气候变化领域集成服务门户(CCPortal): Inconsistent recognition of uncertainty in studies of climate change impacts on forests

CCPortal

DOI	10.1088/1748-9326/ab4670
	Inconsistent recognition of uncertainty in studies of climate change impacts on forests
	Petr M.; Vacchiano G.; Thom D.; Mairota P.; Kautz M.; Goncalves L.M.S.; Yousefpour R.; Kaloudis S.; Reyer C.P.O.
发表日期	2019
ISSN	17489318
卷号	14 期号:11
英文摘要	Background. Uncertainty about climate change impacts on forests can hinder mitigation and adaptation actions. Scientific enquiry typically involves assessments of uncertainties, yet different uncertainty components emerge in different studies. Consequently, inconsistent understanding of uncertainty among different climate impact studies (from the impact analysis to implementing solutions) can be an additional reason for delaying action. In this review we (a) expanded existing uncertainty assessment frameworks into one harmonised framework for characterizing uncertainty, (b) used this framework to identify and classify uncertainties in climate change impacts studies on forests, and (c) summarised the uncertainty assessment methods applied in those studies. Methods. We systematically reviewed climate change impact studies published between 1994 and 2016. We separated these studies into those generating information about climate change impacts on forests using models -'modelling studies', and those that used this information to design management actions-'decision-making studies'. We classified uncertainty across three dimensions: nature, level, and location, which can be further categorised into specific uncertainty types. Results. We found that different uncertainties prevail in modelling versus decision-making studies. Epistemic uncertainty is the most common nature of uncertainty covered by both types of studies, whereas ambiguity plays a pronounced role only in decision-making studies. Modelling studies equally investigate all levels of uncertainty, whereas decision-making studies mainly address scenario uncertainty and recognised ignorance. Finally, the main location of uncertainty for both modelling and decision-making studies is within the driving forces-representing, e.g. socioeconomic or policy changes. The most frequently used methods to assess uncertainty are expert elicitation, sensitivity and scenario analysis, but a full suite of methods exists that seems currently underutilized. Discussion & Synthesis. The misalignment of uncertainty types addressed by modelling and decision-making studies may complicate adaptation actions early in the implementation pathway. Furthermore, these differences can be a potential barrier for communicating research findings to decision-makers. © 2019 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd
英文关键词	Decision-making; Modelling; Science communication; Uncertainty assessment methods; Uncertainty recognition
语种	英语
scopus关键词	Climate models; Decision making; Forestry; Models; Uncertainty analysis; Climate change impact; Communicating researches; Epistemic uncertainties; Expert elicitation; Potential barriers; Science communications; Uncertainty assessment; Uncertainty recognition; Climate change; action plan; assessment method; climate change; climate effect; communication network; decision making; environmental modeling; forest; mitigation; policy implementation; uncertainty analysis
来源期刊	Environmental Research Letters
文献类型	期刊论文
条目标识符	http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/154337
作者单位	Forest Research, Forestry Commission, Northern Research Station, Roslin, EH25 9SY, United Kingdom; DISAA, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milano, I-20133, Italy; Institute of Silviculture, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences (BOKU), Vienna, A-1190, Austria; Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, United States; Department of Agri-Environmental and Territorial Sciences, University of Bari 'Aldo Moro', Bari, I-70126, Italy; Forest Health, Forest Research Institute Baden-Württemberg, Freiburg, D-79100, Germany; INESC Coimbra, NOVA IMS, Polytechnic Institute of Leiria, Leiria, Portugal; Forestry Economics and Forest Planning, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, D-70106, Germany; Department of Science, Agricultural University of Athens, Karpenisi, 36100, Greece; Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association, PO Box 60 12 03, Potsdam, D-14412, Germany
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714	Petr M.,Vacchiano G.,Thom D.,et al. Inconsistent recognition of uncertainty in studies of climate change impacts on forests[J],2019,14(11).
APA	Petr M..,Vacchiano G..,Thom D..,Mairota P..,Kautz M..,...&Reyer C.P.O..(2019).Inconsistent recognition of uncertainty in studies of climate change impacts on forests.Environmental Research Letters,14(11).
MLA	Petr M.,et al."Inconsistent recognition of uncertainty in studies of climate change impacts on forests".Environmental Research Letters 14.11(2019).