Rachel Warren

@article{0ae96dea8b184ffbb14ba0d4eda9cac3,

title = {Assessing the potential risks of climate change on the natural capital of six countries resulting from global warming of 1.5 to 4 °C above pre‑industrial levels},

author = {Jeff Price and Rachel Warren and Nicole Forstenhäusler and Rhosanna Jenkins and Erin Graham},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-023-03650-w},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2024},

date = {2024-02-29},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {177},

number = {3},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {We present the results from a new framework providing an assessment of how climate change risks to natural capital accrue with warming of 1.5–4 °C in six countries (China, Brazil, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, and India). Unlike typical biodiversity and climate change studies, this assessment also considers landcover and population changes across a range of 17 ecosystem services. The potential impacts of climate change (alone) on natural capital at 1.5 °C is greatest in Brazil and least in Ghana. However, when population and landcover change are included, areas projected to be at high natural capital risk begin to accrue by 1.5 °C in all countries. By 2 °C, Ethiopia and Ghana show increasing areas at high risk, even though they are at low risk owing to climate alone. Thus, current impacts to biodiversity and ecosystem services and changes in potential demand coupled with warming exceed changes projected by climate alone. However, this also indicates that there is adaptation potential, especially with warming of<2 °C, to reduce risk through restoring habitat. At lower levels of warming, targeted restoration of marginal agricultural habitats would increase the bank of natural capital for use by people and provide support for remaining agricultural lands. By 3 °C, the adaptation potential from restoration is substantially less:<1% in Brazil, India and Egypt; 7–8% in China and Ethiopia; but still 26% in Ghana. This indicates that restoration as an adaptation option for biodiversity, and thus, natural capital, rapidly decreases with increasing temperatures. By 2100, factoring in population change (SSP2), current ecological footprint, and current landcover, even with only 1.5 °C warming, large parts of Brazil, eastern China, most of Egypt, much of Ethiopia, southwestern Ghana (except for protected areas), and most of India are at high to extreme natural capital risk with an adaptation deficit potentially equating to a soft adaptation limit.},

note = {Funding information: The study was funded by the UK Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS).},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{4f23362f0fa24039a290e0065a9c2c85,

title = {Biodiversity losses associated with global warming of 1.5 to 4°C above pre-industrial levels in six countries},

author = {Jeff Price and Rachel Warren and Nicole Forstenhäusler},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-023-03666-2},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2024},

date = {2024-02-29},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {177},

number = {3},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {We quantify the projected impacts of alternative levels of global warming upon the climatically determined geographic ranges of plants and vertebrates in six countries (China, Brazil, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana and India), accounting for uncertainties in regional climate projection. We quantify in a spatially explicit fashion the species richness remaining or lost, allowing the identification of climate refugia which we define as areas where > 75% ]of the species currently present remain in a world with a particular level of global warming above pre-industrial levels. In all countries and in both taxa, species richness declines with warming, as does the proportion of each country remaining a climate refugium for plants or vertebrates. In percentage terms, refugia loss relative to a 1961–1990 baseline period is greatest in India and Brazil, and least in Ghana and Ethiopia for the same level of warming, and is greater for plants than for vertebrates. Taking account of present land uses (i.e. area still considered natural), and using species richness of plants as a proxy to indicate biodiversity more generally, the proportion of land acting as climate refugia for biodiversity in five of the countries variously declines from 54–75% of a country in the 1961–1990 baseline period to 20–64% for 1.5 °C global warming, 11–53% for 2 °C, 3–33% for 3 °C and 2–24% for 4 °C warming. In Ethiopia, India, Brazil and China, climate refugia decline rapidly with warming while in Ghana and China some refugia persist even with 3–4 °C of warming. Only small percentages of Brazil, India and China are both climate refugia and lie within protected areas; hence, an expansion of the protected area networks in these countries would be required to deliver climate resilient biodiversity conservation. These percentages are larger in Ethiopia and Ghana and, in some areas of Ghana, the only remaining refugia are in protected areas, the remaining landscape converted to other uses.},

note = {Data and code availability: This publication is based on the extraction of data from an existing well established database and hence code availability is not applicable. The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Funding information: This research leading to these results received funding from the UK Government, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, as part of the 1.5–4 °C warming project under contract number UKSBS CR18083-S2.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{f5483287847a4f0395fab9e0e45c529c,

title = {Risks associated with global warming of 1.5 to 4°C above pre-industrial levels in human and natural systems in six countries},

author = {Rachel Warren and Jeff Price and Nicole Forstenhäusler and Oliver Andrews and Sally Brown and Kristie Ebi and David Gernaat and Philip Goodwin and Dabo Guan and Yi He and Desmond Manful and Zhiqiang Yin and Yi Hu and Katie Jenkins and Rhosanna Jenkins and Alan Kennedy-Asser and Timothy J. Osborn and Detlef Vuuren and Craig Wallace and Daoping Wang and Rebecca Wright},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-023-03646-6},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2024},

date = {2024-02-29},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {177},

number = {3},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {The Topical Collection “Accrual of Climate Change Risk in Six Vulnerable Countries” provides a harmonised assessment of risks to human and natural systems due to global warming of 1.5–4 °C in six countries (China, Brazil, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, and India) using a consistent set of climate change and socioeconomic scenarios. It compares risks in 2100 if warming has reached 3 °C, broadly corresponding to current global greenhouse gas emission reduction policies, including countries’ National Determined Contributions, rather than the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to ‘well below’ 2 °C and ‘pursuing efforts’ to limit to 1.5 °C. Global population is assumed either constant at year 2000 levels or to increase to 9.2 billion by 2100. In either case, greater warming is projected to lead, in all six countries, to greater exposure of land and people to drought and fluvial flood hazard, greater declines in biodiversity, and greater reductions in the yield of maize and wheat. Limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, compared with ~ 3 °C, is projected to deliver large benefits for all six countries, including reduced economic damages due to fluvial flooding. The greatest projected benefits are the avoidance of a large increase in exposure of agricultural land to severe drought, which is 61%, 43%, 18%, and 21% lower in Ethiopia, China, Ghana, and India at 1.5 °C than at 3 °C, whilst avoided increases in human exposure to severe drought are 20–80% lower at 1.5 °C than 3 °C across the six countries. Climate refugia for plants are largely preserved at 1.5 °C warming in Ghana, China, and Ethiopia, but refugia shrink in areal extent by a factor of 2, 3, 3, 4, and 10 in Ghana, China, India, Ethiopia, and Brazil, respectively, if warming reaches 3 °C. Economic damages associated with sea-level rise are projected to increase in coastal nations, but more slowly if warming were limited to 1.5 °C. Actual benefits on the ground will also depend on national and local contexts and the extent of future investment in adaptation.},

note = {Data availability: This publication is based on the extraction of data from an existing well-established database, and hence, code availability is not applicable. The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Funding information: This research leading to these results received funding from the UK Government, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, as part of the 1.5–4 °C warming project under contract number UKSBS CR18083-S2.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{544cbfe56b0a4308b839d3531543b734,

title = {Integrating climate-change refugia into 30 by 30 conservation planning in North America},

author = {Sarah P. Saunders and Joanna Grand and Brooke L. Bateman and Mariah Meek and Chad B. Wilsey and Nicole Forstenhäusler and Erin Graham and Rachel Warren and Jeff Price},

doi = {10.1002/fee.2592},

issn = {1540-9295},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-03-01},

journal = {Frontiers in Ecology & the Environment},

volume = {21},

number = {2},

pages = {77–84},

publisher = {Ecological Society of America},

abstract = {Countries have set targets for conserving natural areas to mitigate biodiversity loss, such as the protection of 30% of lands by 2030, commonly referred to as “30 by 30”. Yet strategic conservation planning to align those targets with climate-change refugia is lacking. We investigated the feasibility of achieving 30 by 30 in North America by assessing the proportions of state/provincial/territorial land projected to provide refugia for terrestrial biodiversity and the proportions of those refugia that are currently protected. We also conducted a reserve selection prioritization to identify priority areas that complement the current protected area network and capture refugia for seven taxonomic groups. In North America, <15% of refugia are protected, but ample opportunity exists to expand protection if warming is limited to 2°C. Beyond 2°C, however, the majority of refugia will occur only at high latitudes and elevations. Incorporation of refugia into 30 by 30 efforts will facilitate species persistence under climate change.},

