Climatic Change

, Volume 128, Issue 3–4, pp 261–277 | Cite as

Direct and indirect impacts of climate and socio-economic change in Europe: a sensitivity analysis for key land- and water-based sectors

  • A. S. Kebede
  • R. Dunford
  • M. Mokrech
  • E. Audsley
  • P. A. Harrison
  • I. P. Holman
  • R. J. Nicholls
  • S. Rickebusch
  • M. D. A. Rounsevell
  • S. Sabaté
  • F. Sallaba
  • A. Sanchez
  • C. Savin
  • M. Trnka
  • F. Wimmer
Article

Abstract

Integrated cross-sectoral impact assessments facilitate a comprehensive understanding of interdependencies and potential synergies, conflicts, and trade-offs between sectors under changing conditions. This paper presents a sensitivity analysis of a European integrated assessment model, the CLIMSAVE integrated assessment platform (IAP). The IAP incorporates important cross-sectoral linkages between six key European land- and water-based sectors: agriculture, biodiversity, flooding, forests, urban, and water. Using the IAP, we investigate the direct and indirect implications of a wide range of climatic and socio-economic drivers to identify: (1) those sectors and regions most sensitive to future changes, (2) the mechanisms and directions of sensitivity (direct/indirect and positive/negative), (3) the form and magnitudes of sensitivity (linear/non-linear and strong/weak/insignificant), and (4) the relative importance of the key drivers across sectors and regions. The results are complex. Most sectors are either directly or indirectly sensitive to a large number of drivers (more than 18 out of 24 drivers considered). Over twelve of these drivers have indirect impacts on biodiversity, forests, land use diversity, and water, while only four drivers have indirect effects on flooding. In contrast, for the urban sector all the drivers are direct. Moreover, most of the driver–indicator relationships are non-linear, and hence there is the potential for ‘surprises’. This highlights the importance of considering cross-sectoral interactions in future impact assessments. Such systematic analysis provides improved information for decision-makers to formulate appropriate adaptation policies to maximise benefits and minimise unintended consequences.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Commission Seventh Framework Programme under Grant Agreement No. 244031 (The CLIMSAVE Project; Climate change integrated assessment methodology for cross-sectoral adaptation and vulnerability in Europe; www.climsave.eu). CLIMSAVE is an endorsed project of the Global Land Project of the IGBP. MT was in addition supported through project: ‘Building Up a Multidisciplinary Scientific Team Focussed on Drought’, no. CZ.1.07/2.3.00/20.0248.

Supplementary material

10584_2014_1313_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (919 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 918 kb)

