South America

Globally, climate extremes are conceptualised as natural hazards, including hurricanes, severe storms, floods, heatwaves, wildfires, and winter weather. Ali et al. [84] emphasise the socio-economic impacts of these hazards, focusing on South Florida, where they have caused extensive damage to infrastructure, homes, and businesses. Such natural hazards can severely disrupt living and non-living environmental elements, destabilise ecosystems, displace communities, and result in substantial business losses. Russell et al. [85] analysed a significant extreme weather event in western North America in 2020; according to the author, this event was intensified by a forceful tropospheric wave pattern, resulting in the Rossby wave breaking. Environmental impacts included historic, wind-driven wildfires in the Pacific Northwest and record cold and snowfall across the Rocky Mountains. This combination of extremes threatens ecological balance, degrades air and water quality, and contributes to biodiversity loss.
In addition, Gao et al. [86] opined that the co-occurrence of two extreme weather events simultaneously (compound events) could catalyse the effects of heatwaves and stagnation on ozone via nonlinear effects, stating that the impact of compound extreme weather events on ozone enhancements in neighbouring parts of the United States was explored. They observe that, on average, compound events have a larger effect on ozone when compared with heatwaves, stagnation, or non-extreme days. While probing further, simulations found a reduced mean positive nonlinear effect of compound events (NLRE) in the United States, and future emission reduction can be beneficial to ozone pollution control by limiting the impacts of compound events on ozone.
In a study by Eugenio et al. [87], climate change and associated extremes are highlighted as serious threats to Argentine viticulture. Key manifestations of these climate extremes include rising temperatures and heatwaves, which can damage leaves and grapes, as well as severe weather events like storms, hail, and heavy rainfall that threaten vineyards. Drought is identified as one of the most critical climate hazards. Like other forms of agriculture, viticulture relies on essential environmental conditions, many of which have been disrupted by climate variability. Furthermore, climate change introduces new threats, such as intense, localised rainfall events and the expansion of vineyards into higher elevations in the Andes.
Similarly, the Xingu River basin in the Brazilian Amazon is recognised for its national and international significance, notably in hydroelectric power generation and forest conservation. Lucas et al. [88] analysed climate extremes in the Xingu River basin, finding an overall increase in air temperature, although rainfall indices showed few significant trends. These findings are considered valuable for strategic decision-making in water resource management and planning.

3.2.2. Asia and Oceania

MacLeod et al. [89] examined forecasting strategies for extreme weather events in Myanmar and the Philippines to scale up anticipatory action for climate change-related disasters. Their study highlights that Southeast Asian countries have, in recent years, faced extreme weather events that have escalated into disasters. Notable climate extremes threatening environmental stability include intense rainfall, cyclones, river floods, and storm surges. The study reveals that extreme rainfall can lead to significant damage and socio-economic repercussions through fluvial and pluvial flooding. Flooding as a socio-economic outcome disrupts livelihoods, displaces communities, and exposes populations to numerous risks. Additionally, the Philippines is identified as one of Southeast Asia’s most vulnerable countries to tropical cyclones.
Similarly, in the south-central coastal region of Bangladesh, Bhuyan et al. [90] emphasise the impact of climate change on rising salinity levels. This increase in salinity is attributed to factors such as sea level rise, irregular rainfall, tidal flooding, capillary salt intrusion, cyclones, storm surges, reduced freshwater flow from upstream, and ineffective management of polders. These factors collectively exacerbate the salinity issue, further challenging agricultural and community resilience in the region. While global temperatures continue to rise, compound extreme climate events (CECEs)—such as the combined impact of droughts and heatwaves—are increasingly observed. Lu et al. [91] analysed these events with reference to ecological indicators in Southwestern China, finding that global warming has intensified the stress on ecosystems in this region. Their research indicates that compound warm–dry events in spring and summer can initially encourage vegetation growth in one season, but persistent spring events may lead to reduced yields in summer due to a delayed response in vegetation. This cyclical impact underscores the complexity of climate change’s effects on ecosystems and agriculture.
The potential effect of extreme climate conditions on autumn phenology (end of the growing season) in Central Asia grassland was investigated by Gao et al. [86] using eight climate indices representing average and extreme local climate conditions. According to the study, there was an increase in drought and heat events during the pre-growing season in Central Asia. Drought and heat events can affect environmental stability in various ways, including the potential for soil degradation and desertification because of the loss of moisture, lower groundwater levels and a decline in surface water, loss of biodiversity and ecosystem disruption, and increased wildfires.
A projection of extreme climate change in the Asian arid region and the Tibetan Plateau in the early and middle 21st century predicated using NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 was carried out by Sun et al. [13], and findings suggest that both the frequency and the intensity of the extreme indices will assume an increase, which can also culminate in accelerated growth under higher-emission scenarios. An inquiry into the current state of climatic trends in the Australian cotton region and their implications for the growing season was carried out by Broughton et al. [92]. It was found from the study that climate changes are in various dimensions, such as a reduction in early-season shocks sold, an increase in minimum temperatures and frequency of high temperatures and evapotranspiration, and an increase in season-long heat accumulation from 1961 to 2020, which impact cotton production by affecting its growth and development. As revealed in the study, the interplay of all the climatic factors can encourage longer reproductive periods for cotton and the potential for increased yields, which is a positive implication with respect to environmental stability.

3.2.3. Europe

Climate extremes are increasingly affecting Europe, and as Leitner [93] revealed, weather-related disasters could impact up to two-thirds of the European population annually by the end of the century. Consequently, there is a pressing need for adequate adaptation to safeguard critical infrastructure, as climate extremes are projected to increase six-fold by mid-century. Specifically, Austria faces a range of climate extremes, notably riverine flooding and agricultural drought, which have historically occurred in 2002, 2005, and 2013, placing significant financial stress on private and public resources. Riverine flooding, for instance, disrupts marine ecosystems, alters water flow, and induces biodiversity shifts, while agricultural drought threatens crop yields, degrades soil, triggers pest and disease outbreaks, and increases wildfire risks.
Moreover, unprecedented warmth is another critical manifestation of climate extremes, posing substantial threats to environmental stability. Roberto et al. [94] examined Spain’s scorching summer in 2022, revealing that Spain has experienced significant increases in extreme heatwaves and severe droughts over the past two decades, particularly during the summer months. These extremes have the potential to disrupt natural and socio-economic systems alike. The effects of extreme warmth on environmental stability are extensive: accelerating glacial and ice sheet melt, raising sea levels, disrupting ecosystems and biodiversity, warming oceans and altering marine life, increasing ocean acidification, intensifying agricultural challenges, and encouraging pest and disease spread. Additionally, these changes heighten risks of heat-related illnesses, waterborne and foodborne diseases, and broader geopolitical and social instability.
From the perspective of farmers and smallholders in the United Kingdom, the management of extreme weather and climate change in the United Kingdom was investigated by Wheeler et al. [95]. Although it is common knowledge that there is a need for agriculture to adapt to climate change, how the risks from extreme weather and climate events were perceived at the farm level was documented in this research. Some of the extremes perceived at the farm level include the impact of heat and drought, heavy rainfall/flooding, extreme cold, extreme heat, stormy/windy weather, and more gradual changes to climatic averages. Heat and drought are a threat to agroecosystem stability, and they can affect the biodiversity in the ecosystem and impact yield, while heavy rainfall/flooding has the potential to wash off the soil and cause erosion.

