24 results on '"Lila Warszawski"'
Search Results
2. State-of-the-art global models underestimate impacts from climate extremes
- Author
-
Jacob Schewe, Simon N. Gosling, Christopher Reyer, Fang Zhao, Philippe Ciais, Joshua Elliott, Louis Francois, Veronika Huber, Heike K. Lotze, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Michelle T. H. van Vliet, Robert Vautard, Yoshihide Wada, Lutz Breuer, Matthias Büchner, David A. Carozza, Jinfeng Chang, Marta Coll, Delphine Deryng, Allard de Wit, Tyler D. Eddy, Christian Folberth, Katja Frieler, Andrew D. Friend, Dieter Gerten, Lukas Gudmundsson, Naota Hanasaki, Akihiko Ito, Nikolay Khabarov, Hyungjun Kim, Peter Lawrence, Catherine Morfopoulos, Christoph Müller, Hannes Müller Schmied, René Orth, Sebastian Ostberg, Yadu Pokhrel, Thomas A. M. Pugh, Gen Sakurai, Yusuke Satoh, Erwin Schmid, Tobias Stacke, Jeroen Steenbeek, Jörg Steinkamp, Qiuhong Tang, Hanqin Tian, Derek P. Tittensor, Jan Volkholz, Xuhui Wang, and Lila Warszawski
- Subjects
Science - Abstract
Impact models projections are used in integrated assessments of climate change. Here the authors test systematically across many important systems, how well such impact models capture the impacts of extreme climate conditions.
- Published
- 2019
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. All options, not silver bullets, needed to limit global warming to 1.5 °C: a scenario appraisal
- Author
-
Lila Warszawski, Elmar Kriegler, Timothy M Lenton, Owen Gaffney, Daniela Jacob, Daniel Klingenfeld, Ryu Koide, María Máñez Costa, Dirk Messner, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Peter Schlosser, Kazuhiko Takeuchi, Sander Van Der Leeuw, Gail Whiteman, and Johan Rockström
- Subjects
climate change ,emissions scenarios, 1.5 °C ,negative emissions ,Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering ,TD1-1066 ,Environmental sciences ,GE1-350 ,Science ,Physics ,QC1-999 - Abstract
Climate science provides strong evidence of the necessity of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. The IPCC 1.5 °C special report (SR1.5) presents 414 emissions scenarios modelled for the report, of which around 50 are classified as ‘1.5 °C scenarios’, with no or low temperature overshoot. These emission scenarios differ in their reliance on individual mitigation levers, including reduction of global energy demand, decarbonisation of energy production, development of land-management systems, and the pace and scale of deploying carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. The reliance of 1.5 °C scenarios on these levers needs to be critically assessed in light of the potentials of the relevant technologies and roll-out plans. We use a set of five parameters to bundle and characterise the mitigation levers employed in the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios. For each of these levers, we draw on the literature to define ‘medium’ and ‘high’ upper bounds that delineate between their ‘reasonable’, ‘challenging’ and ‘speculative’ use by mid century. We do not find any 1.5 °C scenarios that stay within all medium upper bounds on the five mitigation levers. Scenarios most frequently ‘over use’ CDR with geological storage as a mitigation lever, whilst reductions of energy demand and carbon intensity of energy production are ‘over used’ less frequently. If we allow mitigation levers to be employed up to our high upper bounds, we are left with 22 of the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios with no or low overshoot. The scenarios that fulfil these criteria are characterised by greater coverage of the available mitigation levers than those scenarios that exceed at least one of the high upper bounds. When excluding the two scenarios that exceed the SR1.5 carbon budget for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, this subset of 1.5 °C scenarios shows a range of 15–22 Gt CO _2 (16–22 Gt CO _2 interquartile range) for emissions in 2030. For the year of reaching net zero CO _2 emissions the range is 2039–2061 (2049–2057 interquartile range).
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Assessing inter-sectoral climate change risks: the role of ISIMIP
- Author
-
Cynthia Rosenzweig, Nigel W Arnell, Kristie L Ebi, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Frank Raes, Chris Rapley, Mark Stafford Smith, Wolfgang Cramer, Katja Frieler, Christopher P O Reyer, Jacob Schewe, Detlef van Vuuren, and Lila Warszawski
- Subjects
Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering ,TD1-1066 ,Environmental sciences ,GE1-350 ,Science ,Physics ,QC1-999 - Abstract
The aims of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) are to provide a framework for the intercomparison of global and regional-scale risk models within and across multiple sectors and to enable coordinated multi-sectoral assessments of different risks and their aggregated effects. The overarching goal is to use the knowledge gained to support adaptation and mitigation decisions that require regional or global perspectives within the context of facilitating transformations to enable sustainable development, despite inevitable climate shifts and disruptions. ISIMIP uses community-agreed sets of scenarios with standardized climate variables and socio-economic projections as inputs for projecting future risks and associated uncertainties, within and across sectors. The results are consistent multi-model assessments of sectoral risks and opportunities that enable studies that integrate across sectors, providing support for implementation of the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. A multi-model analysis of risk of ecosystem shifts under climate change
- Author
-
Lila Warszawski, Andrew Friend, Sebastian Ostberg, Katja Frieler, Wolfgang Lucht, Sibyll Schaphoff, David Beerling, Patricia Cadule, Philippe Ciais, Douglas B Clark, Ron Kahana, Akihiko Ito, Rozenn Keribin, Axel Kleidon, Mark Lomas, Kazuya Nishina, Ryan Pavlick, Tim Tito Rademacher, Matthias Buechner, Franziska Piontek, Jacob Schewe, Olivia Serdeczny, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
- Subjects
climate change ,ecosystem change ,global vegetation ,Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering ,TD1-1066 ,Environmental sciences ,GE1-350 ,Science ,Physics ,QC1-999 - Abstract
Climate change may pose a high risk of change to Earth’s ecosystems: shifting climatic boundaries may induce changes in the biogeochemical functioning and structures of ecosystems that render it difficult for endemic plant and animal species to survive in their current habitats. Here we aggregate changes in the biogeochemical ecosystem state as a proxy for the risk of these shifts at different levels of global warming. Estimates are based on simulations from seven global vegetation models (GVMs) driven by future climate scenarios, allowing for a quantification of the related uncertainties. 5–19% of the naturally vegetated land surface is projected to be at risk of severe ecosystem change at 2 ° C of global warming (ΔGMT) above 1980–2010 levels. However, there is limited agreement across the models about which geographical regions face the highest risk of change. The extent of regions at risk of severe ecosystem change is projected to rise with ΔGMT, approximately doubling between ΔGMT = 2 and 3 ° C, and reaching a median value of 35% of the naturally vegetated land surface for ΔGMT = 4 °C. The regions projected to face the highest risk of severe ecosystem changes above ΔGMT = 4 °C or earlier include the tundra and shrublands of the Tibetan Plateau, grasslands of eastern India, the boreal forests of northern Canada and Russia, the savanna region in the Horn of Africa, and the Amazon rainforest.
