Current challenges of implementing anthropogenic land-use and land-cover change in models contributing to climate change assessments

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from European Geosciences Union (EGU) via the DOI in this record.Land-use and land-cover change (LULCC) represents one of the key drivers of global environmental change. However, the processes and drivers of anthropogenic land-use activity are still overly simplistically implemented in terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs). The published results of these models are used in major assessments of processes and impacts of global environmental change, such as the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Fully coupled models of climate, land use and biogeochemical cycles to explore land use-climate interactions across spatial scales are currently not available. Instead, information on land use is provided as exogenous data from the land-use change modules of integrated assessment models (IAMs) to TBMs. In this article, we discuss, based on literature review and illustrative analysis of empirical and modeled LULCC data, three major challenges of this current LULCC representation and their implications for land use-climate interaction studies: (I) provision of consistent, harmonized, land-use time series spanning from historical reconstructions to future projections while accounting for uncertainties associated with different land-use modeling approaches, (II) accounting for sub-grid processes and bidirectional changes (gross changes) across spatial scales, and (III) the allocation strategy of independent land-use data at the grid cell level in TBMs. We discuss the factors that hamper the development of improved land-use representation, which sufficiently accounts for uncertainties in the land-use modeling process. We propose that LULCC data-provider and user communities should engage in the joint development and evaluation of enhanced LULCC time series, which account for the diversity of LULCC modeling and increasingly include empirically based information about sub-grid processes and land-use transition trajectories, to improve the representation of land use in TBMs. Moreover, we suggest concentrating on the development of integrated modeling frameworks that may provide further understanding of possible land-climate-society feedbacks.The research in this paper has been supported by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme project LUC4C (Grant No. 603542), ERC grant GLOLAND (No. 311819) and BiodivERsA project TALE (No. 832.14.006) funded by the Dutch National Science Foundation (NWO). This research contributes to the Global Land Project (www.globallandproject.org). This is paper number 26 of the Birmingham Institute of Forest Research

Global and regional effects of land-use change on climate in 21st century simulations with interactive carbon cycle

Biogeophysical (BGP) and biogeochemical (BGC) effects of land-use and land cover change (LULCC) are separated at the global and regional scales in new interactive CO2 simulations for the 21st century. Results from four earth system models (ESMs) are analyzed for the future RCP8.5 scenario from simulations with and without land-use and land cover change (LULCC), contributing to the Land-Use and Climate, IDentification of robust impacts (LUCID) project. Over the period 2006–2100, LULCC causes the atmospheric CO2 concentration to increase by 12, 22, and 66 ppm in CanESM2, MIROC-ESM, and MPI-ESM-LR, respectively. Statistically significant changes in global near-surface temperature are found in three models with a BGC-induced global mean annual warming between 0.07 and 0.23 K. BGP-induced responses are simulated by three models in areas of intense LULCC of varying sign and magnitude (between −0.47 and 0.10 K). Modifications of the land carbon pool by LULCC are disentangled in accordance with processes that can lead to increases and decreases in this carbon pool. Global land carbon losses due to LULCC are simulated by all models: 218, 57, 35 and 34 Gt C by MPI-ESM-LR, MIROC-ESM, IPSL-CM5A-LR and CanESM2, respectively. On the contrary, the CO2-fertilization effect caused by elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations due to LULCC leads to a land carbon gain of 39 Gt C in MPI-ESM-LR and is almost negligible in the other models. A substantial part of the spread in models' responses to LULCC is attributed to the differences in implementation of LULCC (e.g., whether pastures or crops are simulated explicitly) and the simulation of specific processes. Simple idealized experiments with clear protocols for implementing LULCC in ESMs are needed to increase the understanding of model responses and the statistical significance of results, especially when analyzing the regional-scale impacts of LULCC

From biota to chemistry and climate: Towards a comprehensive description of trace gas exchange between the biosphere and atmosphere