note = {Funding Information: Funding was provided by the UK Natural Environment Research Council grant NE/P014992/1.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{3210f3df482f4483826c1c9773d07ca3,

title = {Quantification of meteorological drought risks between 1.5°C and 4°C of global warming in six countries},

author = {Jeff Price and Rachel Warren and Nicole Forstenhäusler and Craig Wallace and Rhosanna Jenkins and Timothy J. Osborn and D. P. Van Vuuren},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-022-03359-2},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-28},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {174},

number = {1-2},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {We quantify the projected impacts of alternative levels of global warming upon the probability and length of severe drought in six countries (China, Brazil, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana and India). This includes an examination of different land cover classes, and a calculation of the proportion of population in 2100 (SSP2) at exposed to severe drought lasting longer than one year. Current pledges for climate change mitigation, which are projected to still result in global warming levels of 3°C or more, would impact all of the countries in this study. For example, with 3°C warming, more than 50% of the agricultural area in each country is projected to be exposed to severe droughts of longer than one year in a 30-year period. Using standard population projections, it is estimated that 80%-100% of the population in Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia and Ghana (and nearly 50% of the population of India) are projected to be exposed to a severe drought lasting one year or longer in a 30-year period. In contrast, we find that meeting the long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement, that is limiting warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, is projected to greatly benefit all of the countries in this study, greatly reducing exposure to severe drought for large percentages of the population and in all major land cover classes, with Egypt potentially benefiting the most.},

note = {Funding: The research leading to these results received funding from the UK Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS). TJO also received support from the Belmont Forum and JPI-Climate project INTEGRATE funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (grant no. NE/P006809/1).},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{e65f2b44bd1e45c2a1c3fb666dca6848,

title = {Quantifying risks avoided by limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2°C above pre-industrial levels},

author = {Rachel Warren and Oliver Andrews and Sally Brown and Felipe J. Colón-González and Nicole Forstenhaeusler and David E. H. J. Gernaat and Philip Goodwin and Ian Harris and Helen He and Chris Hope and Desmond Manful and Timothy J. Osborn and Jeff Price and Detlef Vuuren and Rebecca Mary Wright},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-021-03277-9},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-06-29},

urldate = {2022-06-29},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {172},

number = {3-4},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {The Paris Agreement aims to constrain global warming to ‘well below 2 °C’ and to ‘pursue efforts’ to limit it to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. We quantify global and regional risk-related metrics associated with these levels of warming that capture climate change–related changes in exposure to water scarcity and heat stress, vector-borne disease, coastal and fluvial flooding and projected impacts on agriculture and the economy, allowing for uncertainties in regional climate projection. Risk-related metrics associated with 2 °C warming, depending on sector, are reduced by 10–44% globally if warming is further reduced to 1.5 °C. Comparing with a baseline in which warming of 3.66 °C occurs by 2100, constraining warming to 1.5 °C reduces these risk indicators globally by 32–85%, and constraining warming to 2 °C reduces them by 26–74%. In percentage terms, avoided risk is highest for fluvial flooding, drought, and heat stress, but in absolute terms risk reduction is greatest for drought. Although water stress decreases in some regions, it is often accompanied by additional exposure to flooding. The magnitude of the percentage of damage avoided is similar to that calculated for avoided global economic risk associated with these same climate change scenarios. We also identify West Africa, India and North America as hotspots of climate change risk in the future.},

note = {Funding: This research leading to these results received funding from the UK Government, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, as part of the Implications of global warming of 1.5 °C and 2 °C project. OA, YH, JP and RW were also funded by joint UK NERC and UK Government Department of BEIS grant NE/P01495X/1.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{d1e67180761d4ac4bcc783eff79d8cd0,

title = {Projected risks associated with heat stress in the UK Climate Projections (UKCP18)},

author = {Alan Kennedy-Asser and Gwilym Owen and Gareth J. Griffith and Oliver Andrews and Y. T. Eunice Lo and Dann M. Mitchell and Katie Jenkins and Rachel F. Warren},

doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/ac541a},

issn = {1748-9326},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-03-01},

journal = {Environmental Research Letters},

volume = {17},

number = {3},

publisher = {IOP Publishing Ltd},

abstract = {Summer heat extremes in the UK pose a risk to health (amongst other sectors) and this is exacerbated by localised socio-economic factors that contribute to vulnerability. Here, regional climate model simulations from the UK Climate Projections are used to assess how different elements of extreme heat will vary across the UK in the future under global mean surface temperature warming levels of +1.5 °C, +2.0 °C and +3.0 °C above pre-industrial. Heat stress metrics incorporating daily maximum and minimum temperature, temperature variability and vapour pressure are included. These show qualitatively similar spatial patterns for the recent past, with the most pronounced heat hazards found in south-eastern regions of the UK. Projected heat hazard changes across the UK are not homogeneous, with southern regions (e.g. Greater London, South East) showing greater increases in maximum temperatures and northern regions (e.g. Scotland and Northern Ireland) showing greater increases in humidity. With +3.0 °C warming, the relative change in combined heat hazards is found to be greatest in the south-western UK, however, in absolute terms, south-eastern regions will still experience the greatest hazards. When combined with socio-economic factors, hotspots of high heat stress risk emerge in parts of London, the Midlands and eastern England along with southern and eastern coastal regions. Weighting of different heat risk factors is subjective and to this end we have developed and made available an interactive app which allows users to assess sensitivities and uncertainties in the projected UK heat risk.},

note = {Funding Information: A K A, O A and R W acknowledge support from the UK Research & Innovation (UKRI) Strategic Priorities Fund UK Climate Resilience programme (NE/S017267/1 and NE/T013931/1). The programme is co-delivered by Met Office and NERC on behalf of UKRI partners AHRC, EPSRC, ESRC. G G is funded by an ESRC Postdoctoral Fellowship (ES/T009101/1). YTEL was funded under the NERC project, HAPPI-Health (NE/R009554/1). D M M acknowledges a NERC fellowship (NE/N014057/1) and Turing Institute fellowship. Development of this Shiny App was supported by funds from Policy Bristol.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{08c68b49873142f6834167c0fd7ed6f8,

title = {Quantification of impacts between 1.5°C and 4°C of global warming on flooding risks in six countries},

author = {Yi He and Desmond Manful and Rachel Warren and Nicole Forstenhaeusler and Timothy J. Osborn and Jeff Price and Rhosanna Jenkins and Craig Wallace and Dai Yamazaki},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-021-03289-5},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-01-25},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {170},

number = {1-2},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {We project climate change induced changes in fluvial flood risks for six global warming levels between 1.5 and 4°C by 2100, focusing on the major river basins of six countries. Daily time series of precipitation, temperature and monthly potential evapotranspiration were generated by combining monthly observations, daily reanalysis data, and projected changes in the five CMIP5 GCMs also selected in the ISI-MIP fast track project. These series were then used to drive the HBV hydrological model and the CaMa-Flood hydrodynamic model to simulate river discharge and flood inundation. Our results indicate that return periods of 1 in 100-year floods in the late 20th century (Q100-20C) are likely to decrease with warming. At 1.5°C warming, 47%, 66%, 27%, 65%, 62% and 92% of the major basin areas in Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana and India respectively experience a decrease in the return period of Q100-20C, increasing to 54%, 81%, 28%, 82%, 86% and 96% with 4°C warming. The decrease in return periods leads to increased number of people exposed to flood risks, particularly with 4°C warming, where exposure in the major river basin areas in the six countries increase significantly, ranging from a doubling (China) to more than 50-fold (Egypt). Limiting warming to 1.5°C would avoid much of these increased risks, resulting in increases ranging from 12% to 1266% for the 6 countries.},

