The inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project (ISI-MIP): Project framework

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 111, Issue 9, 2014, Pages 3228-3232

  Warszawski, Lila ^a   Frieler, Katja ^a   Huber, Veronika ^a   Piontek, Franziska ^a   Serdeczny, Olivia ^a   Schewe, Jacob ^a  

^a POTSDAM INSTITUTE FOR CLIMATE IMPACT RESEARCH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Climate data; Multi sector

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SIMULATION; SOCIOECONOMICS;

CLIMATE DATA; MULTI-SECTOR;

AGRICULTURE; ATMOSPHERE; BIOTA; CARBON DIOXIDE; CLIMATE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENT; FORECASTING; HUMANS; MALARIA; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; TEMPERATURE; WATER SUPPLY;

EID: 84895814507     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1312330110     Document Type: Review

References (54)

1. Parry M, et al. (1999) The global impact of climate change: A new assessment. Glob Environ Change 9:S1-S2.
2. Füssel HM, Toth FL, van Minnen JG, Kaspar F (2003) Climate impact response functions as impact tools in the tolerable windows approach. Clim Change 56(1-2):91-117.
3. Arnell N, et al. (2013) A global assessment of the effects of climate policy on the impacts of climate change. Nature Climate Change 3:512-519.
4. Cramer W, et al. (2001) Global response of terrestrial ecosystem structure and function to CO2 and climate change: Results from six dynamic global vegetation models. Glob Change Biol 7:357-373.
5. Sitch S, et al. (2008) Evaluation of the terrestrial carbon cycle, future plant geography and climate-carbon cycle feedbacks using five Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs). Glob Change Biol 14:2015-2039.
6. Haddeland I, et al. (2011) Multimodel estimate of the global terrestrial water balance: Setup and first results. J Hydrometeorol 12(5):869-884.
7. Rosenzweig C, et al. (2012) The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP): Protocols and pilot studies. Agric For Meteorol 170:166-182.
8. Moss RH, et al. (2010) The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463(7282):747-756.
9. Taylor KE, Stouffer RJ, Meehl GA (2012) An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 93(4):485-498.
10. Hempel S, Frieler K, Warszawski L, Schewe J, Piontek F (2013) A trend-preserving bias correction-The ISI-MIP approach. Earth Syst Dynam Discuss 4:49-92.
11. Weedon GP, et al. (2011) Creation of the WATCH forcing data and its use to assess global and regional reference crop evaporation over land during the twentieth century. J Hydrometeorol 12(5): 823-848.
12. van Vuuren DP, et al. (2012) A proposal for a new scenario framework to support research and assessment in different climate research communities. Glob Environ Change 22(1):21-35.
13. Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) Database (2012). Available at https://secure.iiasa.ac.at/web-apps/ene/SspDb. Accessed May 1, 2012.
14. Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN)/Columbia University (2012) National Aggregates of Geospatial Data Collection: Population, landscape, and climate estimates, Version 3 (PLACE III). (NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC), Palisades, NY). Available at http://sedac. ciesin.columbia.edu/data/collection/gpw-v3. Accessed May 1, 2012.
15. Rost S, et al. (2008) Agricultural green and blue water consumption and its influence on the global water system. Water Resour Res 44(9):1-17.
16. Bondeau A, et al. (2007) Modelling the role of agriculture for the 20th century global terrestrial carbon balance. Glob Change Biol 13(5):679-706.
17. Best MJ, et al. (2011) The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description-Part 1: Energy and water fluxes. Geosci Model Dev 4:677-699.
18. Clark DB, et al. (2011) The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), Model description-Part 2: Carbon fluxes and vegetation. Geosci Model Dev 4:701-722.
19. Lohmann D, Raschke E, Nijssen B, Lettenmaier DP (1998) Regional scale hydrology: I. Formulation of the VIC-2L model coupled to a routing model. Hydrol Sci J 43(1):131-141.
20. Hanasaki N, et al. (2008) An integrated model for the assessment of global water resources. Part 1: Model description and input meteorological forcing. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 12:1007-1025.
21. Döll P, Kaspar F, Lehner B (2003) A global hydrological model for deriving water availability indicators: Model tuning and validation. J Hydrol 270(1-2):105-134.
22. Gosling S, Arnell N (2011) Simulating current global river runoff with a global hydrological model: Model revisions, validation and sensitivity analysis. Hydrol Processes 25(7):1129-1145.
23. Wisser D, Fekete BM, Vörösmarty CJ, Schumann AH (2010) Reconstructing 20th century global hydrography: A contribution to the Global Terrestrial Network-Hydrology (GTN-H). Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 14:1-24.
24. Stacke T, Hagemann S (2012) Development and validation of a global dynamical wetlands extent scheme. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 9:405-440.
25. Wada Y, et al. (2010) Global depletion of groundwater resources. Geophys Res Lett 37(20):L20402.
26. Pokhrel Y, et al. (2012) Incorporating anthropogenic water regulation modules into a land surface model. J Hydrometeor 13(1): 255-269.
27. Tang Q, Oki T, Kanae S, Hu H (2008) Hydrological cycles change in the Yellow River basin during the last half of the twentieth century. J Clim 21(8):1790-1806.
28. Piao S, et al. (2007) Changes in climate and land use have a larger direct impact than rising CO2 on global river runoff trends. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(39):15242-15247.
29. Friend A, White A (2000) Evaluation and analysis of a dynamic terrestrial ecosystem model under preindustrial conditions at the global scale. Global Biogeochem Cycles 14(4):1173-1190.
30. Woodward FI, Smith TM, Emanuel WR (1995) A global land primary productivity and phytogeography model. Global Biogeochem Cycles 9(4):471-490.
31. Pavlick R, Drewry DT, Bohn K, Reu B, Kleidon A (2012) The Jena Diversity-Dynamic Global Vegetation Model (JeDi-DGVM): A diverse approach to representing terrestrial biogeography and biogeochemistry based on plant functional trade-offs. Biogeosciences Discuss 10:4137-4177.
32. Inatomi M, Ito A, Ishijima K, Murayama S (2010) Greenhouse gas budget of a cool-temperate deciduous broad-leaved forest in Japan estimated using a process-based model. Ecosystems (N Y) 13(3): 472-483.
33. Williams J, Jones C, Kiniry J, Spanel D (1989) The EPIC crop growth model. Trans ASAE 32:497-511.
34. Williams J (1995) The EPIC Model. Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, ed Singh VP (Water Resources Publications, Highlands Ranch, CO), pp 909-1000.
35. Jones PD, Moberg A (2003) Hemispheric and large-scale surface air temperature variations: An extensive revision and an update to 2001. J Clim 16(2):206-223.
36. Deryng D, Sacks WJ, Barford CC, Ramankutty N (2011) Simulating the effects of climate and agricultural management practices on global crop yield. Global Biogeochem Cycles 25(2):1-18.
37. MNP (2006) An overview of IMAGE 2.4. Integrated Modelling of Global Environmental Change, eds Bowman A, Kram T, Goldewijk KK (Bilthoven, The Netherlands).
38. Lindeskog M, et al. (2013) Effects of crop phenology and management on the terrestrial carbon cycle: Case study for Africa. Earth Syst Dynam Discuss 4:235-278.
39. Craig MH, Snow RW, le Sueur D (1999) A climate-based distribution model of malaria transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. Parasitol Today 15(3):105-111.
40. Béguin A, et al. (2011) The opposing effects of climate change and socio-economic development on the global distribution of malaria. Glob Environ Change 21(4):1209-1214.
41. Hoshen MB, Morse AP (2004) A weather-driven model of malaria transmission. Malar J 3:32.
42. van Lieshout M, Kovats R, Livermore M, Martens P (2004) Climate change and malaria: Analysis of the SRES climate and socioeconomic scenarios. Glob Environ Change 14(1):87-99.
43. Tompkins AM, Ermert V (2013) A regional-scale, high resolution dynamical malaria model that accounts for population density, climate and surface hydrology. Malar J 12:65.
44. Hinkel J, Klein R (2009) The DINAS-COAST project: Developing a tool for the dynamic and interactive assessment of coastal vulnerability. Glob Environ Change 19(3):384-395.
45. Fujimori S, Masui T, Matsuoka Y (2012) Center for Social and Environmental System Research, NIES. Discussion Paper Series, Center for Social and Environmental System Research, NIES. Available at www.nies.go.jp/social/dp/ pdf/2012-01.pdf. Accessed January 31, 2013.
46. van der Mensbrugghe D (2013) The ENVironmental Impact and Sustanability Applied General Equilibrium (ENVISAGE) Model: Version 8.0. processed. Technical Report (FAO, Rome).
47. Paltsev S, et al. (2005) The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) Model: Version 4. Technical Report (MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Cambridge, MA).
48. Pant H (2007) Global Trade and Environment Model (GTEM) (Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences, Canberra).
49. Darwin R (1998) FARM: A Global Framework for Integrated Land Use/Cover Modeling Australian National University (Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, Ecological Economics Program) Working Papers in Ecological Economics. Available at http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:anu:wpieep:9802. Accessed January 31, 2013.
50. Banse M, Van Meijl H, Tabeau A, Woltjer G (2008) Will EU biofuel policies affect global agricultural markets? Eur Rev Agric Econ 35(2): 117-141.
51. Wise M, Kate C (2011) GCAM 3.0 Agriculture and Land Use: Technical Description of Modeling Approach. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory PNNL-20971. Available at http://wiki.umd.edu/gcam/images/2/25/GCAM-AgLU- Documentation.pdf. Accessed January 31, 2013.
52. Havlik P, et al. (2011) Global land-use implications of first and second generation biofuel targets. Energy Policy 39:5690-5702.
53. Rosegrant MW, Meijer S, Cline SA (2008) International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model Description (International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC).
54. Lotze-Campen H, et al. (2008) Global food demand, productivity growth, and the scarcity of land and water resources: A spatially explicit mathematical programming approach. Agric Econ 39(3): 325-338.