Understanding the cascade of GCM and downscaling uncertainties in hydro‐climatic projections over India

ABSTRACT India is a major agrarian country strongly impacted by spatio‐temporal variations in the Indian monsoon. The impact assessment is usually accomplished by implementing projections from general circulation models (GCMs). Unfortunately, these projections cannot capture the dynamicity of the mo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of climatology 2018-04, Vol.38 (S1), p.e178-e190
Hauptverfasser: Sharma, Tarul, Vittal, H., Chhabra, Surbhi, Salvi, Kaustubh, Ghosh, Subimal, Karmakar, Subhankar
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e190
container_issue S1
container_start_page e178
container_title International journal of climatology
container_volume 38
creator Sharma, Tarul
Vittal, H.
Chhabra, Surbhi
Salvi, Kaustubh
Ghosh, Subimal
Karmakar, Subhankar
description ABSTRACT India is a major agrarian country strongly impacted by spatio‐temporal variations in the Indian monsoon. The impact assessment is usually accomplished by implementing projections from general circulation models (GCMs). Unfortunately, these projections cannot capture the dynamicity of the monsoon and require either statistical (SD) or dynamical (DD) downscaling of the GCM projections to a finer resolution. Both downscaling techniques can capture the spatio‐temporal variation in climatic variables but are marred by uncertainty in the projections resulting from the choice of the GCM and downscaling method, which affects climate change adaptations. Here, we assessed uncertainties in the projections of hydro‐climatic variables over India by considering multiple downscaling techniques, multiple GCMs, and their combined effects (referred as the total uncertainty). Multiple hydrological variables were simulated by implementing the variable infiltration capacity model that considered outputs from DD (derived by the coordinated regional climate downscaling experiment, CORDEX) and SD forced with multiple GCM simulations. Our results showed that the SD projections captured the observed spatio‐temporal variability of hydro‐climatic variables more efficiently than the DD projections. Importantly, contribution from the downscaled projections to the total uncertainty was significantly smaller compared to the inter‐GCM uncertainty. We believe uncertainty analysis is an important component of good scientific practice; however, several researchers appear to be rather reluctant to embrace the concept of uncertainty in making projections, predictions, and forecasting. It remains a common practice to show climate change exercises to decision‐makers/stakeholders, without uncertainty bounds. Here, a successful attempt was made to identify the key sources of uncertainty and adequately bracket the uncertainty, indicating a requirement of the code of practice to provide formal guidance, particularly for climate‐change impact assessments. This consequently emphasized the importance of follow‐up research to understand the inter‐GCM uncertainty, which has a significant impact on sustainable agriculture and water resources management in India. PDFs and box plots showing uncertainties in projected mean changes resulting from different downscaling techniques, different GCMs, and from both downscaling and GCMs, considered as total uncertainty all over India for considered hydro‐cl
doi_str_mv 10.1002/joc.5361
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2030186848</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2030186848</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3591-625891039153001f533c48bdec289514633a49dcb563f1a66138f86ac4b43f023</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEFOwzAQRS0EEqUgcQRLbNikzMSJsZeoglJU1A1dR67jUEfBLnZK1R1H4IycBJeyZTXSzPt_vj4hlwgjBMhvWq9HJeN4RAYI8jYDEOKYDEBImYkCxSk5i7EFACmRD4hduNqE2CtXW_dK-5WhWkWtakN9QyfjZ5outPZbl5bdHtk4bUKvrOutidQ6utrVwX9_funOvqnearoOvjW6t95F6j9MoNNkrs7JSaO6aC7-5pAsHu5fxo_ZbD6Zju9mmWalxIznpZAITGLJALApGdOFWNZG50KWWHDGVCFrvSw5a1Bxjkw0gitdLAvWQM6G5Orgm2K8b0zsq9ZvgksvqxwYoOCiEIm6PlA6-BiDaap1SPHDrkKo9kUmla72RSY0O6Bb25ndv1z1NB__8j_wQnSh</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2030186848</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Understanding the cascade of GCM and downscaling uncertainties in hydro‐climatic projections over India</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Sharma, Tarul ; Vittal, H. ; Chhabra, Surbhi ; Salvi, Kaustubh ; Ghosh, Subimal ; Karmakar, Subhankar</creator><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Tarul ; Vittal, H. ; Chhabra, Surbhi ; Salvi, Kaustubh ; Ghosh, Subimal ; Karmakar, Subhankar</creatorcontrib><description>ABSTRACT India is a major agrarian country strongly impacted by spatio‐temporal variations in the Indian monsoon. The impact assessment is usually accomplished by implementing projections from general circulation models (GCMs). Unfortunately, these projections cannot capture the dynamicity of the monsoon and require either statistical (SD) or dynamical (DD) downscaling of the GCM projections to a finer resolution. Both downscaling techniques can capture the spatio‐temporal variation in climatic variables but are marred by uncertainty in the projections resulting from the choice of the GCM and downscaling method, which affects climate change adaptations. Here, we assessed uncertainties in the projections of hydro‐climatic variables over India by considering multiple downscaling techniques, multiple GCMs, and their combined effects (referred as the total