note = {Funding Information: The study was funded by the UK Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS). TJO also received support from the Belmont Forum and JPI-Climate project INTEGRATE funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (grant no. NE/P006809/1). DY is funded by TOUGOU program by MEXT Japan (JPMXD0717935457). The observed discharge data was obtained from the Global Runoff Data Centre (GRDC).},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{182899ea9399448bade7835782acf965,

title = {Global and regional aggregate damages associated with global warming of 1.5 to 4 °C above pre-industrial levels},

author = {Rachel Warren and C. Hope and D. E. H. J. Gernaat and D. P. Vuuren and K. Jenkins},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-021-03198-7},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-22},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {168},

number = {3-4},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {We quantify global and regional aggregate damages from global warming of 1.5 to 4 °C above pre-industrial levels using a well-established integrated assessment model, PAGE09. We find mean global aggregate damages in 2100 of 0.29% of GDP if global warming is limited to about 1.5 °C (90% confidence interval 0.09–0.60%) and 0.40% for 2 °C (range 0.12–0.91%). These are, respectively, 92% and 89% lower than mean losses of 3.67% of GDP (range 0.64–10.77%) associated with global warming of 4 °C. The net present value of global aggregate damages for the 2008–2200 period is estimated at $48.7 trillion for ~ 1.5 °C global warming (range $13–108 trillion) and $60.7 trillion for 2 °C (range $15–140 trillion). These are, respectively, 92% and 90% lower than the mean NPV of $591.7 trillion of GDP for 4 °C warming (range $70–1920 trillion). This leads to a mean social cost of CO2 emitted in 2020 of ~ $150 for 4 °C warming as compared to $30 at ~ 1.5 °C warming. The benefits of limiting warming to 1.5 °C rather than 2 °C might be underestimated since PAGE09 is not recalibrated to reflect the recent understanding of the full range of risks at 1.5 °C warming.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{03abd9a54af9412fa7d709e27b895032,

title = {Addressing risks to biodiversity arising from a changing climate: the need for ecosystem restoration in the Tana River Basin, Kenya},

author = {Rhosanna L. M. Jenkins and Rachel F. Warren and Jeff T. Price},

doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0254879},

issn = {1932-6203},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-07-21},

journal = {PLoS One},

volume = {16},

number = {7},

publisher = {Public Library of Science},

abstract = {Climate change is projected to have significant effects on the distribution of species globally, but research into the implications in parts of Africa has been limited. Using species distribution modelling, this study models climate change-related risks to the terrestrial biodiversity (birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians and plants) of Kenya’s economically-important and ecologically diverse Tana River Basin. Large reductions in species richness are projected with just 2°C warming (relative to preindustrial levels) with birds and plants seeing the greatest impact. Potential climate refugia for biodiversity are identified within the basin, but often overlap with areas already converted to agriculture or set aside for agricultural expansion, and the majority are outside protected areas. Similarly, some protected areas contain no projected refugia at higher levels of global warming, showing they may be insufficient to protect the basin’s biodiversity as climate changes. However, risks to biodiversity are much smaller if the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to ‘well below 2°C’ warming, rather than 2°C only, is met. The potential for refugia for plants and animals decreases strongly with warming. For example, 82% of the basin remaining climatically suitable for at least 75% of the plants currently present at 1.5°C warming, as compared with 23% at 2°C and 3% at 4.5°C. This research provides the first assessment of the combined effects of development plans and climate change on biodiversity of the Tana River Basin, including identifying potential areas for restoration, and contributes to a greater understanding of biodiversity protection and adaptation options in Kenya.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{20d3c75f4f664c91b59174761d2cb675,

title = {Global costs of protecting against sea-level rise at 1.5 to 4.0 °C},

author = {Sally Brown and Katie Jenkins and Philip Goodwin and Daniel Lincke and Athanasios T. Vafeidis and Richard S. J. Tol and Rhosanna Jenkins and Rachel Warren and Robert J. Nicholls and Svetlana Jevrejeva and Agustin Sanchez Arcilla and Ivan D. Haigh},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-021-03130-z},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-07-06},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {167},

number = {1-2},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {Sea levels will rise, even with stringent climate change mitigation. Mitigation will slow the rate of rise. There is limited knowledge on how the costs of coastal protection vary with alternative global warming levels of 1.5 to 4.0 °C. Analysing six sea-level rise scenarios (0.74 to 1.09 m, 50th percentile) across these warming levels, and five Shared Socioeconomic Pathways, this paper quantifies the economic costs of flooding and protection due to sea-level rise using the Dynamic Interactive Vulnerability Assessment (DIVA) modelling framework. Results are presented for World Bank income groups and five selected countries from the present to 2100. Annual sea flood damage costs without additional adaptation are more influenced by socio-economic development than sea-level rise, indicating that there are opportunities to control risk with development choices. In contrast, annual sea dike investment costs are more dependent on the magnitude of sea-level rise. In terms of total costs with adaptation, upper middle, low middle and low income groups are projected to have higher relative costs as a proportion of GDP compared with high income groups. If low income countries protected now, flood costs could be reduced after 2050 and beyond. However, without further adaptation, their coasts will experience growing risks and costs leaving them increasingly reliant on emergency response measures. Without mitigation or adaptation, greater inequalities in damage costs between income groups could result. At country level, annual sea flood damage costs without additional adaptation are projected to rapidly increase with approximately 0.2 m of sea-level rise, leaving limited time to plan and adapt.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{e02b34c74d08414dbfc2ab76a47f9d50,

title = {Assessing the economic impacts of future fluvial flooding in six countries under climate change and socio-economic development},

author = {Zhiqiang Yin and Yixin Hu and Katie Jenkins and Yi He and Nicole Forstenhäusler and Rachel Warren and Lili Yang and Rhosanna Jenkins and Dabo Guan},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-021-03059-3},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-07},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {166},

number = {3-4},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {Floods are among the most frequent and costliest natural hazards. Fluvial flood losses are expected to increase in the future, driven by population and economic growth in flood-prone areas, and exacerbated in many regions by effects of climate change on the hydrological cycle. Yet, studies assessing direct and indirect economic impacts of fluvial flooding in combination with climate change and socio-economic projections at a country level are rare. This study presents an integrated flood risk analysis framework to calculate total (direct and indirect) economic damages, with and without socio-economic development, under a range of warming levels from < 1.5 to 4 °C in Brazil, China, India, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Ghana. Direct damages are estimated by linking spatially explicit daily flood hazard data from the Catchment-based Macro-scale Floodplain (CaMa-Flood) model with country- and sector-specific depth-damage functions. These values input into an economic Input-Output model for the estimation of indirect losses. The study highlights that total fluvial flood losses are largest in China and India when expressed in absolute terms. When expressed as a share of national GDP, Egypt faces the largest total losses under both the climate change and climate change plus socio-economic development experiments. The magnitude of indirect losses also increased significantly when socio-economic development was modelled. The study highlights the importance of including socio-economic development when estimating direct and indirect flood losses, as well as the role of recovery dynamics, essential to provide a more comprehensive picture of potential losses that will be important for decision makers.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{c1c0e62aa8b24b23897fb072750da4c5,

title = {Economic impacts of climate-induced crop yield changes: Evidence from agri-food industries in six countries},

author = {Daoping Wang and Katie Jenkins and Nicole Forstenhäusler and Tianyang Lei and Jeff Price and Rachel Warren and Rhosanna Jenkins and Dabo Guan},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-021-03062-8},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-03},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {166},

