Insuring future climate catastrophes

The combined influences of a change in climate patterns and the increased concentration of property and economic activity in hazard-prone areas has the potential of restricting the availability and affordability of insurance. This paper evaluates the premiums that private insurers are likely to charge and their ability to cover residential losses against hurricane risk in Florida as a function of (a) recent projections on future hurricane activity in 2020 and 2040; (b) insurance market conditions (i.e., soft or hard market); (c) the availability of reinsurance; and (d) the adoption of adaptation measures (i.e., implementation of physical risk reduction measures to reduce wind damage to the structure and buildings). We find that uncertainties in climate projections translate into a divergent picture for insurance in Florida. Under dynamic climate models, the total price of insurance for Florida (assuming constant exposure) could increase significantly by 2040, from $12.9 billion (in 1990) to $14.2 billion, under hard market conditions. Under lower bound projections, premiums could decline to $9.4 billion by 2040. Taking a broader range of climate change scenarios, including several statistical ones, prices could be between $4.7 and $32.1 billion by 2040. The upper end of this range suggests that insurance could be unaffordable for many people in Florida. The adoption of most recent building codes for all residences in the state could reduce by nearly half the expected price of insurance so that even under high climate change scenarios, insurance premiums would be lower than under the 1990 baseline climate scenario. Under a full adaptation scenario, if insurers can obtain reinsurance, they will be able to cover 100 % of the loss if they allocated 10 % of their surplus to cover a 100-year return hurricane, and 63 % and 55 % of losses from a 250-year hurricane in 2020 and 2040. Property-level adaptation and the maintenance of strong and competitive reinsurance markets will thus be essential to maintain the affordability and availability of insurance in the new era of catastrophe risk.     

Projecting long-term armed conflict risk: An underappreciated field of inquiry?

Little research has been done on projecting long-term conflict risks. Such projections are currently neither included in the development of socioeconomic scenarios or climate change impact assessments nor part of global agenda-setting policy processes. In contrast, in other fields of inquiry, long-term projections and scenario studies are established and relevant for both strategical agenda-setting and applied policies. Although making projections of armed conflict risk in response to climate change is surrounded by uncertainty, there are good reasons to further develop such scenario-based projections. In this perspective article we discuss why quantifying implications of climate change for future armed conflict risk is inherently uncertain, but necessary for shaping sustainable future policy agendas. We argue that both quantitative and qualitative projections can have a purpose in future climate change impact assessments and put out the challenges this poses for future research.     

Characterizing climate change risks by linking robust decision frameworks and uncertain probabilistic projections

There is increasing concern that avoiding climate change impacts will require proactive adaptation, particularly for infrastructure systems with long lifespans. However, one challenge in adaptation is the uncertainty surrounding climate change projections generated by general circulation models (GCMs). This uncertainty has been addressed in different ways. For example, some researchers use ensembles of GCMs to generate probabilistic climate change projections, but these projections can be highly sensitive to assumptions about model independence and weighting schemes. Because of these issues, others argue that robustness-based approaches to climate adaptation are more appropriate, since they do not rely on a precise probabilistic representation of uncertainty. In this research, we present a new approach for characterizing climate change risks that leverages robust decision frameworks and probabilistic GCM ensembles. The scenario discovery process is used to search across a multi-dimensional space and identify climate scenarios most associated with system failure, and a Bayesian statistical model informed by GCM projections is then developed to estimate the probability of those scenarios. This provides an important advancement in that it can incorporate decision-relevant climate variables beyond mean temperature and precipitation and account for uncertainty in probabilistic estimates in a straightforward way. We also suggest several advancements building on prior approaches to Bayesian modeling of climate change projections to make them more broadly applicable. We demonstrate the methodology using proposed water resources infrastructure in Lake Tana, Ethiopia, where GCM disagreement on changes in future rainfall presents a major challenge for infrastructure planning.     

