Recent studies assessing plausible futures for agricultural markets and global food security have had contradictory outcomes. Ten global economic models that produce long-term scenarios were asked to compare a reference scenario with alternate socio-economic, climate change and bioenergy scenarios using a common set of key drivers. Results suggest that, once general assumptions are harmonized, the variability in general trends across models declines, and that several common conclusions are possible. Nonetheless, differences in basic model parameters, sometimes hidden in the way market behavior is modeled, result in significant differences in the details. This holds for both the common reference scenario and for the various shocks applied. We conclude that agro-economic modelers aiming to inform the agricultural and development policy debate require better data and analysis on both economic behavior and biophysical drivers. More interdisciplinary modeling efforts are required to cross-fertilize analyses at different scales.