A comparative analysis of projected impacts of climate change on river runoff from global and catchment-scale hydrological models

We present a comparative analysis of projected impacts of climate change on river runoff from two types of distributed hydrological model, a global hydrological model (GHM) and catchment-scale hydrological models (CHM). Analyses are conducted for six catchments that are global in coverage and feature strong contrasts in spatial scale as well as climatic and development conditions. These include the Liard (Canada), Mekong (SE Asia), Okavango (SW Africa), Rio Grande (Brazil), Xiangu (China) and Harper's Brook (UK). A single GHM (Mac-PDM.09) is applied to all catchments whilst different CHMs are applied for each catchment. The CHMs typically simulate water resources impacts based on a more explicit representation of catchment water resources than that available from the GHM, and the CHMs include river routing. Simulations of average annual runoff, mean monthly runoff and high (Q5) and low (Q95) monthly runoff under baseline (1961-1990) and climate change scenarios are presented. We compare the simulated runoff response of each hydrological model to (1) prescribed increases in global mean temperature from the HadCM3 climate model and (2)a prescribed increase in global-mean temperature of 2oC for seven GCMs to explore response to climate model and structural uncertainty. We find that differences in projected changes of mean annual runoff between the two types of hydrological model can be substantial for a given GCM, and they are generally larger for indicators of high and low flow. However, they are relatively small in comparison to the range of projections across the seven GCMs. Hence, for the six catchments and seven GCMs we considered, climate model structural uncertainty is greater than the uncertainty associated with the type of hydrological model applied. Moreover, shifts in the seasonal cycle of runoff with climate change are presented similarly by both hydrological models, although for some catchments the monthly timing of high and low flows differs.This implies that for studies that seek to quantify and assess the role of climate model uncertainty on catchment-scale runoff, it may be equally as feasible to apply a GHM as it is to apply a CHM, especially when climate modelling uncertainty across the range of available GCMs is as large as it currently is. Whilst the GHM is able to represent the broad climate change signal that is represented by the CHMs, we find, however, that for some catchments there are differences between GHMs and CHMs in mean annual runoff due to differences in potential evaporation estimation methods, in the representation of the seasonality of runoff, and in the magnitude of changes in extreme monthly runoff, all of which have implications for future water management issues.

The implications of climate policy for the impacts of climate change on global water resources

This paper assesses the implications of climate policy for exposure to water resources stresses. It compares a Reference scenario which leads to an increase in global mean temperature of 4oC by the end of the 21st century with a Mitigation scenario which stabilises greenhouse gas concentrations at around 450ppm CO2e and leads to a 2oC increase in 2100. Associated changes in river runoff are simulated using a global hydrological model, for four spatial patterns of change in temperature and rainfall. There is a considerable difference in hydrological change between these four patterns, but the percentages of change avoided at the global scale are relatively robust. By the 2050s, the Mitigation scenario typically avoids between 16 and 30% of the change in runoff under the Reference scenario, and by 2100 it avoids between 43 and 65%. Two different measures of exposure to water resources stress are calculated, based on resources per capita and the ratio of withdrawals to resources. Using the first measure, the Mitigation scenario avoids 8-17% of the impact in 2050 and 20-31% in 2100; with the second measure, the avoided impacts are 5-21% and 15-47% respectively. However, at the same time, the Mitigation scenario also reduces the positive impacts of climate change on water scarcity in other areas. The absolute numbers and locations of people affected by climate change and climate policy vary considerably between the four climate model patterns.

The socioeconomics of food crop production and climate change vulnerability: a global scale quantitative analysis of how grain crops are sensitive to drought

Many studies warn that climate change may undermine global food security. Much work on this topic focuses on modelling crop-weather interactions but these models do not generally account for the ways in which socio-economic factors influence how harvests are affected by weather. To address this gap, this paper uses a quantitative harvest vulnerability index based on annual soil moisture and grain production data as the dependent variables in a Linear Mixed Effects model with national scale socio-economic data as independent variables for the period 1990-2005. Results show that rice, wheat and maize production in middle income countries were especially vulnerable to droughts. By contrast, harvests in countries with higher investments in agriculture (e.g higher amounts of fertilizer use) were less vulnerable to drought. In terms of differences between the world's major grain crops, factors that made rice and wheat crops vulnerable to drought were quite consistent, whilst those of maize crops varied considerably depending on the type of region. This is likely due to the fact that maize is produced under very different conditions worldwide. One recommendation for reducing drought vulnerability risks is coordinated development and adaptation policies, including institutional support that enables farmers to take proactive action.

Variation in the global-scale impacts of climate change on crop productivity due to climate model uncertainty and adaptation

Crop production is inherently sensitive to fluctuations in weather and climate and is expected to be impacted by climate change. To understand how this impact may vary across the globe many studies have been conducted to determine the change in yield of several crops to expected changes in climate. Changes in climate are typically derived from a single to no more than a few General Circulation Models (GCMs). This study examines the uncertainty introduced to a crop impact assessment when 14 GCMs are used to determine future climate. The General Large Area Model for annual crops (GLAM) was applied over a global domain to simulate the productivity of soybean and spring wheat under baseline climate conditions and under climate conditions consistent with the 2050s under the A1B SRES emissions scenario as simulated by 14 GCMs. Baseline yield simulations were evaluated against global country-level yield statistics to determine the model's ability to capture observed variability in production. The impact of climate change varied between crops, regions, and by GCM. The spread in yield projections due to GCM varied between no change and a reduction of 50%. Without adaptation yield response was linearly related to the magnitude of local temperature change. Therefore, impacts were greatest for countries at northernmost latitudes where warming is predicted to be greatest. However, these countries also exhibited the greatest potential for adaptation to offset yield losses by shifting the crop growing season to a cooler part of the year and/or switching crop variety to take advantage of an extended growing season. The relative magnitude of impacts as simulated by each GCM was not consistent across countries and between crops. It is important, therefore, for crop impact assessments to fully account for GCM uncertainty in estimating future climates and to be explicit about assumptions regarding adaptation.

A global assessment of the effects of climate policy on the impacts of climate change

This study presents the first global-scale multi-sectoral regional assessment of the magnitude and uncertainty in the impacts of climate change avoided by emissions policies. The analysis suggests that the most stringent emissions policy considered here – which gives a 50% chance of remaining below a 2oC temperature rise target - reduces impacts by 20-65% by 2100 relative to a ‘business-as-usual’ pathway (A1B) which reaches 4oC, and can delay impacts by several decades. Effects vary between sector and region, and there are few noticeable effects of mitigation policy by 2030. The impacts avoided by 2100 are more strongly influenced by the date and level at which emissions peak than the rate of decline of emissions, with an earlier and lower emissions peak avoiding more impacts. The estimated proportion of impacts avoided at the global scale is relatively robust despite uncertainty in the spatial pattern of climate change, but the absolute amount of avoided impacts is considerably more variable and therefore uncertain.

How will organic carbon stocks in mineral soils evolve under future climate? Global projections using RothC for a range of climate change scenarios

We use a soil carbon (C) model (RothC), driven by a range of climate models for a range of climate scenarios to examine the impacts of future climate on global soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks. The results suggest an overall global increase in SOC stocks by 2100 under all scenarios, but with a different extent of increase among the climate model and emissions scenarios. The impacts of projected land use changes are also simulated, but have relatively minor impacts at the global scale. Whether soils gain or lose SOC depends upon the balance between C inputs and decomposition. Changes in net primary production (NPP) change C inputs to the soil, whilst decomposition usually increases under warmer temperatures, but can also be slowed by decreased soil moisture. Underlying the global trend of increasing SOC under future climate is a complex pattern of regional SOC change. SOC losses are projected to occur in northern latitudes where higher SOC decomposition rates due to higher temperatures are not balanced by increased NPP, whereas in tropical regions, NPP increases override losses due to higher SOC decomposition. The spatial heterogeneity in the response of SOC to changing climate shows how delicately balanced the competing gain and loss processes are, with subtle changes in temperature, moisture, soil type and land use, interacting to determine whether SOC increases or decreases in the future. Our results suggest that we should stop looking for a single answer regarding whether SOC stocks will increase or decrease under future climate, since there is no single answer. Instead, we should focus on improving our prediction of the factors that determine the size and direction of change, and the land management practices that can be implemented to protect and enhance SOC stocks.