number = {3-4},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {The potential impact of climate change on agriculture has been one of the most discussed topics in the literature on climate change. Although the possible impacts of climate change on crop yields have been widely studied, there remains little quantitative understanding of the heterogeneous economic responses to climate-induced crop yield changes in different economies, particularly at higher levels of warming. This study assesses the economic impacts of eight scenarios of warming, from 1.5 to 4 °C, on rice and wheat yields in China, India, Brazil, Egypt, Ghana and Ethiopia. The role of both natural and social factors in crop production is considered by coupling a statistical crop model (ClimaCrop) and a global economic model (GTAP). Changes in economic outputs, consumer and producer prices and national economic welfare are presented. The study shows marginal benefits of crop yield changes on GDP and welfare in China up to 3.5 and 3.0 °C, respectively. This is due to projected increases in rice yields which lower domestic consumer rice prices. Although at higher warming levels these trends begin to reverse. The other countries are negatively impacted due to declining crop yields, with increasing consumer prices of domestic and imported rice and wheat. GDP and welfare declines, with more severe reductions associated with the higher warming levels, particularly in India and Ethiopia. The method is beneficial as the economic outputs reflect a more in-depth picture of the response of global markets and ultimately regional consequences of agricultural impacts that will be of importance to decision makers.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{99dd4c91372749a88697590f44929a5d,

title = {Evaluating heat extremes in the UK Climate Projections (UKCP18)},

author = {A. T. Kennedy-Asser and O. Andrews and D. M. Mitchell and R. F. Warren},

doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/abc4ad},

issn = {1748-9326},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-05},

journal = {Environmental Research Letters},

volume = {16},

number = {1},

publisher = {IOP Publishing Ltd},

abstract = {In recent years, UK summer heatwaves have resulted in thousands of excess deaths, with both extreme temperatures and high humidity increasing health risks. Here, the UK Climate Projections 2018 (UKCP18) are compared to observational (HadUK-Grid) and reanalysis data (ERA5) to quantify model performance at capturing mean, extremes (95th to 99.5th percentiles) and variability in the climate state and heat stress metrics (simplified wet bulb global temperature, sWBGT; Humidex; apparent temperature). Simulations carried out for UKCP18 generally perform as well as or better than CMIP5 models in reproducing observed spatial patterns of UK climate relating to extreme heat, with RMSE values on average ~30% less than for the CMIP5 models. Increasing spatial resolution in UKCP18 simulations is shown to yield a minor improvement in model performance (RMSE values on average ~5% less) compared to observations, however there is considerable variability between ensemble members within resolution classes. For both UKCP18 and CMIP5 models, model error in capturing characteristics of extreme heat generally reduces when using heat stress metrics with a larger vapour pressure component, such as sWBGT. Finally, the 95th percentile of observed UK summer temperature is shown to have ~60% greater interannual variability than the summer mean over the recent past (1981–2000). This effect is underestimated in UKCP18 models (~33%) compared to HadUK-grid and ERA5. Compared to projected future changes in the global mean temperature, UK summer mean and 95th percentile temperatures are shown in increase at a faster rate than the global mean.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{34f0320de9d849d4b741504a73167313,

title = {Burning embers: Towards more transparent and robust climate-change risk assessments},

author = {Zinta Zommers and Philippe Marbaix and Andreas Fischlin and Zelina Z. Ibrahim and Sean Grant and Alexandre K. Magnan and Hans-Otto Pörtner and Mark Howden and Katherine Calvin and Koko Warner and Wim Thiery and Zita Sebesvari and Edouard L. Davin and Jason P. Evans and Cynthia Rosenzweig and Brian C. O'Neill and Anand Patwardhan and Rachel Warren and Maarten Aalst and Margot Hulbert},

doi = {10.1038/s43017-020-0088-0},

issn = {2662-138X},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-10-01},

journal = {Nature Reviews Earth and Environment},

volume = {1},

number = {10},

pages = {516–529},

publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},

abstract = {The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports provide policy-relevant insights about climate impacts, vulnerabilities and adaptation through a process of peer-reviewed literature assessments underpinned by expert judgement. An iconic output from these assessments is the burning embers diagram, first used in the Third Assessment Report to visualize reasons for concern, which aggregate climate-change-related impacts and risks to various systems and sectors. These burning embers use colour transitions to show changes in the assessed level of risk to humans and ecosystems as a function of global mean temperature. In this Review, we outline the history and evolution of the burning embers and associated reasons for concern framework, focusing on the methodological approaches and advances. While the assessment framework and figure design have been broadly retained over time, refinements in methodology have occurred, including the consideration of different risks, use of confidence statements, more formalized protocols and standardized metrics. Comparison across reports reveals that the risk level at a given temperature has generally increased with each assessment cycle, reflecting accumulating scientific evidence. For future assessments, an explicit, transparent and systematic process of expert elicitation is needed to enhance comparability, quality and credibility of burning embers.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{119c544d6b7b4b889636b2254c04152c,

title = {Investigating the potential impact of 1.5, 2 and 3 °C global warming levels on crop suitability and planting season over West Africa},

author = {Temitope Samuel Egbebiyi and Olivier Crespo and Christopher Lennard and Modathir Zaroug and Grigory Nikulin and Ian Harris and Jeff Price and Nicole Forstenhäusler and Rachel Warren},

doi = {10.7717/peerj.8851},

issn = {2167-8359},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-05},

journal = {PeerJ},

volume = {8},

publisher = {PeerJ},

abstract = {West African rainfed agriculture is highly vulnerable to climate variability and change. Global warming is projected to result in higher regional warming and have a strong impact on agriculture. This study specifically examines the impact of global warming levels (GWLs) of 1.5°, 2° and 3 °C relative to 1971–2000 on crop suitability over West Africa. We used 10 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase5 Global Climate Models (CMIP5 GCMs) downscaled by Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) Rossby Centre’s regional Atmospheric model version 4, RCA4, to drive Ecocrop, a crop suitability model, for pearl millet, cassava, groundnut, cowpea, maize and plantain. The results show Ecocrop simulated crop suitability spatial representation with higher suitability, observed to the south of latitude 14°N and lower suitability to its north for 1971–2000 for all crops except for plantain (12°N). The model also simulates the best three planting months within the growing season from September-August over the past climate. Projected changes in crop suitability under the three GWLs 1.5–3.0 °C suggest a spatial suitability expansion for legume and cereal crops, notably in the central southern Sahel zone; root and tuber and plantain in the central Guinea-Savanna zone. In contrast, projected decreases in the crop suitability index value are predicted to the south of 14°N for cereals, root and tuber crops; nevertheless, the areas remain suitable for the crops. A delay of between 1-3 months is projected over the region during the planting month under the three GWLs for legumes, pearl millet and plantain. A two month delay in planting is projected in the south, notably over the Guinea and central Savanna zone with earlier planting of about three months in the Savanna-Sahel zones. The effect of GWL2.0 and GWL3.0 warming in comparison to GWL1.5 °C are more dramatic on cereals and root and tuber crops, especially cassava. All the projected changes in simulated crop suitability in response to climatic variables are statistically significant at 99% confidence level. There is also an increasing trend in the projected crop suitability change across the three warming except for cowpea. This study has implications for improving the resilience of crop production to climate changes, and more broadly, to food security in West Africa.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{a9083bdcf2ba49098a6df7e08e7b55f7,

title = {The human imperative of stabilizing global climate change at 1.5°C},

author = {O. Hoegh-Guldberg and D. Jacob and M. Taylor and T. Guillén Bolaños and M. Bindi and S. Brown and I. A. Camilloni and A. Diedhiou and R. Djalante and K. Ebi and F. Engelbrecht and J. Guiot and Y. Hijioka and S. Mehrotra and C. W. Hope and A. J. Payne and H. -O. Pörtner and S. I. Seneviratne and A. Thomas and R. Warren and G. Zhou},

doi = {10.1126/science.aaw6974},

issn = {0036-8075},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-09-20},

journal = {Science},

volume = {365},

number = {6459},

publisher = {American Association for the Advancement of Science},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{5726071d514641e99ca70009e3e84958,

title = {Global water availability under high-end climate change: A vulnerability based assessment},

author = {A. G. Koutroulis and L. V. Papadimitriou and M. G. Grillakis and I. K. Tsanis and Rachel Warren and R. A. Betts},

