A recurring question in using crop models to simulate potential impacts of climate change is what constitutes sufficiently novel or high quality work to merit publication in a peer-reviewed journal? As modeling tools become easier to use and base data become more widely available, one could argue that simply simulating potential impacts for crop X in country Y is no longer original research: the work is more of an engineering exercise that should be published as a report, not an article in a science journal. Meanwhile, controversies over the reliability of IPCC findings have created demand for greater reliance on peer review.
These conflicting concerns (among others) led us to conduct a structured review of how crop models are used to simulate potential impacts of climate change. The basic methodology was to score 221 papers for traits under six subject areas:

1.       target crops and regions

2.       the crop model(s) used and their characteristics

3.       sources and application of data on [CO2] and climate

4.       impact parameters evaluated

5.       assessment of variability or risk

6.       adaptation strategies.
The results were published in Field Crops Research:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378429011002395
There appear to be ample opportunities for novel research in simulating potential impacts of climate change and for improving our basic approaches in such work.
If you are unable to access the full text, please feel free to contact me direct for a copy of the paper.
Warmest regards (and as always, apologies for cross postings.

Jeff White

Jeffrey W. White
Plant Physiologist
ALARC USDA ARS
21881 N Cardon Lane
Maricopa AZ 85138
Tel +1-520-316-6368