3.2.4. Africa

To understand the spatial and temporal variability of heatwave phenomena in the Southern African region, Meque et al. [96] identified heatwaves using three different approaches. From their study, heatwaves were reported to be a major concern to societies as they can negatively impact human health, the economy, and natural ecosystems. More specifically, heatwaves as a climate extreme can increase the risk of human mortality and morbidity, particularly among vulnerable people, food insecurity due to crop failure, more predisposition to wildfires, and significant economic loss.
Region-specific climate extremes, with evidence from a global panel of regions, were explored by Kalkuhl et al. [97] in terms of their impact on economic production. They made an investigation based on a dataset containing the subnational economic output and Gross Regional Product (GRP) for more than 1500 regions in 77 countries, which allowed for estimating the historic climate impact at varying timescales. It was found that temperature affects productivity levels significantly and can also influence biodiversity and ecosystem health, induce habitat degradation, increase the proliferation of diseases, and contribute to drought and water stress, forest fires, and ocean warming. From an economic standpoint, an increase to about 3.5 °C by the end of the century can reduce global productivity output by 7–14% in 2100, which will be more detrimental to tropical and poor regions.
Gemeda et al. [98] investigated some elements of climate extremes using a standardised evapotranspiration index and future projections of rainfall and temperature in some wet parts of southwest Ethiopia. It was found in the research that Ethiopia is one of the most predisposed and vulnerable countries to climate extremes, and there is a need for a thorough understanding of these climate extremes at short and long timescales to aid the minimisation of the potential impacts of these extremes. The extreme climatic events experienced in the wettest part of southwestern Ethiopia were extreme drought, extreme wet, severe drought, and severe wet during the study period. They attributed extreme drought to increased evapotranspiration caused by excess heat and global warming. At the same time, drought threatens environmental stability because it affects the ecosystem by reducing water availability and increasing biodiversity loss, vegetation stress, and the depletion of soil health.
Climate change is a global phenomenon; it has various manifestations, such as signals and other changes, and this was explored in the Sahel catchment of Burkina Faso [99]. Extreme climate indices, changes in the climate, and spatiotemporal variations were investigated in the Dano catchment in Burkina Faso using historical data from 1981 to 2010 and projected data for 2020 to 2049. It was found that the catchment would experience a reduction in the mean annual rainfall and warming of about 25.5% and 25.6% for increases of 1.35 °C and 1.55 °C, respectively. A reduction in rainfall significantly affects environmental stability and can result in soil degradation and desertification, water scarcity for the biodiversity in the environment, reduced agricultural productivity, and a number of other effects.

3.3. Are Agroecosystems Under Threat?

Since the inception of agriculture, ensuring food security has been essential to human survival, yet this stability is heavily reliant on the resilience of agroecosystems. These complex systems, comprising diverse plant, animal, and microbial interactions, face intensifying pressures from climate externalities, land degradation, and biodiversity loss. To understand the scale of these risks, several researchers [17,100] have performed simulations and modelling techniques to project future climate extremes. In this section, we will take a general view of the future of agroecosystems globally, examining whether they can support food security in the years to come.
Climate externalities are anticipated to persist well into the foreseeable future [12]. These projections have been substantiated in Ethiopia, where Gemeda et al. [98] observed significant upward temperature trends for 2041–2060 and 2081–2100, particularly under RCP6.0 and RCP8.5 scenarios. Similar findings were reported by Hadi Ahmad et al. [101] for Kastina State, Nigeria, where projections indicate rising temperatures coupled with decreasing precipitation levels by 2050. Sun et al. [13] further suggest that extreme climate indices’ frequency and intensity will increase, particularly under the SSP5-8.5 high-emission scenario. They indicate that while extreme high precipitation and temperature events may increase moderately during the early sub-period of the 21st century (2026–2045), with minimal variation across emission scenarios, the differences in severity are expected to intensify by the mid-21st century (2041–2060).
Furthermore, the projections by Yaduvanshi et al. [102] indicate substantial shifts in temperature extremes across multiple warming levels within nine climate zones in India, forecasting increases in hot temperature extremes alongside decreases in cold extremes. For instance, under a 3 °C warming scenario (RCP8.5) and a 2 °C warming scenario (RCP4.5), the Warm Spell Duration Index is projected to rise by 131 and 66 days, respectively. Additionally, hot days and warm nights are expected to increase significantly, while cold days and nights are projected to decrease. These trends are expected to persist through at least 2070. Supporting these findings, Masroor and Sajjad [103] observed a significant upward trend in temperatures and declining rainfall in southeastern sub-basins. Meteorological forecasts for 2017–2027 predict a reduction in rainfall (significant at the 0.05 level) and an increase in maximum temperature (significant at the 0.01 level), predisposing these regions to arid conditions and increasing the likelihood of severe droughts. Consequently, these anticipated shifts in temperature and precipitation pose severe threats to agroecosystems, as higher temperatures increase the likelihood of prolonged droughts and extreme heat events; they intensify risks to crop yields, reduce agricultural productivity, intensify water scarcity, and drive migration pressures in affected areas. In regions where agricultural production is rain-fed, such as Ethiopia and Nigeria, these changes jeopardise crop productivity and food security.
Declining precipitation will likely diminish agricultural yield potential, while increasing temperatures advance drier conditions in the Mediterranean regions. For instance, Rogger et al. [17] project that winter wheat in the Swiss Central Plateau will experience increased heat stress days (Tmax ≥ 30 °C) during critical flowering and early grain-filling stages. Under RCP2.6 (mitigated climate change), heat stress days are projected to increase from an average of 1.5 days (1982–2006) to 2.1 days by 2075–2099 and to 3.6 days under RCP8.5 (unmitigated emissions). Using the Wang and Engel cereal phenology model, Rogger et al. [17] emphasised that early-maturing wheat varieties might experience less heat stress than late-maturing ones, although both face elevated stress levels under high-emission scenarios by the end of the century. These findings are consistent with the results of similar studies in France [104], England and Wales [105], Germany [106], and Switzerland [107].
Also, agricultural lands in the Mediterranean have been projected to experience negative changes in climatic conditions four to seven times during the 21st century [108]. According to their findings, these negative impacts include a consistent increase in maximum heat and drought intensities, projected to emerge primarily by 2030 and 2050 over croplands and wheatlands. Although they predict one to four positive changes in climatic impact in the southern part of the Mediterranean croplands within the same timeframe, this is not sufficient to prevent the impending yield losses because these scenarios pose a significant threat to food sustainability due to various physiological and metabolic processes within different phases of crop development [76,109]. This evidence suggests that climate-induced stressors, such as extreme temperatures, drought, and altered precipitation patterns, increasingly threaten agroecosystems.
The compounding effects of these climate externalities pose severe risks to the stability and productivity of agroecosystems, jeopardising their ability to support food security and sustain essential ecosystem services. However, these threats can be averted if proactive, evidence-based adaptation and mitigation strategies are implemented to protect these systems and secure a sustainable food supply for future generations.