doi = {10.1016/j.gloplacha.2019.01.013},

issn = {0921-8181},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-04-01},

journal = {Global and Planetary Change},

volume = {175},

pages = {52–63},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Global sustainability is intertwined with freshwater security. Emerging changes in global freshwater availability have been recently detected as a combined result of human interventions, natural variability and climate change. Expected future socioeconomic and climatic changes will further impact freshwater resources. The quantification of the impacts is challenging due to the complexity of interdependencies between physical and socioeconomic systems. This study demonstrates a vulnerability based assessment of global freshwater availability through a conceptual framework, considering transient hydro-climatic impacts of crossing specific warming levels (1.5 °C, 2 °C and 4 °C) and related socioeconomic developments under high-end climate change (RCP8.5). We use high resolution climate scenarios and a global land surface model to develop indicators of exposure for 25,000 watersheds. We also exploit spatially explicit datasets to describe a range of adaptation options through sensitivity and adaptive capacity indicators according to the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). The combined dynamics of climate and socioeconomic changes suggest that although there is important potential for adaptation to reduce freshwater vulnerability, climate change risks cannot be totally and uniformly eliminated. In many regions, socioeconomic developments will have greater impact on water availability compared to climate induced changes. The number of people under increased freshwater vulnerability varies substantially depending the level of global warming and the degree of socioeconomic developments, from almost 1 billion people at 4 °C and SSP5 to almost 3 billion people at 4 °C and SSP3. Generally, it is concluded that larger adaptation efforts are required to address the risks associated with higher levels of warming of 4 °C compared to the lower levels of 1.5 °C or 2 °C. The watershed scale and country level aggregated results of this study can provide a valuable resource for decision makers to plan for climate change adaptation and mitigation actions.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2141,

title = {Producing Policy-relevant Science by Enhancing Robustness and Model Integration for the Assessment of Global Environmental Change},

author = {RF Warren and NR Edwards and F Babonneau and PM Bacon and JP Dietrich and RW Ford and P Garthwaite and D Gerten and S Goswami and A Haurie and K Hiscock and PB Holden and MR Hyde and SR Joshi and A Kanudia and M Labriet and M Leimbach and OK Oyebamiji and T Osborn and B Pizzileo and A Popp},

doi = {10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.05.010},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

journal = {Environmental Modelling and Software},

volume = {111},

pages = {248-258},

chapter = {248},

abstract = {<p>We use the flexible model coupling technology known as the bespoke framework generator to link established existing modules representing dynamics in the global economy (GEMINI_E3), the energy system (TIAM-WORLD), the global and regional climate system (MAGICC6, PLASIM-ENTS and ClimGEN), the agricultural system, the hydrological system and ecosystems (LPJmL), together in a single integrated assessment modelling (IAM) framework, building on the pre-existing framework of the Community Integrated Assessment System. Next, we demonstrate the application of the framework to produce policy-relevant scientific information. We use it to show that when using carbon price mechanisms to induce a transition from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy, prices can be minimised if policy action is taken early, if burden sharing regimes are used, and if agriculture is intensified. Some of the coupled models have been made available for use at a secure and user-friendly web portal. textcopyright 2018 The Authors</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{0f707268c35545a8b5766e637263c894,

title = {Producing policy-relevant science by enhancing robustness and model integration for the assessment of global environmental change},

author = {R. F. Warren and N. R. Edwards and F. Babonneau and P. M. Bacon and J. P. Dietrich and R. W. Ford and P. Garthwaite and D. Gerten and S. Goswami and A. Haurie and K. Hiscock and P. B. Holden and M. R. Hyde and S. R. Joshi and A. Kanudia and M. Labriet and M. Leimbach and O. K. Oyebamiji and T. Osborn and B. Pizzileo and A. Popp and J. Price and G. Riley and S. Schaphoff and P. Slavin and M. Vielle and C. Wallace},

doi = {10.1016/j.envsoft.2018.05.010},

issn = {1364-8152},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

journal = {Environmental Modelling and Software},

volume = {111},

pages = {248–258},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {We use the flexible model coupling technology known as the bespoke framework generator to link established existing modules representing dynamics in the global economy (GEMINI_E3), the energy system (TIAM-WORLD), the global and regional climate system (MAGICC6, PLASIM-ENTS and ClimGEN), the agricultural system, the hydrological system and ecosystems (LPJmL), together in a single integrated assessment modelling (IAM) framework, building on the pre-existing framework of the Community Integrated Assessment System. Next, we demonstrate the application of the framework to produce policy-relevant scientific information. We use it to show that when using carbon price mechanisms to induce a transition from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy, prices can be minimised if policy action is taken early, if burden sharing regimes are used, and if agriculture is intensified. Some of the coupled models have been made available for use at a secure and user-friendly web portal.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{bdb6997ca5fc4a4a8f246a0c493e36f3,

title = {The economics of 1.5°C climate change},

author = {Simon Dietz and Alex Bowen and Baran Doda and Ajay Gambhir and Rachel Warren},

doi = {10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-025817},

issn = {1543-5938},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-10-01},

journal = {Annual Review of Environment and Resources},

volume = {43},

pages = {455–480},

publisher = {Annual Reviews Inc.},

abstract = {The economic case for limiting warming to 1.5°C is unclear, due to manifold uncertainties. However, it cannot be ruled out that the 1.5°C target passes a cost-benefit test. Costs are almost certainly high: The median global carbon price in 1.5°C scenarios implemented by various energy models is more than US$100 per metric ton of CO2 in 2020, for example. Benefits estimates range from much lower than this to much higher. Some of these uncertainties may reduce in the future, raising the question of how to hedge in the near term. Maintaining an option on limiting warming to 1.5°C means targeting it now. Setting off with higher emissions will make 1.5°C unattainable quickly without recourse to expensive large-scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR), or solar radiation management (SRM), which can be cheap but poses ambiguous risks society seems unwilling to take. Carbon pricing could reduce mitigation costs substantially compared with ramping up the current patchwork of regulatory instruments. Nonetheless, a mix of policies is justified and technology-specific approaches may be required. It is particularly important to step up mitigation finance to developing countries, where emissions abatement is relatively cheap.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{60e97d8edd7e4d3aaaf5c5022e9e73be,

title = {Advancing national climate change risk assessment to deliver national adaptation plans},

author = {Rachel Warren and Rob Wilby and Kathryn Brown and Paul Watkiss and Richard Betts and James Murphy and Jason Lowe},

doi = {10.1098/rsta.2017.0295},

issn = {1364-503X},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-06-13},

journal = {Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences},

volume = {376},

number = {2121},

publisher = {The Royal Society},

abstract = {A wide range of climate vulnerability and risk assessments have been implemented using different approaches at different scales, some with a broad multi-sectoral scope and others focused on single risks or sectors. This paper describes the novel approach to vulnerability and risk assessment which was designed and put into practice in the United Kingdom's Second Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA2) so as to build upon its earlier assessment (CCRA1). First, we summarize and critique the CCRA1 approach, and second describe the steps taken in the CCRA2 approach in detail, providing examples of how each was applied in practice. Novel elements of the approach include assessment of both present day and future vulnerability, a focus on the urgency of adaptation action, and a structure focused around systems of receptors rather than conventional sectors. Both stakeholders and reviewers generally regarded the approach as successful in providing advice on current risks and future opportunities to the UK from climate change, and the fulfilment of statutory duty. The need for a well-supported and open suite of impact indicators going forward is highlighted.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2a071c16931448fc903458fb2083343c,

title = {The many possible climates from the Paris Agreement’s aim of 1.5°C warming},

author = {Sonia I. Seneviratne and Joeri Rogelj and Roland Séférian and Richard Wartenburger and Myles R. Allen and Michelle Cain and Richard J. Millar and Kristie L. Ebi and Neville Ellis and Ove Hoegh-Guldberg and Antony J. Payne and Carl-Friedrich Schleussner and Petra Tschakert and Rachel F. Warren},

