5 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
- ItemBalancing trade-offs between ecosystem services in Germany's forests under climate change(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2018) Gutsch, Martin; Lasch-Born, Petra; Kollas, Chris; Suckow, Felicitas; Reyer, Christopher P.O.Germany's forests provide a variety of ecosystem services. Sustainable forest management aims to optimize the provision of these services at regional level. However, climate change will impact forest ecosystems and subsequently ecosystem services. The objective of this study is to quantify the effects of two alternative management scenarios and climate impacts on forest variables indicative of ecosystem services related to timber, habitat, water, and carbon. The ecosystem services are represented through nine model output variables (timber harvest, above and belowground biomass, net ecosystem production, soil carbon, percolation, nitrogen leaching, deadwood, tree dimension, broadleaf tree proportion) from the process-based forest model 4C. We simulated forest growth, carbon and water cycling until 2045 with 4C set-up for the whole German forest area based on National Forest Inventory data and driven by three management strategies (nature protection, biomass production and a baseline management) and an ensemble of regional climate scenarios (RCP2.6, RCP 4.5, RCP 8.5). We provide results as relative changes compared to the baseline management and observed climate. Forest management measures have the strongest effects on ecosystem services inducing positive or negative changes of up to 40% depending on the ecosystem service in question, whereas climate change only slightly alters ecosystem services averaged over the whole forest area. The ecosystem services 'carbon' and 'timber' benefit from climate change, while 'water' and 'habitat' lose. We detect clear trade-offs between 'timber' and all other ecosystem services, as well as synergies between 'habitat' and 'carbon'. When evaluating all ecosystem services simultaneously, our results reveal certain interrelations between climate and management scenarios. North-eastern and western forest regions are more suitable to provide timber (while minimizing the negative impacts on remaining ecosystem services) whereas southern and central forest regions are more suitable to fulfil 'habitat' and 'carbon' services. The results provide the base for future forest management optimizations at the regional scale in order to maximize ecosystem services and forest ecosystem sustainability at the national scale.
- ItemPhotosynthetic productivity and its efficiencies in ISIMIP2a biome models: Benchmarking for impact assessment studies(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2017) Ito, Akihiko; Nishina, Kazuya; Reyer, Christopher P.O.; François, Louis; Henrot, Alexandra-Jane; Munhoven, Guy; Jacquemin, Ingrid; Tian, Hanqin; Yang, Jia; Pan, Shufen; Morfopoulos, Catherine; Betts, Richard; Hickler, Thomas; Steinkamp, Jörg; Ostberg, Sebastian; Schaphoff, Sibyll; Ciais, Philippe; Chang, Jinfeng; Rafique, Rashid; Zeng, Ning; Zhao, FangSimulating vegetation photosynthetic productivity (or gross primary production, GPP) is a critical feature of the biome models used for impact assessments of climate change. We conducted a benchmarking of global GPP simulated by eight biome models participating in the second phase of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP2a) with four meteorological forcing datasets (30 simulations), using independent GPP estimates and recent satellite data of solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence as a proxy of GPP. The simulated global terrestrial GPP ranged from 98 to 141 Pg C yr−1 (1981–2000 mean); considerable inter-model and inter-data differences were found. Major features of spatial distribution and seasonal change of GPP were captured by each model, showing good agreement with the benchmarking data. All simulations showed incremental trends of annual GPP, seasonal-cycle amplitude, radiation-use efficiency, and water-use efficiency, mainly caused by the CO2 fertilization effect. The incremental slopes were higher than those obtained by remote sensing studies, but comparable with those by recent atmospheric observation. Apparent differences were found in the relationship between GPP and incoming solar radiation, for which forcing data differed considerably. The simulated GPP trends co-varied with a vegetation structural parameter, leaf area index, at model-dependent strengths, implying the importance of constraining canopy properties. In terms of extreme events, GPP anomalies associated with a historical El Niño event and large volcanic eruption were not consistently simulated in the model experiments due to deficiencies in both forcing data and parameterized environmental responsiveness. Although the benchmarking demonstrated the overall advancement of contemporary biome models, further refinements are required, for example, for solar radiation data and vegetation canopy schemes.
- 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.
