Theoretical and Applied Climatology

, Volume 132, Issue 1–2, pp 153–166 | Cite as

Precipitation projections under GCMs perspective and Turkish Water Foundation (TWF) statistical downscaling model procedures

  • İsmail Dabanlı
  • Zekai Şen
Original Paper


The statistical climate downscaling model by the Turkish Water Foundation (TWF) is further developed and applied to a set of monthly precipitation records. The model is structured by two phases as spatial (regional) and temporal downscaling of global circulation model (GCM) scenarios. The TWF model takes into consideration the regional dependence function (RDF) for spatial structure and Markov whitening process (MWP) for temporal characteristics of the records to set projections. The impact of climate change on monthly precipitations is studied by downscaling Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change-Special Report on Emission Scenarios (IPCC-SRES) A2 and B2 emission scenarios from Max Plank Institute (EH40PYC) and Hadley Center (HadCM3). The main purposes are to explain the TWF statistical climate downscaling model procedures and to expose the validation tests, which are rewarded in same specifications as “very good” for all stations except one (Suhut) station in the Akarcay basin that is in the west central part of Turkey. Eventhough, the validation score is just a bit lower at the Suhut station, the results are “satisfactory.” It is, therefore, possible to say that the TWF model has reasonably acceptable skill for highly accurate estimation regarding standard deviation ratio (SDR), Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), and percent bias (PBIAS) criteria. Based on the validated model, precipitation predictions are generated from 2011 to 2100 by using 30-year reference observation period (1981–2010). Precipitation arithmetic average and standard deviation have less than 5% error for EH40PYC and HadCM3 SRES (A2 and B2) scenarios.



This study is supported by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) with grant number 1059B141501044. The corresponding author would like to thank TUBITAK for its support and Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmet ÖZTOPAL for valuable contributions in this study. Also, the authors wish to thank Turkish State Meteorological Service (TSMS) for the supply of long-term monthly mean climatic variables.


