We compare ensembles of water supply and demand projections from 10 global hydrological models and six global gridded crop models. These are produced as part of the Inter-Sectoral Impacts Model Intercomparison Project, with coordination from the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project, and driven by outputs of general circulation models run under representative concentration pathway 8.5 as part of the Fifth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. Models project that direct climate impacts to maize, soybean, wheat, and rice involve losses of 400–1,400 Pcal (8–24% of present-day total) when CO₂ fertilization effects are accounted for or 1,400–2,600 Pcal (24–43%) otherwise. Freshwater limitations in some irrigated regions (western United States; China; and West, South, and Central Asia) could necessitate the reversion of 20–60 Mha of cropland from irrigated to rainfed management by end-of-century, and a further loss of 600–2,900 Pcal of food production. In other regions (northern/eastern United States, parts of South America, much of Europe, and South East Asia) surplus water supply could in principle support a net increase in irrigation, although substantial investments in irrigation infrastructure would be required. Significance Freshwater availability is relevant to almost all socioeconomic and environmental impacts of climate and demographic change and their implications for sustainability. We compare ensembles of water supply and demand projections driven by ensemble output from five global climate models. Our results suggest reasons for concern. Direct climate impacts to maize, soybean, wheat, and rice involve losses of 400–2,600 Pcal (8–43% of present-day total). Freshwater limitations in some heavily irrigated regions could necessitate reversion of 20–60 Mha of cropland from irrigated to rainfed management, and a further loss of 600–2,900 Pcal. Freshwater abundance in other regions could help ameliorate these losses, but substantial investment in infrastructure would be required.

Crop models are increasingly used to simulate crop yields at the global scale, but so far there is no general framework on how to assess model performance. Here we evaluate the simulation results of 14 global gridded crop modeling groups that have contributed historic crop yield simulations for maize, wheat, rice and soybean to the Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP). Simulation results are compared to reference data at global, national and grid cell scales and we evaluate model performance with respect to time series correlation, spatial correlation and mean bias. We find that global gridded crop models (GGCMs) show mixed skill in reproducing time series correlations or spatial patterns at the different spatial scales. Generally, maize, wheat and soybean simulations of many GGCMs are capable of reproducing larger parts of observed temporal variability (time series correlation coefficients (r) of up to 0.888 for maize, 0.673 for wheat and 0.643 for soybean at the global scale) but rice yield variability cannot be well reproduced by most models. Yield variability can be well reproduced for most major producing countries by many GGCMs and for all countries by at least some. A comparison with gridded yield data and a statistical analysis of the effects of weather variability on yield variability shows that the ensemble of GGCMs can explain more of the yield variability than an ensemble of regression models for maize and soybean, but not for wheat and rice. We identify future research needs in global gridded crop modeling and for all individual crop modeling groups. In the absence of a purely observation-based benchmark for model evaluation, we propose that the best performing crop model per crop and region establishes the benchmark for all others, and modelers are encouraged to investigate how crop model performance can be increased. We make our evaluation system accessible to all crop modelers so that other modeling groups can also test their model performance against the reference data and the GGCMI benchmark.

Nitrous oxide (N₂O) is an important greenhouse gas and also an ozone-depleting substance that has both natural and anthropogenic sources. Large estimation uncertainty remains on the magnitude and spatiotemporal patterns of N₂O fluxes and the key drivers of N₂O production in the terrestrial biosphere. Some terrestrial biosphere models have been evolved to account for nitrogen processes and to show the capability to simulate N₂O emissions from land ecosystems at the global scale, but large discrepancies exist among their estimates primarily because of inconsistent input datasets, simulation protocol, and model structure and parameterization schemes. Based on the consistent model input data and simulation protocol, the global N₂O Model Intercomparison Project (NMIP) was initialized with 10 state-of-the-art terrestrial biosphere models that include nitrogen (N) cycling. Specific objectives of NMIP are to 1) unravel the major N cycling processes controlling N₂O fluxes in each model and identify the uncertainty sources from model structure, input data, and parameters; 2) quantify the magnitude and spatial and temporal patterns of global and regional N₂O fluxes from the preindustrial period (1860) to present and attribute the relative contributions of multiple environmental factors to N₂O dynamics; and 3) provide a benchmarking estimate of N₂O fluxes through synthesizing the multimodel simulation results and existing estimates from ground-based observations, inventories, and statistical and empirical extrapolations. This study provides detailed descriptions for the NMIP protocol, input data, model structure, and key parameters, along with preliminary simulation results. The global and regional N₂O estimation derived from the NMIP is a key component of the global N₂O budget synthesis activity jointly led by the Global Carbon Project and the International Nitrogen Initiative.