| 1. |
- Alexander, Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessing uncertainties in land cover projections
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology. - : Wiley. - 1354-1013. ; 23:2, s. 767-781
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Understanding uncertainties in land cover projections is critical to investigating land-based climate mitigation policies, assessing the potential of climate adaptation strategies and quantifying the impacts of land cover change on the climate system. Here, we identify and quantify uncertainties in global and European land cover projections over a diverse range of model types and scenarios, extending the analysis beyond the agro-economic models included in previous comparisons. The results from 75 simulations over 18 models are analysed and show a large range in land cover area projections, with the highest variability occurring in future cropland areas. We demonstrate systematic differences in land cover areas associated with the characteristics of the modelling approach, which is at least as great as the differences attributed to the scenario variations. The results lead us to conclude that a higher degree of uncertainty exists in land use projections than currently included in climate or earth system projections. To account for land use uncertainty, it is recommended to use a diverse set of models and approaches when assessing the potential impacts of land cover change on future climate. Additionally, further work is needed to better understand the assumptions driving land use model results and reveal the causes of uncertainty in more depth, to help reduce model uncertainty and improve the projections of land cover.
|
|
| 2. |
- Kim, HyeJin, et al.
(författare)
-
Towards a better future for biodiversity and people : Modelling Nature Futures
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Global Environmental Change. - 0959-3780 .- 1872-9495. ; 82
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Nature Futures Framework (NFF) is a heuristic tool for co-creating positive futures for nature and people. It seeks to open up a diversity of futures through mainly three value perspectives on nature - Nature for Nature, Nature for Society, and Nature as Culture. This paper describes how the NFF can be applied in modelling to support decision-making. First, we describe key considerations for the NFF in developing qualitative and quantitative scenarios: i) multiple value perspectives on nature as a state space where pathways improving nature toward a frontier can be represented, ii) mutually reinforcing key feedbacks of social-ecological systems that are important for nature conservation and human wellbeing, iii) indicators of multiple knowledge systems describing the evolution of complex social-ecological dynamics. We then present three approaches to modelling Nature Futures scenarios in the review, screening, and design phases of policy processes. This paper seeks to facilitate the integration of relational values of nature in models and strengthen modelled linkages across biodiversity, nature's contributions to people, and quality of life.
|
|
| 3. |
- Krause, Andreas, et al.
(författare)
-
Global consequences of afforestation and bioenergy cultivation on ecosystem service indicators
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Biogeosciences. - : Copernicus GmbH. - 1726-4170 .- 1726-4189. ; 14:21, s. 4829-4850
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Land management for carbon storage is discussed as being indispensable for climate change mitigation because of its large potential to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and to avoid further emissions from deforestation. However, the acceptance and feasibility of land-based mitigation projects depends on potential side effects on other important ecosystem functions and their services. Here, we use projections of future land use and land cover for different land-based mitigation options from two land-use models (IMAGE and MAgPIE) and evaluate their effects with a global dynamic vegetation model (LPJ-GUESS). In the landuse models, carbon removal was achieved either via growth of bioenergy crops combined with carbon capture and storage, via avoided deforestation and afforestation, or via a combination of both. We compare these scenarios to a reference scenario without land-based mitigation and analyse the LPJ-GUESS simulations with the aim of assessing synergies and trade-offs across a range of ecosystem service indicators: Carbon storage, surface albedo, evapotranspiration, water runoff, crop production, nitrogen loss, and emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds. In our mitigation simulations cumulative carbon storage by year 2099 ranged between 55 and 89 GtC. Other ecosystem service indicators were influenced heterogeneously both positively and negatively, with large variability across regions and land-use scenarios. Avoided deforestation and afforestation led to an increase in evapotranspiration and enhanced emissions of biogenic volatile organic compounds, and to a decrease in albedo, runoff, and nitrogen loss. Crop production could also decrease in the afforestation scenarios as a result of reduced crop area, especially for MAgPIE land-use patterns, if assumed increases in crop yields cannot be realized. Bioenergy-based climate change mitigation was projected to affect less area globally than in the forest expansion scenarios, and resulted in less pronounced changes in most ecosystem service indicators than forest-based mitigation, but included a possible decrease in nitrogen loss, crop production, and biogenic volatile organic compounds emissions.
|
|
| 4. |
- Krause, Andreas, et al.