References

  1. Audsley E, Pearn KR, Simota C et al (2006) What can scenario modelling tell us about future European scale agricultural land use, and what not? Environ Sci Pol 9:148–162Google Scholar
  2. Audsley E, Trnka M, Sabaté S et al (2014) Interactively modelling land profitability to estimate European agricultural and forest land use under future scenarios of climate, socio-economics and adaptation. Climatic Change. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1164-6
  3. Aydinalp C, Cresser MS (2008) The effects of global climate change on agriculture. Am Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci 3(5):672–676Google Scholar
  4. Bates BC, Kundzewicz ZW, Wu S, Palutikof JP (eds) (2008) Climate Change and Water. Technical Paper of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. IPCC Secretariat, Geneva, 210 ppGoogle Scholar
  5. Berry PM, Rounsevell MDA, Harrison PA, Audsley E (2006) Assessing the vulnerability of agricultural land use and species climate change and the role of policy in facilitating adaptation. Environ Sci Pol 9(2):189–204Google Scholar
  6. Berry PM, Brown S, Chen M et al. (2014) Cross-sectoral interactions of adaptation and mitigation measures. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1214-0
  7. Brown AM (2001) A step-by-step guide to non-linear regression analysis of experimental data using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Comput Methods Prog Biomed 65:191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown C, Brown E, Murray-Rust D et al (2014) Analysing uncertainties in climate change impact assessment across sectors and scenarios. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1133-0
  9. Carter TR, Jones RN, Lu X et al (2007) New assessment methods and the characterisation of future conditions. In: Parry ML et al (eds) Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 133–171Google Scholar
  10. Ciais P, Reichstein M, Viovy N et al (2005) Europe-wide reduction in primary productivity caused by the heat and drought in 2003. Nature 437:529–533Google Scholar
  11. Dubrovsky M, Trnka M, Holman IP et al (2014) Developing a reduced-form ensemble of climate change scenarios for Europe and its application to selected impact indicators. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1297-7
  12. Dunford R, Harrison PA, Rounsevell MDA (2014) Exploring scenario and model uncertainty in cross-sectoral integrated assessment approaches to climate change impacts. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1211-3 Google Scholar
  13. EEA (2007) Climate change and water adaptation issues. European Environment Agency, EEA Technical Report, No. 2/2007, 110ppGoogle Scholar
  14. Frieler K and the ISI-MIP Team (2013) Accounting for cross-sectoral linkages of climate change impacts based on multi-model projections. Geophysical Research Abstracts, EGU General Assembly 2013, 15:EGU2013–12601Google Scholar
  15. Green RE, Harley M, Miles L et al (eds.) (2003) Global climate change and biodiversity. Summary of papers and discussion, Norwich, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. Harremoes P, Turner RK (2001) Methods for integrated assessment. Reg Environ Chang 2:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harrison PA, Holman IP, Cojocaru G et al (2013) Combining qualitative and quantitative understanding for exploring cross-sectoral climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability in Europe. Reg Environ Chang 13:761–780Google Scholar
  18. Harrison PA, Holman IP, Berry PM (2014a) Assessing cross-sectoral climate change impacts, vulnerability and adaptation: An Introduction to the CLIMSAVE project. Climatic Change (Editorial)Google Scholar
  19. Harrison PA, Dunford R, Savin C et al (2014b) Cross-sectoral impacts of climate change and socio-economic change for multiple, European land- and water-based sectors. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1239-4
  20. Hinkel J, Nicholls RJ, Vafeidis AT et al (2010) Assessing risk of and adaptation to sea-level rise in the European Union: an application of DIVA. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 15:703–719Google Scholar
  21. Hinkel J, Lincke D, Vafeidis AT et al (2013) Coastal flood damage and adaptation costs under 21st century sea-level rise. PNAS 111(9):3292–3297Google Scholar
  22. Holman IP, Harrison PA (eds.) (2012) Report describing the development and validation of the sectoral meta-models for integration into the IA Platform. CLIMSAVE Deliverable D2.2. http://www.climsave.eu/climsave/doc/Report_on_the_Meta-models.pdf. Accessed 09 Feb 2013
  23. Holman IP, Rounsevell MDA, Shackley S et al (2005) A regional, multi-sectoral and integrated assessment of the impacts of climate and socio-economic change in the UK, Part I: Methodology. Clim Chang 71:9–41Google Scholar
  24. Holman IP, Rounsevell MDA, Berry PM, Nicholls RJ (2008a) Development and application of participatory integrated assessment software to support local/regional impact and adaptation assessment. Clim Chang 90:1–4Google Scholar
  25. Holman IP, Rounsevell MDA, Cojacaru G et al (2008b) The concepts and development of a participatory regional integrated assessment tool. Clim Chang 90(1–2):5–30Google Scholar
  26. Kenny GJ, Ye W, Flux T, Warrick RA (2001) Climate variations and New Zealand agriculture: The CLIMPACTS system and issues of spatial and temporal scale. Environ Int 27(2–3):189–195Google Scholar
  27. Kok K, Bärlund I, Flörke M et al (2014) European participatory scenario development: strengthening the link between stories and models. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1143-y
  28. Lasdon LS, Waren AD, Jain A, Ratner M (1978) Design and testing of a generalised reduced gradient code for non-linear programming. ACM Trans. Math Softw 4:34–50Google Scholar
  29. Lindner M, Maroschek M, Netherer S et al (2008) Climate change impacts, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability of European forest ecosystems. For Ecol Manag 259(4):698–709Google Scholar
  30. Ludwig F, van Vliet MTH, Biemans H (2013) Climate change impacts on the water-food-energy nexus. IMAPCTS WORLD 2013, International Conference on Climate Change Effects, May 27–30, Potsdam, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  31. 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 Modelling, pp.339–361Google Scholar
  32. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Island PRESS, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  33. Mokrech M, Nicholls RJ, Richards JA et al (2008) Regional impact assessment of flooding under future climate and socio-economic scenarios for East Anglia and North West England. Clim Chang 90:31–55Google Scholar
  34. Mokrech M, Kebede AS, Nicholls RJ et al (2014) An integrated approach for assessing flood impacts due to future climate and socio-economic conditions and the scope of adaptation in Europe. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1298-6
  35. Moss RH, Edmonds JA, Hibbard KA et al (2010) The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463:747–756Google Scholar
  36. Nelson GC, Janetos A, Bennet E (2005) Drivers of change in ecosystem condition and services. In: Carpenter SR et al (eds) Scenarios Assessment of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press, London, UK, pp 173–222Google Scholar
  37. Nicholls RJ, Kebede AS (2012) Indirect impacts of coastal climate change and sea-level rise: the UK example. Clim Pol 12:S28–S52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ratto M, Castelletti A, Pagano A (2012) Emulation techniques for the reduction and sensitivity analysis of complex environmental models. Environ Model Softw 34:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Saltelli A, Chan K, Scott M (eds) (2000) Sensitivity Analysis. Probability and Statistics Series. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Toth FL, Bruckner T, Füssel H-M et al (2003) Integrated assessment of long-term climate policies. Part 1. Model presentation. Clim Chang 56:37–56Google Scholar
  41. Wimmer F, Audsley E, Malsy M et al. (2014) Modelling the effects of cross-sectoral water allocation schemes in Europe. Clim Chang. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1161-9

