Advertisement

Climatic Change

, Volume 90, Issue 1–2, pp 5–30 | Cite as

The concepts and development of a participatory regional integrated assessment tool

  • I. P. Holman
  • M. D. A. Rounsevell
  • G. Cojacaru
  • S. Shackley
  • C. McLachlan
  • E. Audsley
  • P. M. Berry
  • C. Fontaine
  • P. A. Harrison
  • C. Henriques
  • M. Mokrech
  • R. J. Nicholls
  • K. R. Pearn
  • J. A. Richards
Article

Abstract

This paper provides an overview of the development of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ – a user friendly software tool designed to allow stakeholders to perform integrated assessments of the effects of climate and/or socio-economic change on the important sectors and resources of two contrasting UK regions. This includes the assessment of agriculture, water resources, biodiversity and coastal and river flooding. The tool arose from the need to further develop the methods applied in the earlier RegIS project, which was the first local to regional integrated assessment in the UK. The limitations of RegIS included very long run times, a limited number of simulations, incomplete linkages between models and no allowance for scenario uncertainty. Based upon the stakeholder needs identified within RegIS, a series of guiding principles were developed with Steering Committee stakeholders, which informed the concept of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ including functionality, appearance and complexity. An Integrated Assessment Methodology based upon the Drivers-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework facilitated the integration of multiple models, scenarios and datasets within the software interface. The development of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ provides a test-bed for further studies of stakeholder-led, regional, integrated assessment, and provides an opportunity to learn the many lessons in undertaking such studies.