Extending the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways for sub-national impacts,adaptation, and vulnerability studies

The exploration of alternative socioeconomic futures is an important aspect of understanding the potential consequences of climate change. While socioeconomic scenarios are common and, at times essential, tools for the impacts, adaptation and vulnerability and integrated assessment modeling research communities, their approaches to scenario development have historically been quite distinct. However, increasing convergence of impacts, adaptation and vulnerability and integrated assessment modeling research in terms of scales of analysis suggests there may be value in the development of a common framework for socioeconomic scenarios. The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways represents an opportunity for the development of such a common framework. However, the scales at which these global storylines have been developed are largely incommensurate with the sub-national scales at which impacts, adaptation and vulnerability and, increasingly, integrated assessment modeling studies are conducted. The objective of this study was to develop sub-national and sectoral extensions of the global SSP storylines in order to identify future socioeconomic challenges for adaptation for the U.S. Southeast. A set of nested qualitative socioeconomic storyline elements, integrated storylines, and accompanying quantitative indicators were developed through an application of the Factor–Actor–Sector framework. In addition to revealing challenges and opportunities associated with the use of the SSPs as a basis for more refined scenario development, this study generated sub-national storyline elements and storylines that can subsequently be used to explore the implications of alternative sub-national socioeconomic futures for the assessment of climate change impacts and adaptation.     

A proposal for a new scenario framework to support research and assessment in different climate research communities

In this paper, we propose a scenario framework that could provide a scenario “thread” through the different climate research communities (climate change – vulnerability, impact, and adaptation - and mitigation) in order to support assessment of mitigation and adaptation strategies and climate impacts. The scenario framework is organized around a matrix with two main axes: radiative forcing levels and socio-economic conditions. The radiative forcing levels (and the associated climate signal) are described by the new Representative Concentration Pathways. The second axis, socio-economic developments comprises elements that affect the capacity for mitigation and adaptation, as well as the exposure to climate impacts. The proposed scenarios derived from this framework are limited in number, allow for comparison across various mitigation and adaptation levels, address a range of vulnerability characteristics, provide information across climate forcing and vulnerability states and span a full century time scale. Assessments based on the proposed scenario framework would strengthen cooperation between integrated-assessment modelers, climate modelers and vulnerability, impact and adaptation researchers, and most importantly, facilitate the development of more consistent and comparable research within and across these research communities.     

A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared climate policy assumptions

The new scenario framework facilitates the coupling of multiple socioeconomic reference pathways with climate model products using the representative concentration pathways. This will allow for improved assessment of climate impacts, adaptation and mitigation. Assumptions about climate policy play a major role in linking socioeconomic futures with forcing and climate outcomes. The paper presents the concept of shared climate policy assumptions as an important element of the new scenario framework. Shared climate policy assumptions capture key policy attributes such as the goals, instruments and obstacles of mitigation and adaptation measures, and introduce an important additional dimension to the scenario matrix architecture. They can be used to improve the comparability of scenarios in the scenario matrix. Shared climate policy assumptions should be designed to be policy relevant, and as a set to be broad enough to allow a comprehensive exploration of the climate change scenario space.     

Robust estimates of climate-induced hydrological change in a temperate mountainous region

A sustainable water resources management depends on sound information about the impacts of climate change. This information is, however, not easily derived because natural runoff variability interferes with the climate change signal. This study presents a procedure that leads to robust estimates of magnitude and Time Of Emergence (TOE) of climate-induced hydrological change that also account for the natural variability contained in the time series. Firstly, natural variability of 189 mesoscale catchments in Switzerland is sampled for 10 ENSEMBLES scenarios for the control (1984–2005) and two scenario periods (near future: 2025–2046, far future: 2074–2095) applying a bootstrap procedure. Then, the sampling distributions of mean monthly runoff are tested for significant differences with the Wilcoxon-Mann–Whitney test and for effect size with Cliff’s delta d. Finally, the TOE of a climate change induced hydrological change is determined when at least eight out of the ten hydrological projections significantly differ from natural variability. The results show that the TOE occurs in the near future period except for high-elevated catchments in late summer. The significant hydrological projections in the near future correspond, however, to only minor runoff changes. In the far future, hydrological change is statistically significant and runoff changes are substantial. Temperature change is the most important factor determining hydrological change in this mountainous region. Therefore, hydrological change depends strongly on a catchment’s mean elevation. Considering that the hydrological changes are predicted to be robust in the near future highlights the importance of accounting for these changes in water resources planning.     