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. S. Kebede
    • 1
  • R. Dunford
    • 2
  • M. Mokrech
    • 3
  • E. Audsley
    • 4
  • P. A. Harrison
    • 2
  • I. P. Holman
    • 4
  • R. J. Nicholls
    • 1
  • S. Rickebusch
    • 5
    • 6
  • M. D. A. Rounsevell
    • 6
  • S. Sabaté
    • 7
    • 8
  • F. Sallaba
    • 9
  • A. Sanchez
    • 7
  • C. Savin
    • 10
  • M. Trnka
    • 11
    • 12
  • F. Wimmer
    • 13
  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and the Environment, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change ResearchUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  2. 2.Environmental Change InstituteUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  3. 3.School of Science and Computer EngineeringUniversity of Houston-Clear LakeHoustonUSA
  4. 4.Cranfield Water Sciences InstituteCranfield UniversityCranfield, BedfordUK
  5. 5.Environmental Systems Analysis GroupWageningen UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands
  6. 6.School of GeoSciencesUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  7. 7.Centre for Ecological Research and Forestry Applications (CREAF)Universitat autonoma de BarcelonaBellaterraSpain
  8. 8.Ecology DepartmentUniversity of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  9. 9.Department of Physical Geography and Ecosystem ScienceLund UniversityLundSweden
  10. 10.TIAMASG FoundationBucharestRomania
  11. 11.Institute of Agrosystems and BioclimatologyMendel University in BrnoBrnoCzech Republic
  12. 12.Global Change Research Centre AS CR v.v.iBrnoCzech Republic
  13. 13.Center for Environmental Systems ResearchUniversity of KasselKasselGermany

Personalised recommendations