Global S&T Development Trend Analysis Platform of Resources and Environment
DOI | 10.1088/1748-9326/ab4670 |
Inconsistent recognition of uncertainty in studies of climate change impacts on forests | |
Petr, M.1; Vacchiano, G.2; Thom, D.3,4; Mairota, P.5; Kautz, M.6; Goncalves, L. M. S.7; Yousefpour, R.8; Kaloudis, S.9; Reyer, C. P. O.10,11 | |
2019-11-01 | |
发表期刊 | ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS
![]() |
ISSN | 1748-9326 |
出版年 | 2019 |
卷号 | 14期号:11 |
文章类型 | Review |
语种 | 英语 |
国家 | Scotland; Italy; Austria; USA; Germany; Portugal; Greece |
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. |
英文关键词 | uncertainty recognition modelling decision-making uncertainty assessment methods science communication |
领域 | 气候变化 |
收录类别 | SCI-E ; SSCI |
WOS记录号 | WOS:000499973700001 |
WOS关键词 | ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ; POLICY-MAKERS ; MANAGEMENT ; FRAMEWORK ; BIODIVERSITY ; PROJECTIONS ; FUTURE ; AGENTS ; RISK |
WOS类目 | Environmental Sciences ; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences |
WOS研究方向 | Environmental Sciences & Ecology ; Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences |
引用统计 | |
文献类型 | 期刊论文 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.173/C666/handle/2XK7JSWQ/224669 |
专题 | 环境与发展全球科技态势 |
作者单位 | 1.Forestry Commiss, Forest Res, Northern Res Stn, Roslin EH25 9SY, Midlothian, Scotland; 2.Univ Milan, DISAA, I-20133 Milan, Italy; 3.Univ Nat Resources & Life Sci BOKU, Inst Silviculture, A-1190 Vienna, Austria; 4.Univ Vermont, Rubenstein Sch Environm & Nat Resources, Burlington, VT 05405 USA; 5.Univ Bari Aldo Moro, Dept Agrienvironm & Territorial Sci, I-70126 Bari, Italy; 6.Forest Res Inst Baden Wurttemberg, Forest Hlth, D-79100 Freiburg, Germany; 7.INESC Coimbra, NOVA IMS, Polytech Inst Leiria, Leiria, Portugal; 8.Univ Freiburg, Forestry Econ & Forest Planning, D-70106 Freiburg, Germany; 9.Agr Univ Athens, Dept Sci, Karpenisi 36100, Greece; 10.Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res PIK, POB 60 12 03, D-14412 Potsdam, Germany; 11.Leibniz Assoc, POB 60 12 03, D-14412 Potsdam, 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]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS,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). |
条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。
修改评论