On the role of climate scenarios for adaptation planning

Climate scenarios have been widely used in impact, vulnerability and adaptation assessments of climate change. However, few studies have actually looked at the role played by climate scenarios in adaptation planning. This paper examines how climate scenarios fit in three broad adaptation frameworks: the IPCC approach, risk approaches, and human development approaches. The use (or not) of climate scenarios in three real projects, corresponding to each adaptation approach, is investigated. It is shown that the role played by climate scenarios is dependant on the adaptation assessment approach, availability of technical and financial capacity to handle scenario information, and the type of adaptation being considered.     

Adaptation: Sensitivity to Natural Variability, Agent Assumptions and Dynamic Climate Changes

The role of adaptation in impact assessment and integrated assessment of climate policy is briefly reviewed. Agriculture in the US is taken as exemplary of this issue. Historic studies in which no adaptation is assumed (so-called "dumb farmer") versus farmer-agents blessed with perfect foresight (so-called "clairvoyant farmer") are contrasted, and considered limiting cases as compared to "realistic farmers." What kinds of decision rules such realistic farmer-agents would adopt to deal with climate change involves a range of issues. These include degrees of belief the climate is actually changing, knowledge about how it will change, foresight on how technology is changing, estimation of what will happen in competitive granaries and assumptions about what governmental policies will be in various regions and over time. Clearly, a transparent specification of such agent-based decision rules is essential to model adaptation explicitly in any impact assessment. Moreover, open recognition of the limited set of assumptions contained in any one study of adaptation demands that authors clearly note that each individual study can represent only a fraction of plausible outcomes. A set of calculations using the Erosion Productivity Impact Calculator (EPIC) crop model is offered here as an example of explicit decision rules on adaptive behavior on climate impacts. The model is driven by a 2xCO₂ regional climate model scenario (from which a "mock" transient scenario was devised) to calculate yield changes for farmer-agents that practice no adaptation, perfect adaptation and 20-year-lagged adaptation, the latter designed to mimic the masking effects of natural variability on farmers' capacity to see how climate is changing. The results reinforce the expectation that the likely effects of natural variability, which would mask a farmer's capacity to detect climate change, is to place the calculated impacts of climate changes in two regions of the US in between that of perfect and no adaptation. Finally, the use of so-called "hedonic" methods (in which land prices in different regions with different current average climates are used to derive implicitly farmers' adaptive responses to hypothesized future climate changes) is briefly reviewed. It is noted that this procedure in which space and time are substituted, amounts to "ergodic economics." Such cross-sectional analyses are static, and thus neglect the dynamics of both climate and societal evolution. Furthermore, such static methods usually consider only a single measure of change (local mean annual temperature), rather than higher moments like climatic variability, diurnal temperature range, etc. These implicit assumptions in ergodic economics make use of such cross-sectional studies limited for applications to integrated assessments of the actual dynamics of adaptive capacity. While all such methods are appropriate for sensitivity analyses and help to define a plausible range of outcomes, none is by itself likely to define the range of plausible adaptive capacities that might emerge in response to climate change scenarios.     

共享社会经济路径(SSPs)的应用与展望

共享社会经济路径(Shared Socioeconomic Pathways, SSPs)是新一代气候变化情景的重要组成部分。SSPs从提出至今已有10年的发展,对于推动气候变化预估与影响研究、支撑气候政策决策的作用逐渐凸显。文中基于179篇主题检索文献分析了SSPs发展和应用的进展,以及在当前气候变化研究中的应用特点。研究发现,次国家和部门层面的SSPs故事线拓展开始兴起,水资源、土地和健康是影响评估领域的关注焦点,方法学上强调模型间耦合与多模型比较。当前SSPs在中国的发展与应用集中于基本要素的预估及气候影响评估,路径对各省间及城乡间社会经济发展差异的刻画有待加强。基于情景发展和应用的现状,最后从加强与气候建模团队的合作、支持影响与脆弱性研究、拓展全球情景、加强模型间比较、提高决策支持力5个方面讨论了SSPs的未来研究展望。     