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. Projecting exposure to extreme climate impact events across six event categories and three spatial scales
- Author
-
Stefan Lange, Jan Volkholz, Tobias Geiger, Fang Zhao, Iliusi Vega, Ted Veldkamp, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Lila Warszawski, Veronika Huber, Jonas Jägermeyr, Jacob Schewe, David N. Bresch, Matthias Büchner, Jinfeng Chang, Philippe Ciais, Marie Dury, Kerry Emanuel, Christian Folberth, Dieter Gerten, Simon N. Gosling, Manolis G. Grillakis, Naota Hanasaki, Alexandra-Jane Henrot, Thomas Hickler, Yasushi Honda, Akihiko Ito, Nikolay Khabarov, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Wenfeng Liu, Christoph Müller, Kazuya Nishina, Sebastian Ostberg, Hannes Müller Schmied, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Tobias Stacke, Jörg Steinkamp, Wim Thiery, Yoshihide Wada, Sven Willner, Hong Yang, Minoru Yoshikawa, Chao Yue, and Katja Frieler
- Subjects
Meteorology And Climatology - Abstract
The extent and impact of climate‐related extreme events depend on the underlying meteorological, hydrological, or climatological drivers as well as on human factors such as land use or population density. Here we quantify the pure effect of historical and future climate change on the exposure of land and population to extreme climate impact events using an unprecedentedly large ensemble of harmonized climate impact simulations from the Inter‐Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b. Our results indicate that global warming has already more than doubled both the global land area and the global population annually exposed to all six categories of extreme events considered: river floods, tropical cyclones, crop failure, wildfires, droughts, and heatwaves. Global warming of 2°C relative to preindustrial conditions is projected to lead to a more than five‐fold increase in cross‐category aggregate exposure globally. Changes in exposure are unevenly distributed, with tropical and subtropical regions facing larger increases than higher latitudes. The largest increases in overall exposure are projected for the population of South Asia.
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. Shaping a resilient future in response to COVID-19
- Author
-
Johan Rockström, Albert V. Norström, Nathanial Matthews, Reinette Biggs, Carl Folke, Ameil Harikishun, Saleemul Huq, Nisha Krishnan, Lila Warszawski, and Deon Nel
- Subjects
Urban Studies ,Global and Planetary Change ,Ecology ,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment ,Geography, Planning and Development ,Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law ,Nature and Landscape Conservation ,Food Science - Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
8. Stockholm to Stockholm: Achieving a safe Earth requires goals that incorporate a just approach
- Author
-
Simona Pedde, Joyeeta Gupta, Lila Warszawski, Wendy Broadgate, Johan Rockström, Dahe Qin, and Governance and Inclusive Development (GID, AISSR, FMG)
- Subjects
Transformative learning ,Political science ,Humanity ,Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous) ,Environmental ethics ,Earth (chemistry) ,Commission ,Economic Justice ,General Environmental Science - Abstract
A global agenda-setting opportunity to reverse ongoing planetary destruction is coming in 2022 with Stockholm+50. The independent Earth Commission will propose a safe and just corridor for humanity to spearhead its transformative agenda, defining goals for a stable Earth integrating justice.
- Published
- 2021
9. All options, not silver bullets, needed to limit global warming to 1.5 ◦C: A scenario appraisal
- Author
-
Johan Rockström, Elmar Kriegler, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Dirk Messner, Daniel Klingenfeld, Ryu Koide, Kazuhiko Takeuchi, Owen Gaffney, María Máñez Costa, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Lila Warszawski, Timothy M. Lenton, Gail Whiteman, Daniela Jacob, Peter Schlosser, and Sander van der Leeuw
- Subjects
010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences ,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment ,Global warming ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,Climate change ,Carbon dioxide removal ,010501 environmental sciences ,Overshoot (population) ,Environmental economics ,01 natural sciences ,1.5 ◦C ,Negative emissions ,Range (aeronautics) ,Scale (social sciences) ,Environmental science ,Production (economics) ,Emissions scenarios ,0105 earth and related environmental sciences ,General Environmental Science ,Pace - Abstract
Climate science provides strong evidence of the necessity of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. The IPCC 1.5 °C special report (SR1.5) presents 414 emissions scenarios modelled for the report, of which around 50 are classified as ‘1.5 °C scenarios’, with no or low temperature overshoot. These emission scenarios differ in their reliance on individual mitigation levers, including reduction of global energy demand, decarbonisation of energy production, development of land-management systems, and the pace and scale of deploying carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. The reliance of 1.5 °C scenarios on these levers needs to be critically assessed in light of the potentials of the relevant technologies and roll-out plans. We use a set of five parameters to bundle and characterise the mitigation levers employed in the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios. For each of these levers, we draw on the literature to define ‘medium’ and ‘high’ upper bounds that delineate between their ‘reasonable’, ‘challenging’ and ‘speculative’ use by mid century. We do not find any 1.5 °C scenarios that stay within all medium upper bounds on the five mitigation levers. Scenarios most frequently ‘over use’ CDR with geological storage as a mitigation lever, whilst reductions of energy demand and carbon intensity of energy production are ‘over used’ less frequently. If we allow mitigation levers to be employed up to our high upper bounds, we are left with 22 of the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios with no or low overshoot. The scenarios that fulfil these criteria are characterised by greater coverage of the available mitigation levers than those scenarios that exceed at least one of the high upper bounds. When excluding the two scenarios that exceed the SR1.5 carbon budget for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, this subset of 1.5 °C scenarios shows a range of 15–22 Gt CO2 (16–22 Gt CO2 interquartile range) for emissions in 2030. For the year of reaching net zero CO2 emissions the range is 2039–2061 (2049–2057 interquartile range).