doi = {10.1038/s41586-018-0181-4},

issn = {0028-0836},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-06-07},

journal = {Nature},

volume = {558},

pages = {41–49},

publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},

abstract = {The United Nations’ Paris Agreement includes the aim of pursuing efforts to limit global warming to only 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. However, it is not clear what the resulting climate would look like across the globe and over time. Here we show that trajectories towards a ‘1.5 °C warmer world’ may result in vastly different outcomes at regional scales, owing to variations in the pace and location of climate change and their interactions with society’s mitigation, adaptation and vulnerabilities to climate change. Pursuing policies that are considered to be consistent with the 1.5 °C aim will not completely remove the risk of global temperatures being much higher or of some regional extremes reaching dangerous levels for ecosystems and societies over the coming decades.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{25e69e5dfd1d41ce9e1017c012df8fbb,

title = {The projected effect on insects, vertebrates, and plants of limiting global warming to 1.5°C rather than 2°C},

author = {R. Warren and J. Price and E. Graham and N. Forstenhaeusler and J. Vanderwal},

doi = {10.1126/science.aar3646},

issn = {0036-8075},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-05-18},

journal = {Science},

volume = {360},

number = {6390},

pages = {791–795},

publisher = {American Association for the Advancement of Science},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{20756b4c8b7b4852ba91090ad1045eff,

title = {Impacts on terrestrial biodiversity of moving from a 2ᵒC to a 1.5ᵒC target},

author = {Pete Smith and Jeff Price and Amy Molotoks and Rachel Warren and Yadvinder Malhi},

doi = {10.1098/rsta.2016.0456},

issn = {1364-503X},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-05-13},

journal = {Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences},

volume = {376},

number = {2119},

publisher = {The Royal Society},

abstract = {We applied a recently developed tool to examine the reduction in climate risk to biodiversity in moving from a 2°C to a 1.5°C target. We then reviewed the recent literature examining the impact of (a) land-based mitigation options and (b) land-based greenhouse gas removal options on biodiversity. We show that holding warming to 1.5°C versus 2°C can significantly reduce the number of species facing a potential loss of 50% of their climatic range. Further, there would be an increase of 5.5–14% of the globe that could potentially act as climatic refugia for plants and animals, an area equivalent to the current global protected area network. Efforts to meet the 1.5°C target through mitigation could largely be consistent with biodiversity protection/enhancement. For impacts of land-based greenhouse gas removal technologies on biodiversity, some (e.g. soil carbon sequestration) could be neutral or positive, others (e.g. bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) are likely to lead to conflicts, while still others (e.g. afforestation/reforestation) are context-specific, when applied at scales necessary for meaningful greenhouse gas removal. Additional effort to meet the 1.5°C target presents some risks, particularly if inappropriately managed, but it also presents opportunities. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{7d44b1b894044b5bb3bcb1346358d51b,

title = {The implications of the United Nations Paris Agreement on climate change for globally significant biodiversity areas},

author = {R. Warren and J. Price and J. VanDerWal and S. Cornelius and H. Sohl},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-018-2158-6},

issn = {0165-0009},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-04-01},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {147},

number = {3-4},

pages = {395–409},

publisher = {Springer},

abstract = {Climate change is already affecting species and their distributions. Distributional range changes have occurred and are projected to intensify for many widespread plants and animals, creating associated risks to many ecosystems. Here, we estimate the climate change-related risks to the species in globally significant biodiversity conservation areas over a range of climate scenarios, assessing their value as climate refugia. In particular, we quantify the aggregated benefit of countries’ emission reduction pledges (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions and Nationally Determined Contributions under the Paris Agreement), and also of further constraining global warming to 2 °C above pre-industrial levels, against an unmitigated scenario of 4.5 °C warming. We also quantify the contribution that can be made by using smart spatial conservation planning to facilitate some levels of autonomous (i.e. natural) adaptation to climate change by dispersal. We find that without mitigation, on average 33% of each conservation area can act as climate refugium (or 18% if species are unable to disperse), whereas if warming is constrained to 2 °C, the average area of climate refuges doubles to 67% of each conservation area (or, without dispersal, more than doubles to 56% of each area). If the country pledges are fulfilled, an intermediate estimate of 47–52% (or 31–38%, without dispersal) is obtained. We conclude that the Nationally Determined Contributions alone have important but limited benefits for biodiversity conservation, with larger benefits accruing if warming is constrained to 2 °C. Greater benefits would result if warming was constrained to well below 2 °C as set out in the Paris Agreement.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{c5bc5d915c534542af0b927b34c97633,

title = {Impacts of climate change on TN load and its control in a River Basin with complex pollution sources},

author = {Xiaoying Yang and Rachel Warren and Yi He and Jinyin Ye and Qiaoling Li and Guoqing Wang},

doi = {10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.288},

issn = {0048-9697},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-02-15},

journal = {Science of the Total Environment},

volume = {615},

pages = {1155–1163},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {It is increasingly recognized that climate change could affect the quality of water through complex natural and anthropogenic mechanisms. Previous studies on climate change and water quality have mostly focused on assessing its impact on pollutant loads from agricultural runoff. A sub-daily SWAT model was developed to simulate the discharge, transport, and transformation of nitrogen from all known anthropogenic sources including industries, municipal sewage treatment plants, concentrated and scattered feedlot operations, rural households, and crop production in the Upper Huai River Basin. This is a highly polluted basin with total nitrogen (TN) concentrations frequently exceeding Class V of the Chinese Surface Water Quality Standard (GB3838-2002). Climate change projections produced by 16 Global Circulation Models (GCMs) under the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios in the mid (2040–2060) and late (2070–2090) century were used to drive the SWAT model to evaluate the impacts of climate change on both the TN loads and the effectiveness of three water pollution control measures (reducing fertilizer use, constructing vegetative filter strips, and improving septic tank performance) in the basin. SWAT simulation results have indicated that climate change is likely to cause an increase in both monthly average and extreme TN loads in February, May, and November. The projected impact of climate change on TN loads in August is more varied between GCMs. In addition, climate change is projected to have a negative impact on the effectiveness of septic tanks in reducing TN loads, while its impacts on the other two measures are more uncertain. Despite the uncertainty, reducing fertilizer use remains the most effective measure for reducing TN loads under different climate change scenarios. Meanwhile, improving septic tank performance is relatively more effective in reducing annual TN loads, while constructing vegetative filter strips is more effective in reducing annual maximum monthly TN loads.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2065,

title = {Advancing national climate change risk assessment to deliver national adaptation plans},

author = {R Warren and R Wilby and K Brown and P Watkiss and R Betts and J Murphy and J Lowe},

url = {https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/66540/},

doi = {10.1098/rsta.2017.0295},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society a-Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences},

volume = {376},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2086,

title = {How much difference does half a degree of global warming make to insects, vertebrates and plants?},

author = {R Warren and J Price and J VanDerWal and E Graham and N Forstenhaeusler},

url = {http://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6390/791},

doi = {10.1126/science.aar3646},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Science},

abstract = {<p>In the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, the United Nations is pursuing efforts to limit global warming to 1.5textdegreeC, whereas earlier aspirations focused on a 2textdegreeC limit. With current pledges, corresponding to ~3.2textdegreeC warming, climatically determined geographic range losses of >50% are projected in ~49% of insects, 44% of plants, and 26% of vertebrates. At 2textdegreeC, this falls to 18% of insects, 16% of plants, and 8% of vertebrates and at 1.5textdegreeC, to 6% of insects, 8% of plants, and 4% of vertebrates. When warming is limited to 1.5textdegreeC as compared with 2textdegreeC, numbers of species projected to lose >50% of their range are reduced by ~66% in insects and by ~50% in plants and vertebrates.</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2071,

title = {Impacts of climate change on TN load and its control in a River Basin with complex pollution sources},

author = {X Yang and R Warren and Y He and J Ye and Q Li and L Li and G Wang},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969717326396},

doi = {10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.288},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Science of the Total Environment},

volume = {615},

pages = {1155-1163},

chapter = {1155},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2057,

title = {Impacts on terrestrial biodiversity of moving from a 2 degrees C to a 1.5 degrees C target},

