Suchergebnisse

Earth System Models (ESM) are key ingredients of many of the climate services that are currently being developed and delivered. However, ESMs have more applications than the provision of climate services, and similarly many climate services use more sources of information than ESMs. This discussion paper elaborates on dilemmas that are evident at the interface between ESMs and climate services, in particular: (a) purposes of the models versus service development, (b) gap between the spatial and temporal scales of the models versus the scales needed in applications, and (c) Tailoring climate model results to real-world applications. A continued and broad-minded dialogue between the ESM developers and climate services providers' communities is needed to improve both the optimal use and direction of ESM development and climate service development. We put forward considerations to improve this dialogue between the communities developing ESMs and climate services, in order to increase the mutual benefit that enhanced understanding of prospects and limitations of ESMs and climate services will bring. ; This work and its contributors (B. van den Hurk, C. Hewitt, J. Bessembinder, F. Doblas-Reyes, R. Döscher) were funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union: Project ref. 689029 (Climateurope project). The co-author and editor of the journal states that she was not involved in the review process of the paper. ; Peer Reviewed ; Postprint (published version)

Earth System Models (ESM) are key ingredients of many of the climate services that are currently being developed and delivered. However, ESMs have more applications than the provision of climate services, and similarly many climate services use more sources of information than ESMs. This discussion paper elaborates on dilemmas that are evident at the interface between ESMs and climate services, in particular: (a) purposes of the models versus service development, (b) gap between the spatial and temporal scales of the models versus the scales needed in applications, and (c) Tailoring climate model results to real-world applications. A continued and broad-minded dialogue between the ESM developers and climate services providers' communities is needed to improve both the optimal use and direction of ESM development and climate service development. We put forward considerations to improve this dialogue between the communities developing ESMs and climate services, in order to increase the mutual benefit that enhanced understanding of prospects and limitations of ESMs and climate services will bring. ; This work and its contributors (B. van den Hurk, C. Hewitt, J. Bessembinder, F. Doblas-Reyes, R. Döscher) were funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union: Project ref. 689029 (Climateurope project). The co-author and editor of the journal states that she was not involved in the review process of the paper. ; Peer Reviewed ; Postprint (published version)

Knowledge of the climate is essential to manage climate-related risks. Underpinning this knowledge is a huge range of climate research and climate service activities. There has been a marked expansion of such activities and while the numerous and diverse funding streams, activities and organizations involved means that climate service development is relatively well resourced in places, there is a risk that the landscape becomes fragmented, duplicative, confusing, and inefficient. To mitigate this, the European Commission established the Climateurope project to bring coordination to Europe's climate-related knowledge base. Climateurope created a managed network to share knowledge, improve synergies and reduce fragmentation among the stakeholders. As the network evolved, we proactively strove for equality, diversity and inclusion, for example for gender, under-represented regions, and under-represented stakeholder groups. Climateurope explored and adopted innovative approaches to engaging the network members, including face-to-face networking events (Festivals), virtual networking events (Webstivals and webinars), use of arts, social media, expert groups, publications, and an active website. The mix and integration of the traditional communications, such as website, publications and expert groups, with more innovative and varied approaches, such as the Festivals, Webstivals, social media and arts, proved popular and successful in making the network active and attractive. We describe how the network and collaboration was established and managed, and we offer some recommendations for others based on our experiences, including consideration of equality, diversity and inclusion, consider strategies for growing, managing and sustaining the network, and consider a mix of virtual and physical networking events. ; This work was funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union: Climateurope - Linking science and society, Project ref. 689029. The views expressed are purely those of the authors who were all involved in the project and may not under any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Thank you to Rob Groenland and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on the paper ; Peer Reviewed ; "Article signat per 18 autors/es: Chris Hewitt, Janette Bessembinder, Mauro Buonocore, Tyrone Dunbar, Natalie Garrett, Lola Kotova, Stacey New, Paula Newton, Rebecca Parfitt, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Francesca Guglielmo, Daniela Jacob, Erik Kjellström, Aleksandra Krzic, Helena Martins, Alessia Pietrosanti, Marta Terrado" ; Postprint (published version)