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
10. Projecting Exposure to Extreme Climate Impact Events Across Six Event Categories and Three Spatial Scales
- Author
-
Yoshihide Wada, Fang Zhao, Yasushi Honda, Thomas Hickler, Jörg Steinkamp, Nikolay Khabarov, Tobias Stacke, Lila Warszawski, David N. Bresch, Tobias Geiger, Wim Thiery, Kazuya Nishina, Jonas Jägermeyr, Sebastian Ostberg, Hannes Müller Schmied, Manolis Grillakis, Iliusi Vega, Kerry Emanuel, Akihiko Ito, Philippe Ciais, Sonia I. Seneviratne, Stefan Lange, Naota Hanasaki, Jinfeng Chang, Jan Volkholz, Aristeidis Koutroulis, Christian Folberth, Matthias Büchner, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Minoru Yoshikawa, Sven Willner, Christoph Müller, Katja Frieler, Hong Yang, Jacob Schewe, Simon N. Gosling, Alexandra Henrot, Dieter Gerten, Marie Dury, Veronika Huber, Chao Yue, Wenfeng Liu, Ted Veldkamp, Hydrology and Hydraulic Engineering, Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement [Gif-sur-Yvette] (LSCE), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency, ERCA 821010 641816 SAW‐2016‐PIK‐1, 603864 Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, BMBF: 01LA1829A, 01LS1201A2, 01LS1711F Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, METI Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, ETH: Fel‐45 15‐1 Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, MINECO: PCIN‐2017‐046, We thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for constructive feedback. We thank three other anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper submitted to a different journal. This research was supported in part by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF, grant numbers 01LS1201A2, 01LS1711F, and 01LA1829A) and the EU FP7 HELIX project (grant number 603864). Some authors acknowledge support from the Leibniz Competition projects SAW‐2013‐PIK‐5 (EXPACT) and SAW‐2016‐PIK‐1 (ENGAGE). Some authors acknowledge funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement number 821010 (CASCADES). N. H., K. N., and Y. H. acknowledge support from the ERTD Funds 2RF‐1802 and S‐14 of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. W. T. was supported by an ETH Zurich postdoctoral fellowship (Fel‐45 15‐1). V. H. was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (MINECO, grant number PCIN‐2017‐046). P. C. acknowledges support from the CLAND ANR Convergence Institute. S. L. acknowledges funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement number 641816 (CRESCENDO). Open access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL., Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), and Water and Climate Risk
- Subjects
010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences ,HYDROLOGICAL MODELS ,Population ,0207 environmental engineering ,FLOOD RISK ,Environmental Sciences & Ecology ,02 engineering and technology ,Subtropics ,[SDU.STU.ME]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Earth Sciences/Meteorology ,01 natural sciences ,Population density ,Latitude ,Climate-related extreme events ,Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous) ,SDG 13 - Climate Action ,Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences ,BURNED AREA ,GLOBAL CROP PRODUCTION ,Geosciences, Multidisciplinary ,020701 environmental engineering ,education ,0105 earth and related environmental sciences ,General Environmental Science ,Event (probability theory) ,education.field_of_study ,Science & Technology ,Land use ,Global warming ,VEGETATION MODEL ORCHIDEE ,Geology ,15. Life on land ,TERRESTRIAL CARBON BALANCE ,13. Climate action ,Climatology ,Physical Sciences ,TROPICAL CYCLONE ACTIVITY ,HURRICANE INTENSITY ,Environmental science ,Tropical cyclone ,INTERANNUAL VARIABILITY ,Life Sciences & Biomedicine ,Environmental Sciences ,INCORPORATING SPITFIRE - Abstract
Summarization: The extent and impact of climate‐related extreme events depend on the underlying meteorological, hydrological, or climatological drivers as well as on human factors such as land use or population density. Here we quantify the pure effect of historical and future climate change on the exposure of land and population to extreme climate impact events using an unprecedentedly large ensemble of harmonized climate impact simulations from the Inter‐Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project phase 2b. Our results indicate that global warming has already more than doubled both the global land area and the global population annually exposed to all six categories of extreme events considered: river floods, tropical cyclones, crop failure, wildfires, droughts, and heatwaves. Global warming of 2°C relative to preindustrial conditions is projected to lead to a more than fivefold increase in cross‐category aggregate exposure globally. Changes in exposure are unevenly distributed, with tropical and subtropical regions facing larger increases than higher latitudes. The largest increases in overall exposure are projected for the population of South Asia. Presented on: Earth's Future
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
11. Understanding the weather signal in national crop-yield variability
- Author
-
Delphine Deryng, James P. Chryssanthacopoulos, Joshua Elliott, Erwin Schmid, Stefan Olin, Sibyll Schaphoff, Jacob Schewe, Nikolay Khabarov, Almut Arneth, Christoph Müller, Lila Warszawski, Thomas A. M. Pugh, Bernhard Schauberger, Christian Folberth, Juraj Balkovic, Katja Frieler, and Anders Levermann
- Subjects
2. Zero hunger ,010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences ,Natural resource economics ,Yield (finance) ,Crop yield ,Empirical modelling ,Climate change ,Subsistence agriculture ,Context (language use) ,Loss and damage ,04 agricultural and veterinary sciences ,15. Life on land ,Livelihood ,01 natural sciences ,13. Climate action ,Climatology ,040103 agronomy & agriculture ,Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous) ,0401 agriculture, forestry, and fisheries ,Environmental science ,0105 earth and related environmental sciences ,General Environmental Science - Abstract
Year-to-year variations in crop yields can have major impacts on the livelihoods of subsistence farmers and may trigger significant global price fluctuations, with severe consequences for people in developing countries. Fluctuations can be induced by weather conditions, management decisions, weeds, diseases, and pests. Although an explicit quantification and deeper understanding of weather-induced crop-yield variability is essential for adaptation strategies, so far it has only been addressed by empirical models. Here, we provide conservative estimates of the fraction of reported national yield variabilities that can be attributed to weather by state-of-the-art, process-based crop model simulations. We find that observed weather variations can explain more than 50% of the variability in wheat yields in Australia, Canada, Spain, Hungary, and Romania. For maize, weather sensitivities exceed 50% in seven countries, including the United States. The explained variance exceeds 50% for rice in Japan and South Korea and for soy in Argentina. Avoiding water stress by simulating yields assuming full irrigation shows that water limitation is a major driver of the observed variations in most of these countries. Identifying the mechanisms leading to crop-yield fluctuations is not only fundamental for dampening fluctuations, but is also important in the context of the debate on the attribution of loss and damage to climate change. Since process-based crop models not only account for weather influences on crop yields, but also provide options to represent human-management measures, they could become essential tools for differentiating these drivers, and for exploring options to reduce future yield fluctuations.