3.4. Adopted Strategies for Adaptation and Mitigation

To curtail challenges associated with climate externalities, researchers have come up with diverse, adaptable solutions, and to investigate the importance and effectiveness of adaptation, Wouterse [110] explored the micro-economics of adaptation using two countries (Ethiopia and Niger) as a focus. Their findings show a correlation between adaptation and lower food insecurity; hence, people have been able to adapt to food insecurity within the context of climate change. This indicates that people must adapt when constrained by significant changes in environmental elements, such as rainfall and temperature, that affect their production and income. Their study also identifies formal education as a significant element of adaptive capacity associated with adaptive production and income strategies. This implies that with education, there is the propensity to adapt, which can occur from the place of informed action, scientifically driven production, diversification in income, and access to financial and credit facilities. We will briefly explore some adaptation strategies identified by researchers to mitigate climate extremes.

3.4.1. Multi-Concept Approach

Eugenio et al. [87] proposed a multi-concept approach to climate mitigation, dividing strategies into three categories: monitoring, structural, and non-structural. Key examples include carbon-neutral production, which is becoming increasingly viable, and monitoring campaigns to assess environmental threats. Additionally, conservation agriculture, as the FAO promotes, and technologies, such as field and remote sensors for detailed mapping, are essential tools guiding these mitigation efforts. Conservation agriculture, in particular, is grounded in three core principles: minimal mechanical soil disturbance, permanent organic soil cover, and crop diversification.
Minimal mechanical soil disturbance supports soil health by enhancing structure, increasing microbial activity and organic matter, aiding in erosion control, improving water retention, and reducing fuel and labour costs. Maintaining permanent organic soil cover through mulching and crop residues also protects against erosion, while crop diversification further boosts resilience to climate change. Diverse cropping systems, including nitrogen-fixing legumes, perennials, and deep-rooted plants, enhance carbon sequestration by contributing organic matter via roots and residues.
In line with these strategies, Bybee-Finley et al. [111] investigated the roles of intraspecific and interspecific diversification within forage cropping systems. They examined three diversification approaches—cultivar diversity (intraspecific), crop species diversity (interspecific), and a combination of both (intra + inter). Comparisons with single-species monocultures revealed that species diversity substantially impacted system responses, more than cultivar diversity. Selecting traits to maximise functional and response diversity was beneficial, further emphasising the value of crop diversity in resilience strategies.
Similarly, Bhuyan et al. [90] explored farmers’ adaptation strategies in the face of climate change and increasing salinity along Bangladesh’s south-central coast. Salinity was identified as a major environmental threat in the region, and the study highlighted that adaptation begins with understanding climate change consequences. Observing rising temperatures in summer and winter, increased rainfall variability, and salinity shifts, farmers have adapted with strategies such as adjusting planting times, adopting salt-tolerant rice varieties, altering cropping patterns, utilising freshwater resources, rainwater harvesting, relay cropping, deep tillage, mulching, and transforming agricultural practices to include livestock, shrimp, and fish culture.

3.4.2. Policy-Driven Agricultural Adaptation in Europe and the United Kingdom

Bernues et al. [112] present a framework for designing effective European agri-environmental policies that support climate mitigation, adaptation, and biodiversity conservation. They identify various agricultural practices that enhance ecosystem services, particularly in mountainous regions of Europe. These practices are organised into several categories, each encompassing strategies to improve environmental resilience.
The first category, “Vegetation and Landscape Elements”, includes measures like maintaining semi-natural vegetation, grasslands, small plots, and traditional land features (hedges, terraces, water points, drove roads, and tracks). Retaining these elements supports biodiversity and stabilises ecosystems. “Crop and Species Management” covers strategies like crop diversification, cultivating locally adapted varieties, and genetic selection for high productivity. Practices here also involve rotational cropping with legumes, planting nectar-rich species to support pollinators, and implementing cover crops and green fallows to maintain soil health. Other categories include “Input Management”, “Grazing”, and “Silviculture”, each offering ways to improve soil, plant, and animal resilience in response to changing climate conditions.
Similarly, Wheeler [95] explored how agricultural practices in the United Kingdom can be adapted to address climate risks, focusing on insights from farmers and stakeholders. The study highlights strategies such as improving infrastructure, enhancing soil health, diversifying risks, and streamlining business practices. Farmers also emphasise adjustments to grazing and feed management, operational timing, and selecting resilient crop varieties and livestock breeds to improve adaptability and productivity. These actions collectively enhance resilience, supporting both environmental stability and farm viability in the face of extreme weather and climate variability.

3.4.3. Agroforestry and Rainwater Harvesting

Stetter and Sauer [113] examined agroforestry as a powerful adaptation and mitigation strategy against climate change and extreme weather. Agroforestry, which incorporates trees and shrubs into agricultural landscapes, offers multiple advantages: it reduces the risk of drought, extreme heat, and heavy rainfall by stabilising ecosystems and enhancing soil and water management. This integration of woody plants within farming systems has significantly boosted resilience to climate impacts, helping agricultural landscapes better withstand climate-related challenges.
Complementing agroforestry, Wang et al. [114] investigated the role of rainwater harvesting, specifically in steep-slope vineyards where water management is crucial. They introduced the concept of micro-water storage as a local solution to address water resource challenges. This approach proved highly effective for managing irregular rainfall and coping with unpredictable or extreme weather events. Rainwater harvesting, as a localised adaptation measure, has both immediate and long-term potential, providing an accessible and sustainable method to mitigate water scarcity issues in vulnerable agricultural areas.

3.4.4. Biological Control Measures

Jimenez [115] highlights the potential of biological inputs, particularly native microbiota, as a critical adaptation tool for reducing crop losses driven by climate change. The study emphasises the biodiversity within native microbiota in agroecosystems as an effective resource for building crop resilience. As climate projections indicate harsher conditions for food production in various regions, biological inputs such as beneficial fungi and bacteria emerge as promising tools for climate adaptation in food systems. These biological controls enhance crop resilience through synergy with plant microbiomes and can lower production costs by decreasing reliance on chemical inputs. Integrating biological inputs with agronomic practices strengthens crop resiliency at the phyto-microbiome level, supporting more sustainable and adaptable agriculture under climate stress.

3.4.5. Proactive and Reactive Adaptation Approach

In Uganda, Wichern [116] investigated strategies farmers use to adapt to climate variability and market shocks, emphasising the impact of unpredictable rainfall on agricultural productivity. The study categorises adaptation strategies into anticipatory (ex-ante) and reactive (ex-post) measures. Ex-ante strategies, employed in expectation of favourable conditions, include expanding the area for the main food or cash crops to increase yields, intensifying weeding, or reallocating land to cultivate more resilient crops. Ex-post strategies, adopted after adverse events, include reliance on off-farm income and remittances, selling livestock, reducing food consumption, or switching to alternative crop and livestock products. Additionally, some farmers cultivate wetlands during dry seasons or seek financial support through borrowing. These adaptive measures reflect the flexibility and resilience necessary for agriculture in regions heavily impacted by climate variability.

