scholarly journals Assessing the quality of state-of-the-art regional climate information: the case of the UK Climate Projections 2018

2021 ◽  
Vol 168 (1-2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Baldissera Pacchetti ◽  
Suraje Dessai ◽  
David A. Stainforth ◽  
Seamus Bradley
Keyword(s):  
Climate Adaptation ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Independence Number ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Climate Information ◽  
Uncertainty Estimates ◽  
Adaptation Decision ◽  
The Uk

AbstractIn this paper, we assess the quality of state-of-the-art regional climate information intended to support climate adaptation decision-making. We use the UK Climate Projections 2018 as an example of such information. Their probabilistic, global, and regional land projections exemplify some of the key methodologies that are at the forefront of constructing regional climate information for decision support in adapting to a changing climate. We assess the quality of the evidence and the methodology used to support their statements about future regional climate along six quality dimensions: transparency; theory; independence, number, and comprehensiveness of evidence; and historical empirical adequacy. The assessment produced two major insights. First, a major issue that taints the quality of UKCP18 is the lack of transparency, which is particularly problematic since the information is directed towards non-expert users who would need to develop technical skills to evaluate the quality and epistemic reliability of this information. Second, the probabilistic projections are of lower quality than the global projections because the former lack both transparency and a theory underpinning the method used to produce quantified uncertainty estimates about future climate. The assessment also shows how different dimensions are satisfied depending on the evidence used, the methodology chosen to analyze the evidence, and the type of statements that are constructed in the different strands of UKCP18. This research highlights the importance of knowledge quality assessment of regional climate information that intends to support climate change adaptation decisions.

scholarly journals Assessing the quality of state-of-the-art regional climate information: the case of the UK Climate Projections 2018

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Baldissera Pacchetti ◽  
Suraje Dessai ◽  
David Stainforth ◽  
Seamus Bradley
Keyword(s):  
State Of The Art ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Climate Information ◽  
Uncertainty Estimates ◽  
Adaptation Decision ◽  
The Uk ◽  
User Perspectives ◽  
Probabilistic Projections

<p>We assess the quality of state-of-the-art regional climate information intended to support adaptation decision-making. We use the UK Climate Projections 2018 (UKCP18) as an example of such information. The probabilistic, global and regional land projections of UKCP18 exemplify some of the key methodologies that are at the forefront of providing regional climate information for decision support in adapting to a changing climate. We assess the quality of the evidence and the methodology used to support their statements about future regional climate derived from these projections along five quality dimensions: transparency, theory, diversity, completeness and adequacy for purpose. The assessment produced two major insights. First, the main issue that taints the quality of UKCP18 is the lack of transparency. The lack of transparency is particularly problematic if the information is directed towards non-expert users, who would need to develop technical skills to evaluate the quality and epistemic reliability of this information. Second, the probabilistic projections are of lower quality than the global projections. This assessment is a consequence of both lack of transparency in the probabilistic projections, and the way the method is used and justified to produce quantified uncertainty estimates about future climate. We suggest how higher quality could be achieved. This can be achieved by improving transparency of evidence and methodology and by better satisfying other dimensions through changes in elements of evidence and methodology. We conclude by recommending further avenues for testing the effectiveness of the framework and highlighting the need for further research in user perspectives on quality.</p>

Evaluating the quality of model-based regional climate information: the case of the UK Climate Projections 2018

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Baldissera Pacchetti ◽  
Suraje Dessai ◽  
Seamus Bradley ◽  
David A. Stainforth
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Regional Scale ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Assessment Framework ◽  
Climate Information ◽  
Climate Services ◽  
Probabilistic Uncertainty ◽  
The Uk

<p>The kind of long-term regional climate information that is increasingly important for making adaptation decisions varies in temporal and spatial resolution, and this information is usually derived from Global Climate models (GCMs). However, information about future changes in regional climate also comes with high degrees of uncertainty–an important element of the information given the high decision stakes of climate change adaptation.</p><p> </p><p>Given these considerations, Baldissera Pacchetti et al. (in press) have proposed a quality assessment framework for evaluating the quality of regional climate information that intends to inform decision making. Evaluating the quality of this information is particularly important for information that is passed on to decision makers in the form of climate services. The framework has five dimensions along which quality can be assessed: diversity, completeness, theory, adequacy for purpose and transparency.  </p><p> </p><p>Here, we critically evaluate this framework by applying it to one example of climate information for adaptation: the UK Climate Projections of 2018 (UKCP18). There are two main motivations for the choice of UKCP18. First, this product embodies some of the main modeling strategies that drive the field of climate science today. For example, the land projections produced by UKCP18 provide probabilistic uncertainty assessments using multi-model and perturbed physics ensembles (MME and PPE), use locally developed GCMs and the models from the international Climate Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP), perform dynamical downscaling for producing information at the regional scale and further fine grain information with convection permitting models. Second, the earlier version of the UK Climate Projections (UKCP09) has received criticism from philosophers of science. The quality assessment framework proposed by Baldissera Pacchetti et al. partly aims to reveal whether the pitfalls identified by philosophers in UKCP09 persist in UKCP18.</p><p> </p><p>We apply the quality assessment framework to four strands of the UKCP18 land projections and illustrate whether and to what extent each of these strands satisfies the quality dimensions of the framework. When appropriate, we show whether quality varies depending on the variable of interest within a particular strand or across strands. For example, the theory quality dimension highlights that epistemic quality along this dimension is better satisfied for estimates about variables that depend on thermodynamic principles (e.g. global average temperature) than fluid dynamical theory (e.g. precipitation) (see, e.g., Risbey and O’Kane 2011) independently of the strand under assessment. We conclude that for those dimensions that can be evaluated, UKCP18 is not sufficiently epistemically reliable to provide information of high quality for all of the products provided.</p>