- Published
- 2017
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
12. A framework for the cross-sectoral integration of multi-model impact projections: land use decisions under climate impacts uncertainties
- Author
-
Katja Frieler, Taikan Oki, Qiuhong Tang, Jens Heinke, Almut Arneth, Douglas B. Clark, Jacob Schewe, Simon N. Gosling, Mark R. Lomas, Dominik Wisser, Yoshimitsu Masaki, Balázs M. Fekete, Ingjerd Haddeland, Pete Falloon, P. Ciais, Franziska Piontek, Christoph Schmitz, Kazuya Nishina, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Elke Stehfest, Anders Levermann, Andrew D. Friend, Petra Döll, C. Gellhorn, Erwin Schmid, Marc F. P. Bierkens, Tobias Stacke, Ryan Pavlick, Veronika Huber, Christian Folberth, K. Neumann, Delphine Deryng, Nikolay Khabarov, Lila Warszawski, Alex C. Ruane, Joshua Elliott, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Hydrologie, Sub NMR Spectroscopy, Sub FG LGH 3e geldstroom, Landscape functioning, Geocomputation and Hydrology, Max-Planck-Institut für Extraterrestrische Physik (MPE), Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystems Analysis, Geobiosphere Science Centre, Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement [Gif-sur-Yvette] (LSCE), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), ICOS-ATC (ICOS-ATC), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), Institute of Physical Geography, Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE), Centre for Terrestrial Carbon Dynamics: National Centre for Earth Observation (CTCD), University of Sheffield [Sheffield], Department of Life Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology [Tokyo] (TITECH), Institute of Industrial Science, Max Planck Institute for Meteorology (MPI-M), Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), and Department of Geosciences
- Subjects
lcsh:Dynamic and structural geology ,Natural resource economics ,Population ,Climate change ,7. Clean energy ,Robust decision-making ,lcsh:QE500-639.5 ,Laboratory of Geo-information Science and Remote Sensing ,11. Sustainability ,ddc:550 ,Life Science ,Laboratorium voor Geo-informatiekunde en Remote Sensing ,lcsh:Science ,[SDU.ENVI]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Continental interfaces, environment ,education ,ComputingMilieux_MISCELLANEOUS ,[SDU.OCEAN]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Ocean, Atmosphere ,2. Zero hunger ,education.field_of_study ,Food security ,business.industry ,lcsh:QE1-996.5 ,Global warming ,Environmental resource management ,15. Life on land ,PE&RC ,lcsh:Geology ,Earth sciences ,Climate change mitigation ,Agriculture and Soil Science ,13. Climate action ,Greenhouse gas ,General Earth and Planetary Sciences ,Environmental science ,lcsh:Q ,Climate model ,business - Abstract
Climate change and its impacts already pose considerable challenges for societies that will further increase with global warming (IPCC, 2014a, b). Uncertainties of the climatic response to greenhouse gas emissions include the potential passing of large-scale tipping points (e.g. Lenton et al., 2008; Levermann et al., 2012; Schellnhuber, 2010) and changes in extreme meteorological events (Field et al., 2012) with complex impacts on societies (Hallegatte et al., 2013). Thus climate change mitigation is considered a necessary societal response for avoiding uncontrollable impacts (Conference of the Parties, 2010). On the other hand, large-scale climate change mitigation itself implies fundamental changes in, for example, the global energy system. The associated challenges come on top of others that derive from equally important ethical imperatives like the fulfilment of increasing food demand that may draw on the same resources. For example, ensuring food security for a growing population may require an expansion of cropland, thereby reducing natural carbon sinks or the area available for bio-energy production. So far, available studies addressing this problem have relied on individual impact models, ignoring uncertainty in crop model and biome model projections. Here, we propose a probabilistic decision framework that allows for an evaluation of agricultural management and mitigation options in a multi-impact-model setting. Based on simulations generated within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP), we outline how cross-sectorally consistent multi-model impact simulations could be used to generate the information required for robust decision making. Using an illustrative future land use pattern, we discuss the trade-off between potential gains in crop production and associated losses in natural carbon sinks in the new multiple crop- and biome-model setting. In addition, crop and water model simulations are combined to explore irrigation increases as one possible measure of agricultural intensification that could limit the expansion of cropland required in response to climate change and growing food demand. This example shows that current impact model uncertainties pose an important challenge to long-term mitigation planning and must not be ignored in long-term strategic decision making.
- Published
- 2015
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
13. Climate impact research: beyond patchwork
- Author
-
Wolfgang Lucht, Lila Warszawski, Nigel W. Arnell, Cynthia Rosenzweig, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Franziska Piontek, Andrew D. Friend, Katja Frieler, Martin Parry, Jacob Schewe, Ingjerd Haddeland, Dieter Gerten, Veronika Huber, Pavel Kabat, and Hermann Lotze-Campen
- Subjects
lcsh:Dynamic and structural geology ,business.industry ,Environmental resource management ,lcsh:QE1-996.5 ,Vulnerability ,lcsh:Geology ,Geography ,lcsh:QE500-639.5 ,Climate impact ,Order (exchange) ,Greenhouse gas ,Impact model ,ddc:550 ,General Earth and Planetary Sciences ,Position (finance) ,lcsh:Q ,business ,Greenhouse effect ,Adaptation (computer science) ,lcsh:Science - Abstract
Despite significant progress in climate impact research, the narratives that science can presently piece together of a 2, 3, 4, or 5 °C warmer world remain fragmentary. Here we briefly review past undertakings to characterise comprehensively and quantify climate impacts based on multi-model approaches. We then report on the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP), a community-driven effort to compare impact models across sectors and scales systematically, and to quantify the uncertainties along the chain from greenhouse gas emissions and climate input data to the modelling of climate impacts themselves. We show how ISI-MIP and similar efforts can substantially advance the science relevant to impacts, adaptation and vulnerability, and we outline the steps that need to be taken in order to make the most of the available modelling tools. We discuss pertinent limitations of these methods and how they could be tackled. We argue that it is time to consolidate the current patchwork of impact knowledge through integrated cross-sectoral assessments, and that the climate impact community is now in a favourable position to do so.