4. Limitations of Existing Studies

Despite the growing body of research on the impact of climate externalities on agroecosystems, significant gaps remain in our understanding of key ecosystem services. The lack of emphasis on cultural services, such as the aesthetic, recreational, and heritage values associated with agricultural landscapes, overlooks significant human–nature interactions that can influence community support for conservation and adaptive practices. Integrating cultural services into research on agroecosystem resilience could reveal how local cultural ties and social engagement might support or hinder adaptation strategies. This broader perspective could also enhance community-based solutions incorporating traditional knowledge and local values.
Additionally, while the impact of climate stressors on crops has been extensively studied, more research on livestock is needed. Livestock systems, being highly susceptible to temperature and extreme weather, are crucial components of many agroecosystems. This gap limits our understanding of animal welfare, health, and productivity under climate stress. Addressing this imbalance by including livestock would provide a more comprehensive view of the overall agricultural productivity and resilience, especially for communities that rely heavily on mixed crop–livestock systems.
Furthermore, we observed that the current focus on select climate variables like drought and temperature excludes other relevant factors such as wind patterns, humidity, and CO2 levels, which can intensely affect plant and animal health. Expanding climate indices to include these variables would allow a better understanding of how interconnected climate factors impact agroecosystems. This approach could reveal less obvious but significant stressors, aiding climate modelling and predicting.
Conclusively, there is a need for sensitivity analysis to quantify the direct effects of climate externalities on agroecosystems. Given the heterogeneous nature of climate impacts across different regions and systems, the variability in sensitivity to climate stressors still needs to be explored. Conducting sensitivity analyses will help identify regions, crops, and livestock systems most vulnerable to climate change, allowing for more precise and effective adaptation strategies.
Addressing this gap can provide a more holistic understanding of the impact of climate externalities on agroecosystem stability and contribute to developing more resilient and sustainable agricultural systems.

