Accuracy versus variability of climate projections for flood assessment in central Italy

S. Camici (), L. Brocca and T. Moramarco
Additional contact information
S. Camici: Research Institute for Geo-Hydrological Protection, National Research Council
L. Brocca: Research Institute for Geo-Hydrological Protection, National Research Council
T. Moramarco: Research Institute for Geo-Hydrological Protection, National Research Council

Climatic Change, 2017, vol. 141, issue 2, No 10, 273-286

Abstract: Abstract Climatic extremes are changing and decision-makers express a strong need for reliable information on future changes over the coming decades as a basis for adaption strategies. In the hydrological-hydraulic context, to estimate changes on floods, a modeling chain composed by general circulation models (GCMs), bias correction (BC) methods, and hydrological modeling is generally applied. It is well-known that each step of the modeling chain introduces uncertainties, resulting in a reduction of the reliability of future climate projections. The main goal of this study is the assessment of the accuracy and variability (i.e., model accuracy, climate intermodel variability, and natural variability) on climate projections related to the present period. By using six different GCMs and two BC methods, the “climate intermodel variability” is evaluated. “Natural variability” is estimated through random realizations of stochastic weather generators. By comparing observed and simulated extreme discharge values, obtained through a continuous rainfall-runoff model, “model accuracy” is computed. The Tiber River basin in central Italy is used as a case study. Results show that in climate projections, model accuracy and climate intermodel variability components have to be clearly distinguished. For accuracy, the hydrological model is found to be the largest source of error; for variability, natural variability contributes for more than 75% to the total variability while GCM and BC have a much lower influence. Moreover, accuracy and variability components vary significantly, and not consistently, between catchments with different permeability characteristics.

Keywords: Return Period; Climate Change Impact; Natural Variability; Runoff Coefficient; Relative Root Mean Square Error (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-016-1876-x Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:climat:v:141:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-016-1876-x

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10584

DOI: 10.1007/s10584-016-1876-x

Access Statistics for this article

Climatic Change is currently edited by M. Oppenheimer and G. Yohe

More articles in Climatic Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().