Use of Representative Climate Futures in impact and adaptation assessment

Abstract

A key challenge for climate projection science is to serve the rapidly growing needs of impact and adaptation assessments (hereafter risk assessments) in an environment where there are substantial differences in the regional projections of climate models, an expanding number of potentially relevant climate model results, and a desire amongst many users to limit the number of future climate scenarios in their assessments. While it may be attractive to select a small number of climate models based on their ability to replicate current climate, there is no robust method for doing this. We outline and illustrate a method that addresses this challenge in a different way. The range of plausible future climates simulated by climate models is classified into a small set of Representative Climate Futures (RCFs) and the relative likelihood of these estimated. For each region, the RCFs are then used as a framework in which to classify more detailed information, such as available climate model and downscaled data sets. Researchers wishing to apply the RCFs in risk assessments can then choose to use a subset of RCFs, such as the “most likely”, “high risk” and “least change” cases for their impact system. Preparation and analysis of future climate data sets can therefore be confined to those models whose simulations best represent the selected RCFs. This significantly reduces the number of models involved, and potentially the effort required to undertake the risk assessment. Consistently applied within a region, RCFs, rather than individual climate models, can become the boundary objects which anchor discussion between the climate science and risk assessment communities, simplifying communication. Since the RCF descriptions need not change as new climate model results emerge, they can also provide a stable framework for assimilating risk assessments undertaken at different times with different sets of climate models. Systematic application of this approach requires various challenges to be addressed, such as robustly classifying future regional climates into a small set and estimating likelihoods.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. AGO (2006) Climate change impacts & risk management a guide for business and government. Australian Greenhouse Office in the Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barron E (2009) Editorial: beyond climate science. Science 326(5953):643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Clarke J, Heady C (2010) Temperature and dry-days projections for 2030 for the shires of Dubbo, Gunnedah and Liverpool Plains, NSW. A report prepared for Marsden Jacobs Associates. Tech rep, CSIRO Marine and Atmopsheric Research, Aspendale, Victoria

  4. Clarke J, Whetton P, Hennessy K (2011) Providing application-specific climate projections datasets: CSIROs climate futures framework. In: Proceedings of MODSIM, international congress on modelling and simulation, modelling and simulation society of Australia and New Zealand, 12–16 December 2011, Perth, Australia

  5. Dessai S, Hulme M, Lempert R, Pielke RJ (2009) Climate prediction: a limit to adaptation? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 64–78

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hennessy K, Clarke J, Whetton P, Kent D (2012) Internally consistent projections for Victoria. CAWCR Technical Report, 10 p. http://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/resources.php. Accessed 11 May 2012

  7. Hulme M, Dessai S (2008) Negotiating future climates for public policy: a critical assessment of the development of climate scenarios for the UK. Environ Sci Policy 11(1):54–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. KNMI (2009) Climate change in the Netherlands: supplements to the KNMI 06 scenarios. Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, Ministry of Transport, Public Works, and Water Management

  9. Knutti R, Furrer R, Tebaldi C, Cermak J, Meehl GA (2010) Challenges in combining projections from multiple climate models. J Climate 23(10):2739–2758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lucas C, Hennessy K, Bathols J (2007) Bushfire weather in Southeast Australia recent trends and projected climate change impacts. Bushfire CRC, Melbourne, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mastrandrea M, Field C, Stocker T, Edenhofer O, Ebi K, Frame D, Held H, Kriegler E, Mach K, Matschoss P, Plattner GK, Yohe G, Zwiers F (2010) Guidance note for lead authors of the IPCC fifth assessment report on consistent treatment of uncertainties. IPCC, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  12. McInnes K, Abbs D, O’Farrell S, Macadam I, O’Grady J, Ranasinghe R (2007) Projected changes in climatological forcing conditions for coastal erosion in NSW. Tech rep, CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Department of Environment and Climate Change

