GSTDTAP
DOI10.1088/1748-9326/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
ISSN1748-9326
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。
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
查看访问统计
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Petr, M.]的文章
[Vacchiano, G.]的文章
[Thom, D.]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Petr, M.]的文章
[Vacchiano, G.]的文章
[Thom, D.]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Petr, M.]的文章
[Vacchiano, G.]的文章
[Thom, D.]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

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。