Climate science in climate security scenarios

The climate is changing and this will have consequences across the globe, affecting all areas of the natural and human environment in complex ways. One tool for exploring the complex relationship between climate change and security is to use a scenariobased approach as means to develop plausible rather than probable narratives. This approach can explore the range of uncertainty, and help policymakers to visualise the potential consequences of climate change. Scenario methodology has been most comprehensively developed for use in business planning and there are some differences in the way scenarios work for climate security. The most notable is the fact that there is a physical modelling basis for climate projections. This means that the uncertainty range associated with at least this one aspect of the scenario can be systematically sampled. This paper reviews how scenarios have been used in the climate security literature to date, in particular in the grey literature. The integration of climate projections is explored in detail, as the main distinguishing feature of climate security scenarios over other scenario types. Few climate security scenarios have been developed to date, but all those included in this review, regardless of the differences in national conditions, regional climate change and potential responses, came to very similar conclusions. This was despite differences in the changes in climate and non-climate drivers, or differences in the scenario approach and audience. A more systematic and scientific approach to developing the scenario drivers and narratives is recommended, and successfully embedding changes in climate within the socio-economic context, through better integration of inter-disciplinary expertise, is critical.     

The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy,land use,and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview

This paper presents the overview of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and their energy, land use, and emissions implications. The SSPs are part of a new scenario framework, established by the climate change research community in order to facilitate the integrated analysis of future climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation, and mitigation. The pathways were developed over the last years as a joint community effort and describe plausible major global developments that together would lead in the future to different challenges for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. The SSPs are based on five narratives describing alternative socio-economic developments, including sustainable development, regional rivalry, inequality, fossil-fueled development, and middle-of-the-road development. The long-term demographic and economic projections of the SSPs depict a wide uncertainty range consistent with the scenario literature. A multi-model approach was used for the elaboration of the energy, land-use and the emissions trajectories of SSP-based scenarios. The baseline scenarios lead to global energy consumption of 400–1200 EJ in 2100, and feature vastly different land-use dynamics, ranging from a possible reduction in cropland area up to a massive expansion by more than 700 million hectares by 2100. The associated annual CO₂ emissions of the baseline scenarios range from about 25 GtCO₂ to more than 120 GtCO₂ per year by 2100. With respect to mitigation, we find that associated costs strongly depend on three factors: (1) the policy assumptions, (2) the socio-economic narrative, and (3) the stringency of the target. The carbon price for reaching the target of 2.6 W/m² that is consistent with a temperature change limit of 2 °C, differs in our analysis thus by about a factor of three across the SSP marker scenarios. Moreover, many models could not reach this target from the SSPs with high mitigation challenges. While the SSPs were designed to represent different mitigation and adaptation challenges, the resulting narratives and quantifications span a wide range of different futures broadly representative of the current literature. This allows their subsequent use and development in new assessments and research projects. Critical next steps for the community scenario process will, among others, involve regional and sectoral extensions, further elaboration of the adaptation and impacts dimension, as well as employing the SSP scenarios with the new generation of earth system models as part of the 6th climate model intercomparison project (CMIP6).     

Assessing uncertainties in climate change impact analyses on the river flow regimes in the UK. Part 2: future climate

The first part of this paper demonstrated the existence of bias in GCM-derived precipitation series, downscaled using either a statistical technique (here the Statistical Downscaling Model) or dynamical method (here high resolution Regional Climate Model HadRM3) propagating to river flow estimated by a lumped hydrological model. This paper uses the same models and methods for a future time horizon (2080s) and analyses how significant these projected changes are compared to baseline natural variability in four British catchments. The UKCIP02 scenarios, which are widely used in the UK for climate change impact, are also considered. Results show that GCMs are the largest source of uncertainty in future flows. Uncertainties from downscaling techniques and emission scenarios are of similar magnitude, and generally smaller than GCM uncertainty. For catchments where hydrological modelling uncertainty is smaller than GCM variability for baseline flow, this uncertainty can be ignored for future projections, but might be significant otherwise. Predicted changes are not always significant compared to baseline variability, less than 50% of projections suggesting a significant change in monthly flow. Insignificant changes could occur due to climate variability alone and thus cannot be attributed to climate change, but are often ignored in climate change studies and could lead to misleading conclusions. Existing systematic bias in reproducing current climate does impact future projections and must, therefore, be considered when interpreting results. Changes in river flow variability, important for water management planning, can be easily assessed from simple resampling techniques applied to both baseline and future time horizons. Assessing future climate and its potential implication for river flows is a key challenge facing water resource planners. This two-part paper demonstrates that uncertainty due to hydrological and climate modelling must and can be accounted for to provide sound, scientifically-based advice to decision makers.     