The impacts of climate change on river flow regimes at the global scale

This paper presents an assessment of the impacts of climate change on a series of indicators of hydrological regimes across the global domain, using a global hydrological model run with climate scenarios constructed using pattern-scaling from 21 CMIP3 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 3) climate models. Changes are compared with natural variability, with a significant change being defined as greater than the standard deviation of the hydrological indicator in the absence of climate change. Under an SRES (Special Report on Emissions Scenarios) A1b emissions scenario, substantial proportions of the land surface (excluding Greenland and Antarctica) would experience significant changes in hydrological behaviour by 2050; under one climate model scenario (Hadley Centre HadCM3), average annual runoff increases significantly over 47% of the land surface and decreases over 36%; only 17% therefore sees no significant change. There is considerable variability between regions, depending largely on projected changes in precipitation. Uncertainty in projected river flow regimes is dominated by variation in the spatial patterns of climate change between climate models (hydrological model uncertainty is not included). There is, however, a strong degree of consistency in the overall magnitude and direction of change. More than two-thirds of climate models project a significant increase in average annual runoff across almost a quarter of the land surface, and a significant decrease over 14%, with considerably higher degrees of consistency in some regions. Most climate models project increases in runoff in Canada and high-latitude eastern Europe and Siberia, and decreases in runoff in central Europe, around the Mediterranean, the Mashriq, central America and Brasil. There is some evidence that projecte change in runoff at the regional scale is not linear with change in global average temperature change. The effects of uncertainty in the rate of future emissions is relatively small

Scenario and modelling uncertainty in global mean temperature change derived from emission-driven global climate models

We compare future changes in global mean temperature in response to different future scenarios which, for the first time, arise from emission-driven rather than concentration-driven perturbed parameter ensemble of a global climate model (GCM). These new GCM simulations sample uncertainties in atmospheric feedbacks, land carbon cycle, ocean physics and aerosol sulphur cycle processes. We find broader ranges of projected temperature responses arising when considering emission rather than concentration-driven simulations (with 10–90th percentile ranges of 1.7 K for the aggressive mitigation scenario, up to 3.9 K for the high-end, business as usual scenario). A small minority of simulations resulting from combinations of strong atmospheric feedbacks and carbon cycle responses show temperature increases in excess of 9 K (RCP8.5) and even under aggressive mitigation (RCP2.6) temperatures in excess of 4 K. While the simulations point to much larger temperature ranges for emission-driven experiments, they do not change existing expectations (based on previous concentration-driven experiments) on the timescales over which different sources of uncertainty are important. The new simulations sample a range of future atmospheric concentrations for each emission scenario. Both in the case of SRES A1B and the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), the concentration scenarios used to drive GCM ensembles, lies towards the lower end of our simulated distribution. This design decision (a legacy of previous assessments) is likely to lead concentration-driven experiments to under-sample strong feedback responses in future projections. Our ensemble of emission-driven simulations span the global temperature response of the CMIP5 emission-driven simulations, except at the low end. Combinations of low climate sensitivity and low carbon cycle feedbacks lead to a number of CMIP5 responses to lie below our ensemble range. The ensemble simulates a number of high-end responses which lie above the CMIP5 carbon cycle range. These high-end simulations can be linked to sampling a number of stronger carbon cycle feedbacks and to sampling climate sensitivities above 4.5 K. This latter aspect highlights the priority in identifying real-world climate-sensitivity constraints which, if achieved, would lead to reductions on the upper bound of projected global mean temperature change. The ensembles of simulations presented here provides a framework to explore relationships between present-day observables and future changes, while the large spread of future-projected changes highlights the ongoing need for such work.

