Climatic Change

, Volume 133, Issue 1, pp 7–21 | Cite as

Comparing IPCC assessments: how do the AR4 and SREX assessments of changes in extremes differ?

Article

Abstract

The assessments of observed, attributed, and projected changes in extremes in two recent reports, the Intergovernmental Panel (IPCC) on Climate Change Fourth Assessment of Climate Change (AR4) and the IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX) are compared. This comparison focuses on global-scale changes in extremes as summarized in two “summary” tables from the AR4 and SREX, respectively. Many of the compared SREX and AR4 assessments of changes in extremes are essentially identical or in partial agreement, once the different language and different approaches to estimating uncertainty are taken into account. Two main exceptions are tropical cyclones and droughts. In the case of tropical cyclones, a less confident SREX assessment of past changes reflects post-AR4 studies that have improved our understanding of “the uncertainties in the historical tropical cyclone records, the incomplete understanding of the physical mechanisms linking tropical cyclone metrics to climate change, and the degree of tropical cyclone variability”. In the case of droughts, “(d)efinitional issues and lack of data…plus the inability of models to include all the factors likely to influence droughts” have led to overall weaker SREX assessments than was the case in AR4, both for observed and projected changes, although differences in the statements being assessed also explain some of the differences. Increased consistency of approach between assessments would simplify future attempts to compare the assessed uncertainties associated with changes in extremes, although changes in the wording of such assessments also needs to be considered. For instance, some aspects of the SREX assessments were the consequence of the revised IPCC uncertainty guidance, which was prepared mid-way through the SREX process.

References

  1. Alexander LV, Zhang X, Peterson TC, Caesar J, Gleason B, Klein Tank AMG, Haylock M, Collins D, Trewin B, Rahimzadeh F, Tagipour A, Kumar KR, Revadekar J, Griffiths G, Vincent L, Stephenson DB, Burn J, Aguilar E, Brunet M, Taylor M, New M, Zhai P, Rusticucci M, Vazquez-Aguirre JL (2006) Global observed changes in daily climate extremes of temperature and precipitation. J Geophys Res-Atmos 111:D05109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bates BC, Kundzewicz ZW, Wu S, Palutikof JP (2008) Climate change and water. Technical paper of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. IPCC Secretariat, Geneva, 210 ppGoogle Scholar
  3. Burke EJ, Brown SJ (2008) Evaluating uncertainties in the projection of future drought. J Hydrometeorol 9(2):292–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dai AG, Trenberth KE, Qian TT (2004) A global dataset of palmer drought severity index for 1870–2002: relationship with soil moisture and effects of surface warming. J Hydrometeorol 5(6):1117–1130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. IPCC (2007) In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  6. IPCC (2012) Summary for policymakers. In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken DJ, Ebi KL, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner G-K, Allen SK, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–21, A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeGoogle Scholar
  7. InterAcademy Council (2010) Review of the processes and procedures of the IPCC. Available from: http://reviewipcc.interacademycouncil.net/report.html
  8. Knutson TR, McBride JL, Chan J, Emanuel K, Holland G, Landsea C, Held I, Kossin JP, Srivastava AK, Sugi M (2010) Tropical cyclones and climate change. Nat Geosci 3(3):157–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mastrandrea MD, Field CB, Stocker TF, Edenhofer O, Ebi KL, Frame DJ, Held H, Kriegler E, Mach KJ, Matschoss PR, Plattner G-K, Yohe GW, Zwiers FW (2010) Guidance note for lead authors of the IPCC fifth assessment report on consistent treatment of uncertainties. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Available at (http://www.ipcc.ch)
  10. Seneviratne SI, Nicholls N, Easterling D, Goodess CM, Kanae S, Kossin J, Luo Y, Marengo J, McInnes K, Rahimi M, Reichstein M, Sorteberg A, Vera C, Zhang X (2012) Changes in climate extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment. In: Field CB, Barros V, Stocker TF, Qin D, Dokken DJ, Ebi KL, Mastrandrea MD, Mach KJ, Plattner G-K, Allen SK, Tignor M, Midgley PM (eds) Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 109–230, A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sheffield J, Wood EF (2008) Global trends and variability in soil moisture and drought characteristics, 1950–2000, from observation-driven simulations of the terrestrial hydrologic cycle. J Clim 21(3):432–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sheffield J, Wood EF, Roderick ML (2012) Little change in global drought over the past 60 years. Nature 491:435–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Alley RB, Berntsen T, Bindoff NL, Chen Z, Chidthaisong A, Gregory JM, Hegerl GC, Heimann M, Hewitson B, Hoskins BJ, Joos F, Jouzel J, Kattsov V, Lohmann U, Matsuno T, Molina M, Nicholls N, Overpeck J, Raga G, Ramaswamy V, Ren J, Rusticucci M, Somerville R, Stocker TF, Whetton P, Wood RA, Wratt D (2007) Technical summary. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Villarini G, Vecchi G (2013) Projected increases in North Atlantic tropical cyclone intensity from CMIP5 Models. J Climate 26:3231–3240Google Scholar
  15. Webster PJ, Holland GJ, Curry JA, Chang H-R (2005) Changes in tropical cyclone number, duration, and intensity in a warming environment. Science 309:1844–1846CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Geography and Environmental ScienceMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Institute for Atmospheric and Climate ScienceETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations