Intercomparison of the Arctic sea ice cover in global ocean–sea ice reanalyses from the ORA-IP project

Ocean–sea ice reanalyses are crucial for assessing the variability and recent trends in the Arctic sea ice cover. This is especially true for sea ice volume, as long-term and large scale sea ice thickness observations are inexistent. Results from the Ocean ReAnalyses Intercomparison Project (ORA-IP) are presented, with a focus on Arctic sea ice fields reconstructed by state-of-the-art global ocean reanalyses. Differences between the various reanalyses are explored in terms of the effects of data assimilation, model physics and atmospheric forcing on properties of the sea ice cover, including concentration, thickness, velocity and snow. Amongst the 14 reanalyses studied here, 9 assimilate sea ice concentration, and none assimilate sea ice thickness data. The comparison reveals an overall agreement in the reconstructed concentration fields, mainly because of the constraints in surface temperature imposed by direct assimilation of ocean observations, prescribed or assimilated atmospheric forcing and assimilation of sea ice concentration. However, some spread still exists amongst the reanalyses, due to a variety of factors. In particular, a large spread in sea ice thickness is found within the ensemble of reanalyses, partially caused by the biases inherited from their sea ice model components. Biases are also affected by the assimilation of sea ice concentration and the treatment of sea ice thickness in the data assimilation process. An important outcome of this study is that the spatial distribution of ice volume varies widely between products, with no reanalysis standing out as clearly superior as compared to altimetry estimates. The ice thickness from systems without assimilation of sea ice concentration is not worse than that from systems constrained with sea ice observations. An evaluation of the sea ice velocity fields reveals that ice drifts too fast in most systems. As an ensemble, the ORA-IP reanalyses capture trends in Arctic sea ice area and extent relatively well. However, the ensemble can not be used to get a robust estimate of recent trends in the Arctic sea ice volume. Biases in the reanalyses certainly impact the simulated air–sea fluxes in the polar regions, and questions the suitability of current sea ice reanalyses to initialize seasonal forecasts.

The Climate-system Historical Forecast Project: do stratosphere-resolving models make better seasonal climate predictions in boreal winter?

Using an international, multi-model suite of historical forecasts from the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) Climate-system Historical Forecast Project (CHFP), we compare the seasonal prediction skill in boreal wintertime between models that resolve the stratosphere and its dynamics (“high-top”) and models that do not (“low-top”). We evaluate hindcasts that are initialized in November, and examine the model biases in the stratosphere and how they relate to boreal wintertime (Dec-Mar) seasonal forecast skill. We are unable to detect more skill in the high-top ensemble-mean than the low-top ensemble-mean in forecasting the wintertime North Atlantic Oscillation, but model performance varies widely. Increasing the ensemble size clearly increases the skill for a given model. We then examine two major processes involving stratosphere-troposphere interactions (the El Niño-Southern Oscillation/ENSO and the Quasi-biennial Oscillation/QBO) and how they relate to predictive skill on intra-seasonal to seasonal timescales, particularly over the North Atlantic and Eurasia regions. High-top models tend to have a more realistic stratospheric response to El Niño and the QBO compared to low-top models. Enhanced conditional wintertime skill over high-latitudes and the North Atlantic region during winters with El Niño conditions suggests a possible role for a stratospheric pathway.

Incorporation of different and changing client interests in the course of a project

There is a widespread assumption that clients’ expectations should be accommodated during a building project. However, there may be conflicting expectations within a client organization and these may change over time in the course of a project. Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is used to study the incorporation of client expectations into the on-going development of a building project. To illustrate this, negotiations over a particular decision, namely the location of a building on one university campus was analysed. Negotiations went through a number of stages, involving a master plan architect, members of the public, campus maps and the Vice Chancellor. An ANT analysis helped to trace diverse actors' interests in a series of discussions and how these interests conflict with each other as one option was chosen over another. The analysis revealed new client interests in each negotiation process. Also, the prioritisation of client interests changed over time. The documentation of diverse and dynamic client interests especially contributes to the understanding of how some client interests fail to be incorporated in decision-making processes

Tracing client interests in the course of a project: why are some client interests incorporated whereas others are not?

Many construction professionals and policy-makers would agree that client expectations should be accommodated during a building project. However, this aspiration is not easy to deal with as there may be conflicting interests within a client organization and these may change over time in the course of a project. This research asks why some client interests, and not others, are incorporated into the development of a building project. Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is used to study a single building project on a University campus. The building project is analysed as a number of discussions and negotiations, in which actors persuade each other to choose one solution over another. The analysis traces dynamic client engagement in decision-making processes as available options became increasingly constrained. However, this relative loss of control was countered by clients who continued the control over the timing of participants' involvement, and thus the way to impose their interests even at the later stage of the project.

The global-scale impacts of climate change: the QUEST-GSI project

This paper introduces the special issue of Climatic Change on the QUEST-GSI project, a global-scale multi-sectoral assessment of the impacts of climate change. The project used multiple climate models to characterise plausible climate futures with consistent baseline climate and socio-economic data and consistent assumptions, together with a suite of global-scale sectoral impacts models. It estimated impacts across sectors under specific SRES emissions scenarios, and also constructed functions relating impact to change in global mean surface temperature. This paper summarises the objectives of the project and its overall methodology, outlines how the project approach has been used in subsequent policy-relevant assessments of future climate change under different emissions futures, and summarises the general lessons learnt in the project about model validation and the presentation of multi-sector, multi-region impact assessments and their associated uncertainties to different audiences.

PMIP4-CMIP6: the contribution of the Paleoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project to CMIP6

The goal of the Palaeoclimate Modelling Intercomparison Project (PMIP) is to understand the response of the climate system to changes in different climate forcings and to feedbacks. Through comparison with observations of the environmental impacts of these climate changes, or with climate reconstructions based on physical, chemical or biological records, PMIP also addresses the issue of how well state-of-the-art models simulate climate changes. Palaeoclimate states are radically different from those of the recent past documented by the instrumental record and thus provide an out-of-sample test of the models used for future climate projections and a way to assess whether they have the correct sensitivity to forcings and feedbacks. Five distinctly different periods have been selected as focus for the core palaeoclimate experiments that are designed to contribute to the objectives of the sixth phase of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6). This manuscript describes the motivation for the choice of these periods and the design of the numerical experiments, with a focus upon their novel features compared to the experiments performed in previous phases of PMIP and CMIP as well as the benefits of common analyses of the models across multiple climate states. It also describes the information needed to document each experiment and the model outputs required for analysis and benchmarking.