Toward a consistent modeling framework to assess multi-sectoral climate impacts

Abstract

Efforts to estimate the physical and economic impacts of future climate change face substantial challenges. To enrich the currently popular approaches to impact analysis—which involve evaluation of a damage function or multi-model comparisons based on a limited number of standardized scenarios—we propose integrating a geospatially resolved physical representation of impacts into a coupled human-Earth system modeling framework. Large internationally coordinated exercises cannot easily respond to new policy targets and the implementation of standard scenarios across models, institutions and research communities can yield inconsistent estimates. Here, we argue for a shift toward the use of a self-consistent integrated modeling framework to assess climate impacts, and discuss ways the integrated assessment modeling community can move in this direction. We then demonstrate the capabilities of such a modeling framework by conducting a multi-sectoral assessment of climate impacts under a range of consistent and integrated economic and climate scenarios that are responsive to new policies and business expectations.

Integrated human-earth system modeling—state of the science and future directions

“…In contrast, Hartley et al (2017) found a difference in gross primary productivity due to differences in the distribution of plant functional types of between −12.7% and +11.2%. This is similar in magnitude to the feedbacks on land productivity found in Thornton et al (2017), but much smaller than the feedbacks from Monier et al (2018) or Reilly et al (2007).…”

“…The changes in climate provided by CNRM induced changes in agriculture and ecosystem productivity in IMAGE. IGSM (Monier et al 2013(Monier et al , 2015(Monier et al , 2018 system and information on terrestrial productivity and trace gases back to the human system. Jarvis et al (2012) incorporated feedbacks between temperature change and emissions, implemented through changes in the carbon intensity of energy.…”

“…For the land productivity results, 'High Pollution' is a high emissions scenario and 'Climate and GHGs only' is the same as 'High Pollution' but excluding the effects of ozone damage on crops Reilly et al (2007). 'Paris Forever' includes the pledges from the UN COP-21 meeting but no new climate policy after 2030; '2 C' is a scenario limiting 2100 temperature to 2 • C (Monier et al 2018). See supplementary material for detailed methods.…”

Global Agricultural Trade Pattern in A Warming World: Regional Realities

“…One important factor to consider is the locations of surplus food production and food demand, given projected climate change and demographic trends such as those of recent studies [10,38,40]. According to the results of this study, current net exporting countries whose TFP is favorably impacted by climate change up to 2030 are predominantly located in cooler temperate climatic zones, e.g., the United States and Canada.…”

“…Increases in wealth may also strengthen trade while appropriate trade policies may alleviate many of the predicted shortcomings that developing countries will experience [8]. Moreover, Monier et al (2018) [38] indicate that few theories attempt to directly translate the impacts of global mean temperature change to GDP. Yet, Chalise and Naranpanawa (2016) [39] reported that overall, the Nepalese economy was significantly and negatively impacted by climate change-induced agricultural productivity losses, and indicated an urgent need to mainstream adaptation and mitigation strategies based on the results of a country-specific CGE model.…”