Evaluating process-based integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation
| Autor: | Valeria Jana Schwanitz, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Céline Guivarch, Erica Thompson, Elmar Kriegler, Bas van Ruijven, Charlie Wilson, Volker Krey |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement (CIRED), Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (Cirad)-École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS)-AgroParisTech-École des Ponts ParisTech (ENPC)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Environmental Sciences |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
Engineering
Atmospheric Science 010504 meteorology & atmospheric sciences Process (engineering) 020209 energy Climate mitigation 02 engineering and technology 01 natural sciences Domain (software engineering) Credibility 0202 electrical engineering electronic engineering information engineering Relevance (information retrieval) Set (psychology) Evaluation 0105 earth and related environmental sciences Interpretability Scientific instrument Global and Planetary Change business.industry Management science IAM VDP::Matematikk og Naturvitenskap: 400 [SHS.ECO]Humanities and Social Sciences/Economics and Finance Climate change mitigation 13. Climate action Process-based integrated assessment model business GE Environmental Sciences |
| Zdroj: | Climatic Change, 166(1-2), 1. Springer Netherlands Climatic Change Climatic Change, Springer Verlag, 2021, 166 (1-2), ⟨10.1007/s10584-021-03099-9⟩ |
| ISSN: | 0165-0009 1573-1480 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10584-021-03099-9⟩ |
| Popis: | Process-based integrated assessment models (IAMs) project long-term transformation pathways in energy and land-use systems under what-if assumptions. IAM evaluation is necessary to improve the models’ usefulness as scientific tools applicable in the complex and contested domain of climate change mitigation. We contribute the first comprehensive synthesis of process-based IAM evaluation research, drawing on a wide range of examples across six different evaluation methods including historical simulations, stylised facts, and model diagnostics. For each evaluation method, we identify progress and milestones to date, and draw out lessons learnt as well as challenges remaining. We find that each evaluation method has distinctive strengths, as well as constraints on its application. We use these insights to propose a systematic evaluation framework combining multiple methods to establish the appropriateness, interpretability, credibility, and relevance of process-based IAMs as useful scientific tools for informing climate policy. We also set out a programme of evaluation research to be mainstreamed both within and outside the IAM community. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink