全球变暖比工业化前水平高 1.5 至 4 ℃对六个国家的人类和自然系统造成的风险

IF 4.8 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Climatic Change Pub Date : 2024-02-29 DOI:10.1007/s10584-023-03646-6
R. Warren, J. Price, N. Forstenhäusler, O. Andrews, S. Brown, K. Ebi, D. Gernaat, P. Goodwin, D. Guan, Y. He, D. Manful, Z. Yin, Y. Hu, K. Jenkins, R. Jenkins, A. Kennedy-Asser, T. J. Osborn, D. VanVuuren, C. Wallace, D. Wang, R. Wright
{"title":"全球变暖比工业化前水平高 1.5 至 4 ℃对六个国家的人类和自然系统造成的风险","authors":"R. Warren, J. Price, N. Forstenhäusler, O. Andrews, S. Brown, K. Ebi, D. Gernaat, P. Goodwin, D. Guan, Y. He, D. Manful, Z. Yin, Y. Hu, K. Jenkins, R. Jenkins, A. Kennedy-Asser, T. J. Osborn, D. VanVuuren, C. Wallace, D. Wang, R. Wright","doi":"10.1007/s10584-023-03646-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":10372,"journal":{"name":"Climatic Change","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risks associated with global warming of 1.5 to 4 °C above pre-industrial levels in human and natural systems in six countries\",\"authors\":\"R. Warren, J. Price, N. Forstenhäusler, O. Andrews, S. Brown, K. Ebi, D. Gernaat, P. Goodwin, D. Guan, Y. He, D. Manful, Z. Yin, Y. Hu, K. Jenkins, R. Jenkins, A. Kennedy-Asser, T. J. Osborn, D. VanVuuren, C. Wallace, D. Wang, R. Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10584-023-03646-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10372,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Climatic Change\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Climatic Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03646-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Climatic Change","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-023-03646-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

专题集 "六个脆弱国家的气候变化风险累积 "采用一套一致的气候变化和社会经济情景,对六个国家(中国、巴西、埃及、埃塞俄比亚、加纳和印度)因全球升温 1.5-4 ℃ 而对人类和自然系统造成的风险进行了统一评估。该研究比较了 2100 年升温达到 3 ℃ 时的风险,这大致相当于当前的全球温室气体减排政策,包括各国的 "国家确定贡献",而不是《巴黎协定》中将升温限制在 "远低于 "2 ℃ 并 "继续努力 "将升温限制在 1.5 ℃ 的目标。假设全球人口要么保持在 2000 年的水平,要么到 2100 年增加到 92 亿。无论在哪种情况下,预计在所有六个国家,气候变暖都将导致土地和人口更易遭受干旱和洪水灾害,生物多样性进一步减少,玉米和小麦产量进一步降低。预计将全球升温控制在 1.5 °C(约 3 °C)将为所有六个国家带来巨大效益,包括减少因河流洪水造成的经济损失。埃塞俄比亚、中国、加纳和印度在 1.5 °C时比 3 °C 时分别低 61%、43%、18% 和 21%,而这六个国家在 1.5 °C 时比 3 °C 时避免人类遭受严重干旱的风险增加了 20-80%。在加纳、中国和埃塞俄比亚,升温 1.5 °C时,植物的气候庇护所基本得以保留,但如果升温达到 3 °C,加纳、中国、印度、埃塞俄比亚和巴西的庇护所面积将分别缩小 2、3、3、4 和 10 倍。在沿海国家,与海平面上升相关的经济损失预计会增加,但如果升温限制在 1.5 °C,则增加速度会更慢。当地的实际收益也将取决于国家和地方的具体情况以及未来适应投资的程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Risks associated with global warming of 1.5 to 4 °C above pre-industrial levels in human and natural systems in six countries

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Climatic Change
Climatic Change 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
4.20%
发文量
180
审稿时长
7.5 months
期刊介绍: Climatic Change is dedicated to the totality of the problem of climatic variability and change - its descriptions, causes, implications and interactions among these. The purpose of the journal is to provide a means of exchange among those working in different disciplines on problems related to climatic variations. This means that authors have an opportunity to communicate the essence of their studies to people in other climate-related disciplines and to interested non-disciplinarians, as well as to report on research in which the originality is in the combinations of (not necessarily original) work from several disciplines. The journal also includes vigorous editorial and book review sections.
期刊最新文献
Green industrial policy for climate action in the basic materials industry Amplification of compound hot-dry extremes and associated population exposure over East Africa Raising the bar: What determines the ambition level of corporate climate targets? A 561-yr (1461-2022 CE) summer temperature reconstruction for Mid-Atlantic-Northeast USA shows connections to volcanic forcing and atmospheric circulation Might I have to move due to climate change? The role of exposure to risk and political partisanship in anticipation of future relocation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1