Localized climate change scenarios of mean temperature and precipitation over Switzerland

There is a growing need of the climate change impact modeling and adaptation community to have more localized climate change scenario information available over complex topography such as in Switzerland. A gridded dataset of expected future climate change signals for seasonal averages of daily mean temperature and precipitation in Switzerland is presented. The basic scenarios are taken from the CH2011 initiative. In CH2011, a Bayesian framework was applied to obtain probabilistic scenarios for three regions within Switzerland. Here, the results for two additional Alpine sub-regions are presented. The regional estimates have then been downscaled onto a regular latitude-longitude grid with a resolution of 0.02° or roughly 2 km. The downscaling procedure is based on the spatial structure of the climate change signals as simulated by the underlying regional climate models and relies on a Kriging with external drift using height as auxiliary predictor. The considered emission scenarios are A1B, A2 and the mitigation scenario RCP3PD. The new dataset shows an expected warming of about 1 to 6 °C until the end of the 21st century, strongly depending on the scenario and the lead time. Owing to a large vertical gradient, the warming is about 1 °C stronger in the Alps than in the Swiss lowlands. In case of precipitation, the projection uncertainty is large and in most seasons precipitation can increase or decrease. In summer a distinct decrease of precipitation can be found, again strongly depending on the emission scenario.     

Integrating top–down and bottom–up approaches to design global change adaptation at the river basin scale

The high uncertainty associated with the effect of global change on water resource systems calls for a better combination of conventional top–down and bottom–up approaches, in order to design robust adaptation plans at the local scale. The methodological framework presented in this article introduces “bottom–up meets top–down” integrated approach to support the selection of adaptation measures at the river basin level by comprehensively integrating the goals of economic efficiency, social acceptability, environmental sustainability and adaptation robustness. The top–down approach relies on the use of a chain of models to assess the impact of global change on water resources and its adaptive management over a range of climate projections. Future demand scenarios and locally prioritised adaptation measures are identified following a bottom–up approach through a participatory process with the relevant stakeholders and experts. The optimal combinations of adaptation measures are then selected using a hydro-economic model at basin scale for each climate projection. The resulting adaptation portfolios are, finally, climate checked to define a robust least-regret programme of measures based on trade-offs between adaptation costs and the reliability of supply for agricultural demands.This innovative approach has been applied to a Mediterranean basin, the Orb river basin (France). Mid-term climate projections, downscaled from 9 General Climate Models, are used to assess the uncertainty associated with climate projections. Demand evolution scenarios are developed to project agricultural and urban water demands on the 2030 time horizon. The results derived from the integration of the bottom–up and top–down approaches illustrate the sensitivity of the adaptation strategies to the climate projections, and provide an assessment of the trade-offs between the performance of the water resource system and the cost of the adaptation plan to inform local decision-making. The article contributes new methodological elements for the development of an integrated framework for decision-making under climate change uncertainty, advocating an interdisciplinary approach that bridges the gap between bottom–up and top–down approaches.     

Agricultural risk management policies under climate uncertainty

Climate change is forecasted to increase the variability of weather conditions and the frequency of extreme events. Due to potential adverse impacts on crop yields it will have implications for demand of agricultural risk management instruments and farmers’ adaptation strategies. Evidence on climate change impacts on crop yield variability and estimates of production risk from farm surveys in Australia, Canada and Spain, are used to analyse the policy choice between three different types of insurance (individual, area-yield and weather index) and ex post payments. The results are found to be subject to strong uncertainties and depend on the risk profile of different farmers and locations; the paper provides several insights on how to analyse these complexities. In general, area yield performs best more often across our countries and scenarios, in particular for the baseline and marginal climate change (without increases in extreme events). However, area yield can be very expensive if farmers have limited information on how climate change affects yields (misalignment in expectations), and particularly so under extreme climate change scenarios. In these more challenging cases, ex post payments perform well to increase low incomes when the risk is systemic like in Australia; Weather index performs well to reduce the welfare costs of risks when the correlation between yields and index is increased by the extreme events. The paper also analyses the robustness of different instruments in the face of limited knowledge of the probabilities of different climate change scenarios; highlighting that this added layer of uncertainty could be overcome to provide sound policy advice under uncertainties introduced by climate change. The role of providing information to farmers on impacts of climate change emerges as a crucial result of this paper as indicated by the significantly higher budgetary expenditures occurring across all instruments when farmers’ expectations are misaligned relative to actual impacts of climate change.     