author = {P Smith and J Price and A Molotoks and R Warren and Y Malhi},

url = {http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/376/2119/20160456},

doi = {10.1098/rsta.2016.0456},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A - Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences},

volume = {376},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2064,

title = {The implications of the United Nations Paris Agreement on climate change for globally significant biodiversity areas},

author = {R Warren and J Price and J VanDerWal and S Cornelius and H Sohl},

url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-018-2158-6},

doi = {10.1007/s10584-018-2158-6},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Climatic Change},

volume = {147},

pages = {395-409},

chapter = {395},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2063,

title = {The projected effect on insects, vertebrates, and plants of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees C rather than 2 degrees C},

author = {R Warren and J Price and E Graham and N Forstenhaeusler and J VanDerWal},

url = {http://science.sciencemag.org/content/360/6390/791},

doi = {10.1126/science.aar3646},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Science},

volume = {360},

chapter = {791},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2085,

title = {Quantifying implications of limiting global warming to 1.5 or 2textdegreeC above pre-industrial levels},

author = {R Warren},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Nature Climate Change},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2011,

title = {Risks associated with global warming of 1.5 or 2C},

author = {R Warren and O Andrews and S Brown and N Forstenhaeusler and D Gernaat and P Goodwin and I Harris and Y He and C Home and FJ Colón-González and R Nicholls and T Osborn and J Price and D Van Vuuren and R Wright},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

publisher = {Tyndall Centre Briefing Note},

abstract = {<p>This Briefing Note summarises research examining the risks associated with global warming of 1.5<strong>textdegree</strong>C and 2<strong>textdegree</strong>C funded by the UK department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) undertaken by researchers at the Tyndall Centre.</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{c6b74967301342d797d23c234c7b90e4,

title = {Conducting robust ecological analyses with climate data},

author = {Andrew J. Suggitt and Philip J. Platts and Izabela M. Barata and Jonathan J. Bennie and Malcolm D. Burgess and Nadia Bystriakova and Simon Duffield and Steven R. Ewing and Phillipa K. Gillingham and Anna Harper and Andrew J. Hartley and Deborah L. Hemming and Ilya M. D. Maclean and Katherine Maltby and Harry H. Marshall and Mike D. Morecroft and James Pearce-Higgins and Paul Pearce-Kelly and Albert B. Phillimore and Jeff T. Price and Ayesha Pyke and James E. Stewart and Rachel Warren and Jane K. Hill},

doi = {10.1111/oik.04203},

issn = {0030-1299},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-11-01},

journal = {Oikos},

volume = {126},

number = {11},

pages = {1533–1541},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {Although the number of studies discerning the impact of climate change on ecological systems continues to increase, there has been relatively little sharing of the lessons learnt when accumulating this evidence. At a recent workshop entitled ‘Using climate data in ecological research’ held at the UK Met Office, ecologists and climate scientists came together to discuss the robust analysis of climate data in ecology. The discussions identified three common pitfalls encountered by ecologists: 1) selection of inappropriate spatial resolutions for analysis; 2) improper use of publically available data or code; and 3) insufficient representation of the uncertainties behind the adopted approach. Here, we discuss how these pitfalls can be avoided, before suggesting ways that both ecology and climate science can move forward. Our main recommendation is that ecologists and climate scientists collaborate more closely, on grant proposals and scientific publications, and informally through online media and workshops. More sharing of data and code (e.g. via online repositories), lessons and guidance would help to reconcile differing approaches to the robust handling of data. We call on ecologists to think critically about which aspects of the climate are relevant to their study system, and to acknowledge and actively explore uncertainty in all types of climate data. And we call on climate scientists to make simple estimates of uncertainty available to the wider research community. Through steps such as these, we will improve our ability to robustly attribute observed ecological changes to climate or other factors, while providing the sort of influential, comprehensive analyses that efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change so urgently require.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{f57bd78a388b4383bea0f6411167a6c1,

title = {Avoiding dangerous climate: results from the AVOID2 programme},

author = {J. A. Lowe and Nigel W. Arnell and R. Warren and A. J. Gambhir and D. Bernie and E. Thompson},

doi = {10.1002/wea.3176},

issn = {0043-1656},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-11-01},

journal = {Weather},

volume = {72},

number = {11},

pages = {340–345},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {The AVOID2 programme provided evidence for UK Government on what might constitute dangerous climate change and the feasibility of avoiding it. The programme quantified some of the benefits of moving from a world that warms by around 4?5?C to one limiting global warming to below or well below 2?C. Whilst there is evidence that this transition is feasible, it will require early action to reduce emissions and to develop the potential for large-scale deployment of a range of low carbon technologies.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{07e7f42c803c4e128ad1b804ff69de32,

title = {IPCC reasons for concern regarding climate change risks},

author = {Brian C. O'Neill and Michael Oppenheimer and Rachel Warren and Stephane Hallegatte and Robert E. Kopp and Hans O. Pörtner and Robert Scholes and Joern Birkmann and Wendy Foden and Rachel Licker and Katharine J. Mach and Phillippe Marbaix and Michael D. Mastrandrea and Jeff Price and Kiyoshi Takahashi and Jean-Pascal Ypersele and Gary Yohe},

doi = {10.1038/nclimate3179},

issn = {1758-678X},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-04},

journal = {Nature Climate Change},

volume = {7},

pages = {28–37},

publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},

abstract = {The reasons for concern framework communicates scientific understanding about risks in relation to varying levels of climate change. The framework, now a cornerstone of the IPCC assessments, aggregates global risks into five categories as a function of global mean temperature change. We review the framework's conceptual basis and the risk judgments made in the most recent IPCC report, confirming those judgments in most cases in the light of more recent literature and identifying their limitations. We point to extensions of the framework that offer complementary climate change metrics to global mean temperature change and better account for possible changes in social and ecological system vulnerability. Further research should systematically evaluate risks under alternative scenarios of future climatic and societal conditions.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1976,

title = {Avoiding dangerous climate: results from the AVOID2 programme},

author = {JA Lowe and N W Arnell and R Warren and AJ Gambhir and D Bernie and E Thompson},

doi = {10.1002/wea.3176},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

journal = {Weather},

volume = {72},

pages = {340-345},

chapter = {340},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1671,

title = {IPCC reasons for concern regarding climate change risks},

author = {Brian C O{textquoteright}Neill and Michael Oppenheimer and Rachel Warren and Stephane Hallegatte and Robert E Kopp and Hans O Poertner and Robert Scholes and Joern Birkmann and Wendy Foden and Rachel Licker},

doi = {DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE3179},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

abstract = {<p>The reasons for concern framework communicates scientific understanding about risks in relation to varying levels of climate change. The framework, now a cornerstone of the IPCC assessments, aggregates global risks into five categories as a function of global mean temperature change. We review the frameworktextquoterights conceptual basis and the risk judgments made in the most recent IPCC report, confirming those judgments in most cases in the light of more recent literature and identifying their limitations. We point to extensions of the framework that offer complementary climate change metrics to global mean temperature change and better account for possible changes in social and ecological system vulnerability. Further research should systematically evaluate risks under alternative scenarios of future climatic and societal conditions.</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{c2bdcbd40084415a854967759d76ae34,

title = {Sensitivity of UK butterflies to local climatic extremes: Which life stages are most at risk?},

author = {Osgur McDermott Long and Rachel Warren and Jeff Price and Tom M. Brereton and Marc S. Botham and Aldina M. A. Franco},