  13. McMichael A, Woodruff R, Whetton P, Hennessy K, Nicholls N, Hales S, Woodward A, Kjellstrom T (2003) Human health and climate change in oceania: a risk assessment 2002. Tech rep, Department of Health and Ageing, Canberra, Australia

  14. Mearns LO (2010) The drama of uncertainty. Clim Change 100(1):77–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Meehl G, Covey C, Delworth T, Latif M, McAvaney B, Mitchell J, Stouffer R, Taylor K (2007) The WCRP CMIP3 multimodel dataset—a new era in climate change research. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 88(9):1383–1394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mitchell TD (2003) Pattern scaling: an examination of the accuracy of the technique for describing future climates. Clim Change 60(3):217–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Morton F (1983) Operational estimates of areal evapo-transpiration and their significance to the science and practice of hydrology. J Hydrol 66(1–4):1–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Murdock T, Spittlehouse D (2011) Selecting and using climate change scenarios for british columbia. Tech rep, Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC

  19. Parry M, Canziani O, Palutikof J, van der Linden P, Hanson C (2007) Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  20. Pitman A, Perkins S (2008) Regional projections of future seasonal and annual changes in rainfall and temperature over australia based on skill-selected AR(4) models. Earth Interact 12:1–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ricketts J, Hennessy K (2009) Climate change in southern South Australia and western Victoria. CSIRO technical report for Maunsel/AECOM, Aspendale, Australia. Available at http://www.climatechangeinaustralia.gov.au/resources.php. Accessed 11 May 2012

  22. Ruosteenoja K, Carter T, Jylh K, Tuomenvirt H (2003) Future climate in world regions: an intercomparison of model-based projections for the new ipcc emissions scenarios. Tech rep, The Finnish Environment 644, Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki

  23. Schoemaker P (1995) Scenario planning: a tool for strategic thinking. In: Sloan management review winter: 1995, pp 25–40

  24. Smith I, Chandler E (2010) Refining rainfall projections for the Murray Darling Basin of south-east Australia—the effect of sampling model results based on performance. Clim Change 102(3–4):377–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Taylor K, Stouffer R, Meehl G (2011) A summary of the CMIP5 experiment design. PCMDI design document, PCMDI

  26. van den Hurk B, Tank A, Lenderink G, van Ulden A, van Oldenborgh G, Katsman C, van den Brink H, Keller F, Bessembinder J, Burgers G, Komen G, Hazeleger W, Drijfhout S (2006) KNMI climate change scenarios 2006 for the Netherlands. Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, Ministry of Transport, Public Works, and Water Management

  27. van Vuuren D, Edmonds J, Kainuma M, Riahi K, Thomson A, Hibbard K, Hurtt G, Kram T, Krey V, Lamarque JF, Masui T, Meinshausen M, Nakicenovic N, Smith S, Rose S (2011) The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim Change 109(1):5–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Watterson I (2012) Understanding and partioning future climates for Australian regions from CMIP3 using ocean warming indices. Clim Change 111:903–922

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Webb LB, Whetton PH, Barlow EWR (2008) Climate change and winegrape quality in Australia. Clim Res 36(2):99–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wilby R, Troni J, Biot Y, Tedd L, Hewitson B, Smith D, Sutton R (2009) A review of climate risk information for adaptation and development planning. Int J Climatol 29(9):1193–1215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wilkinson A, Eidinow E (2008) Evolving practices in environmental scenarios: a new scenario typology. Environ Res Lett 3(4):045017

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is an activity of the CSIRO Climate Adaptation National Research Flagship. We thank Mark Stafford Smith, Leanne Webb, Jonas Bhend and the reviewers for valuable assistance, and we also acknowledge the modelling groups, the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI) and the WCRP’s Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) for their roles in making available the WCRP CMIP3 multi-model dataset.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Penny Whetton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Whetton, P., Hennessy, K., Clarke, J. et al. Use of Representative Climate Futures in impact and adaptation assessment. Climatic Change 115, 433–442 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0471-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Future Climate
  • Global Climate Model
  • Adaptation Planning
  • Climate Scientist
  • Relative Likelihood