  1. Barnes SL (1964) A technique for maximizing details in numerical weather map analysis. J Appl Meteorol 3:396–409. doi: 10.1175/1520-0450(1964)003<0396:ATFMDI>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Charles SP, Bates BC, Smith IN, Hughes JP (2004) Statistical downscaling of daily precipitation from observed and modelled atmospheric fields. Hydrol Process 18:1373–1394. doi: 10.1002/hyp.1418 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen H, Xu C-Y, Guo S (2012) Comparison and evaluation of multiple GCMs, statistical downscaling and hydrological models in the study of climate change impacts on runoff. J Hydrol 434-435:36–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.02.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ghosh S, Mujumdar PP (2008) Statistical downscaling of GCM simulations to streamflow using relevance vector machine. Adv Water Resour 31(1):132–146. doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2007.07.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gilchrist B, Cressman GP (1954) An experiment in objective analysis. Tellus 6:309–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. He X, Chaney NW, Schleiss M, Sheffield J (2016) Spatial downscaling of precipitation using adaptable random forests. Water Resour Res 52:8217–8237. doi: 10.1002/2016WR019034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hewitson BC, Crane RG (1996) Climate downscaling: techniques and application. Clim Res 7:85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huang J, Chen X, Xue Y et al (2017) Changing characteristics of wet/dry spells during 1961–2008 in Sichuan province, southwest China. Theor Appl Climatol 127:129. doi: 10.1007/s00704-015-1621-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hughes JP, Guttorp P, Charles SP (1999) A non-homogeneous hidden Markov model for precipitation occurrence. Appl Stat 48(1):15–30. doi: 10.1111/1467-9876.00136 Google Scholar
  10. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 996 ppGoogle Scholar
  11. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1132 ppGoogle Scholar
  12. Kerr GH, DeGaetano AT, Stoof CR et al (2016) Climate change effects on wildland fire risk in the northeastern and Great Lakes states predicted by a downscaled multi-model ensemble. Theor Appl Climatol. doi: 10.1007/s00704-016-1994-4 Google Scholar
  13. Laflamme EM, Linder E, Pan Y (2015) Statistical downscaling of regional climate model output to achieve projections of precipitation extremes. Weather and Climate Extremes:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.wace.2015.12.001
  14. Mandelbrot BB (1971) A fast-fractional Gaussian noise generator. Water Resour Res 7(3):543–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mehrotra R, Sharma A (2005) A nonparametric nonhomogeneous hidden Markov model for downscaling of multi-site daily rainfall occurrences. J Geophys Res 110:D16108. doi: 10.1029/2004JD005677 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mehrotra R, Sharma A, Kumar DN, Reshmidevi TV (2013) Assessing future rainfall projections using multiple GCMS and a multi-site stochastic downscaling model. J Hydrol 488:84–100. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.02.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mishra AK, Singh VP (2009) Analysis of drought severity-area-frequency curves using a general circulation model and scenario uncertainty. Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres 114(6):1–18. doi: 10.1029/2008JD010986 Google Scholar
  18. Moriasi DN et al (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans ASABE 50:885–900. doi: 10.13031/2013.23153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Muchuru S, Landman WA, Dewitt DG (2015) Prediction of inflows into Lake Kariba using a combination of physical and empirical models. Int J Climatol 2581(October 2015):2570–2581. doi: 10.1002/joc.4513 Google Scholar
  20. Nakicenovic N, Alcamo J, Davis G et al (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios: a special report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 599 pp. Available online at: Google Scholar
  21. Nash JE, Sutcliffe JV (1970) River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I—a discussion of principles. J Hydrol 10(3):282–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pegram G, Bárdossy A (2013) Downscaling regional circulation model rainfall to gauge sites using recorrelation and circulation pattern dependent quantile-quantile transforms for quantifying climate change. J Hydrol 504:142–159. doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.09.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Piras M, Mascaro G, Deidda R, Vivoni ER (2016) Impacts of climate change on precipitation and discharge extremes through the use of statistical downscaling approaches in a Mediterranean basin. Sci Total Environ 543:952–964. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.06.088 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rashid MM, Beecham S, Chowdhury RK (2016) Statistical downscaling of rainfall: a non-stationary and multi-resolution approach. Theor Appl Climatol 124(3–4):919–933. doi: 10.1007/s00704-015-1465-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sarr MA, Seidou O, Tramblay Y, El Adlouni S (2015) Comparison of downscaling methods for mean and extreme precipitation in Senegal. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies 4:369–385. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrh.2015.06.005 Google Scholar
  26. Semenov MA, Barrow EM (2002) LARS-WG: a stochastic weather generator for use in climate impact studies, version 3.0, user manual. Rothamsted Research, HarpendenGoogle Scholar
  27. Şen Z (1974) Small sample properties of the stationary stochastic processes and the Hurst phenomenon in hydrology. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Imperial College of Science and Technology, University of London, p 252Google Scholar
  28. Şen Z (2009a) Spatial modeling principles in earth sciences. Springer, Dordrecht 351 ppGoogle Scholar
  29. Şen Z (2009b) Precipitation downscaling in climate modeling using a spatial dependence function. Int J Glob Warm 1(1–3):29–42Google Scholar
  30. Şen Z (2010) Critical assessment of downscaling procedures in climate change impact models. The International Journal of Ocean and Climate Systems 1(2):85–98 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Şen Z (2012) A statistical downscaling model with applications in northwestern Turkey. Int J of Global Warming 4(1):31–5.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Şen Z, Habib Z (2000) Spatial precipitation assessment with elevation by using point cumulative semivariogram technique. Water Resour Manag 14(4):311–325. doi: 10.1023/A:1008191012044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Şen Z, Öztopal A (2001) Assessment of regional air pollution variability in Istanbul. Environmetrics 12(5):401–420. doi: 10.1002/env.462 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Şen Z, Uyumaz A, Öztopal A, Cebeci M, Küçükmehmetoğlu M, Erdik T, Sirdaş S, Şahin AD, Geymen A, Ceylan V, Oğuz S, Karsavran Y (2010) Final report on the impacts of climate change on Istanbul and Turkey water resources. ISKI Project, Istanbul, p 552Google Scholar
  35. Şen Z, Al Alsheikh A, Alamoud A, Al-Hamid AA, El-Sebaay AS, Abu-Risheh AW (2012) Quadrangle downscaling of global climate models and application to Riyadh. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering-Asce 138(10):918–923. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)IR.1943-4774.0000478 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sohn S-J, Tam C-Y (2015) Long-lead station-scale prediction of hydrological droughts in South Korea based on bivariate pattern-based downscaling. Clim Dyn 46(9):3305–3321. doi: 10.1007/s00382-015-2770-3 Google Scholar
  37. Stehlik J, Bárdossy A (2002) Multivariate stochastic downscaling model for generating daily precipitation series based on atmospheric circulation. J Hydrol 256:120. doi: 10.1016/j.protcy.2016.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thomas HA, Fiering MB (1962) Mathematical synthesis of streamflow sequences for the analysis of river basin by simulation. In: Maass A, Hufschmidt M, Dorfman R, Thomas HA Jr, Marglin SA, Fair GM (eds) Design of water resource systems. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Torres RR, Marengo JA (2013) Uncertainty assessments of climate change projections over South America. Theor Appl Climatol 112(1–2):253–272. doi: 10.1007/s00704-012-0718-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. TUBITAK (2013) Akarçay Havzası Koruma Eylem Planı Nihai Raporu, CTUE, (Turkish)Google Scholar
  41. Vrac M, Naveau P (2007) Stochastic downscaling of precipitation: from dry to heavy rainfalls. Water Resour Res 43:W07402. doi: 10.1029/2006WR005308 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vu MT, Aribarg T, Supratid S, Raghavan SV, Liong SY (2016) Statistical downscaling rainfall using artificial neural network: significantly wetter Bangkok? Theor Appl Climatol 126(3–4):453–467. doi: 10.1007/s00704-015-1580-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wilby RL, Wigley TML (1997) Downscaling general circulation model output: a review of methods and limitations. Prog Phys Geogr 21:530–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wilby RL, Dawson CW, Barrow EM (2002) SDSM—a decision support tool for the assessment of regional climate change impacts. Environ Mod & Software 17:147–159Google Scholar
  45. Yuan Z, Yang Z, Yan D et al (2017) Historical changes and future projection of extreme precipitation in China. Theor Appl Climatol 127:393. doi: 10.1007/s00704-015-1643-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Öztopal A (2006) Artificial neural network approach to spatial estimation of wind velocity data. Energy Convers Manag 47(4):395–406. doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2005.05.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Civil Engineering Faculty, Department of Civil EngineeringIstanbul Technical UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Glenn Department of Civil EngineeringClemson UniversityClemsonUSA

Personalised recommendations