Projection of global wave climate change towards the end of the 21st century

Wind generated waves at the sea surface are of outstanding importance for both their practical relevance in many aspects, such as coastal erosion, protection, or safety of navigation, and for their scientific relevance in modifying fluxes at the air-sea interface. So far long-term changes in ocean wave climate have been studied mostly from a regional perspective with global dynamical studies emerging only recently. Here a global wave climate study is presented, in which a global wave model (WAM) is driven by atmospheric forcing from a global climate model (ECHAM5) for present day and potential future climate conditions represented by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change) A1B emission scenario. It is found that changes in mean and extreme wave climate towards the end of the twenty-first century are small to moderate, with the largest signals being a poleward shift in the annual mean and extreme significant wave heights in the mid-latitudes of both hemispheres, more pronounced in the Southern Hemisphere, and most likely associated with a corresponding shift in mid-latitude storm tracks. These changes are broadly consistent with results from the few studies available so far. The projected changes in the mean wave periods, associated with the changes in the wave climate in the mid to high latitudes, are also shown, revealing a moderate increase in the equatorial eastern side of the ocean basins. This study presents a step forward towards a larger ensemble of global wave climate projections required to better assess robustness and uncertainty of potential future wave climate change.

The AVOID programme’s new simulations of the global benefits of stringent climate change mitigation

Quantitative simulations of the global-scale benefits of climate change mitigation are presented, using a harmonised, self-consistent approach based on a single set of climate change scenarios. The approach draws on a synthesis of output from both physically-based and economics-based models, and incorporates uncertainty analyses. Previous studies have projected global and regional climate change and its impacts over the 21st century but have generally focused on analysis of business-as-usual scenarios, with no explicit mitigation policy included. This study finds that both the economics-based and physically-based models indicate that early, stringent mitigation would avoid a large proportion of the impacts of climate change projected for the 2080s. However, it also shows that not all the impacts can now be avoided, so that adaptation would also therefore be needed to avoid some of the potential damage. Delay in mitigation substantially reduces the percentage of impacts that can be avoided, providing strong new quantitative evidence for the need for stringent and prompt global mitigation action on greenhouse gas emissions, combined with effective adaptation, if large, widespread climate change impacts are to be avoided. Energy technology models suggest that such stringent and prompt mitigation action is technologically feasible, although the estimated costs vary depending on the specific modelling approach and assumptions.

Late Pleistocene climate change and the global expansion of anatomically modern humans

The extent to which past climate change has dictated the pattern and timing of the out-of-Africa expansion by anatomically modern humans is currently unclear [Stewart JR, Stringer CB (2012) Science 335:1317–1321]. In particular, the incompleteness of the fossil record makes it difficult to quantify the effect of climate. Here, we take a different approach to this problem; rather than relying on the appearance of fossils or archaeological evidence to determine arrival times in different parts of the world, we use patterns of genetic variation in modern human populations to determine the plausibility of past demographic parameters. We develop a spatially explicit model of the expansion of anatomically modern humans and use climate reconstructions over the past 120 ky based on the Hadley Centre global climate model HadCM3 to quantify the possible effects of climate on human demography. The combinations of demographic parameters compatible with the current genetic makeup of worldwide populations indicate a clear effect of climate on past population densities. Our estimates of this effect, based on population genetics, capture the observed relationship between current climate and population density in modern hunter–gatherers worldwide, providing supporting evidence for the realism of our approach. Furthermore, although we did not use any archaeological and anthropological data to inform the model, the arrival times in different continents predicted by our model are also broadly consistent with the fossil and archaeological records. Our framework provides the most accurate spatiotemporal reconstruction of human demographic history available at present and will allow for a greater integration of genetic and archaeological evidence.

Improving assessment and modelling of climate change impacts on global terrestrial biodiversity.

Understanding how species and ecosystems respond to climate change has become a major focus of ecology and conservation biology. Modelling approaches provide important tools for making future projections, but current models of the climate-biosphere interface remain overly simplistic, undermining the credibility of projections. We identify five ways in which substantial advances could be made in the next few years: (i) improving the accessibility and efficiency of biodiversity monitoring data, (ii) quantifying the main determinants of the sensitivity of species to climate change, (iii) incorporating community dynamics into projections of biodiversity responses, (iv) accounting for the influence of evolutionary processes on the response of species to climate change, and (v) improving the biophysical rule sets that define functional groupings of species in global models.