Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Important distinctiveness of SSP3–7.0 for use in impact assessments

  • Comment
  • Published:

From Nature Climate Change

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Recent criticisms have suggested that future emissions are unlikely to lead to the warmest climate scenario available (SSP5–8.5), which has resulted in the second highest scenario (SSP3–7.0) receiving increased attention. The distinctiveness of SSP3–7.0 has not been well recognized, but it is relevant for the proper interpretation of studies that use this scenario.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1: Distinctiveness of the climate change projections under SSP3–7.0.

References

  1. Hausfather, Z. et al. Nature 605, 26–29 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Taylor, K. E. et al. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. IPCC Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. & Meyer, L. A.) (IPCC, 2014).

  4. O’Neill, B. C. et al. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 3461–3482 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. IPCC: Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Lee, H. & Romero, J.) (IPCC, 2023).

  6. Climate Action Tracker: Warming Projections Global Update—November 2022 https://go.nature.com/47jNhP4 (Climate Analytics & NewClimate Institute, 2022).

  7. Hausfather, Z. & Peters, G. P. Nature 577, 618–620 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fujimori, S. et al. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 268–283 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lund, M. et al. Atmos. Chem. Phys 19, 13827–13839 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Collins, W. J. et al. Geosci. Model Dev. 10, 585–607 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Popp, A. et al. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 331–345 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lawrence, D. M. et al. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 2973–2998 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wilcox, L. J. et al. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 20, 11955–11977 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Shiogama, H. et al. Earth Syst. Dyn. 14, 1107–1124 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Allen, R. J. et al. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 20, 9641–9663 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This comment was supported by the Advanced Studies of Climate Change Projection (SENTAN, JPMXD0722680395) of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan, by the Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (JPMEERF23S21130 and JPMEERF23S21120) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency and the Ministry of Environment of Japan and by the Sumitomo Electric Industries Group CSR Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Earth System Division, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan

    Hideo Shiogama, Michiya Hayashi & Tomoo Ogura

  2. Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Shinichiro Fujimori

  3. College of Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Japan

    Tomoko Hasegawa

  4. Department of Civil Engineering, Shibaura Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan

    Yukiko Hirabayashi

  5. Institute for Agro-Environmental Sciences, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization, Tsukuba, Japan

    Toshichika Iizumi

  6. Social Systems Division, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan

    Kiyoshi Takahashi

  7. Research Institute for Applied Mechanics, Kyushu University, Kasuga, Japan

    Toshihiko Takemura

Authors
  1. Hideo Shiogama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shinichiro Fujimori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tomoko Hasegawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michiya Hayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yukiko Hirabayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tomoo Ogura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Toshichika Iizumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kiyoshi Takahashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Toshihiko Takemura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

H.S. conceived the paper. H.S. and M.H. conducted the analysis. All the authors provided insights and contributed to the writing of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hideo Shiogama.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Methods, Tables S1 and S2, Fig. S1 and References.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shiogama, H., Fujimori, S., Hasegawa, T. et al. Important distinctiveness of SSP3–7.0 for use in impact assessments. Nat. Clim. Chang. 13, 1276–1278 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01883-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-023-01883-2

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation