Influence of fire on the carbon cycle and climate

Purpose of Review: Understanding of how fire affects the carbon cycle and climate is crucial for climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies. As those are often based on Earth system model simulations, we identify recent progress and research needs that can improve the model representation of fire and its impacts. Recent Findings New constraints of fire effects on the carbon cycle and climate are provided by the quantification of the carbon ages and effects of vegetation types and traits. For global scale modelling the low understanding of the human-fire relationship is limiting. Summary Recent developments allow improvements in Earth system models with respect to the influences of vegetation on climate, peatland burning and the pyrogenic carbon cycle. Better understanding of human influences is required. Given the impacts of fire on carbon storage and climate, thorough understanding of the effects of fire in the Earth system is crucial to support climate change mitigation and adaptation

Recent global and regional trends in burned area and their compensating environmental controls

The apparent decline in the global incidence of fire between 1996 and 2015, as measured by satellite- observations of burned area, has been related to socioeconomic and land use changes. However, recent decades have also seen changes in climate and vegetation that influence fire and fire-enabled vegetation models do not reproduce the apparent decline. Given that the satellite-derived burned area datasets are still relatively short (<20 years), this raises questions both about the robustness of the apparent decline and what causes it. We use two global satellite-derived burned area datasets and a data-driven fire model to (1) assess the spatio-temporal robustness of the burned area trends and (2) to relate the trends to underlying changes in temperature, precipitation, human population density and vegetation conditions. Although the satellite datasets and simulation all show a decline in global burned area over ~20 years, the trend is not significant and is strongly affected by the start and end year chosen for trend analysis and the year-to-year variability in burned area. The global and regional trends shown by the two satellite datasets are poorly correlated for the common overlapping period (2001–2015) and the fire model simulates changes in global and regional burned area that lie within the uncertainties of the satellite datasets. The model simulations show that recent increases in temperature would lead to increased burned area but this effect is compensated by increasing wetness or increases in population, both of which lead to declining burned area. Increases in vegetation cover and density associated with recent greening trends lead to increased burned area in fuel-limited regions. Our analyses show that global and regional burned area trends result from the interaction of compensating trends in controls of wildfire at regional scales

A data-driven approach to identify controls on global fire activity from satellite and climate observations (SOFIA V1)

Vegetation fires affect human infrastructures, ecosystems, global vegetation distribution, and atmospheric composition. However, the climatic, environmental, and socioeconomic factors that control global fire activity in vegetation are only poorly understood, and in various complexities and formulations are represented in global process-oriented vegetation-fire models. Data-driven model approaches such as machine learning algorithms have successfully been used to identify and better understand controlling factors for fire activity. However, such machine learning models cannot be easily adapted or even implemented within process-oriented global vegetation-fire models. To overcome this gap between machine learning-based approaches and process-oriented global fire models, we introduce a new flexible data-driven fire modelling approach here (Satellite Observations to predict FIre Activity, SOFIA approach version 1). SOFIA models can use several predictor variables and functional relationships to estimate burned area that can be easily adapted with more complex process-oriented vegetation-fire models. We created an ensemble of SOFIA models to test the importance of several predictor variables. SOFIA models result in the highest performance in predicting burned area if they account for a direct restriction of fire activity under wet conditions and if they include a land cover-dependent restriction or allowance of fire activity by vegetation density and biomass. The use of vegetation optical depth data from microwave satellite observations, a proxy for vegetation biomass and water content, reaches higher model performance than commonly used vegetation variables from optical sensors. We further analyse spatial patterns of the sensitivity between anthropogenic, climate, and vegetation predictor variables and burned area. We finally discuss how multiple observational datasets on climate, hydrological, vegetation, and socioeconomic variables together with data-driven modelling and model–data integration approaches can guide the future development of global process-oriented vegetation-fire models

The Fire Modeling Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), phase 1: experimental and analytical protocols

The important role of fire in regulating vegetation community composition and contributions to emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols make it a critical component of dynamic global vegetation models and Earth system models. Over two decades of development, a wide variety of model structures and mechanisms have been designed and incorporated into global fire models, which have been linked to different vegetation models. However, there has not yet been a systematic examination of how these different strategies contribute to model performance. Here we describe the structure of the first phase of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), which for the first time seeks to systematically compare a number of models. By combining a standardized set of input data and model experiments with a rigorous comparison of model outputs to each other and to observations, we will improve the understanding of what drives vegetation fire, how it can best be simulated, and what new or improved observational data could allow better constraints on model behavior. Here we introduce the fire models used in the first phase of FireMIP, the simulation protocols applied, and the benchmarking system used to evaluate the models

How contemporary bioclimatic and human controls change global fire regimes

Anthropogenically driven declines in tropical savannah burnt area have recently received attention due to their effect on trends in global burnt area. Large-scale trends in ecosystems where vegetation has adapted to infrequent fire, especially in cooler and wetter forested areas, are less well understood. Here, small changes in fire regimes can have a substantial impact on local biogeochemistry. To investigate trends in fire across a wide range of ecosystems, we used Bayesian inference to quantify four primary controls on burnt area: fuel continuity, fuel moisture, ignitions and anthropogenic suppression. We found that fuel continuity and moisture are the dominant limiting factors of burnt area globally. Suppression is most important in cropland areas, whereas savannahs and boreal forests are most sensitive to ignitions. We quantify fire regime shifts in areas with more than one, and often counteracting, trends in these controls. Forests are of particular concern, where we show average shifts in controls of 2.3–2.6% of their potential maximum per year, mainly driven by trends in fuel continuity and moisture. This study gives added importance to understanding long-term future changes in the controls on fire and the effect of fire trends on ecosystem function