doi = {10.1111/1365-2656.12594},

issn = {0021-8790},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

journal = {Journal of Animal Ecology},

volume = {86},

number = {1},

pages = {108–116},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {1. There is growing recognition as to the importance of extreme climatic events (ECEs) in determining changes in species populations. In fact it’s often the extent of climate variability that determines a population’s ability to persist at a given site. 2. This study examined the impact of ECEs on the resident UK butterfly species (n=41) over a 37 year period. The study investigated the sensitivity of butterflies to four extremes (Drought, Extreme Precipitation, Extreme Heat, Extreme Cold), identified at the site level, across each species’ life stages. Variations in the vulnerability of butterflies at the site level were also compared based on 3 life history traits (voltinism, habitat requirement, and range). 3. This is the first study to examine the effects of ECEs at the site level across all life stages of a butterfly, identifying sensitive life stages and unravelling the role life history traits play in species sensitivity to ECEs. 4. Butterfly population changes were found to be primarily driven by temperature extremes. Extreme heat was detrimental during overwintering periods and beneficial during adult periods and extreme cold had opposite impacts on both of these life stages. Previously undocumented detrimental effects were identified for extreme precipitation during the pupal life stage for univoltine species. Generalists were found to have significantly more negative associations with ECEs than specialists. 5. With future projections of warmer, wetter winters and more severe weather events, UK butterflies could come under severe pressure given the findings of this study.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{9bd70177073c4bfb91b05bf06a02b4d8,

title = {The Biodiversity and Climate Change Virtual Laboratory: Where ecology meets big data},

author = {Willow Hallgren and Linda Beaumont and Andrew Bowness and Lynda Chambers and Erin Graham and Hamish Holewa and Shawn Laffan and Brendan Mackey and Henry Nix and Jeff Price and Jeremy Vanderwal and Rachel Warren and Gerhard Weis},

doi = {10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.10.025},

issn = {1364-8152},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

journal = {Environmental Modelling and Software},

volume = {76},

pages = {182–186},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {Advances in computing power and infrastructure, increases in the number and size of ecological and environmental datasets, and the number and type of data collection methods, are revolutionizing the field of Ecology. To integrate these advances, virtual laboratories offer a unique tool to facilitate, expedite, and accelerate research into the impacts of climate change on biodiversity. We introduce the uniquely cloud-based Biodiversity and Climate Change Virtual Laboratory (BCCVL), which provides access to numerous species distribution modelling tools; a large and growing collection of biological, climate, and other environmental datasets; and a variety of experiment types to conduct research into the impact of climate change on biodiversity.Users can upload and share datasets, potentially increasing collaboration, cross-fertilisation of ideas, and innovation among the user community. Feedback confirms that the BCCVL's goals of lowering the technical requirements for species distribution modelling, and reducing time spent on such research, are being met.},

note = {© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{20240af22ba94301b9b04d2605cb979c,

title = {Key impacts of climate engineering on biodiversity and ecosystems, with priorities for future research},

author = {Caitlin G. McCormack and Wanda Born and Peter J. Irvine and Eric P. Achterberg and Tatsuya Amano and Jeff Ardron and Pru N. Foster and Jean-Pierre Gattuso and Stephen J. Hawkins and Erica Hendy and W. Daniel Kissling and Salvador E. Lluch-Cota and Eugene J. Murphy and Nick Ostle and Nicholas J. P. Owens and R. Ian Perry and Hans O. Portner and Robert J. Scholes and Frank M. Schurr and Oliver Schweiger and Josef Settele and Rebecca K. Smith and Sarah Smith and Jill Thompson and Derek P. Tittensor and Mark Cleunen and Chris Vivian and Katrin Vohland and Rachel Warren and Andrew Watkinson and Steve Widdicombe and Phillip Williamson and Emma Woods and Jason J. Blackstock and William J. Sutherland},

doi = {10.1080/1943815X.2016.1159578},

issn = {1943-815X},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

journal = {Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences},

volume = {13},

number = {2-4},

pages = {103–128},

publisher = {Taylor and Francis},

abstract = {Climate change has significant implications for biodiversity and ecosystems. With slow progress towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions, climate engineering (or ‘geoengineering’) is receiving increasing attention for its potential to limit anthropogenic climate change and its damaging effects. Proposed techniques, such as ocean fertilization for carbon dioxide removal or stratospheric sulfate injections to reduce incoming solar radiation, would significantly alter atmospheric, terrestrial and marine environments, yet potential side-effects of their implementation for ecosystems and biodiversity have received little attention. A literature review was carried out to identify details of the potential ecological effects of climate engineering techniques. A group of biodiversity and environmental change researchers then employed a modified Delphi expert consultation technique to evaluate this evidence and prioritize the effects based on the relative importance of, and scientific understanding about, their biodiversity and ecosystem consequences. The key issues and knowledge gaps are used to shape a discussion of the biodiversity and ecosystem implications of climate engineering, including novel climatic conditions, alterations to marine systems and substantial terrestrial habitat change. This review highlights several current research priorities in which the climate engineering context is crucial to consider, as well as identifying some novel topics for ecological investigation.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{6effb4f907e04025930d4f6bec967154,

title = {Using scenarios to project the changing profitability of fisheries under climate change},

author = {Miranda Jones and Stephen R. Dye and John K. Pinnegar and Rachel Warren and William W. L. Cheung},

doi = {10.1111/faf.12081},

issn = {1467-2960},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

journal = {Fish and Fisheries},

volume = {16},

pages = {603–622},

publisher = {Wiley},

abstract = {Over-exploitation and economic underperformance are widespread in the world's fisheries. Global climate change is further affecting the distribution of marine species, raising concern for the persistence of biodiversity and presenting additional challenges to fisheries management. However, few studies have attempted to extend bioclimatic projections to assess the socio-economic impacts of climate-induced range shifts. This study investigates the potential implications of changes in relative environmental suitability and fisheries catch potential on UK fisheries by linking species distribution modelling with cost-benefit analyses. We develop scenarios and apply a multimodel approach to explore the economic sensitivity of UK fisheries and key sources of uncertainty in the modelling procedure. We projected changes in maximum potential catch of key species and the resulting responses in terms of net present value (NPV) over a 45-year period under scenarios of change in fuel price, discount rate and government subsidies. Results suggest that total maximum potential catch will decrease within the UK EEZ by 2050, resulting in a median decrease in NPV of 10%. This value decreases further when trends of fuel price change are extrapolated into the future, becoming negative when capacity-enhancing subsidies are removed. Despite the variation in predictions from alternative models and data input, the direction of change in NPV is robust. This study highlights key factors influencing future profitability of UK fisheries and the importance of enhancing adaptive capacity in UK fisheries.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{eaed8182a346417b98ca46fc4733daec,

title = {Drought-damage functions for the estimation of drought costs under future projections of climate change},

author = {Katie Jenkins and Rachel Warren},

doi = {10.1142/S2345737615500013},

issn = {2345-7376},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-08-21},

journal = {Journal of Extreme Events},

volume = {2},

number = {1},

abstract = {Drought events and their impacts pose a considerable problem for governments, businesses and individuals. Superimposed on this is the risk of anthropogenic climate change. Climate models are increasingly being used to understand how climate change may affect future drought regimes. However, methodologies to quantify economic costs which could occur under these future scenarios are virtually non-existent. In this study, historic drought events were identified in regional precipitation data using the Standardized Precipitation Index, and their magnitude quantified and linked to reported economic costs. Drought damage functions were created for Australia, Brazil, China, India, Spain/Portugal and the USA. Projections of drought magnitude for 2003–2050 were modeled using the Community Integrated Assessment System, for a range of climate and emission scenarios, and future economic costs estimated. Severe and extreme drought events were projected to cause estimated additional losses ranging between 0.04 and 9 percent of national GDP in Australia, the USA and Spain/Portugal under future scenarios of climate change. The combined effect on global GDP from projected long-term drought events in the countries analyzed resulted in additional annual losses of 0.01 to 0.25 percent. This is considered conservative as the analysis is representative of seven countries only; does not incorporate the possibility of successive drought events, or compounding effects on vulnerability from interactions with other extreme events. Furthermore, it excludes indirect economic effects; social and environmental losses; the possibility of increasing vulnerability due to changing socio-economic conditions; and the possibility of irreversible or systemic collapse of economies as the study highlighted that under future climate change drought magnitude may exceed current experience potentially passing thresholds of social and economic resilience. Stringent mitigation had little effect on the increasing impacts of drought in the first half of the 21st century, so in the short-term adaptation in drought “hot spots” will be crucial.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}