Robust climate change research: a review on multi-model analysis

被引:83
作者
Duan, Hongbo [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Gupeng [3 ]
Wang, Shouyang [1 ,4 ]
Fan, Ying [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Chinese Acad Sci, Sch Econ & Management, Beijing 100190, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Kansas, Dept Econ, Lawrence, KS 66045 USA
[3] Univ Chinese Acad Sci, Sch Publ Policy & Management, Beijing 100049, Peoples R China
[4] Chinese Acad Sci, Acad Math & Syst Sci, Beijing 100190, Peoples R China
[5] Beihang Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Beijing 100191, Peoples R China
来源
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS | 2019年 / 14卷 / 03期
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
multi-model study; robust climate policy; integrated assessment model; climate models; survey; ENDOGENOUS TECHNOLOGICAL-CHANGE; ENERGY SECURITY; MITIGATION STRATEGIES; CARBON EMISSIONS; CO2; MITIGATION; GAS EMISSIONS; MODEL; SCENARIOS; POLICY; FUTURE;
D O I
10.1088/1748-9326/aaf8f9
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Significant differences in key results across the various climate models and integrated assessment models (IAMs) represent a critical challenge to reliable scientific findings and the robust design of climate policies, which leads to an enormous amount of attention and the urgent call for a multi-model study. In this paper, we develop an integrated literature-survey framework by combining the typical content analysis with a simple statistical analysis to systematically examine the developing trends of IAM-based multi-model studies and explore the model-robust climate policy findings; we also conduct an extended analysis to identify the role of a multi-model approach in global warming and other global change research by employing co-citation network analysis. The results reveal that multi-model comparison and ensemble are effective methods to explore reliable scientific findings and yield robust policy conclusions. The current multi-model studies are sparse as a whole, especially for IAM-based climate economic and policy research; future multi-model works, at both the global and regional levels, are therefore promising. We observe that the developed countries (the EU and the US) dominate the current multi-model study, which could be proved by the number of primary IAMs developed, frequency of models adopted, and number of works published. Addressing the risks of global warming relies on reliable scientific research and robust climate policy design, particularly for the developing large emitters, which heavily depends on consistent efforts toward primary model development and comprehensive cooperation with state-of-the-art model teams all over the world.
引用
收藏
页数:23
相关论文
共 140 条
[1]   Halving global GHG emissions by 2050 without depending on nuclear and CCS [J].
Akashi, Osamu ;
Hanaoka, Tatsuya ;
Masui, Toshihiko ;
Kainuma, Mikiko .
CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2014, 123 (3-4) :611-622
[2]   Estimates of GHG emission reduction potential by country, sector, and cost [J].
Akimoto, Keigo ;
Sano, Fuminori ;
Homma, Takashi ;
Oda, Junichiro ;
Nagashima, Miyuki ;
Kii, Masanobu .
ENERGY POLICY, 2010, 38 (07) :3384-3393
[3]  
Aldy J, 2016, NAT CLIM CHANGE, V6, P1000, DOI [10.1038/NCLIMATE3106, 10.1038/nclimate3106]
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2017, LANDSCAPE ECOL, DOI DOI 10.1007/s10980-016-0404-8
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1995, USERS GUIDE MESSAGE
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2008, OECD Econ Dep Work Pap, DOI DOI 10.1787/230123880460
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2015, WHY ARE WE WAITING L
[8]   Shutting Down the Thermohaline Circulation [J].
Anthoff, David ;
Estrada, Francisco ;
Tol, Richard S. J. .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2016, 106 (05) :602-606
[9]   The impacts of climate change across the globe: A multi-sectoral assessment [J].
Arnell, N. W. ;
Brown, S. ;
Gosling, S. N. ;
Gottschalk, P. ;
Hinkel, J. ;
Huntingford, C. ;
Lloyd-Hughes, B. ;
Lowe, J. A. ;
Nicholls, R. J. ;
Osborn, T. J. ;
Osborne, T. M. ;
Rose, G. A. ;
Smith, P. ;
Wheeler, T. R. ;
Zelazowski, P. .
CLIMATIC CHANGE, 2016, 134 (03) :457-474
[10]   Global energy scenarios meeting stringent CO2 constraints -: cost-effective fuel choices in the transportation sector [J].
Azar, C ;
Lindgren, K ;
Andersson, BA .
ENERGY POLICY, 2003, 31 (10) :961-976