5. Conclusions

Climate extremes, including intensified heat, altered precipitation, droughts, and floods, have disrupted agroecosystems. These threaten essential ecosystem services such as food production, soil fertility, water purification, and biodiversity. These impacts manifest in reduced crop yields, altered nutrient cycles, and increased environmental contamination. For instance, variations in precipitation lead to soil degradation and water pollution, while high-intensity rainfall aggravates runoff and chemical leaching.
The compounding effects of these externalities diminish the ability of agroecosystems to sustain productivity and ecological health, jeopardising food security and environmental stability globally. Research projections indicate a likely persistence of these adverse conditions, with regions experiencing significant temperature increases, precipitation volatility, and prolonged extreme weather events. Agroecosystems in regions with high dependence on rain-fed agriculture, like parts of Africa, Asia, and the Mediterranean, are particularly vulnerable. In such areas, the escalating climate-induced stressors could lead to widespread reductions in crop yields, increased soil degradation, water scarcity, and potential economic displacement.
Adaptation and mitigation strategies are vital to countering these threats. Effective approaches include conservation agriculture, agroforestry, and advanced water management practices to bolster ecosystem resilience and promote sustainable resource use. Incorporating native biodiversity, optimising crop diversification, and implementing rainwater harvesting are also recommended to maintain agroecosystem function under climate pressures. Ongoing research and proactive adaptation policies are crucial to ensure future food security and ecosystem sustainability. These should aim to foster climate-resilient agricultural practices and strengthen agroecosystems’ natural defences against climate extremes, thereby safeguarding both human livelihoods and ecological balance.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, T.O.; methodology, T.O.; software, T.O.; validation, T.O., G.A. and M.S.; formal analysis, T.O., G.A.; investigation, T.O., G.A.; resources, T.O., G.A.; data curation, T.O.; writing—original draft preparation, T.O., G.A.; writing—review and editing, T.O., G.A., M.S.; visualisation, T.O.; supervision, M.S.; project administration, T.O., G.A.; funding acquisition, T.O., G.A., M.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study, the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. IPCC. Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Masson-Delmotte, V.P., Zhai, A., Pirani, S.L., Connors, C., Péan, S., Berger, N., Caud, Y., Chen, L., Goldfarb, M.I., Gomis, M., et al., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  2. UN Environment. Responding to Climate Change|Europe|UNEP—UN Environment Programme. 24 October 2017. Available online: https://www.unep.org/regions/europe/regional-initiatives/responding-climate-change (accessed on 17 October 2024).
  3. Field, C.B.; Barros, V.; Stocker, T.F.; Qin, D.; Dokken, D.J.; Ebi, K.L.; Mastrandrea, M.D.; Mach, K.J.; Plattner, G.-K.; Allen, S.K.; et al. Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Power, A.G. Ecosystem services and agriculture: Tradeoffs and synergies. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2010, 365, 2959–2971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, World Resources Institute, Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  6. Dale, V.H.; Polasky, S. Measures of the effects of agricultural practices on ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 64, 286–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhu, Y.G.; Reid, B.J.; Meharg, A.A.; Banwart, S.A.; Fu, B.J. Optimising Peri-URban Ecosystems (PURE) to re-couple urban-rural symbiosis. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 586, 1085–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Moonen, A.C.; Bàrberi, P. Functional biodiversity: An agroecosystem approach. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 127, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). Ecosystems and Human Well Being: Current State and Trends; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, E.C.; Pascual, U.; Mertz, O. Ecosystem services and nature’s contribution to people: Negotiating diverse values and trade-offs in land systems. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2019, 38, 86–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mbow, C.; Rosenzweig, C.E.; Barioni, L.G.; Benton, T.G.; Herrero, M.; Krishnapillai, M.; Ruane, A.C.; Liwenga, E.; Pradhan, P.; Rivera-Ferre, M.G.; et al. Food Security; No. GSFC-E-DAA-TN78913; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  12. IPCC. Summary for policymakers. In Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. A Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Core Writing Team, Lee, H., Romero, J., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  13. Sun, Y.; Zhu, R.; Wang, T. Projection of extreme climate change in the Asian arid region and the Tibetan Plateau in the early and middle 21st century based on NEX-GDDP-CMIP6. Atmos. Ocean. Sci. Lett. 2024, 100534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Shoukat, M.R.; Wang, J.; Habib-ur-Rahman, M.; Hui, X.; Hoogenboom, G.; Yan, H. Adaptation strategies for winter wheat production at farmer fields under a changing climate: Employing crop and multiple global climate models. Agric. Syst. 2024, 220, 104066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Chen, T.; Dai, J.; Chen, X.; Liang, C.; Shi, T.; Lyu, Y.; Zhao, F.; Wu, X.; Gao, M.; Huang, J.; et al. Agricultural land management extends the duration of the impacts of extreme climate events on vegetation in double–cropping systems in the Yangtze–Huai plain China. Ecol. Indic. 2024, 158, 111488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ahrari, A.; Ghag, K.; Mustafa, S.; Panchanathan, A.; Gemitzi, A.; Oussalah, M.; Klöve, B.; Haghighi, A.T. Assess the Impact of Climate Variability on Potato Yield using Remote Sensing Data in Northern Finland. Smart Agric. Technol. 2024, 8, 100485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rogger, J.; Hund, A.; Fossati, D.; Holzkämper, A. Can Swiss wheat varieties escape future heat stress? Eur. J. Agron. 2021, 131, 126394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Guga, S.; Ma, Y.; Riao, D.; Zhi, F.; Xu, J.; Zhang, J. Drought monitoring of sugarcane and dynamic variation characteristics under global warming: A case study of Guangxi, China. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 275, 108035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Stewart, I.T.; Rogers, J.; Graham, A. Water security under severe drought and climate change: Disparate impacts of the recent severe drought on environmental flows and water supplies in Central California. J. Hydrol. X 2020, 7, 100054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Tiefenbacher, A.; Weigelhofer, G.; Klik, A.; Mabit, L.; Santner, J.; Wenzel, W.; Strauss, P. Antecedent soil moisture and rain intensity control pathways and quality of organic carbon exports from arable land. Catena 2021, 202, 105297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Quintana, J.R.; Martín-Sanz, J.P.; Valverde-Asenjo, I.; Molina, J.A. Drought differently destabilises soil structure in a chronosequence of abandoned agricultural lands. Catena 2023, 222, 106871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Junior, A.C.G.; Junior, E.C.; Schwantes, D.; Kaufmann, V.; Braccini, A.L.; da Silva, T.R.B.; Aranda, M.; Zimmermann, J. Atrazine fate in Rhodic Ferralsol grown with corn under high-intensity rainfall conditions. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 276, 108065. [Google Scholar]
  23. Gao, M.; Peng, C.; Hu, Y.; Liu, W.; Ye, Y.; Zheng, Y.; Chen, T.W. Composition and vertical distribution of agricultural soil Macrofauna community after an extreme high temperature event in the summer of 2022. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 153, 110439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Moreno, J.L.; Bastida, F.; Díaz-López, M.; Li, Y.; Zhou, Y.; López-Mondéjar, R.; Benavente-Ferraces, I.; Rojas, R.; Rey, A.; García-Gil, J.C.; et al. Response of soil chemical properties, enzyme activities and microbial communities to biochar application and climate change in a Mediterranean agroecosystem. Geoderma 2022, 407, 115536. [Google Scholar]
  25. Olesen, J.E.; Bindi, M. Consequences of climate change for European agricultural productivity, land use and policy. Eur. J. Agron. 2002, 16, 239–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Nazir, U.; Anjum, S.A.; Farooq, A.; Nawaz, U.; Nawaz, M.; Samiullah, M. Climate change and agricultural system: Potential impacts and soil management strategies A review. J. Agric. Res. 2017, 55, 501–515. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ray, D.K.; Gerber, J.S.; MacDonald, G.K.; West, P.C. Climate variation explains a third of global crop yield variability. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 5989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zegeye, H. Climate change in Ethiopia: Impacts, mitigation and adaptation. Int. J. Res. Environ. Stud. 2018, 5, 18–35. [Google Scholar]