uncertainty). Multiple hydrological variables were simulated by implementing the variable infiltration capacity model that considered outputs from DD (derived by the coordinated regional climate downscaling experiment, CORDEX) and SD forced with multiple GCM simulations. Our results showed that the SD projections captured the observed spatio‐temporal variability of hydro‐climatic variables more efficiently than the DD projections. Importantly, contribution from the downscaled projections to the total uncertainty was significantly smaller compared to the inter‐GCM uncertainty. We believe uncertainty analysis is an important component of good scientific practice; however, several researchers appear to be rather reluctant to embrace the concept of uncertainty in making projections, predictions, and forecasting. It remains a common practice to show climate change exercises to decision‐makers/stakeholders, without uncertainty bounds. Here, a successful attempt was made to identify the key sources of uncertainty and adequately bracket the uncertainty, indicating a requirement of the code of practice to provide formal guidance, particularly for climate‐change impact assessments. This consequently emphasized the importance of follow‐up research to understand the inter‐GCM uncertainty, which has a significant impact on sustainable agriculture and water resources management in India. PDFs and box plots showing uncertainties in projected mean changes resulting from different downscaling techniques, different GCMs, and from both downscaling and GCMs, considered as total uncertainty all over India for considered hydro‐climatic variables during JJAS. Here, the PDFs are obtained from nonparametric kernel density estimation. (a) Depicts the uncertainty analysis for precipitation. The uncertainty for the downscaled products was less when compared to GCM and total uncertainties. The increased uncertainty for GCM and total was visible in terms of increase in sparseness and decrease in peakedness of the PDFs. Box plots also depict the increase in IQR indicating increase in GCM and total uncertainties. Similar results were obtained for all other hydro‐climatic variables; i.e. for maximum temperature (b), minimum temperature (c), wind speed (d), base flow (e), runoff (f), ET (g), and soil moisture (h).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0899-8418</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-0088</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/joc.5361</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Adaptation ; Agricultural management ; Climate change ; Climate variability ; Computer simulation ; downscaling ; Environmental assessment ; General circulation models ; Hydrologic models ; hydrological model ; Hydrology ; hydro‐climatic impact ; Impact assessment ; Infiltration ; Infiltration capacity ; Monsoons ; Regional climates ; Sustainable agriculture ; Temporal variability ; Temporal variations ; Uncertainty ; Uncertainty analysis ; uncertainty propagation ; Variables ; Water resources ; Water resources management</subject><ispartof>International journal of climatology, 2018-04, Vol.38 (S1), p.e178-e190</ispartof><rights>2017 Royal Meteorological Society</rights><rights>2018 Royal Meteorological Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3591-625891039153001f533c48bdec289514633a49dcb563f1a66138f86ac4b43f023</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3591-625891039153001f533c48bdec289514633a49dcb563f1a66138f86ac4b43f023</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1132-1403</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjoc.5361$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjoc.5361$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Tarul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vittal, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chhabra, Surbhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salvi, Kaustubh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghosh, Subimal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karmakar, Subhankar</creatorcontrib><title>Understanding the cascade of GCM and downscaling uncertainties in hydro‐climatic projections over India</title><title>International journal of climatology</title><description>ABSTRACT India is a major agrarian country strongly impacted by spatio‐temporal variations in the Indian monsoon. The impact assessment is usually accomplished by implementing projections from general circulation models (GCMs). Unfortunately, these projections cannot capture the dynamicity of the monsoon and require either statistical (SD) or dynamical (DD) downscaling of the GCM projections to a finer resolution. Both downscaling techniques can capture the spatio‐temporal variation in climatic variables but are marred by uncertainty in the projections resulting from the choice of the GCM and downscaling method, which affects climate change adaptations. Here, we assessed uncertainties in the projections of hydro‐climatic variables over India by considering multiple downscaling techniques, multiple GCMs, and their combined effects (referred as the total uncertainty). Multiple hydrological variables were simulated by implementing the variable infiltration capacity model that considered outputs from DD (derived by the coordinated regional climate downscaling experiment, CORDEX) and SD forced with multiple GCM simulations. Our results showed that the SD projections captured the observed spatio‐temporal variability of hydro‐climatic variables more efficiently than