TY - JOUR
T1 - Integrated assessment model diagnostics
T2 - Key indicators and model evolution
AU - Harmsen, Mathijs
AU - Kriegler, Elmar
AU - Van Vuuren, Detlef P.
AU - Van Der Wijst, Kaj Ivar
AU - Luderer, Gunnar
AU - Cui, Ryna
AU - Dessens, Olivier
AU - Drouet, Laurent
AU - Emmerling, Johannes
AU - Morris, Jennifer Faye
AU - Fosse, Florian
AU - Fragkiadakis, Dimitris
AU - Fragkiadakis, Kostas
AU - Fragkos, Panagiotis
AU - Fricko, Oliver
AU - Fujimori, Shinichiro
AU - Gernaat, David
AU - Guivarch, Céline
AU - Iyer, Gokul
AU - Karkatsoulis, Panagiotis
AU - Keppo, Ilkka
AU - Keramidas, Kimon
AU - Köberle, Alexandre
AU - Kolp, Peter
AU - Krey, Volker
AU - Krüger, Christoph
AU - Leblanc, Florian
AU - Mittal, Shivika
AU - Paltsev, Sergey
AU - Rochedo, Pedro
AU - Van Ruijven, Bas J.
AU - Sands, Ronald D.
AU - Sano, Fuminori
AU - Strefler, Jessica
AU - Arroyo, Eveline Vasquez
AU - Wada, Kenichi
AU - Zakeri, Behnam
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd.
PY - 2021/5
Y1 - 2021/5
N2 - Integrated assessment models (IAMs) form a prime tool in informing about climate mitigation strategies. Diagnostic indicators that allow comparison across these models can help describe and explain differences in model projections. This increases transparency and comparability. Earlier, the IAM community has developed an approach to diagnose models (Kriegler (2015 Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90 45-61)). Here we build on this, by proposing a selected set of well-defined indicators as a community standard, to systematically and routinely assess IAM behaviour, similar to metrics used for other modeling communities such as climate models. These indicators are the relative abatement index, emission reduction type index, inertia timescale, fossil fuel reduction, transformation index and cost per abatement value. We apply the approach to 17 IAMs, assessing both older as well as their latest versions, as applied in the IPCC 6th Assessment Report. The study shows that the approach can be easily applied and used to indentify key differences between models and model versions. Moreover, we demonstrate that this comparison helps to link model behavior to model characteristics and assumptions. We show that together, the set of six indicators can provide useful indication of the main traits of the model and can roughly indicate the general model behavior. The results also show that there is often a considerable spread across the models. Interestingly, the diagnostic values often change for different model versions, but there does not seem to be a distinct trend.
AB - Integrated assessment models (IAMs) form a prime tool in informing about climate mitigation strategies. Diagnostic indicators that allow comparison across these models can help describe and explain differences in model projections. This increases transparency and comparability. Earlier, the IAM community has developed an approach to diagnose models (Kriegler (2015 Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90 45-61)). Here we build on this, by proposing a selected set of well-defined indicators as a community standard, to systematically and routinely assess IAM behaviour, similar to metrics used for other modeling communities such as climate models. These indicators are the relative abatement index, emission reduction type index, inertia timescale, fossil fuel reduction, transformation index and cost per abatement value. We apply the approach to 17 IAMs, assessing both older as well as their latest versions, as applied in the IPCC 6th Assessment Report. The study shows that the approach can be easily applied and used to indentify key differences between models and model versions. Moreover, we demonstrate that this comparison helps to link model behavior to model characteristics and assumptions. We show that together, the set of six indicators can provide useful indication of the main traits of the model and can roughly indicate the general model behavior. The results also show that there is often a considerable spread across the models. Interestingly, the diagnostic values often change for different model versions, but there does not seem to be a distinct trend.
KW - 6th Assessment Report IPCC
KW - AR6
KW - climate policy
KW - diagnostics
KW - integrated assessment models
KW - mitigation
KW - renewable energy
U2 - 10.1088/1748-9326/abf964
DO - 10.1088/1748-9326/abf964
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85105919084
SN - 1748-9318
VL - 16
JO - Environmental Research Letters
JF - Environmental Research Letters
IS - 5
M1 - 054046
ER -