3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- ItemAssessing inter-sectoral climate change risks: The role of ISIMIP(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2017) Rosenzweig, Cynthia; Arnell, Nigel W.; Ebi, Kristie L.; Lotze-Campen, Hermann; Raes, Frank; Rapley, Chris; Smith, Mark Stafford; Cramer, Wolfgang; Frieler, Katja; Reyer, Christopher P.O.; Schewe, Jacob; van Vuuren, Detlef; Warszawski, LilaThe aims of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) are to provide a framework for the intercomparison of global and regional-scale risk models within and across multiple sectors and to enable coordinated multi-sectoral assessments of different risks and their aggregated effects. The overarching goal is to use the knowledge gained to support adaptation and mitigation decisions that require regional or global perspectives within the context of facilitating transformations to enable sustainable development, despite inevitable climate shifts and disruptions. ISIMIP uses community-agreed sets of scenarios with standardized climate variables and socio-economic projections as inputs for projecting future risks and associated uncertainties, within and across sectors. The results are consistent multi-model assessments of sectoral risks and opportunities that enable studies that integrate across sectors, providing support for implementation of the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
- ItemThe Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview(Amsterdam : Elsevier, 2016) Riahi, Keywan; van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Kriegler, Elmar; Edmonds, Jae; O’Neill, Brian C.; Fujimori, Shinichiro; Bauer, Nico; Calvin, Katherine; Dellink, Rob; Fricko, Oliver; Lutz, Wolfgang; Popp, Alexander; Crespo Cuaresma, Jesus; KC, Samir; Leimbach, Marian; Jiang, Leiwen; Kram, Tom; Rao, Shilpa; Emmerling, Johannes; Ebi, Kristie; Hasegawa, Tomoko; Havlik, Petr; Humpenöder, Florian; Aleluia Da Silva, Lara; Smith, Steve; Stehfest, Elke; Bosetti, Valentina; Eom, Jiyong; Gernaat, David; Masui, Toshihiko; Rogelj, Joeri; Strefler, Jessica; Drouet, Laurent; Krey, Volker; Luderer, Gunnar; Harmsen, Mathijs; Takahashi, Kiyoshi; Baumstark, Lavinia; Doelman, Jonathan C.; Kainuma, Mikiko; Klimont, Zbigniew; Marangoni, Giacomo; Lotze-Campen, Hermann; Obersteiner, Michael; Tabeau, Andrzej; Tavoni, MassimoThis paper presents the overview of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and their energy, land use, and emissions implications. The SSPs are part of a new scenario framework, established by the climate change research community in order to facilitate the integrated analysis of future climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation, and mitigation. The pathways were developed over the last years as a joint community effort and describe plausible major global developments that together would lead in the future to different challenges for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. The SSPs are based on five narratives describing alternative socio-economic developments, including sustainable development, regional rivalry, inequality, fossil-fueled development, and middle-of-the-road development. The long-term demographic and economic projections of the SSPs depict a wide uncertainty range consistent with the scenario literature. A multi-model approach was used for the elaboration of the energy, land-use and the emissions trajectories of SSP-based scenarios. The baseline scenarios lead to global energy consumption of 400–1200 EJ in 2100, and feature vastly different land-use dynamics, ranging from a possible reduction in cropland area up to a massive expansion by more than 700 million hectares by 2100. The associated annual CO2 emissions of the baseline scenarios range from about 25 GtCO2 to more than 120 GtCO2 per year by 2100. With respect to mitigation, we find that associated costs strongly depend on three factors: (1) the policy assumptions, (2) the socio-economic narrative, and (3) the stringency of the target. The carbon price for reaching the target of 2.6 W/m2 that is consistent with a temperature change limit of 2 °C, differs in our analysis thus by about a factor of three across the SSP marker scenarios. Moreover, many models could not reach this target from the SSPs with high mitigation challenges. While the SSPs were designed to represent different mitigation and adaptation challenges, the resulting narratives and quantifications span a wide range of different futures broadly representative of the current literature. This allows their subsequent use and development in new assessments and research projects. Critical next steps for the community scenario process will, among others, involve regional and sectoral extensions, further elaboration of the adaptation and impacts dimension, as well as employing the SSP scenarios with the new generation of earth system models as part of the 6th climate model intercomparison project (CMIP6).
- ItemUnderstanding adaptive capacity of smallholder African indigenous vegetable farmers to climate change in Kenya(Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2020) Chepkoech, Winifred; Mungai, Nancy W.; Stöber, Silke; Lotze-Campen, HermannUnderstanding the adaptive capacity (AC) of farmers is crucial to planning effective adaptation. Action to promote farmers’ AC is required because climate change (CC) is resulting in unpredictable alterations in weather patterns. Based on the sustainable livelihoods framework (SLF), this study explored how access to natural, physical, financial, social and human capitals enhances the AC. Quantitative data from 269 African indigenous vegetable (AIV) farmers in three selected agro-climatic zones in Kenya were analysed. Four indicators in each capital were selected based on previous studies and judgments collected from an expert online ranking survey (n = 35). The Kruskal-Wallis H test and an independent sample t-test were used to test the independence of AC scores and access to the different resources. The findings showed that the majority of farmers (53%) had a moderate AC, while fewer (32%) and (15%) had low or high AC levels respectively. Disparities in adaptive capacity scores were recorded between respondents in terms of their age, marital status and location. Farmers had high access to social capital but low access to financial, natural and human capitals. Female farmers showed lower capacities in the areas of financial, human and natural resources, while their male counterparts had low access to some human and social capitals. Resilient interventions that target individuals with low adaptive capacities are required. © 2020 The Authors