the DD projections. Importantly, contribution from the downscaled projections to the total uncertainty was significantly smaller compared to the inter‐GCM uncertainty. We believe uncertainty analysis is an important component of good scientific practice; however, several researchers appear to be rather reluctant to embrace the concept of uncertainty in making projections, predictions, and forecasting. It remains a common practice to show climate change exercises to decision‐makers/stakeholders, without uncertainty bounds. Here, a successful attempt was made to identify the key sources of uncertainty and adequately bracket the uncertainty, indicating a requirement of the code of practice to provide formal guidance, particularly for climate‐change impact assessments. This consequently emphasized the importance of follow‐up research to understand the inter‐GCM uncertainty, which has a significant impact on sustainable agriculture and water resources management in India. PDFs and box plots showing uncertainties in projected mean changes resulting from different downscaling techniques, different GCMs, and from both downscaling and GCMs, considered as total uncertainty all over India for considered hydro‐climatic variables during JJAS. Here, the PDFs are obtained from nonparametric kernel density estimation. (a) Depicts the uncertainty analysis for precipitation. The uncertainty for the downscaled products was less when compared to GCM and total uncertainties. The increased uncertainty for GCM and total was visible in terms of increase in sparseness and decrease in peakedness of the PDFs. Box plots also depict the increase in IQR indicating increase in GCM and total uncertainties. Similar results were obtained for all other hydro‐climatic variables; i.e. for maximum temperature (b), minimum temperature (c), wind speed (d), base flow (e), runoff (f), ET (g), and soil moisture (h).</description><subject>Adaptation</subject><subject>Agricultural management</subject><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Climate variability</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>downscaling</subject><subject>Environmental assessment</subject><subject>General circulation models</subject><subject>Hydrologic models</subject><subject>hydrological model</subject><subject>Hydrology</subject><subject>hydro‐climatic impact</subject><subject>Impact assessment</subject><subject>Infiltration</subject><subject>Infiltration capacity</subject><subject>Monsoons</subject><subject>Regional climates</subject><subject>Sustainable agriculture</subject><subject>Temporal variability</subject><subject>Temporal variations</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><subject>Uncertainty analysis</subject><subject>uncertainty propagation</subject><subject>Variables</subject><subject>Water resources</subject><subject>Water resources management</subject><issn>0899-8418</issn><issn>1097-0088</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kEFOwzAQRS0EEqUgcQRLbNikzMSJsZeoglJU1A1dR67jUEfBLnZK1R1H4IycBJeyZTXSzPt_vj4hlwgjBMhvWq9HJeN4RAYI8jYDEOKYDEBImYkCxSk5i7EFACmRD4hduNqE2CtXW_dK-5WhWkWtakN9QyfjZ5outPZbl5bdHtk4bUKvrOutidQ6utrVwX9_funOvqnearoOvjW6t95F6j9MoNNkrs7JSaO6aC7-5pAsHu5fxo_ZbD6Zju9mmWalxIznpZAITGLJALApGdOFWNZG50KWWHDGVCFrvSw5a1Bxjkw0gitdLAvWQM6G5Orgm2K8b0zsq9ZvgksvqxwYoOCiEIm6PlA6-BiDaap1SPHDrkKo9kUmla72RSY0O6Bb25ndv1z1NB__8j_wQnSh</recordid><startdate>201804</startdate><enddate>201804</enddate><creator>Sharma, Tarul</creator><creator>Vittal, H.</creator><creator>Chhabra, Surbhi</creator><creator>Salvi, Kaustubh</creator><creator>Ghosh, Subimal</creator><creator>Karmakar, Subhankar</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1132-1403</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201804</creationdate><title>Understanding the cascade of GCM and downscaling uncertainties in hydro‐climatic projections over India</title><author>Sharma, Tarul ; Vittal, H. ; Chhabra, Surbhi ; Salvi, Kaustubh ; Ghosh, Subimal ; Karmakar, Subhankar</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3591-625891039153001f533c48bdec289514633a49dcb563f1a66138f86ac4b43f023</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adaptation</topic><topic>Agricultural management</topic><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Climate variability</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>downscaling</topic><topic>Environmental assessment</topic><topic>General circulation models</topic><topic>Hydrologic models</topic><topic>hydrological model</topic><topic>Hydrology</topic><topic>hydro‐climatic impact</topic><topic>Impact assessment</topic><topic>Infiltration</topic><topic>Infiltration capacity</topic><topic>Monsoons</topic><topic>Regional climates</topic><topic>Sustainable agriculture</topic><topic>Temporal variability</topic><topic>Temporal variations</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><topic>Uncertainty analysis</topic><topic>uncertainty propagation</topic><topic>Variables</topic><topic>Water resources</topic><topic>Water resources management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sharma, Tarul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vittal, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chhabra, Surbhi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salvi, Kaustubh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghosh, Subimal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karmakar, Subhankar</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy &amp; Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><jtitle>International journal of climatology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sharma, Tarul</au><au>Vittal, H.