- Published
- 2014
14. Assessing the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming – simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b)
- Author
-
Katja Frieler, Richard Betts, Eleanor Burke, Philippe Ciais, Sebastien Denvil, Delphine Deryng, Kristie Ebi, Tyler Eddy, Kerry Emanuel, Joshua Elliott, Eric Galbraith, Simon N. Gosling, Kate Halladay, Fred Hattermann, Thomas Hickler, Jochen Hinkel, Veronika Huber, Chris Jones, Valentina Krysanova, Stefan Lange, Heike K. Lotze, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Matthias Mengel, Ioanna Mouratiadou, Hannes Müller Schmied, Sebastian Ostberg, Franziska Piontek, Alexander Popp, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Jacob Schewe, Miodrag Stevanovic, Tatsuo Suzuki, Kirsten Thonicke, Hanqin Tian, Derek P. Tittensor, Robert Vautard, Michelle van Vliet, Lila Warszawski, and Fang Zhao
- Abstract
In Paris, France, December 2015, the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) invited the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide a "special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways". In Nairobi, Kenya, April 2016, the IPCC panel accepted the invitation. Here we describe the response devised within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) to provide tailored, cross-sectorally consistent impacts projections. The simulation protocol is designed to allow for (1) separation of the impacts of historical warming starting from pre-industrial conditions from other human drivers such as historical land-use changes (based on pre-industrial and historical impact model simulations); (2) quantification of the effects of additional warming up to 1.5 °C, including a potential overshoot and long-term effects up to 2299, compared to a no-mitigation scenario (based on the low-emissions Representative Concentration Pathway RCP2.6 and a no-mitigation pathway RCP6.0) with socio-economic conditions fixed at 2005 levels; and (3) assessment of the climate effects based on the same climate scenarios but accounting for simultaneous changes in socio-economic conditions following the middle-of-the-road Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP2, Fricko et al., 2016) and differential bio-energy requirements associated with the transformation of the energy system to comply with RCP2.6 compared to RCP6.0. With the aim of providing the scientific basis for an aggregation of impacts across sectors and analysis of cross-sectoral interactions that may dampen or amplify sectoral impacts, the protocol is designed to facilitate consistent impacts projections from a range of impact models across different sectors (global and regional hydrology, global crops, global vegetation, regional forests, global and regional marine ecosystems and fisheries, global and regional coastal infrastructure, energy supply and demand, health, and tropical cyclones).
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
15. Supplementary material to 'Assessing the impacts of 1.5 °C global warming – simulation protocol of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2b)'
- Author
-
Katja Frieler, Richard Betts, Eleanor Burke, Philippe Ciais, Sebastien Denvil, Delphine Deryng, Kristie Ebi, Tyler Eddy, Kerry Emanuel, Joshua Elliott, Eric Galbraith, Simon N. Gosling, Kate Halladay, Fred Hattermann, Thomas Hickler, Jochen Hinkel, Veronika Huber, Chris Jones, Valentina Krysanova, Stefan Lange, Heike K. Lotze, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Matthias Mengel, Ioanna Mouratiadou, Hannes Müller Schmied, Sebastian Ostberg, Franziska Piontek, Alexander Popp, Christopher P. O. Reyer, Jacob Schewe, Miodrag Stevanovic, Tatsuo Suzuki, Kirsten Thonicke, Hanqin Tian, Derek P. Tittensor, Robert Vautard, Michelle van Vliet, Lila Warszawski, and Fang Zhao
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
16. SUPERFLUID VORTEX UNPINNING AS A COHERENT NOISE PROCESS, AND THE SCALE INVARIANCE OF PULSAR GLITCHES
- Author
-
Andrew Melatos and Lila Warszawski
- Subjects
Physics ,Condensed matter physics ,FOS: Physical sciences ,Astronomy and Astrophysics ,Astrophysics ,Scale invariance ,Standard deviation ,Glitch ,Vortex ,Superfluidity ,Astrophysics - Solar and Stellar Astrophysics ,Pulsar ,Space and Planetary Science ,Quasiperiodic function ,Lattice (order) ,Solar and Stellar Astrophysics (astro-ph.SR) - Abstract
The scale-invariant glitch statistics observed in individual pulsars (exponential waiting-time and power-law size distributions) are consistent with a critical self-organization process, wherein superfluid vortices pin metastably in macroscopic domains and unpin collectively via nearest-neighbor avalanches. Macroscopic inhomogeneity emerges naturally if pinning occurs at crustal faults. If, instead, pinning occurs at lattice sites and defects, which are macroscopically homogeneous, we show that an alternative, noncritical self-organization process operates, termed coherent noise, wherein the global Magnus force acts uniformly on vortices trapped in a range of pinning potentials and undergoing thermal creep. It is found that vortices again unpin collectively, but not via nearest-neighbor avalanches, and that, counterintuitively, the resulting glitch sizes are scale invariant, in accord with observational data. A mean-field analytic theory of the coherent noise process, supported by Monte-Carlo simulations, yields a power-law size distribution, between the smallest and largest glitch, with exponent $a$ in the range $-2\leq a \leq 0$. When the theory is fitted to data from the nine most active pulsars, including the two quasiperiodic glitchers PSR J0537$-$6910 and PSR J0835$-$4510, it directly constrains the distribution of pinning potentials in the star, leading to two conclusions: (i) the potentials are broadly distributed, with the mean comparable to the standard deviation; and (ii) the mean potential decreases with characteristic age. An observational test is proposed to discriminate between nearest-neighbor avalanches and coherent noise., 39 pages, 11 figures. Accepted for publication in ApJ
- Published
- 2009
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
17. The impact of H i in galaxies on 21-cm intensity fluctuations during the reionization epoch
- Author
-
S. Peng Oh, Lila Warszawski, Paul M. Geil, and Stuart Wyithe
- Subjects
Physics ,COSMIC cancer database ,Astrophysics (astro-ph) ,Extrapolation ,FOS: Physical sciences ,Spectral density ,Astronomy and Astrophysics ,Astrophysics ,Galaxy ,Intensity (physics) ,Amplitude ,Space and Planetary Science ,Absorption (electromagnetic radiation) ,Sign (mathematics) - Abstract
We investigate the impact of neutral hydrogen (HI) in galaxies on the statistics of 21-cm fluctuations using analytic and semi-numerical modelling. Following the reionisation of hydrogen the HI content of the Universe is dominated by damped absorption systems (DLAs), with a cosmic density in HI that is observed to be constant at a level equal to ~2% of the cosmic baryon density from z~1 to z~5. We show that extrapolation of this constant fraction into the reionisation epoch results in a reduction of 10-20% in the amplitude of 21-cm fluctuations over a range of spatial scales. The assumption of a different percentage during the reionisation era results in a proportional change in the 21-cm fluctuation amplitude. We find that consideration of HI in galaxies/DLAs reduces the prominence of the HII region induced shoulder in the 21-cm power spectrum (PS), and hence modifies the scale dependence of 21-cm fluctuations. We also estimate the 21cm-galaxy cross PS, and show that the cross PS changes sign on scales corresponding to the HII regions. From consideration of the sensitivity for forthcoming low-frequency arrays we find that the effects of HI in galaxies/DLAs on the statistics of 21-cm fluctuations will be significant with respect to the precision of a PS or cross PS measurement. In addition, since overdense regions are reionised first we demonstrate that the cross-correlation between galaxies and 21-cm emission changes sign at the end of the reionisation era, providing an alternative avenue to pinpoint the end of reionisation. The sum of our analysis indicates that the HI content of the galaxies that reionise the universe will need to be considered in detailed modelling of the 21-cm intensity PS in order to correctly interpret measurements from forthcoming low-frequency arrays., Comment: 11 pages, 6 figures. Submitted to MNRAS