Keywords

Climate Change Impact Integrate Assessment Glob Environ Change Climate Change Impact Assessment Agric Ecosyst Environ 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alcamo J (1994) Image 2.0 – Integrated modelling of global climate change. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcamo J, Kreileman GJJ, Leemans R (1996) Global models meet global policy. Glob Environ Change 6(4):255–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alcamo J, Leemans R, Kreileman E (eds) (1998) Global change scenarios of the 21st century: results from the IMAGE 2.1 Model. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnell NW, Livermore MJL, Kovats S, Levy P, Nicholls R, Parry ML, Gaffin SR (2004) Climate and socio-economic scenarios for global-scale climate change impacts assessments: characterising the SRES storylines. Glob Environ Change 14(1):3–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Audsley E, Pearn KR, Harrison PA, Berry PM (2008) The impact of future socio-economic and climate changes on agricultural land use and the wider environment in East Anglia and North West England using a metamodel system. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9450-9
  6. Bayliss A (1999) Flood estimation handbook, vol. 5: Catchment descriptors. Institute of Hydrology, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkhout F, Hertin J, Jordan A (2002) Socio-economic futures in climate change impacts assessment: using scenarios as learning machines. Glob Environ Change 12:83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carmichael J, Tansey J, Robinson J (2004) An integrated assessment modelling tool. Glob Environ Change 14:171–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Demeritt D, Landgon D (2004) The UK climate change programme and communication with local authorities. Glob Environ Change 14:325–336Google Scholar
  10. Dessai S, Hulme M (2004) Does climate adaptation policy need probabilities. Climate Policy 4:107–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DETR (Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions) (2000) Climate change: the UK programme. HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Dowlatabadi H (1995) Integrated assessment models of climate change: an incomplete overview. Energy Policy 23(4/5):289–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dunbar MJ, Acreman MC, Kirk S (2004) Environmental flow setting in England and Wales – current practice: future challenges. J Water Environ Manage 18:5–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. EEA (European Environment Agency) (2003) Europe’s environment: the third assessment. Environment Assessment Report No. 10. European Environment Agency, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  15. Fisher A (2000) Preliminary findings from the Mid-Atlantic regional assessment. Clim Res 14(3):261–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fontela E (2000) Bridging the gap between scenarios and models. Foresight 2(1):11–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gaffin SR, Rosenzweig C, Xing X, Yetman G (2004) Downscaling and geo-spatial gridding of socio-economic projections from the IPCC Special Report n Emissions Scenarios (SRES). Glob Environ Change 14:105–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gustard A, Bullock A, Dixon JM (1992) Report No. 108 Low flow estimation in the United Kingdom. Institute of Hydrology, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  19. Harremoes P, Turner RK (2001) Methods for integrated assessment. Reg Environ Change 2:57–65Google Scholar
  20. Harrison PA, Berry PM, Butt N, New M (2006) Modelling climate change impacts on species’ distributions at the European scale: implications for conservation policy. Environ Sci Policy 9:116–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harrison PA, Berry PM, Henriques C, Holman IP (2008) Impacts of socio-economic and climate change scenarios on wetlands: linking water resource and biodiversity meta-models. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9454-5
  22. Henriques C, Holman IP, Audsley E, Pearn K (2008) An interactive multi-scale integrated assessment of future regional water availability for agricultural irrigation in East Anglia and North West England. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9459-0
  23. Holman IP, de Vries TT (eds) (2005) Development of a metamodel tool for regional integrated climate change management (RegIS2). Final Report for Project No. CC0362, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Holman IP, Harman J (2008) Preliminary evaluation of the benefits of a participatory regional integrated assessment software. Clim ChangeGoogle Scholar
  25. Holman IP, Rounsevell MDA, Shackley S, Harrison PA, Nicholls RJ, Berry PM, Audsley E (2005a) A regional, multi-sectoral and integrated assessment of the impacts of climate and socio-economic change in the UK: I methodology. Clim Change 71:9–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Holman IP, Nicholls RJ, Berry PM, Harrison PA, Audsley E, Shackley S, Rounsevell MDA (2005b) A regional, multi-sectoral and integrated assessment of the impacts of climate and socio-economic change in the UK: II Results. Clim Change 71:43–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hulme M, Jenkins GJ, Lu X, Turnpenny JR, Mitchell TD, Jones RG, Lowe J, Murphy JM, Hassell D, Boorman P, McDonald R, Hill S (2002) Climate change scenarios for the United Kingdom: the UKCIP02 scientific report. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  28. IPCC (2001) Technical summary. Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. A Report of Working Group II of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 966Google Scholar
  30. Jones RN (2001) An environmental risk assessment/management framework for climate change impact assessments. Nat Hazards 23(2–3):197–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kandlikar M, Risbey J, Dessai S (2005) Representing and communicating deep uncertainty in climate-change assessments. External Geophysics, Climate and Environment 337:443–455Google Scholar
  32. La Jeunesse IM, Rounsevell MDA, Vanclooster M, Romanowicz AA (2003) Delivering a decision support system tool to a river contract: a way to implement the participatory approach principle at the catchment scale? Phys Chem Earth 28:547–554Google Scholar
  33. Leimbach M, Jaeger C (2004) A modular approach to integrated assessment modelling. Environ Model Assess 9:207–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lorenzoni I, Jordan A, Hulme M, Turner RK, O’Riordan T (2000) A co-evolutionary approach to climate change impact assessment: Part I. Integrating socio-economic and climate change scenarios. Glob Environ Change 10:57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Matsuoka Y, Morita T, Kainuma M (2001) Integrated assessment model of climate change: the AIM approach. In: Matsuno T, Kida H (eds) Present and future of modelling global environmental change: toward integrated modeling. Terra Scientific Publishing Company, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  36. Mokrech M, Nicholls RJ, Richards JA, Henriques C, Holman IP, Shackley S (2008) Regional impact assessment of flooding under future climate and socio-economic scenarios for East Anglia and North West England. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9449-2
  37. Morris J, Gomez M, Vasileiou K, Berbel J (2004) WADI scenario definition. In: Vecino JB, Martin CG (eds) Sustainability of European irrigated agriculture under water framework directive and agenda 2000. Final report of 5th Framework project EVK1-2000-00057, ISBN 92-894-8005-XGoogle Scholar
  38. Nakicenovic N, Swart R (eds) (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios. A special report of working group III of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Nicholls RJ, Wilson T (2001) Chapter five. Integrated impacts on coastal areas and revir flooding. In: Holman IP, Loveland PJ (eds) Regional climate change impact and response studies in East Anglia and North West England (RegIS). Final Report of MAFF project no. CC0337. http://www.ukcip.org.uk
  40. Nordhaus WD (1994) Managing the global commons. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  41. Nordhaus WD, Yang Z (1996) RICE: a regional dynamic general equilibrium model of alternative climate change strategies. Am Econ Rev 86:726–741Google Scholar
  42. Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (1993) OECD core set of indicators for environmental performance review. Environmental Monograph No. 83, OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  43. Parry M, Arnell N, Hulme M, Martens P, Nicholls R, White A (1999) The global impact of climate change: a new assessment. Glob Environ Change 9:S1-S2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Parry M, Rosenzweig C, Iglesias A, Livermore M, Fischer G (2004) Assessing the effects of climate change on global food production under different socio-economic scenarios. Glob Environ Change 14(1):53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pearson RG, Dawson TP, Berry PM, Harrison PA (2002) SPECIES: a spatial valuation of climate impact on the envelope of species. Ecol Model 154(3):289–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. RCEP (Royal Commission for Environmetal Pollution) (2002) Environmental Planning. http://www.rcep.org.uk/epreport.htm
  47. Richards JA, Mokrech M, Berry PM, Nicholls RJ (2008) Regional assessment of climate change impacts on coastal and fluvial ecosystems and the scope for adaptation. Climatic Change. doi:10.1007/s10584-008-9451-8
  48. Robson A, Reed D (1999) Flood estimation handbook, vol 3: statistical procedures for flood frequency estimation. Institute of Hydrology, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  49. Rosenberg NJ (1993) A methodology called ‘MINK’ for study of climate change impacts and responses on the regional scale. Clim Change 24:1–2, 1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rounsevell MDA, Annetts JE, Audsley E, Mayr T, Reginster I (2003) Modelling the spatial distribution of agricultural land use at the regional scale. Agric Ecosyst Environ 95(2–3):465–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rounsevell MDA, Ewert F, Reginster I, Leemans R, Carter TR (2005) Future scenarios of European agricultural land use. II: projecting changes in cropland and grassland. Agric Ecosyst Environ 107:117–13Google Scholar
  52. Rounsevell MDA, Reginster I, Araújo MB, Carter TR, Dendoncker N, Ewert F, House JI, Kankaanpää S, Leemans R, Metzger MJ, Schmit C, Smith P, Tuck G (2006) A coherent set of future land use change scenarios for Europe. Agric Ecosyst Environ 114:57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schneider SH (1997) Integrated assessment modelling of global climate change: transparent rationale tool for policy making or opaque screen hiding value-laden assumptions? Environ Model Assess 2:229–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Science and Policy Associates Inc and ESYS (1996) Proposal for a UK integrated climate change impacts assessment. Report prepared for the Department of the Environment and the Environment Agency. Department of the Environment, LondonGoogle Scholar
  55. Shackley S, Deanwood R (2002) Stakeholder perceptions of climate change impacts at the regional scale: implications for the effectiveness of regional and local responses. J Environ Plan Manag 45(3):381–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shackley S, Deanwood R (2003) Constructing social futures for climate-change impacts and response studies: building qualitative and quantitative scenarios with the participation of stakeholders. Clim Res 24(1):71–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Strzepek K, Yates D, Yohe G, Tol RJS, Mader N (2001) Constructing “not-implausible” climate and economic scenarios for Egypt. Integrated Assessment 2:139–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Toth FL (2003) Climate policy in light of climate science: the ICLIPS project. Clim Change 56:7–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Turner RK et al (1998) Coastal management and environmental economics: analysing environmental and socio-economic change on the British coast. Geogr J 164:269–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Turnpeny J, Haxeltine A, O’Riordan T (2004) A scoping study of user needs for integrated assessment of climate change in the UK context: part 1 of the development of an interactive integrated assessment process. Integrated Assessment 4(4):283–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Turnpenny J, O’Riordan T, Haxeltine A (2005) Developing regional and local scenarios for climate change mitigation and adaptation; Part 2: scenario creation. Tyndall Working Paper 67, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change ResearchGoogle Scholar
  62. Tyson P, Steffen W, Mitra AP, Fu C, Lebel L (2001) The earth system: regional – global linkages. Reg Environ Change 2:128–140Google Scholar
  63. UKCIP (United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme) (2001) Socio-economic scenarios for climate change impact assessment: a guide to their use in the UK Climate Impacts Programme. UKCIP, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  64. van Asselt MBA, Rijkens-Klomp N (2002) A look in the mirror: reflection on participation in integrated assessment from a methodological perspective. Glob Environ Change 12:167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wolfe AK, Kerchner N, Wilbanks T (2001) Public involvement on a regional scale. Environ Impact Asses Rev 21:431–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Yarnal B (1998) Integrated regional assessment and climate change impacts in river basins. Clim Res 11(1):65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Yohe G, Jacobsen M, Gapotchenko T (1999) Spanning “not implausible” futures to assess relative vulnerability to climate change and climate variability. Glob Environ Change 9:233–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. P. Holman
    • 1
  • M. D. A. Rounsevell
    • 2
    • 8
  • G. Cojacaru
    • 3
  • S. Shackley
    • 4
  • C. McLachlan
    • 4
  • E. Audsley
    • 5
    • 9
  • P. M. Berry
    • 6
  • C. Fontaine
    • 2
    • 8
  • P. A. Harrison
    • 6
  • C. Henriques
    • 1
  • M. Mokrech
    • 7
  • R. J. Nicholls
    • 7
  • K. R. Pearn
    • 5
    • 9
  • J. A. Richards
    • 7
  1. 1.Natural Resources DepartmentCranfield UniversityBedfordUK
  2. 2.Université catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium
  3. 3.Research Institute for Soil Science and Agrochemistry (ICPA)BucharestRomania
  4. 4.Manchester School of ManagementUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK
  5. 5.Silsoe Research InstituteBedfordUK
  6. 6.Environmental Change InstituteOxford University Centre for the EnvironmentOxfordUK
  7. 7.School of Civil Engineering and the EnvironmentUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  8. 8.School of GeosciencesUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  9. 9.Natural Resources DepartmentCranfield UniversityBedfordUK

Personalised recommendations