</au><au>Chhabra, Surbhi</au><au>Salvi, Kaustubh</au><au>Ghosh, Subimal</au><au>Karmakar, Subhankar</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Understanding the cascade of GCM and downscaling uncertainties in hydro‐climatic projections over India</atitle><jtitle>International journal of climatology</jtitle><date>2018-04</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>S1</issue><spage>e178</spage><epage>e190</epage><pages>e178-e190</pages><issn>0899-8418</issn><eissn>1097-0088</eissn><abstract>ABSTRACT India is a major agrarian country strongly impacted by spatio‐temporal variations in the Indian monsoon. The impact assessment is usually accomplished by implementing projections from general circulation models (GCMs). Unfortunately, these projections cannot capture the dynamicity of the monsoon and require either statistical (SD) or dynamical (DD) downscaling of the GCM projections to a finer resolution. Both downscaling techniques can capture the spatio‐temporal variation in climatic variables but are marred by uncertainty in the projections resulting from the choice of the GCM and downscaling method, which affects climate change adaptations. Here, we assessed uncertainties in the projections of hydro‐climatic variables over India by considering multiple downscaling techniques, multiple GCMs, and their combined effects (referred as the total uncertainty). Multiple hydrological variables were simulated by implementing the variable infiltration capacity model that considered outputs from DD (derived by the coordinated regional climate downscaling experiment, CORDEX) and SD forced with multiple GCM simulations. Our results showed that the SD projections captured the observed spatio‐temporal variability of hydro‐climatic variables more efficiently than the DD projections. Importantly, contribution from the downscaled projections to the total uncertainty was significantly smaller compared to the inter‐GCM uncertainty. We believe uncertainty analysis is an important component of good scientific practice; however, several researchers appear to be rather reluctant to embrace the concept of uncertainty in making projections, predictions, and forecasting. It remains a common practice to show climate change exercises to decision‐makers/stakeholders, without uncertainty bounds. Here, a successful attempt was made to identify the key sources of uncertainty and adequately bracket the uncertainty, indicating a requirement of the code of practice to provide formal guidance, particularly for climate‐change impact assessments. This consequently emphasized the importance of follow‐up research to understand the inter‐GCM uncertainty, which has a significant impact on sustainable agriculture and water resources management in India. PDFs and box plots showing uncertainties in projected mean changes resulting from different downscaling techniques, different GCMs, and from both downscaling and GCMs, considered as total uncertainty all over India for considered hydro‐climatic variables during JJAS. Here, the PDFs are obtained from nonparametric kernel density estimation. (a) Depicts the uncertainty analysis for precipitation. The uncertainty for the downscaled products was less when compared to GCM and total uncertainties. The increased uncertainty for GCM and total was visible in terms of increase in sparseness and decrease in peakedness of the PDFs. Box plots also depict the increase in IQR indicating increase in GCM and total uncertainties. Similar results were obtained for all other hydro‐climatic variables; i.e. for maximum temperature (b), minimum temperature (c), wind speed (d), base flow (e), runoff (f), ET (g), and soil moisture (h).</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/joc.5361</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1132-1403</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0899-8418
ispartof International journal of climatology, 2018-04, Vol.38 (S1), p.e178-e190
issn 0899-8418
1097-0088
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2030186848
source Wiley Online Library All Journals
subjects Adaptation
Agricultural management
Climate change
Climate variability
Computer simulation
downscaling
Environmental assessment
General circulation models
Hydrologic models
hydrological model
Hydrology
hydro‐climatic impact
Impact assessment
Infiltration
Infiltration capacity
Monsoons
Regional climates
Sustainable agriculture
Temporal variability
Temporal variations
Uncertainty
Uncertainty analysis
uncertainty propagation
Variables
Water resources
Water resources management
title Understanding the cascade of GCM and downscaling uncertainties in hydro‐climatic projections over India
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T03%3A54%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Understanding%20the%20cascade%20of%20GCM%20and%20downscaling%20uncertainties%20in%20hydro%E2%80%90climatic%20projections%20over%20India&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20climatology&rft.au=Sharma,%20Tarul&rft.date=2018-04&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=S1&rft.spage=e178&rft.epage=e190&rft.pages=e178-e190&rft.issn=0899-8418&rft.eissn=1097-0088&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/joc.5361&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2030186848%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2030186848&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true