- Published
- 2009
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
18. The relevance of uncertainty in future crop production for mitigation strategy planning
- Author
-
Jens Heinke, Erwin Schmid, Dominik Wisser, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Franziska Piontek, Marc F. P. Bierkens, Pete Falloon, Douglas B. Clark, Anders Levermann, Katja Frieler, Alex C. Ruane, Kazuya Nishina, Veronika Huber, K. Neumann, Jacob Schewe, Simon N. Gosling, Elke Stehfest, Andrew D. Friend, Ingjerd Haddeland, Nikolay Khabarov, P. Ciais, Qiuhong Tang, Ryan Pavlick, Lila Warszawski, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Christian Folberth, Joshua Elliott, Christoph Schmitz, A. Arneth, Mark R. Lomas, Balázs M. Fekete, Petra Döll, C. Gellhorn, Taikan Oki, D. Deryng, Tobias Stacke, and Yoshimitsu Masaki
- Subjects
Strategic planning ,education.field_of_study ,Food security ,Computer science ,business.industry ,Population ,Environmental resource management ,Climate change ,Environmental economics ,Supply and demand ,Climate change mitigation ,Agricultural land ,ddc:550 ,Production (economics) ,education ,business - Abstract
In order to achieve climate change mitigation, long-term decisions are required that must be reconciled with other societal goals that draw on the same resources. For example, ensuring food security for a growing population may require an expansion of crop land, thereby reducing natural carbon sinks or the area available for bio-energy production. Here, we show that current impact-model uncertainties pose an important challenge to long-term mitigation planning and propose a new risk-assessment and decision framework that accounts for competing interests. Based on cross-sectorally consistent simulations generated within the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI-MIP) we discuss potential gains and limitations of additional irrigation and trade-offs of the expansion of agricultural land as two possible response measures to climate change and growing food demand. We describe an illustrative example in which the combination of both measures may close the supply demand gap while leading to a loss of approximately half of all natural carbon sinks. We highlight current limitations of available simulations and additional steps required for a comprehensive risk assessment.
- Published
- 2014
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
19. Carbon residence time dominates uncertainty in terrestrial vegetation responses to future climate and atmospheric CO 2
- Author
-
Pete Falloon, Patricia Cadule, Andrew D. Friend, Sibyll Schaphoff, Kazuya Nishina, Akihiko Ito, Philippe Ciais, Tim T. Rademacher, Rozenn Keribin, Douglas B. Clark, Philippe Peylin, Ryan Pavlick, Mark R. Lomas, Andy Wiltshire, Nicolas Vuichard, Ron Kahana, Axel Kleidon, Rutger Dankers, F. Ian Woodward, Sebastian Ostberg, Lila Warszawski, Richard Betts, Wolfgang Lucht, University of Cambridge [UK] (CAM), Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Change (MOHC), United Kingdom Met Office [Exeter], Institut Pierre-Simon-Laplace (IPSL (FR_636)), École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS-PSL), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-École polytechnique (X)-Centre National d'Études Spatiales [Toulouse] (CNES)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université Paris Cité (UPCité), Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement [Gif-sur-Yvette] (LSCE), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), ICOS-ATC (ICOS-ATC), Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Centre for Ecology and Hydrology [Wallingford] (CEH), Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry (MPI-BGC), Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Department of Animal and Plant Sciences [Sheffield], University of Sheffield [Sheffield], Global Centre for Environmental Research (GCER), University of Newcastle (UoN), Modélisation des Surfaces et Interfaces Continentales (MOSAIC), Potsdam-Institut für Klimafolgenforschung (PIK), École normale supérieure - Paris (ENS Paris), Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-École polytechnique (X)-Centre National d'Études Spatiales [Toulouse] (CNES)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université de Paris (UP), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Friend, Andrew [0000-0002-9029-1045], and Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository
- Subjects
Mediterranean climate ,NPP ,Time Factors ,Climate Change ,Climate change ,Atmospheric sciences ,Carbon cycle ,Carbon Cycle ,11. Sustainability ,Computer Simulation ,[SDU.ENVI]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Continental interfaces, environment ,ComputingMilieux_MISCELLANEOUS ,[SDU.OCEAN]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Ocean, Atmosphere ,Biomass (ecology) ,Multidisciplinary ,Atmosphere ,Global Climate Impacts: A Cross-Sector, Multi-Model Assessment Special Feature ,Uncertainty ,Primary production ,ISI-MIP ,Vegetation ,15. Life on land ,Carbon Dioxide ,Models, Theoretical ,Plants ,Turnover ,Carbon ,GVM ,DGVM ,13. Climate action ,Climatology ,Greenhouse gas ,Environmental science ,Terrestrial ecosystem ,Forecasting - Abstract
Future climate change and increasing atmospheric CO 2 are expected to cause major changes in vegetation structure and function over large fractions of the global land surface. Seven global vegetation models are used to analyze possible responses to future climate simulated by a range of general circulation models run under all four representative concentration pathway scenarios of changing concentrations of greenhouse gases. All 110 simulations predict an increase in global vegetation carbon to 2100, but with substantial variation between vegetation models. For example, at 4 °C of global land surface warming (510–758 ppm of CO 2 ), vegetation carbon increases by 52–477 Pg C (224 Pg C mean), mainly due to CO 2 fertilization of photosynthesis. Simulations agree on large regional increases across much of the boreal forest, western Amazonia, central Africa, western China, and southeast Asia, with reductions across southwestern North America, central South America, southern Mediterranean areas, southwestern Africa, and southwestern Australia. Four vegetation models display discontinuities across 4 °C of warming, indicating global thresholds in the balance of positive and negative influences on productivity and biomass. In contrast to previous global vegetation model studies, we emphasize the importance of uncertainties in projected changes in carbon residence times. We find, when all seven models are considered for one representative concentration pathway × general circulation model combination, such uncertainties explain 30% more variation in modeled vegetation carbon change than responses of net primary productivity alone, increasing to 151% for non-HYBRID4 models. A change in research priorities away from production and toward structural dynamics and demographic processes is recommended.