Exchange of non-CO2 trace gases between the land surface and the atmosphere plays an important role in atmospheric chemistry and climate. Recent studies have highlighted its importance for interpretation of glacial-interglacial ice-core records, the simulation of the pre-industrial and present atmosphere, and the potential for large climate-chemistry and climate-aerosol feedbacks in the coming century. However, spatial and temporal variations in trace gas emissions and the magnitude of future feedbacks are a major source of uncertainty in atmospheric chemistry, air quality and climate science. To reduce such uncertainties Dynamic Global Vegetation Models (DGVMs) are currently being expanded to mechanistically represent processes relevant to non-CO2 trace gas exchange between land biota and the atmosphere. In this paper we present a review of important non-CO2 trace gas emissions, the state-of-the-art in DGVM modelling of processes regulating these emissions, identify key uncertainties for global scale model applications, and discuss a methodology for model integration and evaluation

Effect of anthropogenic land-use and land cover changes on climate and land carbon storage in CMIP5 projections for the 21st century

This is the final version of the article. Available from the American Meteorological Society via the DOI in this record.The effects of land-use changes on climate are assessed using specified-concentration simulations complementary to the representative concentration pathway 2.6 (RCP2.6) and RCP8.5 scenarios performed for phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5). This analysis focuses on differences in climate and land–atmosphere fluxes between the ensemble averages of simulations with and without land-use changes by the end of the twenty-first century. Even though common land-use scenarios are used, the areas of crops and pastures are specific for each Earth system model (ESM). This is due to different interpretations of land-use classes. The analysis reveals that fossil fuel forcing dominates land-use forcing. In addition, the effects of land-use changes are globally not significant, whereas they are significant for regions with land-use changes exceeding 10%. For these regions, three out of six participating models—the Second Generation Canadian Earth System Model (CanESM2); Hadley Centre Global Environmental Model, version 2 (Earth System) (HadGEM2-ES); and Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate, Earth System Model (MIROC-ESM)—reveal statistically significant changes in mean annual surface air temperature. In addition, changes in land surface albedo, available energy, and latent heat fluxes are small but significant for most ESMs in regions affected by land-use changes. These climatic effects are relatively small, as land-use changes in the RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 scenarios are small in magnitude and mainly limited to tropical and subtropical regions. The relative importance of the climatic effects of land-use changes is higher for the RCP2.6 scenario, which considers an expansion of biofuel croplands as a climate mitigation option. The underlying similarity among all models is the loss in global land carbon storage due to land-use changes.We acknowledge the World Climate Research Programme Working Group on Coupled Modelling, which is responsible for CMIP, and we thank the climate modeling groups for producing and making available their model output. We thank Karl Taylor and Charles Doutriaux for help with setting up the CMOR tables for the LUCID–CMIP5 experiments. We appreciate a support by the staff of the German Climate Computing Center (DKRZ), in particular by Stephanie Legutke and Estanislao Gonzalez, in performing the LUCID–CMIP5 simulations and in making the model results available via DKRZ ESG gateway. We thank Andy Pitman and an anonymous reviewer for providing constructive and helpful comments on the manuscript. CDJ was supported by the Joint DECC/Defra Met Office Hadley Centre Climate Programme (GA01101). EK was supported by the Environmental Research and Technology Development Fund (S-5, S-10) of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan. PF and FP were supported by the EU-FP7 COMBINE project (Grant 226520)

Afforestation impact on soil temperature in regional climate model simulations over Europe

In the context of the first phase of the Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment in the European domain (EURO-CORDEX) flagship plot study on Land Use and Climate Across Scales (LUCAS), we investigate the biophysical impact of afforestation on the seasonal cycle of soil temperature over the European continent with an ensemble of 10 regional climate models. For this purpose, each ensemble member performed two idealized land cover experiments in which Europe is covered either by forests or grasslands. The multi-model mean exhibits a reduction of the annual amplitude of soil temperature (AAST) due to afforestation over all European regions, although this is not a robust feature among the models. In the Mediterranean, the spread of simulated AAST response to afforestation is between −4 and +2 ∘C at 1 m below the ground, while in Scandinavia the inter-model spread ranges from −7 to +1 ∘C. We show that the large range in the simulated AAST response is due to the representation of the summertime climate processes and is largely explained by inter-model differences in leaf area index (LAI), surface albedo, cloud fraction and soil moisture, when all combined into a multiple linear regression. The changes in these drivers essentially determine the ratio between the increased radiative energy at surface (due to lower albedo in forests) and the increased sum of turbulent heat fluxes (due to mixing-facilitating characteristics of forests), and consequently decide the changes in soil heating with afforestation in each model. Finally, we pair FLUXNET sites to compare the simulated results with observation-based evidence of the impact of forest on soil temperature. In line with models, observations indicate a summer ground cooling in forested areas compared to open lands. The vast majority of models agree with the sign of the observed reduction in AAST, although with a large variation in the magnitude of changes. Overall, we aspire to emphasize the biophysical effects of afforestation on soil temperature profile with this study, given that changes in the seasonal cycle of soil temperature potentially perturb crucial biochemical processes. Robust knowledge on biophysical impacts of afforestation on soil conditions and its feedbacks on local and regional climate is needed in support of effective land-based climate mitigation and adaption policies