(författare)
-
Large uncertainty in carbon uptake potential of land-based climate-change mitigation efforts
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology. - : Wiley. - 1354-1013. ; 24:7, s. 3025-3038
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Most climate mitigation scenarios involve negative emissions, especially those that aim to limit global temperature increase to 2°C or less. However, the carbon uptake potential in land-based climate change mitigation efforts is highly uncertain. Here, we address this uncertainty by using two land-based mitigation scenarios from two land-use models (IMAGE and MAgPIE) as input to four dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs; LPJ-GUESS, ORCHIDEE, JULES, LPJmL). Each of the four combinations of land-use models and mitigation scenarios aimed for a cumulative carbon uptake of ~130 GtC by the end of the century, achieved either via the cultivation of bioenergy crops combined with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) or avoided deforestation and afforestation (ADAFF). Results suggest large uncertainty in simulated future land demand and carbon uptake rates, depending on the assumptions related to land use and land management in the models. Total cumulative carbon uptake in the DGVMs is highly variable across mitigation scenarios, ranging between 19 and 130 GtC by year 2099. Only one out of the 16 combinations of mitigation scenarios and DGVMs achieves an equivalent or higher carbon uptake than achieved in the land-use models. The large differences in carbon uptake between the DGVMs and their discrepancy against the carbon uptake in IMAGE and MAgPIE are mainly due to different model assumptions regarding bioenergy crop yields and due to the simulation of soil carbon response to land-use change. Differences between land-use models and DGVMs regarding forest biomass and the rate of forest regrowth also have an impact, albeit smaller, on the results. Given the low confidence in simulated carbon uptake for a given land-based mitigation scenario, and that negative emissions simulated by the DGVMs are typically lower than assumed in scenarios consistent with the 2°C target, relying on negative emissions to mitigate climate change is a highly uncertain strategy.
|
|
| 5. |
- Leclere, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Bending the curve of terrestrial biodiversity needs an integrated strategy
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 585:7826, s. 551-556
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Increased efforts are required to prevent further losses to terrestrial biodiversity and the ecosystem services that it provides(1,2). Ambitious targets have been proposed, such as reversing the declining trends in biodiversity(3); however, just feeding the growing human population will make this a challenge(4). Here we use an ensemble of land-use and biodiversity models to assess whether-and how-humanity can reverse the declines in terrestrial biodiversity caused by habitat conversion, which is a major threat to biodiversity(5). We show that immediate efforts, consistent with the broader sustainability agenda but of unprecedented ambition and coordination, could enable the provision of food for the growing human population while reversing the global terrestrial biodiversity trends caused by habitat conversion. If we decide to increase the extent of land under conservation management, restore degraded land and generalize landscape-level conservation planning, biodiversity trends from habitat conversion could become positive by the mid-twenty-first century on average across models (confidence interval, 2042-2061), but this was not the case for all models. Food prices could increase and, on average across models, almost half (confidence interval, 34-50%) of the future biodiversity losses could not be avoided. However, additionally tackling the drivers of land-use change could avoid conflict with affordable food provision and reduces the environmental effects of the food-provision system. Through further sustainable intensification and trade, reduced food waste and more plant-based human diets, more than two thirds of future biodiversity losses are avoided and the biodiversity trends from habitat conversion are reversed by 2050 for almost all of the models. Although limiting further loss will remain challenging in several biodiversity-rich regions, and other threats-such as climate change-must be addressed to truly reverse the declines in biodiversity, our results show that ambitious conservation efforts and food system transformation are central to an effective post-2020 biodiversity strategy. To promote the recovery of the currently declining global trends in terrestrial biodiversity, increases in both the extent of land under conservation management and the sustainability of the global food system from farm to fork are required.
|
|
| 6. |
- Prestele, Reinhard, et al.
(författare)
-
Hotspots of uncertainty in land-use and land-cover change projections : a global-scale model comparison
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology. - : Wiley. - 1354-1013 .- 1365-2486. ; 22:12, s. 3967-3983
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Model-based global projections of future land-use and land-cover (LULC) change are frequently used in environmental assessments to study the impact of LULC change on environmental services and to provide decision support for policy. These projections are characterized by a high uncertainty in terms of quantity and allocation of projected changes, which can severely impact the results of environmental assessments. In this study, we identify hotspots of uncertainty, based on 43 simulations from 11 global-scale LULC change models representing a wide range of assumptions of future biophysical and socioeconomic conditions. We attribute components of uncertainty to input data, model structure, scenario storyline and a residual term, based on a regression analysis and analysis of variance. From this diverse set of models and scenarios, we find that the uncertainty varies, depending on the region and the LULC type under consideration. Hotspots of uncertainty appear mainly at the edges of globally important biomes (e.g., boreal and tropical forests). Our results indicate that an important source of uncertainty in forest and pasture areas originates from different input data applied in the models. Cropland, in contrast, is more consistent among the starting conditions, while variation in the projections gradually increases over time due to diverse scenario assumptions and different modeling approaches. Comparisons at the grid cell level indicate that disagreement is mainly related to LULC type definitions and the individual model allocation schemes. We conclude that improving the quality and consistency of observational data utilized in the modeling process and improving the allocation mechanisms of LULC change models remain important challenges. Current LULC representation in environmental assessments might miss the uncertainty arising from the diversity of LULC change modeling approaches, and many studies ignore the uncertainty in LULC projections in assessments of LULC change impacts on climate, water resources or biodiversity.
|
|