- Published
- 2014
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
20. Multisectoral climate impact hotspots in a warming world
- Author
-
Alex C. Ruane, Wietse Franssen, Christian Folberth, Katja Frieler, K. Neumann, Hyungjun Kim, Felipe de Jesus Colón González, Franziska Piontek, Andrew P. Morse, Z. D. Tessler, Christoph Müller, Deborah Hemming, Joshua Elliott, Andrew D. Friend, Simon N. Gosling, Douglas B. Clark, Nikolay Khabarov, Mark R. Lomas, Lila Warszawski, Yoshimitsu Masaki, Thomas A. M. Pugh, Kazuya Nishina, Qiuhong Tang, Martina Flörke, Jacob Schewe, Erwin Schmid, Dominik Wisser, Adrian M. Tompkins, Sebastian Ostberg, Matthias Mengel, Ryan Pavlick, Tobias Stacke, Delphine Deryng, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
- Subjects
Conservation of Natural Resources ,malaria ,Vulnerability ,Climate change ,Water supply ,Public policy ,WASS ,Public Policy ,drought ,Environment ,Global Warming ,models ,Water Supply ,11. Sustainability ,Humans ,Computer Simulation ,Economic impact analysis ,Leerstoelgroep Rurale ontwikkelingssociologie ,Environmental planning ,Ecosystem ,Multidisciplinary ,WIMEK ,Geography ,business.industry ,Global warming ,Global Climate Impacts: A Cross-Sector, Multi-Model Assessment Special Feature ,Temperature ,Agriculture ,World population ,Models, Theoretical ,Malaria ,Rural Development Sociology ,13. Climate action ,Environmental science ,Climate model ,Water Systems and Global Change ,business ,global climate - Abstract
The impacts of global climate change on different aspects of humanity’s diverse life-support systems are complex and often difficult to predict. To facilitate policy decisions on mitigation and adaptation strategies, it is necessary to understand, quantify, and synthesize these climate-change impacts, taking into account their uncertainties. Crucial to these decisions is an understanding of how impacts in different sectors overlap, as overlapping impacts increase exposure, lead to interactions of impacts, and are likely to raise adaptation pressure. As a first step we develop herein a framework to study coinciding impacts and identify regional exposure hotspots. This framework can then be used as a starting point for regional case studies on vulnerability and multifaceted adaptation strategies. We consider impacts related to water, agriculture, ecosystems, and malaria at different levels of global warming. Multisectoral overlap starts to be seen robustly at a mean global warming of 3 °C above the 1980–2010 mean, with 11% of the world population subject to severe impacts in at least two of the four impact sectors at 4 °C. Despite these general conclusions, we find that uncertainty arising from the impact models is considerable, and larger than that from the climate models. In a low probability-high impact worst-case assessment, almost the whole inhabited world is at risk for multisectoral pressures. Hence, there is a pressing need for an increased research effort to develop a more comprehensive understanding of impacts, as well as for the development of policy measures under existing uncertainty.
- Published
- 2013
21. The Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISI–MIP): Project framework
- Author
-
Katja Frieler, Franziska Piontek, Olivia Serdeczny, Lila Warszawski, Jacob Schewe, and Veronika Huber
- Subjects
Multidisciplinary ,business.industry ,Atmosphere ,Climate Change ,Global warming ,Environmental resource management ,Global Climate Impacts: A Cross-Sector, Multi-Model Assessment Special Feature ,Temperature ,Climate change ,Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project ,Agriculture ,Carbon Dioxide ,Environment ,Models, Theoretical ,Biota ,Malaria ,Socioeconomic Factors ,Climate impact ,Water Supply ,Impact model ,Environmental science ,Humans ,business ,Multi sectoral ,Forecasting - Abstract
The Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project offers a framework to compare climate impact projections in different sectors and at different scales. Consistent climate and socio-economic input data provide the basis for a cross-sectoral integration of impact projections. The project is designed to enable quantitative synthesis of climate change impacts at different levels of global warming. This report briefly outlines the objectives and framework of the first, fast-tracked phase of Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project, based on global impact models, and provides an overview of the participating models, input data, and scenario set-up.