Uncertainties in climate responses to past land cover change: First results from the LUCID intercomparison study

Seven climate models were used to explore the biogeophysical impacts of human-induced land cover change (LCC) at regional and global scales. The imposed LCC led to statistically significant decreases in the northern hemisphere summer latent heat flux in three models, and increases in three models. Five models simulated statistically significant cooling in summer in near-surface temperature over regions of LCC and one simulated warming. There were few significant changes in precipitation. Our results show no common remote impacts of LCC. The lack of consistency among the seven models was due to: 1) the implementation of LCC despite agreed maps of agricultural land, 2) the representation of crop phenology, 3) the parameterisation of albedo, and 4) the representation of evapotranspiration for different land cover types. This study highlights a dilemma: LCC is regionally significant, but it is not feasible to impose a common LCC across multiple models for the next IPCC assessment

The Copenhagen Diagnosis: Updating the World on the Latest Climate Science

The Copenhagen Diagnosis is a summary of the global warming peer reviewed science since 2007. Produced by a team of 26 scientists led by the University of New South Wales Climate Research Centre, the Diagnosis convincingly proves that the effects of global warming have gotten worse in the last three years. It is a timely update to the UN’s Intercontinental Panel on Climate Change 2007 Fourth Assessment document (IPCC AR4). The report places the blame for the century long temperature increase on human factors and says the turning point ";must come soon";. If we are to limit warming to 2 degrees above pre-industrial values, global emissions must peak by 2020 at the latest and then decline rapidly. The scientists warned that waiting for higher levels of scientific certainty could mean that some tipping points will be crossed before they are recognized. By 2050 we will effectively need to be in a post-carbon economy if we are to avoid unlivable temperatures

Counting on U training to enhance trusting relationships and mental health literacy among business advisors : protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Financial distress is thought to be a key reason why small-medium enterprise (SME) owners experience higher levels of mental health conditions compared with the broader population. Business advisors who form trusting, high-quality relationships with their SME clients, are therefore well placed to: (1) help prevent/reduce key sources of financial distress, (2) better understand the business and personal needs of their clients and, (3) recognise the signs and symptoms of mental health conditions and encourage help-seeking where appropriate. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of relationship building training (RBT) combined with mental health first aid (MHFA) training for business advisors with MHFA alone, on the financial and mental health of their SME-owner clients. Methods: This is a single blind, two-arm randomised controlled trial. Participants will be business advisors who provide information, guidance and/or assistance to SME owner clients and are in contact with them at least 3 times a year. The business advisors will invite their SME-owner clients to complete 3 online surveys at baseline, 6- and 12-months. Business advisors will be randomised to one of two conditions, using a 1:1 allocation ratio: (1) MHFA with RBT; or (2) MHFA alone, and complete 3 online surveys at baseline, 2- and 6- months. Primary outcomes will be measured in the business advisors and consist of the quality of the relationship, stigmatizing attitude, confidence to offer mental health first aid, quality of life and provision of mental health first aid. Secondary outcomes will be measured in the SMEs and includes trust in their business advisors, the quality of this relationship, financial wellbeing, financial distress, psychological distress, help-seeking behaviour, and quality of life. To complement the quantitative data, we will include a qualitative process evaluation to examine what contextual factors impacted the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance of the training. Discussion: As there is evidence for the connections between client trust, quality of relationship and financial and mental wellbeing, we hypothesise that the combined RBT and MHFA training will lead to greater improvements in these outcomes in SME owners compared with MHFA alone. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04982094. Retrospectively registered 13/8/2021. The study started in February 2021 and the recruitment is ongoing. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0498209