Abstract

Projections of climate change over Africa are highly uncertain, with wide disparity amongst models in their magnitude of local rainfall and temperature change, and in some regions even disparity in the sign of rainfall change. This has significant implications for decision-makers within the context of a vulnerable population and few resources for adaptation. One approach towards addressing this uncertainty is to rank models according to their historical climate performance and disregard those with least skill. This approach is systematically evaluated by defining 23 metrics of model skill and focussing on two vulnerable regions of Africa, the Sahel and the Greater Horn of Africa. Some discrimination in the performance of 39 CMIP5 models is achieved, although divergence amongst metrics in their ranking of climate models implies some uncertainty in using these metrics to robustly judge the models' relative performance. Importantly, when the more capable models are selected by an overall performance measure, projection uncertainty is not reduced because these models are typically spread across the full range of projections (except perhaps for Central to East Sahel rainfall). This suggests that the method’s underlying assumption is false, this assumption being that the modelled processes that most strongly drive errors and uncertainty in projected change are a subset of the processes whose errors are observed by standard metrics of historical climate. Further research must now develop an expert judgement approach that will discriminate models using an in-depth understanding of the mechanisms that drive the errors and uncertainty in projected changes over Africa.

Highlights

  • The population of Africa is vulnerable to climate change

  • This study has evaluated the contemporary skill of 39 CMIP5 models for two vulnerable regions of Africa, split into four ‘Region-Season Combinations’: the West Sahel, the Central to East Sahel, and the Greater Horn of Africa’s Long Rains and Short Rains seasons

  • Assessment across 23 ‘primary metrics’ often led to differing conclusions about a model’s relative skill, implying some uncertainty in the use of these metrics to assess the relative trustworthiness of the models' future projections

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The population of Africa is vulnerable to climate change. Widespread poverty renders the very foundations of society – such as rainfed agriculture, water supply and urban sanitation – vulnerable to weather and climate extremes, and leaves little capacity for adaptation. This study aims to assess the trustworthiness of 39 models from version 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5, Taylor et al 2012) for two especially vulnerable regions of Africa, using a basket of carefully chosen metrics This assessment is integrated into an analysis of projected rainfall and temperature changes over these regions to evaluate the impact on uncertainty. The observational datasets used to validate the models are the GPCC-Reanalysis v4 precipitation dataset (Global Precipitation Climatology Centre, Schneider et al 2014), the GPCP v2.1 pentad precipitation dataset (Global Precipitation Climatology Project, Xie et al 2003), the Berkley surface air temperature dataset (Rohde et al 2013), and the HadISST1.1 SST dataset (Hadley Centre Sea Ice and Sea Surface Temperatures, version 1.1, Rayner et al 2003) These are chosen for their relatively plentiful use of raw data, high spatial resolution Note that for some models, a number of primary metrics are missing: 14 models did not perform an AMIP simulation, and 6 models did not archive the daily rainfall data required for onset metrics

Discrimination of models
Relevance of metrics to climate projections
Impact on projection uncertainty
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call