- ItemAre forest disturbances amplifying or canceling out climate change-induced productivity changes in European forests?(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2017) Reyer, Christopher P.O.; Bathgate, Stephen; Blennow, Kristina; Borges, Jose G.; Bugmann, Harald; Delzon, Sylvain; Faias, Sonia P.; Garcia-Gonzalo, Jordi; Gardiner, Barry; Gonzalez-Olabarria, Jose Ramon; Gracia, Carlos; Hernández, Juan Guerra; Kellomäki, Seppo; Kramer, Koen; Lexer, Manfred J.; Lindner, Marcus; van der Maaten, Ernst; Maroschek, Michael; Muys, Bart; Nicoll, Bruce; Palahi, Marc; Palma, João HN; Paulo, Joana A.; Peltola, Heli; Pukkala, Timo; Rammer, Werner; Ray, Duncan; Sabaté, Santiago; Schelhaas, Mart-Jan; Seidl, Rupert; Temperli, Christian; Tomé, Margarida; Yousefpour, Rasoul; Zimmermann, Niklaus E.; Hanewinkel, MarcRecent studies projecting future climate change impacts on forests mainly consider either the effects of climate change on productivity or on disturbances. However, productivity and disturbances are intrinsically linked because 1) disturbances directly affect forest productivity (e.g. via a reduction in leaf area, growing stock or resource-use efficiency), and 2) disturbance susceptibility is often coupled to a certain development phase of the forest with productivity determining the time a forest is in this specific phase of susceptibility. The objective of this paper is to provide an overview of forest productivity changes in different forest regions in Europe under climate change, and partition these changes into effects induced by climate change alone and by climate change and disturbances. We present projections of climate change impacts on forest productivity from state-of-the-art forest models that dynamically simulate forest productivity and the effects of the main European disturbance agents (fire, storm, insects), driven by the same climate scenario in seven forest case studies along a large climatic gradient throughout Europe. Our study shows that, in most cases, including disturbances in the simulations exaggerate ongoing productivity declines or cancel out productivity gains in response to climate change. In fewer cases, disturbances also increase productivity or buffer climate-change induced productivity losses, e.g. because low severity fires can alleviate resource competition and increase fertilization. Even though our results cannot simply be extrapolated to other types of forests and disturbances, we argue that it is necessary to interpret climate change-induced productivity and disturbance changes jointly to capture the full range of climate change impacts on forests and to plan adaptation measures.
- ItemRegional contribution to variability and trends of global gross primary productivity(Bristol : IOP Publishing, 2017) Chen, Min; Rafique, Rashid; Asrar, Ghassem R.; Bond-Lamberty, Ben; Ciais, Philippe; Zhao, Fang; Reyer, Christopher P.O.; Ostberg, Sebastian; Chang, Jinfeng; Ito, Akihiko; Yang, Jia; Zeng, Ning; Kalnay, Eugenia; West, Tristram; Leng, Guoyong; Francois, Louis; Munhoven, Guy; Henrot, Alexandra; Tian, Hanqin; Pan, Shufen; Nishina, Kazuya; Viovy, Nicolas; Morfopoulos, Catherine; Betts, Richard; Schaphoff, Sibyll; Steinkamp, JörgTerrestrial gross primary productivity (GPP) is the largest component of the global carbon cycle and a key process for understanding land ecosystems dynamics. In this study, we used GPP estimates from a combination of eight global biome models participating in the Inter-Sectoral Impact-Model Intercomparison Project phase 2a (ISIMIP2a), the Moderate Resolution Spectroradiometer (MODIS) GPP product, and a data-driven product (Model Tree Ensemble, MTE) to study the spatiotemporal variability of GPP at the regional and global levels. We found the 2000–2010 total global GPP estimated from the model ensemble to be 117 ± 13 Pg C yr−1 (mean ± 1 standard deviation), which was higher than MODIS (112 Pg C yr−1), and close to the MTE (120 Pg C yr−1). The spatial patterns of MODIS, MTE and ISIMIP2a GPP generally agree well, but their temporal trends are different, and the seasonality and inter-annual variability of GPP at the regional and global levels are not completely consistent. For the model ensemble, Tropical Latin America contributes the most to global GPP, Asian regions contribute the most to the global GPP trend, the Northern Hemisphere regions dominate the global GPP seasonal variations, and Oceania is likely the largest contributor to inter-annual variability of global GPP. However, we observed large uncertainties across the eight ISIMIP2a models, which are probably due to the differences in the formulation of underlying photosynthetic processes. The results of this study are useful in understanding the contributions of different regions to global GPP and its spatiotemporal variability, how the model- and observational-based GPP estimates differ from each other in time and space, and the relative strength of the eight models. Our results also highlight the models' ability to capture the seasonality of GPP that are essential for understanding the inter-annual and seasonal variability of GPP as a major component of the carbon cycle.