  29. Zhang, Q.; Han, L.; Jia, J.; Song, L.; Wang, J. Management of drought risk under global warming. Theor. Appl. Clim. 2016, 125, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kim, W.; Iizumi, T.; Nishimori, M. Global patterns of crop production losses associated with droughts from 1983 to 2009. J. Appl. Meteor. Clim. 2019, 58, 1233–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lesk, C.; Rowhani, P.; Ramankutty, N. Influence of extreme weather disasters on global crop production. Nature 2016, 529, 84–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Alizadeh, M.R.; Adamowski, J.; Nikoo, M.R.; AghaKouchak, A.; Dennison, P.; Sadegh, M. A century of observations reveals increasing likelihood of continental-scale compound dry-hot extremes. Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eaaz4571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Gao, X.N.; Liu, R.; Wu, Z.L.; Wu, J.Y. Characteristics of endophytic fungal and bacterial community in the stalks of sugarcane cultivars resistant to ratoon stunting disease. Biotechnol. Bull. 2022, 38, 166. [Google Scholar]
  34. Yuan, W.; Cai, W.; Chen, Y.; Liu, S.; Dong, W.; Zhang, H.; Yu, G.; Chen, Z.; He, H.; Guo, W. Severe summer heatwave and drought strongly reduced carbon uptake in Southern China. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 18813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. FAO. OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2018-2027; OECD Publishing: Paris, France; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  36. Frank, T. Western Drought Has Lasted Longer Than the Dust Bowl. E&E News. 2021. Available online: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/western-drought-has-lasted-longer-than-the-dust-bowl/ (accessed on 15 October 2019).
  37. Pappas, S. Half the Country Is Facing an Apocalyptic Summer. Live Science. 2021. Available online: https://www.livescience.com/western-drought-summer-wildfires.html (accessed on 10 April 2021).
  38. Kong, X.; Hou, R.; Yang, G.; Ouyang, Z. Climate warming extends the effective growth period of winter wheat and increases grain protein content. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2023, 336, 109477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Yu, Y.; Yang, X.; Guan, Z.; Zhang, Q.; Li, X.; Gul, C.; Xia, X. The impacts of temperature averages, variabilities and extremes on China’s winter wheat yield and its changing rate. Environ. Res. Commun. 2023, 5, 071002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Wang, L.; Liu, X.; Liu, X.; Bao, X.; Zhang, X.; Yin, B.; Wang, W.; Wang, Y.; Zhen, W. Effects of spring limited irrigation on grain yield and root characteristics of winter wheat in groundwater-overexploitation areas in the North China plain. Agric. Water Manag. 2024, 294, 108729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Intel, M. Hurricane Ida: Direct Agricultural Impacts and Larger Implications of Flooding. 2021. Available online: https://www.fb.org/market-intel/hurricane-ida-direct-agricultural-impacts-and-larger-implications-of-flooding (accessed on 10 April 2021).
  42. Rabbani, G.; Rahman, A.; Mainuddin, K. Salinity-induced loss and damage to farming households in coastal Bangladesh. Int. J. Glob. Warm. 2013, 5, 400–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Fraga, H.; García de Cortázar Atauri, I.; Malheiro, A.C.; Santos, J.A. Modelling Climate Change Impacts on Viticultural Yield, Phenology and Stress Conditions in Europe. Glob. Change Biol. 2016, 22, 3774–3788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Webb, L.B.; Whetton, P.H.; Bhend, J.; Darbyshire, R.; Briggs, P.R.; Barlow, E.W.R. Earlier Wine-Grape Ripening Driven by Climatic Warming and Drying and Management Practices. Nat. Clim. Change 2012, 2, 259–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Gashu, K.; Sikron Persi, N.; Drori, E.; Harcavi, E.; Agam, N.; Bustan, A.; Fait, A. Temperature Shift between Vineyards Modulates Berry Phenology and Primary Metabolism in a Varietal Collection of Wine Grapevine. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 588739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Fonseca, A.; Santos, J.A.; Mariza, S.; Santos, M.; Martinho, J.; Aranha, J.; Terêncio, D.; Cortes, R.; Houet, T.; Palka, G.; et al. Tackling Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity towards Integrative Conservation in Atlantic Landscapes. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2022, 38, e02216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Polsky, L.; von Keyserlingk, M.A.G. Invited review: Effects of heat stress on dairy cattle welfare. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 8645–8657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Guzmán-Luna, P.; Mauricio-Iglesias, M.; Flysjö, A.; Hospido, A. Analysing the interaction between the dairy sector and climate change from a life cycle perspective: A review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 126, 168–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Turk, R.; Podpečan, O.; Mrkun, J.; Flegar-Meštrić, Z.; Perkov, S.; Zrimšek, P. The effect of seasonal thermal stress on lipid mobilisation, antioxidant status and reproductive performance in dairy cows. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2015, 50, 595–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Vitali, A.; Bernabucci, U.; Nardone, A.; Lacetera, N. Effect of season, month and temperature humidity index on the occurrence of clinical mastitis in dairy heifers. Adv. Anim. Biosci. 2016, 7, 250–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sammad, A.; Umer, S.; Shi, R.; Zhu, H.; Zhao, X.; Wang, Y. Dairy cow reproduction under the influence of heat stress. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2020, 104, 978–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Rashid, M.A.; Andersen, M.N.; Wollenweber, B.; Zhang, X.; Olesen, J.E. Acclimation to higher VPD and temperature minimised negative effects on assimilation and grain yield of wheat. Agric. Meteorol. 2018, 248, 119–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Yu, H.; Li, S.; Ding, J.; Yang, T.; Wang, Y. Water use efficiency and its drivers of two typical cash crops in an arid area of Northwest China. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 287, 108433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Comino, J.R.; Sinoga, J.R.; González, J.S.; Guerra-Merchán, A.; Seeger, M.; Ries, J. High variability of soil erosion and hydrological processes in Mediterranean hillslope vineyards (Montes de Málaga, Spain). Catena 2016, 145, 274–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ali, M.G.M.; Ibrahim, M.M.; ElBaroudy, A.; Fullen, M.; Omar, E.-S.H.; Ding, Z.; Kheir, A.M.S. Climate change impact and adaptation on wheat yield, water use and water use efficiency at North Nile Delta. Front. Earth Sci. 2020, 14, 522–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Liu, W.; Sun, F.; Feng, Y.; Li, C.; Chen, J.; Sang, Y.F.; Zhang, Q. Increasing population exposure to global warm-season concurrent dry and hot extremes under different warming levels. Environ. Res. Lett. 2021, 16, 94002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lizaso, J.I.; Ruiz-Ramos, M.; Rodríguez, L.; Gabaldon-Leal, C.; Oliveira, J.A.; Lorite, I.J.; Sánchez, D.; García, E.; Rodríguez, A. Impact of high temperatures in maise: Phenology and yield components. Field Crop. Res. 2018, 216, 129–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Greer, D.H.; Weedon, M.M. Modelling photosynthetic responses to temperature of grapevine (Vitis vinifera cv. Semillon) leaves on vines grown in a hot climate. Plant Cell Environ. 2012, 35, 1050–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Muleke, A.; Harrison, M.T.; De Voil, P.; Hunt, I.; Liu, K.; Yanotti, M.; Eisner, R. Earlier crop flowering caused by global warming alleviated by irrigation. Environ. Res. Lett. 2022, 17, 044032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Xiong, Q.Q.; Shen, T.H.; Zhong, L.; Zhu, C.L.; Peng, X.S.; He, X.P.; Fu, J.R.; Ouyang, L.J.; Bian, J.M.; Hu, L.F.; et al. Comprehensive metabolomic, proteomic and physiological analyses of grain yield reduction in rice under abrupt drought-flood alternation stress. Physiol. Plant 2019, 167, 564–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Dhillon, G.S.; Inamdar, S. Storm event patterns of particulate organic carbon (POC) for large storms and differences with dissolved organic carbon (DOC). Biogeochemistry 2014, 118, 61–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Fei, K.; Deng, L.; Zhang, L.; Sun, T.; Wu, Y.; Fan, X.; Dong, Y. Lateral transport of soil total carbon with slope runoff and interflow: Effects of rainstorm characteristics under simulated rainfall. CATENA 2019, 179, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Lloyd, C.E.M.; Michaelides, K.; Chadwick, D.R.; Dungait, J.A.J.; Evershed, R.P. Runoff- and erosion-driven transport of cattle slurry: Linking molecular tracers to hydrological processes. Biogeosciences 2016, 13, 551–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Xian, Q.; Li, P.; Liu, C.; Cui, J.; Guan, Z.; Tang, X. Concentration and spectroscopic characteristics of DOM in surface runoff and fracture flow in a cropland plot of a loamy soil. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 622–623, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Zhang, Q.; Shao, M.; Jia, X.; Wei, X. Changes in soil physical and chemical properties after short drought stress in semi-humid forests. Geoderma 2019, 338, 170–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Schimel, J.P.; Schaeffer, S.M. Microbial control over carbon cycling in soil. Front. Microbiol. 2012, 3, 348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Borken, W.; Matzner, E. Reappraisal of drying and wetting effects on C and N mineralisation and fluxes in soils. Glob. Change Biol. 2009, 15, 808–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Ramos, M.C.; Lizaga, I.; Gaspar, L.; Catalá, A.; Navas, A. Assessment of nutrient differences in detached soil particles between cropland and revegetated abandoned land. Land Degrad. Dev. 2024, 35, 5029–5042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Liu, M.; Guilin, H.; Zhang, Q. Effects of soil aggregate stability on soil organic carbon and nitrogen under land use change in an erodible region in southwest China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Yılmaz, E.; Çanakcı, M.; Topakcı, M.; Sönmez, S.; Ağsaran, B.; Alagöz, Z.; Çıtak, S.; Uras, D.S. Effect of vineyard pruning residue application on soil aggregate formation, aggregate stability and carbon content in different aggregate sizes. Catena 2019, 183, 104219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Straffelini, E.; Pijl, A.; Otto, S.; Marchesini, E.; Pitacco, A.; Tarolli, P. A high-resolution physical modelling approach to assess runoff and soil erosion in vineyards under different soil managements. Soil Tillage Res. 2022, 222, 105418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Skendžić, S.; Zovko, M.; Živković, I.P.; Lešić, V.; Lemić, D. The impact of climate change on agricultural insect pests. Insects 2021, 12, 440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Zhang, J.; Peng, J.; Zheng, J.; Yao, Y. Characterisation of stress and moisturedependent resilient behaviour for compacted clays in South China. Road Mater. Pavement Des. 2020, 21, 262–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Liu, Y.; Hu, T.; Zhu, R.; Li, H.; Chen, Q.; Jing, P.; Mahmoud, A.; Wang, Y.; Li, X. Response of rice’s hydraulic transport and photosynthetic capacity to drought-flood abrupt alternation. Agric. Water Manag. 2024, 303, 109023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Huang, J.; Hu, T.; Yasir, M.; Gao, Y.; Chen, C.; Zhu, R.; Wang, X.; Yuan, H.; Yang, J. Root growth dynamics and yield responses of rice (Oryza sativa L.) Under drought—Flood abrupt alternating conditions. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2018, 157, 11–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zhu, T.; Fonseca De Lima, C.F.; De Smet, I. The heat is on: How crop growth, development, and yield respond to high temperature. J. Exp. Bot. 2021, 72, 7359–7373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Joshi, J.; Stocker, B.D.; Hofhansl, F.; Zhou, S.; Dieckmann, U.; Prentice, I.C. Towards a unified theory of plant photosynthesis and hydraulics. Nat. Plants 2022, 8, 1304–1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Li, Y.; Guan, K.; Schnitkey, G.D.; DeLucia, E.; Peng, B. Excessive rainfall leads to yield loss of a comparable magnitude to extreme drought in the United States. Glob. Change Biol. 2019, 25, 2325–2337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhen, B.; Guo, X.P.; Zhou, X.G.; Lu, H.F.; Wang, Z.C. Effect of the alternating stresses of drought and waterlogging on the growth, chlorophyll content, and yield of rice (Oryza sativa L.). J. Irrig. Drain Eng. 2019, 145, 04019004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Xiong, Q.Q.; Deng, Y.; Zhong, L.; He, H.H.; Chen, X.R. Effects of drought-flood abrupt alternation on yield and physiological characteristics of rice. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2018, 20, 1107–1116. [Google Scholar]
  81. Hubbard, M.; Germida, J.; Vujanovic, V. Fungal endophytes improve wheat seed germination under heat and drought stress. Botany 2012, 90, 137–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Bista, D.R.; Heckathorn, S.A.; Jayawardena, D.M.; Mishra, S.; Boldt, J.K. Effects of drought on nutrient uptake and the levels of nutrient-uptake proteins in roots of drought sensitive and-tolerant grasses. Plants 2018, 7, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Mirzabaev, A.; Bezner Kerr, R.; Hasegawa, T.; Pradhan, P.; Wreford, A.; Cristina Tirado von der Pahlen, M.; Gurney-Smith, H. Severe climate change risks to food security and nutrition. Clim. Risk Manag. 2023, 39, 100473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Ali, J.; Wahl, T.; Enriquez, A.R.; Rashid, M.M.; Morim, J.; Gall, M.; Emrich, C.T. The role of compound climate and weather extreme events in creating socio-economic impacts in South Florida. Weather Clim. Extrem. 2023, 42, 100625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Russell, E.N.; Loikith, P.C.; Ajibade, I.; Done, J.M.; Lower, C. The meteorology and impacts of the September 2020 Western United States extreme weather event. Weather Clim. Extrem. 2024, 43, 100647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Gao, Y.; Zhang, J.; Yan, F.; Leung, L.; Luo, K.; Zhang, Y.; Bell, M. Nonlinear Effect of Compound Extreme Weather Events on Ozone Formation over the United States—ScienceDirect. 2020. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212094720301365 (accessed on 7 November 2024).
  87. Eugenio, E.; Natalia, C.; Carlos, S.; Regina, A.; Maria, J.; Paolo, T. Viticulture in Argentina Under Extreme Weather Scenarios: Actual Challenges, Future Perspectives—ScienceDirect. 2023. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666683923000159 (accessed on 19 October 2024).
  88. Lucas, E.W.M.; Sousa, F.d.A.S.d.; Silva, F.D.d.S.; Júnior, R.L.d.R.; Pinto, D.D.C.; Silva, V.d.P.R.d. Trends in climate extreme indices assessed in the Xingu river basin—Brazilian Amazon. Weather Clim. Extrem. 2021, 31, 100306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. MacLeod, D.; Easton-Calabria, E.; de Perez, E.C.; Jaime, C. Verification of forecasts for extreme rainfall, tropical cyclones, flood and storm surge over Myanmar and the Philippines. Weather Clim. Extrem. 2021, 33, 100325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Bhuyan, M.I.; Supit, I.; Kumar, U.; Mia, S.; Ludwig, F. The significance of farmers’ climate change and salinity perceptions for on-farm adaptation strategies in the south-central coast of Bangladesh. J. Agric. Food Res. 2024, 16, 101097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Lu, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Song, B.; Shao, H.; Tian, X.; Liu, S. The responses of ecological indicators to compound extreme climate indices in Southwestern China. Ecol. Indic. 2023, 157, 111253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Broughton, K.; Nunn, C.; Bange, M. The here and now of climate change: Climatic trends throughout Australian cotton regions and implications for the growing season. Field Crop. Res. 2024, 315, 109491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Leitner, M.; Babcicky, P.; Schinko, T.; Glas, N. The status of climate risk management in Austria. Assessing the governance landscape and proposing ways forward for comprehensively managing flood and drought risk. Clim. Risk Manag. 2020, 30, 100246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Serrano-Notivoli, R.; Tejedor, E.; Sarricolea, P.; Meseguer-Ruiz, O.; de Luis, M.; Sa, M.Á.; Longares, L.A.; Olcina, J. Unprecedented Warmth: A Look at Spain’s Exceptional Summer of 2022—ScienceDirect. 2023. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169809523003289 (accessed on 19 October 2024).
  95. Wheeler, R.; Lobley, M. Managing extreme weather and climate change in UK agriculture: Impacts, attitudes and action among farmers and stakeholders. Clim. Risk Manag. 2021, 32, 100313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Meque, A.; Pinto, I.; Maúre, G.; Beleza, A. Understanding the variability of heatwave characteristics in southern Africa. Weather Clim. Extrem. 2022, 38, 100498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Kalkuhl, M.; Wenz, L. The Impact of Climate Conditions on Economic Production. Evidence from a Global Panel of Regions—ScienceDirect. 2020. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069620300838 (accessed on 2 November 2024).
