日本語
 
Privacy Policy ポリシー/免責事項
  詳細検索ブラウズ

アイテム詳細

  How evaluation of hydrological models influences results of climate impact assessment - an editorial

Krysanova, V., Hattermann, F. F., & Kundzewicz, Z. W. (2020). How evaluation of hydrological models influences results of climate impact assessment - an editorial. Climatic Change, 163(3), 1121-1141. doi:10.1007/s10584-020-02927-8.

Item is

基本情報

表示: 非表示:
資料種別: 学術論文

ファイル

表示: ファイル
非表示: ファイル
:
24710oa.pdf (出版社版), 822KB
ファイル名:
24710oa.pdf
説明:
-
閲覧制限:
公開
MIMEタイプ / チェックサム:
application/pdf / [MD5]
技術的なメタデータ:
著作権日付:
-
著作権情報:
-
CCライセンス:
-

関連URL

表示:

作成者

表示:
非表示:
 作成者:
Krysanova, Valentina1, 著者              
Hattermann, Fred Fokko1, 著者              
Kundzewicz, Zbigniew W.1, 著者              
所属:
1Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, ou_persistent13              

内容説明

表示:
非表示:
キーワード: -
 要旨: This paper introduces the Special Issue (SI) “How evaluation of hydrological models influences results of climate impact assessment.” The main objectives were as follows: (a) to test a comprehensive model calibration/validation procedure, consisting of five steps, for regional-scale hydrological models; (b) to evaluate performance of global-scale hydrological models; and (c) to reveal whether the calibration/validation methods and the model evaluation results influence climate impacts in terms of the magnitude of the change signal and the uncertainty range. Here, we shortly describe the river basins and large regions used as case studies; the hydrological models, data, and climate scenarios used in the studies; and the applied approaches for model evaluation and for analysis of projections for the future. After that, we summarize the main findings. The following general conclusions could be drawn. After successful comprehensive calibration and validation, the regional-scale models are more robust and their projections for the future differ from those of the model versions after the conventional calibration and validation. Therefore, climate impacts based on the former models are more trustworthy than those simulated by the latter models. Regarding the global-scale models, using only models with satisfactory or good performance on historical data and weighting them based on model evaluation results is a more reliable approach for impact assessment compared to the ensemble mean approach that is commonly used. The former method provides impact results with higher credibility and reduced spreads in comparison to the latter approach. The studies for this SI were performed in the framework of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP).

資料詳細

表示:
非表示:
言語:
 日付: 2020-11-032020-12-15
 出版の状態: Finally published
 ページ: -
 出版情報: -
 目次: -
 査読: 査読あり
 識別子(DOI, ISBNなど): DOI: 10.1007/s10584-020-02927-8
PIKDOMAIN: RD2 - Climate Resilience
MDB-ID: No data to archive
Organisational keyword: RD2 - Climate Resilience
Research topic keyword: Climate impacts
Research topic keyword: Freshwater
Regional keyword: Europe
Regional keyword: Global
Model / method: Model Intercomparison
Model / method: SWIM
Model / method: LPJmL
Working Group: Hydroclimatic Risks
 学位: -

関連イベント

表示:

訴訟

表示:

Project information

表示:

出版物 1

表示:
非表示:
出版物名: Climatic Change
種別: 学術雑誌, SCI, Scopus, p3
 著者・編者:
所属:
出版社, 出版地: -
ページ: - 巻号: 163 (3) 通巻号: - 開始・終了ページ: 1121 - 1141 識別子(ISBN, ISSN, DOIなど): CoNE: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/cone/journals/resource/journals80
Publisher: Springer