3.7. Representing Interactions in Scenarios and Ensuring Consistency
3.7.1. Introduction
There is great diversity in the scenarios adopted in impact assessments. This
diversity is valuable in providing alternative views of the future, although
it can hamper attempts to summarize and interpret likely impacts by introducing
inconsistencies within or between studies. Moreover, there are certain key dependencies
in climate change science that have resulted in time lags and inconsistencies
in the application of scientific results between different research areas. This
has been reflected in the IPCC process (see Table 3-6).
Thus, although TAR WGI reviews recent projections of future
climate, these results are not yet available to the impacts community to prepare
and publish their analyses, on which the TAR WGII assessment is based. Instead,
most impact studies have relied on earlier, more rudimentary climate projections.
Similarly, the simplified assumptions used in climate model simulations about
changes in radiative forcing of the climate from changing GHG and aerosol concentrations
represent only a limited subset of plausible atmospheric conditions under a
range of emissions scenarios reviewed by TAR WGIII.
Creation of comprehensive scenarios that encompass the full complexity of global
change processes and their interactions (including feedbacks and synergies)
represents a formidable scientific challenge. This section addresses some components
of this complexity. First it treats generally accepted biogeochemical processes;
second, it addresses emerging climate-system processes; and third, it reviews
rarely considered interactions between anthropogenic and natural driving forces.
Finally, the importance of comprehensiveness and compatibility in scenario development
is discussed.
3.7.2. Representing Processes and Interactions in Scenarios
3.7.2.1. Generally Considered Interactions
Emissions of greenhouse gases have increased their atmospheric concentrations,
which alter the radiative properties of the atmosphere and can change the climate
(see TAR WGI Chapters 3-8).
Determination of atmospheric concentrations from emissions is not straightforward;
it involves the use of models that represent biogeochemical cycles and chemical
processes in the atmosphere (Harvey et al., 1997; TAR
WGI Chapters 3-5). Several
atmosphere-ocean interactions are considered in defining the future transient
response of the climate system (Sarmiento et al., 1998; TAR
WGI Chapter 8). For the purposes of scenario development,
CO2 occupies a special role, as a greenhouse gas (IPCC, 1996a) and
by directly affecting carbon fluxes through CO2 fertilization and
enhanced water-use efficiency (see Section 3.4.2).
These direct responses are well known from experimentation (Kirschbaum et
al., 1996). Biospheric carbon storage is further strongly influenced by
climate, land use, and the transient response of vegetation. All of these interactions
define the final CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere and subsequent
levels of climate change (see Table 3-7).
The early simple climate models that were used in the IPCC's First and
Second Assessment Reports all emphasized the importance of CO2 fertilization
but few other biogeochemical interactions (Harvey et al., 1997). Inclusion
of more realistic responses of the carbon cycle in climate scenarios still is
an evolving research area (Walker et al., 1999), but most interactions
now are adequately represented.
3.7.2.2. Less Considered Interactions
Interactions between land, vegetation, and the atmosphere have been studied
extensively in deforestation and desertification model experiments (Charney
et al., 1977; Bonan et al., 1992; Zhang et al., 1996; Hahmann
and Dickinson, 1997). Changes in surface characteristics such as snow/ice and
surface albedo and surface roughness length modify energy, water, and gas fluxes
and affect atmospheric dynamics. These interactions occur at various scales
(Hayden, 1998), but although their importance is well appreciated (Eltahir and
Gong, 1996; Manzi and Planton, 1996; Lean and Rowntree, 1997; Zeng, 1998) they
still generally are ignored in scenario development.
Climate modeling studies (e.g., Henderson-Sellers et al., 1995; Thompson
and Pollard, 1995; Sellers et al., 1996) suggest an additional warming
of about 0.5°C after deforestation on top of the radiative effects of GHG,
but these effects are not necessarily additive on regional scales. Betts et
al. (1997) concur that vegetation feedbacks can be significant for climate
on regional scales. More recent studies, however, tend to predict smaller changes,
partly as a result of the inclusion of more interactions such as the cloud radiative
feedback. Field experiments show large changes in surface hydrology and micrometeorological
conditions at deforested sites (Gash et al., 1996). On the other hand,
observations have not provided direct evidence of changes in overall climate
in the Amazon basin (Chu et al., 1994) or in Sahel surface albedo
(Nicholson et al., 1998), but the available data series are too short
to be conclusive.
Table 3-8: Summary of scenarios adopted in an assessment
of global impacts on five sectors (Parry and Livermore, 1999). |
|
Scenario Type (up to 2100) |
Ecosystemsa
|
Water Resourcesb
|
Food Securityc
|
Coastal Floodingd
|
Malaria
Riske
|
|
Socioeconomic/technological |
|
|
|
|
|
- Population |
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
- GDP |
|
|
X |
X |
|
- GDP per capita |
|
|
X |
X |
|
- Water use |
|
X |
|
|
|
- Trade liberalization |
|
|
X |
|
|
- Yield technology |
|
|
X |
|
|
- Flood protection |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land-cover/land-use change |
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
|
|
|
|
- CO2
concentration |
X |
|
X |
|
|
- Nitrogen deposition |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Climate |
|
|
|
|
|
- Temperature |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
- Precipitation |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
- Humidity |
X |
X |
|
|
|
- Cloud cover/radiation |
X |
X |
|
|
|
- Windspeed |
|
X |
|
|
|
- Diurnal temperature range |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sea level |
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
Palaeoclimatic reconstructions, using empirical data and model results, provide
better opportunities to study vegetation-atmosphere interactions. Climate models
that incorporate dynamic vegetation responses simulate larger vegetation shifts
for changed past climates than expected by the orbitally forced climate effect
alone. For example, an additional 200-300 km poleward displacement of forests
simulated for 6,000 ky BP in North America was triggered by changes in surface
albedo (Kutzbach et al., 1996; Texier et al., 1997; Ganopolski
et al., 1998). However, these shifts are not observed in all model experiments
(e.g., Broström et al., 1998). Other modeling results suggest that
oceans also play a prominent role (Hewitt and Mitchell, 1998). Thus, vegetation-ocean-climate
interaction seems to be important in defining regional climate change responses.
Most vegetation models used in scenario development are equilibrium models
(i.e., for a given climate they predict a fixed vegetation distribution). The
latest dynamic vegetation models attempt to include plant physiology, biogeochemistry,
and land surface hydrology (e.g., Goudriaan et al., 1999), and some explicitly
treat vegetation structure and succession. Foley et al. (1998) coupled
one such model to a GCM and found that the most climatically sensitive zones
were the desert/grassland and forest/tundra ecotones. These zones also tend
to be exposed to large disturbances and natural climate variability (Schimel
et al., 1997b). In another model experiment, Zeng and Neelin (1999) found
that interannual and inter-decadal climate variability helps to keep the African
savannah region from getting either too dry or too wet, through nonlinear vegetation-atmosphere
interactions. Few of these models contain simulations of disturbances, such
as fire regimes (Crutzen and Goldammer, 1993; Kasischke and Stocks, 2000), which
rapidly alter vegetation patterns and influence vegetation responses. Unfortunately,
hardly any of these insights are included routinely in scenario development.
|