Realised added value in dynamical downscaling of Australian climate change

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Di Virgilio ◽  
Jason P. Evans ◽  
Alejandro Di Luca ◽  
Michael R. Grose ◽  
Vanessa Round ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Climate Adaptation ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Eastern Australia ◽  
Australian Alps ◽  
Future Climate Projections

<p>Coarse resolution global climate models (GCM) cannot resolve fine-scale drivers of regional climate, which is the scale where climate adaptation decisions are made. Regional climate models (RCMs) generate high-resolution projections by dynamically downscaling GCM outputs. However, evidence of where and when downscaling provides new information about both the current climate (added value, AV) and projected climate change signals, relative to driving data, is lacking. Seasons and locations where CORDEX-Australasia ERA-Interim and GCM-driven RCMs show AV for mean and extreme precipitation and temperature are identified. A new concept is introduced, ‘realised added value’, that identifies where and when RCMs simultaneously add value in the present climate and project a different climate change signal, thus suggesting plausible improvements in future climate projections by RCMs. ERA-Interim-driven RCMs add value to the simulation of summer-time mean precipitation, especially over northern and eastern Australia. GCM-driven RCMs show AV for precipitation over complex orography in south-eastern Australia during winter and widespread AV for mean and extreme minimum temperature during both seasons, especially over coastal and high-altitude areas. RCM projections of decreased winter rainfall over the Australian Alps and decreased summer rainfall over northern Australia are collocated with notable realised added value. Realised added value averaged across models, variables, seasons and statistics is evident across the majority of Australia and shows where plausible improvements in future climate projections are conferred by RCMs. This assessment of varying RCM capabilities to provide realised added value to GCM projections can be applied globally to inform climate adaptation and model development.</p>

scholarly journals Assessing the quality of regional climate information

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-38
Author(s):  
Marina Baldissera Pacchetti ◽  
Suraje Dessai ◽  
Seamus Bradley ◽  
David A. Stainforth
Keyword(s):  
Information Needs ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Climate Information

CapsuleA framework for the assessment of quality in regional climate information needs to include dimensions such as: Diversity, Completeness, Theory, Adequacy for purpose, and Transparency.

scholarly journals Tailoring the visual communication of climate projections for local adaptation practitioners in Germany and the UK

2015 ◽  
Vol 373 (2055) ◽  
pp. 20140457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Lorenz ◽  
Suraje Dessai ◽  
Piers M. Forster ◽  
Jouni Paavola
Keyword(s):  
Local Adaptation ◽  
Information Content ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Visual Representations ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
User Group ◽  
Climate Information ◽  
Changing Climate ◽  
Clear Link ◽  
The Uk

Visualizations are widely used in the communication of climate projections. However, their effectiveness has rarely been assessed among their target audience. Given recent calls to increase the usability of climate information through the tailoring of climate projections, it is imperative to assess the effectiveness of different visualizations. This paper explores the complexities of tailoring through an online survey conducted with 162 local adaptation practitioners in Germany and the UK. The survey examined respondents’ assessed and perceived comprehension (PC) of visual representations of climate projections as well as preferences for using different visualizations in communicating and planning for a changing climate. Comprehension and use are tested using four different graph formats, which are split into two pairs. Within each pair the information content is the same but is visualized differently. We show that even within a fairly homogeneous user group, such as local adaptation practitioners, there are clear differences in respondents’ comprehension of and preference for visualizations. We do not find a consistent association between assessed comprehension and PC or use within the two pairs of visualizations that we analysed. There is, however, a clear link between PC and use of graph format. This suggests that respondents use what they think they understand the best, rather than what they actually understand the best. These findings highlight that audience-specific targeted communication may be more complex and challenging than previously recognized.

scholarly journals One-Way Nested Regional Climate Simulations and Domain Size

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 229-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Vannitsem ◽  
F. Chomé
Keyword(s):  
Western Europe ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Domain Size ◽  
Regional Model ◽  
Dynamical Behaviors ◽  
Climate Simulations ◽  
Intermediate Size ◽  
The Impact

Abstract The impact of domain size on regional climate simulations is explored in the context of a state-of-the-art regional model centered over western Europe. It is found that the quality of the climate simulations is highly dependent on the domain size. Moreover, the choice of an optimal version is more complex than usually thought, the less appropriate domain having an intermediate size (about 3000 km × 3000 km), and the best versions nearly cover a quarter of the Northern Hemisphere. The use of periodically reinitialized trajectories does improve the climate of suboptimal models but leads to unrealistic dynamical behaviors. The implications for regional climate simulations are briefly discussed.

Assessing the quality of climate information for adaptation.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Baldissera Pacchetti ◽  
Suraje Dessai ◽  
Seamus Bradley ◽  
David A Stainforth
Keyword(s):  
Regional Climate ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Data Models ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Climate Information ◽  
Standard Quality ◽  
Assess Quality ◽  
The Relationship

<p>There are now a plethora of data, models and approaches available to produce climate information intended to inform adaptation to a changing climate. There is, however, no analytical framework to assess the epistemic issues concerning the quality of these data, models and approaches. An evaluation of the quality of climate information is a fundamental requirement for its appropriate application in societal decision-making. By integrating insights from the philosophy of science, environmental social science and physical climate science, we construct an analytical framework for “science-based statements about future climate” that allows for an assessment of their quality for adaptation planning. We target statements about local and regional climate with a lead time of one to one hundred years. Our framework clarifies how standard quality descriptors in the literature, such as “robustness”, “adequacy”, “completeness” and “transparency”, rely on both the type of evidence and the relationship between the evidence and the statement. This clarification not only provides a more precise framework for quality, but also allows us to show how certain evidential standards may change as a function of the purpose of a statement. We argue that the most essential metrics to assess quality are: Robustness, Theory, Completeness, Adequacy for purpose, Transparency. Our framework goes further by providing guidelines on when quantitative statements about future climate are warranted and potentially decision-relevant, when these statements would be more valuable taking other forms (e.g. qualitative statements), and when statements about future climate are not warranted at all.</p>

scholarly journals The Gnat and the Bull: Do Climate Outlook Forums Make a Difference?

2020 ◽  
Vol 101 (6) ◽  
pp. E771-E784
Author(s):  
Andrea K. Gerlak ◽  
Simon J. Mason ◽  
Meaghan Daly ◽  
Diana Liverman ◽  
Zack Guido ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Regional Climate ◽  
Objective Evaluation ◽  
User Engagement ◽  
Climate Information ◽  
Climate Services ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Consensus Forecasts ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Perceived Usability

Abstract Little has been documented about the benefits and impacts of the recent growth in climate services, despite a growing call to justify their value and stimulate investment. Regional Climate Outlook Forums (RCOFs), an integral part of the public and private enterprise of climate services, have been implemented over the last 20 years with the objectives of producing and disseminating seasonal climate forecasts to inform improved climate risk management and adaptation. In proposing guidance on how to measure the success of RCOFs, we offer three broad evaluative categories that are based on the primary stated goals of the RCOFs: 1) quality of the climate information used and developed at RCOFs; 2) legitimacy of RCOF processes focused on consensus forecasts, broad user engagement, and capacity building; and 3) usability of the climate information produced at RCOFs. Evaluating the quality of information relies largely on quantitative measures and statistical techniques that are standardized and transferrable, but assessing the RCOF processes and perceived usability of RCOF products will necessitate a combination of quantitative and qualitative social science methods that are sensitive to highly variable regional contexts. As RCOFs have taken up different formats and procedures to adapt to diverse institutional and political settings and varied technical and scientific capacities, objective evaluation methods adopted should align with the goals and intent of the evaluation and be performed in a participatory, coproduction manner where producers and users of climate services together design the evaluation metrics and processes. To fully capture the potential benefits of the RCOFs, it may be necessary to adjust or recalibrate the goals of these forums to better fit the evolving landscape of climate services development, needs, and provision.

scholarly journals Evaluation of regional climate models ALARO-0 and REMO2015 at 0.22° resolution over the CORDEX Central Asia domain

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Top ◽  
Lola Kotova ◽  
Lesley De Cruz ◽  
Svetlana Aniskevich ◽  
Leonid Bobylev ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Central Asia ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Regional Climate ◽  
Regional Climate Models ◽  
Horizontal Resolution ◽  
Maximum Temperature ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Climate Information ◽  
Climate Data

Abstract. To allow for climate impact studies on human and natural systems high-resolution climate information is needed. Over some parts of the world plenty of regional climate simulations have been carried out, while in other regions hardly any high-resolution climate information is available. This publication aims at addressing one of these regional gaps by presenting an evaluation study for two regional climate models (RCMs) (REMO and ALARO-0) at a horizontal resolution of 0.22° (25 km) over Central Asia. The output of the ERA-Interim driven RCMs is compared with different observational datasets over the 1980–2017 period. The choice of the observational dataset has an impact on the scores but in general one can conclude that both models reproduce reasonably well the spatial patterns for temperature and precipitation. The evaluation of minimum and maximum temperature demonstrates that both models underestimate the daily temperature range. More detailed studies of the annual cycle over subregions should be carried out to reveal whether this is due to an incorrect simulation in cloud cover, atmospheric circulation or heat and moisture fluxes. In general, the REMO model scores better for temperature whereas the ALARO-0 model prevails for precipitation. This publication demonstrates that the REMO and ALARO-0 RCMs can be used to perform climate projections over Central Asia and that the produced climate data can be applied in impact modelling.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document