The status and challenge of global fire modelling

This is the final version of the article. Available from European Geosciences Union / Copernicus Publications via the DOI in this record.The discussion paper version of this article was published in Biogeosciences Discussions on 25 January 2016 and is in ORE at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/34451Biomass burning impacts vegetation dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate, with sometimes deleterious socio-economic impacts. Under future climate projections it is often expected that the risk of wildfires will increase. Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes, using either well-founded empirical relationships or process-based models with good predictive skill. While a large variety of models exist today, it is still unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. This is the central question underpinning the creation of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), an international initiative to compare and evaluate existing global fire models against benchmark data sets for present-day and historical conditions. In this paper we review how fires have been represented in fire-enabled dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) and give an overview of the current state of the art in fire-regime modelling. We indicate which challenges still remain in global fire modelling and stress the need for a comprehensive model evaluation and outline what lessons may be learned from FireMIP.Stijn Hantson and Almut Arneth acknowledge support by the EU FP7 projects BACCHUS (grant agreement no. 603445) and LUC4C (grant agreement no. 603542). This work was supported, in part, by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), through the Helmholtz Association and its research programme ATMO, and the HGF Impulse and Networking fund. The MC-FIRE model development was supported by the global change research programmes of the Biological Resources Division of the US Geological Survey (CA 12681901,112-), the US Department of Energy (LWT-6212306509), the US Forest Service (PNW96–5I0 9 -2-CA), and funds from the Joint Fire Science Program. I. Colin Prentice is supported by the AXA Research Fund under the Chair Programme in Biosphere and Climate Impacts, part of the Imperial College initiative Grand Challenges in Ecosystems and the Environment. Fang Li was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation (grant agreement no. 41475099 and no. 2010CB951801). Jed O. Kaplan was supported by the European Research Council (COEVOLVE 313797). Sam S. Rabin was funded by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, as well as by the Carbon Mitigation Initiative. Allan Spessa acknowledges funding support provided by the Open University Research Investment Fellowship scheme. FireMIP is a non-funded community initiative and participation is open to all. For more information, contact Stijn Hantson ([email protected])

Quantitative assessment of fire and vegetation properties in simulations with fire-enabled vegetation models from the Fire Model Intercomparison Project

Global fire-vegetation models are widely used to assess impacts of environmental change on fire regimes and the carbon cycle and to infer relationships between climate, land use and fire. However, differences in model structure and parameterizations, in both the vegetation and fire components of these models, could influence overall model performance, and to date there has been limited evaluation of how well different models represent various aspects of fire regimes. The Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP) is coordinating the evaluation of state-of-the-art global fire models, in order to improve projections of fire characteristics and fire impacts on ecosystems and human societies in the context of global environmental change. Here we perform a systematic evaluation of historical simulations made by nine FireMIP models to quantify their ability to reproduce a range of fire and vegetation benchmarks. The FireMIP models simulate a wide range in global annual total burnt area (39–536 Mha) and global annual fire carbon emission (0.91–4.75 Pg C yr−1) for modern conditions (2002–2012), but most of the range in burnt area is within observational uncertainty (345–468 Mha). Benchmarking scores indicate that seven out of nine FireMIP models are able to represent the spatial pattern in burnt area. The models also reproduce the seasonality in burnt area reasonably well but struggle to simulate fire season length and are largely unable to represent interannual variations in burnt area. However, models that represent cropland fires see improved simulation of fire seasonality in the Northern Hemisphere. The three FireMIP models which explicitly simulate individual fires are able to reproduce the spatial pattern in number of fires, but fire sizes are too small in key regions, and this results in an underestimation of burnt area. The correct representation of spatial and seasonal patterns in vegetation appears to correlate with a better representation of burnt area. The two older fire models included in the FireMIP ensemble (LPJ–GUESS–GlobFIRM, MC2) clearly perform less well globally than other models, but it is difficult to distinguish between the remaining ensemble members; some of these models are better at representing certain aspects of the fire regime; none clearly outperforms all other models across the full range of variables assessed

The status and challenge of global fire modelling

Biomass burning impacts vegetation dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate, with sometimes deleterious socio-economic impacts. Under future climate projections it is often expected that the risk of wildfires will increase. Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes, using either well-founded empirical relationships or process-based models with good predictive skill. While a large variety of models exist today, it is still unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. This is the central question underpinning the creation of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), an international initiative to compare and evaluate existing global fire models against benchmark data sets for present-day and historical conditions. In this paper we review how fires have been represented in fire-enabled dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) and give an overview of the current state of the art in fire-regime modelling. We indicate which challenges still remain in global fire modelling and stress the need for a comprehensive model evaluation and outline what lessons may be learned from FireMIP

The College News, 1923-01-24, Vol. 09, No. 13

Bryn Mawr College student newspaper. Merged with The Haverford News in 1968 to form the Bi-college News (with various titles from 1968 on). Published weekly (except holidays) during the academic year

The status and challenge of global fire modelling

Biomass burning impacts vegetation dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, atmospheric chemistry, and climate, with sometimes deleterious socio-economic impacts. Under future climate projections it is often expected that the risk of wildfires will increase. Our ability to predict the magnitude and geographic pattern of future fire impacts rests on our ability to model fire regimes, using either well-founded empirical relationships or process-based models with good predictive skill. While a large variety of models exist today, it is still unclear which type of model or degree of complexity is required to model fire adequately at regional to global scales. This is the central question underpinning the creation of the Fire Model Intercomparison Project (FireMIP), an international initiative to compare and evaluate existing global fire models against benchmark data sets for present-day and historical conditions. In this paper we review how fires have been represented in fire-enabled dynamic global vegetation models (DGVMs) and give an overview of the current state of the art in fire-regime modelling. We indicate which challenges still remain in global fire modelling and stress the need for a comprehensive model evaluation and outline what lessons may be learned from FireMIP