Uncertainty Analysis of Monthly Precipitation in GCMs Using Multiple Bias Correction Methods under Different RCPs

Young Hoon Song, Eun-Sung Chung and Mohammed Sanusi Shiru
Additional contact information
Young Hoon Song: Faculty of Civil Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul 01811, Korea
Eun-Sung Chung: Faculty of Civil Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul 01811, Korea
Mohammed Sanusi Shiru: Faculty of Civil Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232 Gongneung-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul 01811, Korea

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 18, 1-19

Abstract: This study quantified the uncertainties in historical and future average monthly precipitation based on different bias correction methods, General Circulation Models (GCMs), Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), projection periods, and locations within the study area (i.e., the coastal and inland areas of South Korea). The GCMs were downscaled using deep learning, random forest, and nine quantile mapping bias correction methods for 22 gauge stations in South Korea. Data from the Korean Meteorology Administration (1970–2005) were used as the reference data in this study. Two statistical measures, the standard deviation and interquartile range, were used to quantify the uncertainties. The probability distribution density was used to assess the similarity/variation in rainfall distributions. For the historical period, the uncertainty in the selection of bias correction methods was greater than that in the selection of GCMs, whereas the opposite pattern was observed for the projection period. The projection period had the lowest level of uncertainty in the selection of RCP scenarios, and for the future, the uncertainly related to the time period was slightly lower than that for the other sources but was much greater than that for the RCP selection. In addition, it was clear that the level of uncertainty of inland areas is much lower than that of coastal areas. The uncertainty in the selection of the GCMs was slightly greater than that in the selection of the bias correction method. Therefore, the uncertainty in the selection of coastal areas was intermediate between the selection of bias correction methods and GCMs. This paper contributes to an improved understanding of the uncertainties in climate change projections arising from various sources.

Keywords: bias correction; General Circulation Model; South Korea; uncertainty (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7508/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7508/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7508-:d:412366

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().