- Published
- 2013
22. A trend-preserving bias correction – the ISI-MIP approach
- Author
-
Jacob Schewe, Sabrina Hempel, Lila Warszawski, Franziska Piontek, and Katja Frieler
- Subjects
lcsh:Dynamic and structural geology ,010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences ,Biome ,0207 environmental engineering ,02 engineering and technology ,010501 environmental sciences ,Transfer function ,01 natural sciences ,lcsh:QE500-639.5 ,Consistency (statistics) ,ddc:550 ,Bias correction ,Precipitation ,lcsh:Science ,020701 environmental engineering ,0105 earth and related environmental sciences ,Global warming ,lcsh:QE1-996.5 ,lcsh:Geology ,13. Climate action ,Climatology ,General Earth and Planetary Sciences ,Environmental science ,Climate model ,lcsh:Q ,Scale (map) - Abstract
Statistical bias correction is commonly applied within climate impact modelling to correct climate model data for systematic deviations of the simulated historical data from observations. Methods are based on transfer functions generated to map the distribution of the simulated historical data to that of the observations. Those are subsequently applied to correct the future projections. Here, we present the bias correction method that was developed within ISI-MIP, the first Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project. ISI-MIP is designed to synthesise impact projections in the agriculture, water, biome, health, and infrastructure sectors at different levels of global warming. Bias-corrected climate data that are used as input for the impact simulations could be only provided over land areas. To ensure consistency with the global (land + ocean) temperature information the bias correction method has to preserve the warming signal. Here we present the applied method that preserves the absolute changes in monthly temperature, and relative changes in monthly values of precipitation and the other variables needed for ISI-MIP. The proposed methodology represents a modification of the transfer function approach applied in the Water Model Intercomparison Project (Water-MIP). Correction of the monthly mean is followed by correction of the daily variability about the monthly mean. Besides the general idea and technical details of the ISI-MIP method, we show and discuss the potential and limitations of the applied bias correction. In particular, while the trend and the long-term mean are well represented, limitations with regards to the adjustment of the variability persist which may affect, e.g. small scale features or extremes.
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
23. A multi-model analysis of risk of ecosystem shifts under climate change
- Author
-
Akihiko Ito, Philippe Ciais, David J. Beerling, Lila Warszawski, Ryan Pavlick, Sebastian Ostberg, Rozenn Keribin, Douglas B. Clark, Jacob Schewe, Katja Frieler, Franziska Piontek, Matthias Buechner, Wolfgang Lucht, Patricia Cadule, Axel Kleidon, Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Sibyll Schaphoff, Tim T. Rademacher, Andrew D. Friend, Mark R. Lomas, Ron Kahana, Kazuya Nishina, Olivia Serdeczny, Potsdam-Institut für Klimafolgenforschung (PIK), University of Cambridge [UK] (CAM), Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield [Sheffield], Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de l'Environnement [Gif-sur-Yvette] (LSCE), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), ICOS-ATC (ICOS-ATC), Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), Centre for Ecology and Hydrology [Wallingford] (CEH), Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Change (MOHC), United Kingdom Met Office [Exeter], National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry (MPI-BGC), Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Department of Animal and Plant Sciences [Sheffield], Department of Geography [Cambridge, UK], Santa Fe Institute, Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), and Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)-Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ)-Commissariat à l'énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives (CEA)-Institut national des sciences de l'Univers (INSU - CNRS)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)
- Subjects
0106 biological sciences ,Biogeochemical cycle ,010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences ,Climate change ,010603 evolutionary biology ,01 natural sciences ,Shrubland ,Meteorology and Climatology ,global vegetation ,[SDV.EE.ECO]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Ecology, environment/Ecosystems ,Ecosystem ,0105 earth and related environmental sciences ,General Environmental Science ,geography ,geography.geographical_feature_category ,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment ,Amazon rainforest ,Ecology ,ecosystem change ,Global warming ,Taiga ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,15. Life on land ,Tundra ,climate change ,13. Climate action ,Environmental science ,[SDV.EE.BIO]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Ecology, environment/Bioclimatology - Abstract
International audience; Climate change may pose a high risk of change to Earth's ecosystems: shifting climatic boundaries may induce changes in the biogeochemical functioning and structures of ecosystems that render it difficult for endemic plant and animal species to survive in their current habitats. Here we aggregate changes in the biogeochemical ecosystem state as a proxy for the risk of these shifts at different levels of global warming. Estimates are based on simulations from seven global vegetation models (GVMs) driven by future climate scenarios, allowing for a quantification of the related uncertainties. 5–19% of the naturally vegetated land surface is projected to be at risk of severe ecosystem change at 2 ° C of global warming (ΔGMT) above 1980–2010 levels. However, there is limited agreement across the models about which geographical regions face the highest risk of change. The extent of regions at risk of severe ecosystem change is projected to rise with ΔGMT, approximately doubling between ΔGMT = 2 and 3 ° C, and reaching a median value of 35% of the naturally vegetated land surface for ΔGMT = 4 °C. The regions projected to face the highest risk of severe ecosystem changes above ΔGMT = 4 °C or earlier include the tundra and shrublands of the Tibetan Plateau, grasslands of eastern India, the boreal forests of northern Canada and Russia, the savanna region in the Horn of Africa, and the Amazon rainforest.
- Published
- 2013
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
24. Turn down the heat: climate extremes, regional impacts, and the case for resilience
- Author
-
Sophie Adams, Florent Baarsch, Alberte Bondeau, Dim Coumou, Reik Donner, Katja Frieler, Bill Hare, Arathy Menon, Mahe Perette, Franziska Plontek, Kira Rehfeld, Alexander Robinson, Marcia Rocha, Joeri Rogelj, Jakob Runge, Michiel Schaeffer, Jacob Schewe, Carl-Friedrich Schleussner, Susanne Schwan, Olivia Serdeczny, Anastasia Svirejeva-Hopkins, Marion Vieweg, Lila Warszawski, and Water and Climate Risk
- Subjects
SDG 13 - Climate Action - Abstract
This report focuses on the risks of climate change to development in Sub-Saharan Africa, South East Asia and South Asia. Building on the 2012 report, Turn Down the Heat: Why a 4°C Warmer World Must be Avoided, this new scientific analysis examines the likely impacts of present day, 2°C and 4°C warming on agricultural production, water resources, and coastal vulnerability for affected populations. It finds many significant climate and development impacts are already being felt in some regions, and in some cases multiple threats of increasing extreme heat waves, sea level rise, more severe storms, droughts and floods are expected to have further severe negative implications for the poorest. Climate related extreme events could push households below the poverty trap threshold. High temperature extremes appear likely to affect yields of rice, wheat, maize and other important crops, adversely affecting food security. Promoting economic growth and the eradication of poverty and inequality will thus be an increasingly challenging task under future climate change. Immediate steps are needed to help countries adapt to the risks already locked in at current levels of 0.8°C warming, but with ambitious global action to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, many of the worst projected climate impacts could still be avoided by holding warming below 2°C.
Catalog
Discovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.