  98. Gemeda, D.O.; Korecha, D.; Garedew, W. Monitoring climate extremes using standardised evapotranspiration index and future projection of rainfall and temperature in the wettest parts of southwest Ethiopia. Environ. Chall. 2022, 7, 100517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Okafor, G.C.; Larbi, I.; Chukwuma, E.C.; Nyamekye, C.; Limantol, A.M.; Dotse, S.-Q. Local climate change signals and changes in climate extremes in a typical Sahel catchment: The case of Dano catchment, Burkina Faso. Environ. Chall. 2021, 5, 100285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Semenov, M.A.; Shewry, P.R. Modelling predicts that heat stress, not drought, will increase vulnerability of wheat in Europe. Sci. Rep. 2011, 1, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Hadi Ahmad, M.; Abubakar, A.; Yusoff Ishak, M.; Shehu Danhassan, S.; Jiahua, Z.; Alatalo, J.M. Modeling the influence of daily temperature and precipitation extreme indices on vegetation dynamics in Katsina State using statistical downscaling model (SDM). Ecol. Indic. 2023, 155, 110979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Yaduvanshi, A.; Nkemelang, T.; Bendapudi, R.; New, M. Temperature and rainfall extremes change under current and future global warming levels across Indian climate zones. Weather Clim. Extrem. 2021, 31, 100291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Masroor, M.; Sajjad, H. Understanding climate change dynamics in the Godavari middle sub-basin using parametric and non-parametric models. Geosyst. Geoenviron. 2024, 3, 100269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Gouache, D.; Le Bris, X.; Bogard, M.; Deudon, O.; Pagé, C.; Gate, P. Evaluating agronomic adaptation options to increasing heat stress under climate change during wheat grain filling in France. Eur. J. Agron. 2012, 39, 62–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Semenov, M.A. Impacts of climate change on wheat in England and Wales. J. R. Soc. Interface 2009, 6, 343–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Strer, M.; Svoboda, N.; Herrmann, A. Abundance of adverse environmental conditions during critical stages of crop production in Northern Germany. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2018, 30, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Trnka, M.; Rötter, R.P.; Ruiz-Ramos, M.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Olesen, J.E.; Žalud, Z.; Semenov, M.A. Adverse weather conditions for European wheat production will become more frequent with climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 2014, 4, 637–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Mirgol, B.; Dieppois, B.; Northey, J.; Eden, J.; Jarlan, L.; Khabba, S.; Le Page, M.; Mahe, G. Future changes in agrometeorological extremes in the southern Mediterranean region: When and where will they affect croplands and wheatlands? Agric. For. Meteorol. 2024, 358, 110232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. del Pozo, A.; Brunel-Saldias, N.; Engler, A.; Ortega-Farias, S.; Acevedo-Opazo, C.; Lobos, G.A.; Jara-Rojas, R.; Molina-Montenegro, M.A. Climate change impacts and adaptation strategies of agriculture in Mediterranean-climate regions (MCRs). Sustainability 2019, 11, 2769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Wouterse, F.; Andrijevic, M.; Schaeffer, M. The Microeconomics of Adaptation: Evidence from Smallholders in Ethiopia and Niger—ScienceDirect. 2022. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X22000742 (accessed on 2 November 2024).
  111. Bybee-Finley, K.; Menalled, U.; Pelzer, C.; Ruhl, L.; Lounsbury, N.; Warren Cherney, N.; Darby, H.; Smith, R.; Ryan, M. Quantifying the Roles of Intraspecific and Interspecific Diversification Strategies in Forage Cropping Systems—ScienceDirect. 2023. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378429023002290 (accessed on 2 November 2024).
  112. Bernués, A.; Tenza-Peral, A.; Gómez-Baggethun, E.; Clemetsen, M.; Eik, L.O.; Martín-Collado, D. Targeting best agricultural practices to enhance ecosystem services in European mountains. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 316, 115255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Stetter, S.; Sauer, J. Tackling Climate Change: Agroforestry Adoption in the Face of Regional Weather Extremes—ScienceDirect. 2024. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924001630 (accessed on 26 October 2024).
  114. Wang, W.; Straffelini, E.; Tarolli, P. Steep-slope viticulture: The effectiveness of micro-water storage in improving resilience to weather extremes. Agric. Water Manag. 2023, 286, 108398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Jiménez, O.R.; Bornemann, A.C.; Medina, Y.E.; Romero, K.; Bravo, J.R. Prospects of biological inputs as a measure for reducing crop losses caused by climate change effects. J. Agric. Food Res. 2023, 14, 100689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Wichern, J.; Hammond, J.; Mark, T.; Wijk, V.; Giller, K.; Descheemaeker, K. Production Variability and Adaptation Strategies of Ugandan Smallholders in the Face of Climate Variability and Market Shocks—ScienceDirect. 2023. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212096323000165 (accessed on 4 November 2024).
Atmosphere 15 01480 g001
Figure 1. Conceptual framework for the review synthesis.
Figure 1. Conceptual framework for the review synthesis.
Atmosphere 15 01480 g001
Atmosphere 15 01480 g002
Figure 2. PRISMA flow diagram showing the process and shape of the systematic literature review.
Figure 2. PRISMA flow diagram showing the process and shape of the systematic literature review.
Atmosphere 15 01480 g002
Atmosphere 15 01480 g003
Figure 3. Text analysis of selected articles.
Figure 3. Text analysis of selected articles.
Atmosphere 15 01480 g003
Atmosphere 15 01480 g004
Figure 4. Frequency of primary keywords.
Figure 4. Frequency of primary keywords.
Atmosphere 15 01480 g004
Atmosphere 15 01480 g005
Figure 5. Map showing the distribution of climate externalities research, highlighting regions with reported extreme climate threats to environmental stability based on papers included in the review.
Figure 5. Map showing the distribution of climate externalities research, highlighting regions with reported extreme climate threats to environmental stability based on papers included in the review.
Atmosphere 15 01480 g005
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Inclusion CriteriaExclusion Criteria
Articles written in English.No access to full text
Selected period: January 2015 to September 2024.Types of publications: reviews, books, conference papers, proceeding papers
Peer-reviewed publications; original articles
The publication primarily focuses on agroecosystems and climate extremes, investigating or demonstrating relationships between climate extremes and environmental sustainability.Articles that do NOT include relevant information on the effect of climate externalities on agroecosystems
Articles exploring climate extreme/change models and agroecological mitigation practices.Articles on agroecosystem or ecosystem services that do not address environmental concerns or implications
Articles investigating both direct (e.g., immediate physical damage to agroecosystems) and indirect (e.g., altered ecological processes or services) impacts.
Table 2. Study keywords.
Table 2. Study keywords.
Primary KeywordsSub-Keywords
climate changegreenhouse gases; global warming; carbon footprint; sea level rise; emission reduction; renewable energy; climate adaptation; carbon sequestration; climate mitigation; temperature anomalies
climate extremes
(extreme weather events or extreme weather)		heatwaves; drought; flooding; hurricanes; tornadoes; extreme precipitation; cold spells; storm surges; wildfires; ice storms
ecosystem Service pollination; water purification; soil fertility; carbon storage; climate regulation; B\biodiversity; erosion control; pest regulation; nutrient cycling; recreation
agroecosystemcrop rotation; sustainable agriculture; soil management; integrated pest management; agroforestry; cover crops; precision farming; organic farming; irrigation systems; livestock management
environmental stabilityecological balance; biodiversity conservation; habitat preservation; resilience; ecosystem health; sustainability; land use planning; pollution control resource management; restoration ecology
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Olowoyeye, T.; Abegunrin, G.; Sojka, M. Are Agroecosystem Services Under Threat? Examining the Influence of Climate Externalities on Ecosystem Stability. Atmosphere 2024, 15, 1480. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15121480

AMA Style

Olowoyeye T, Abegunrin G, Sojka M. Are Agroecosystem Services Under Threat? Examining the Influence of Climate Externalities on Ecosystem Stability. Atmosphere. 2024; 15(12):1480. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15121480

Chicago/Turabian Style

Olowoyeye, Temidayo, Gideon Abegunrin, and Mariusz Sojka. 2024. "Are Agroecosystem Services Under Threat? Examining the Influence of Climate Externalities on Ecosystem Stability" Atmosphere 15, no. 12: 1480. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15121480

APA Style

Olowoyeye, T., Abegunrin, G., & Sojka, M. (2024). Are Agroecosystem Services Under Threat? Examining the Influence of Climate Externalities on Ecosystem Stability. Atmosphere, 15(12), 1480. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos15121480

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop