Inferential, non-parametric statistics to assess quality of probabilistic forecast systems

Many statistical forecast systems are available to interested users. In order to be useful for decision-making, these systems must be based on evidence of underlying mechanisms. Once causal connections between the mechanism and their statistical manifestation have been firmly established, the forecasts must also provide some quantitative evidence of `quality’. However, the quality of statistical climate forecast systems (forecast quality) is an ill-defined and frequently misunderstood property. Often, providers and users of such forecast systems are unclear about what ‘quality’ entails and how to measure it, leading to confusion and misinformation. Here we present a generic framework to quantify aspects of forecast quality using an inferential approach to calculate nominal significance levels (p-values) that can be obtained either by directly applying non-parametric statistical tests such as Kruskal-Wallis (KW) or Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) or by using Monte-Carlo methods (in the case of forecast skill scores). Once converted to p-values, these forecast quality measures provide a means to objectively evaluate and compare temporal and spatial patterns of forecast quality across datasets and forecast systems. Our analysis demonstrates the importance of providing p-values rather than adopting some arbitrarily chosen significance levels such as p < 0.05 or p < 0.01, which is still common practice. This is illustrated by applying non-parametric tests (such as KW and KS) and skill scoring methods (LEPS and RPSS) to the 5-phase Southern Oscillation Index classification system using historical rainfall data from Australia, The Republic of South Africa and India. The selection of quality measures is solely based on their common use and does not constitute endorsement. We found that non-parametric statistical tests can be adequate proxies for skill measures such as LEPS or RPSS. The framework can be implemented anywhere, regardless of dataset, forecast system or quality measure. Eventually such inferential evidence should be complimented by descriptive statistical methods in order to fully assist in operational risk management.

Space allowances for confined livestock and their determination from allometric principles

The amount of space provided to animals governs important elements of their behaviour and, hence, is critical for their health and welfare. We review the use of allometric principles and equations to estimate the static space requirements of animals when standing and lying, and the space required for animals to feed, drink, stand-up and lie-down. We use the research literature relating to transportation and intensive housing of sheep and cattle to assess the validity of allometric equations for estimating space allowances. We investigated these areas because transportation and intensive housing provide points along a continuum in terms of the duration of confinement, (from hours to months) and spatial requirements are likely to increase with increasing duration of confinement, as animals will need to perform a greater behavioural repertoire for long-term survival, health and welfare. We find that, although there are theoretical reasons why allometric relationships to space allowances may vary slightly for different classes of stock, space allowances that have been demonstrated to have adverse effects on animal welfare during transportation correlated well with an inability to accommodate standing animals, as estimated from allometry. For intensive housing, we were able to detect a space allowance below which there were adverse effects on welfare. For short duration transportation during which animals remain standing, a space allowance per animal described by the allometric equation: area (m^2) = 0.020W^0.66, where W = liveweight (kg), would appear to be appropriate. Where it is desirable for all animals to lie simultaneously, then a minimum space allowance per animal described by the allometric equation: area (m^2) = 0.027W^0.66 appears to permit this, given that animals in a group time-share space. However, there are insufficient data to determine whether this allowance onboard a vehicle/vessel would enable animals to move and access food and water with ease. In intensive housing systems, a minimum space allowance per animal described by the allometric equation: area (m^2) = 0.033W^0.66 appears to be the threshold below which there are adverse effects on welfare. These suggested space allowances require verification with a range of species under different thermal conditions and, for transportation, under different conditions of vehicular/vessel stability. The minimum length of trough per animal (L in m) required for feeding and drinking can be determined from L = 0.064W^0.33, with the number of animals required to feed/drink simultaneously taken into account, together with any requirement to minimise competition. This also requires verification with a range of species. We conclude that allometric relationships are an appropriate basis for the formulation of space allowances for livestock.