Probabilistic spatial risk assessment of heat impacts and adaptations for London

High temperatures and heatwaves can cause large societal impacts by increasing health risks, mortality rates, and personal discomfort. These impacts are exacerbated in cities because of the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect, and the high and increasing concentrations of people, assets and economic activities. Risks from high temperatures are now widely recognised but motivation and implementation of proportionate policy responses is inhibited by inadequate quantification of the benefits of adaptation options, and associated uncertainties. This study utilises high spatial resolution probabilistic projections of urban temperatures along with projections of demographic change, to provide a probabilistic risk assessment of heat impacts on urban society. The study focuses on Greater London and the surrounding region, assessing mortality risk, thermal discomfort in residential buildings, and adaptation options within an integrated framework. Climate change is projected to increase future heat-related mortality and residential discomfort. However, adjusting the temperature response function by 1–2 °C, to simulate adaptation and acclimatisation, reduced annual heat related mortality by 32–69 % across the scenarios tested, relative to a no adaptation scenario. Similar benefits of adaptation were seen for residential discomfort. The study also highlights additional benefits in terms of reduced mortality and residential discomfort that mitigating the urban heat island, by reducing albedo and anthropogenic heat emissions, could have.     

Fossil-fueled development (SSP5): An energy and resource intensive scenario for the 21st century

This paper presents a set of energy and resource intensive scenarios based on the concept of Shared Socio-Economic Pathways (SSPs). The scenario family is characterized by rapid and fossil-fueled development with high socio-economic challenges to mitigation and low socio-economic challenges to adaptation (SSP5). A special focus is placed on the SSP5 marker scenario developed by the REMIND-MAgPIE integrated assessment modeling framework. The SSP5 baseline scenarios exhibit very high levels of fossil fuel use, up to a doubling of global food demand, and up to a tripling of energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions over the course of the century, marking the upper end of the scenario literature in several dimensions. These scenarios are currently the only SSP scenarios that result in a radiative forcing pathway as high as the highest Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP8.5). This paper further investigates the direct impact of mitigation policies on the SSP5 energy, land and emissions dynamics confirming high socio-economic challenges to mitigation in SSP5. Nonetheless, mitigation policies reaching climate forcing levels as low as in the lowest Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP2.6) are accessible in SSP5. The SSP5 scenarios presented in this paper aim to provide useful reference points for future climate change, climate impact, adaption and mitigation analysis, and broader questions of sustainable development.     

RCP 8.5��A scenario of comparatively high greenhouse gas emissions

This paper summarizes the main characteristics of the RCP8.5 scenario. The RCP8.5 combines assumptions about high population and relatively slow income growth with modest rates of technological change and energy intensity improvements, leading in the long term to high energy demand and GHG emissions in absence of climate change policies. Compared to the total set of Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), RCP8.5 thus corresponds to the pathway with the highest greenhouse gas emissions. Using the IIASA Integrated Assessment Framework and the MESSAGE model for the development of the RCP8.5, we focus in this paper on two important extensions compared to earlier scenarios: 1) the development of spatially explicit air pollution projections, and 2) enhancements in the land-use and land-cover change projections. In addition, we explore scenario variants that use RCP8.5 as a baseline, and assume different degrees of greenhouse gas mitigation policies to reduce radiative forcing. Based on our modeling framework, we find it technically possible to limit forcing from RCP8.5 to lower levels comparable to the other RCPs (2.6 to 6 W/m²). Our scenario analysis further indicates that climate policy-induced changes of global energy supply and demand may lead to significant co-benefits for other policy priorities, such as local air pollution.