Deutsch
 
Datenschutzhinweis Impressum
  DetailsucheBrowse

Datensatz

DATENSATZ AKTIONENEXPORT
Zur Ablage hinzufügen
  Lokale TagsFreigabegeschichteDetailsÜbersicht

Freigegeben
Zeitschriftenartikel

Evaluating process-based integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation

Urheber*innen

Wilson,  Charlie
External Organizations;

Guivarch,  Céline
External Organizations;

/persons/resource/Elmar.Kriegler

Kriegler,  Elmar
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research;

van Ruijven,  Bas
External Organizations;

van Vuuren,  Detlef P.
External Organizations;

Krey,  Volker
External Organizations;

Schwanitz,  Valeria Jana
External Organizations;

Thompson,  Erica L.
External Organizations;

Externe Ressourcen
Es sind keine externen Ressourcen hinterlegt
Volltexte (frei zugänglich)

25627oa.pdf
(Verlagsversion), 2MB

Ergänzendes Material (frei zugänglich)
Es sind keine frei zugänglichen Ergänzenden Materialien verfügbar
Zitation

Wilson, C., Guivarch, C., Kriegler, E., van Ruijven, B., van Vuuren, D. P., Krey, V., Schwanitz, V. J., Thompson, E. L. (2021): Evaluating process-based integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation. - Climatic Change, 166, 1-2, 3.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03099-9


Zitierlink: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/pubman/item/item_25627
Zusammenfassung
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.