Application of the UKCIP02 climate change scenarios: Reflections and lessons learnt

Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Global Environmental Change journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gloenvcha

Application of the UKCIP02 climate change scenarios: Reflections and lessons learnt Megan Gawith *, Roger Street, Richard Westaway, Anna Steynor UK Climate Impacts Programme, Oxford University Centre for the Environment, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3QY, United Kingdom

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history: Received 21 April 2008 Received in revised form 23 September 2008 Accepted 27 September 2008

The UKCIP02 climate change scenarios have become the standard reference for climate change in the UK since their release in 2002. This paper describes and reflects on the ways in which they have been applied. It then identifies some strengths, weaknesses and barriers to their application, and extracts key lessons that may inform the development and provision of future climate change scenarios. Analysis of the application of UKCIP02 shows that the scenarios have been used primarily as a communication device, as well as for scientific research and to inform policy and decision-making on climate change. They have played a critical role in raising awareness on climate change and in engaging organisations in the need to adapt. Their presentation in an accessible style, and their availability in a variety of formats, greatly facilitated their uptake. However, analysis has also revealed weaknesses which served as barriers to their uptake. Some of these, such as file format and accessibility issues, were readily overcome through technical solutions. Others, such as the issue of how to use uncertain information in decision-making, have only been partially addressed and remain an outstanding challenge for future scenario packages. Two key lessons have emerged which may benefit the provision of future climate scenarios in the UK and elsewhere. First, it is not enough to simply make climate change scenarios available. Their provision must be accompanied by ongoing guidance and support to ensure widespread and appropriate uptake. Second, on-going dialogue between those providing scenarios and the communities using them is fundamental to constructively meet the challenges associated with delivering credible scenarios that balance user requirements and expectations with what the science can deliver. ß 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: UKCIP02 Climate change scenarios Climate change impacts and adaptation

1. Introduction The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP) was established in 1997 by the Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions (now the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Defra) to facilitate an integrated, stakeholder-led assessment of climate change impacts in the UK. UKCIP was based on two main premises designed to address key deficiencies in existing climate impacts research. First, government-led research on climate change was not reaching potential users or informing action and decision-making on climate change (Lorenzoni et al., 2007). DETR recognised that ‘‘bottom-up’’, stakeholder-driven research was more likely to provide the information that decision-makers needed to plan how to adapt to climate change, so determined that UKCIP should be stakeholderled in its approach. Second, it was not possible at the time to integrate results of individual studies to determine the vulner-

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1865 285719; fax: +44 1865 285710. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Gawith). 0959-3780/$ – see front matter ß 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.09.005

ability of the UK as a whole to climate change, as studies typically used different data, scenarios, assumptions, and spatial and temporal scales. UKCIP was therefore to provide an integrating framework within which studies could be undertaken, so results could be compared and individual sectors obtain a more realistic assessment of climate change impacts (McKenzie-Hedger et al., 2000). The manner in which the Programme was to function was innovative. UKCIP itself was not to conduct the research. Instead, it was to facilitate and oversee research undertaken by others within its integrating framework, provide core tools for impacts assessment, and offer ongoing support and guidance to both the research teams and project funders (McKenzie-Hedger et al., 2000). As such, it bridged the gap between researchers and decision-makers in government organisations and businesses, functioning in a capacity that is now widely recognised as being one of a boundary organisation (Lorenzoni et al., 2007). A cornerstone of UKCIP’s integrating framework was to be a standard set of climate change scenarios (SPA and ESYS, 1996). Two sets of have been produced over the lifetime of the programme with funding from Defra. The first, UKCIP98 (Hulme and Jenkins,

114

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

1998), helped establish the fledgling Programme, lending it credibility and providing it with a means of engaging stakeholders (McKenzie-Hedger et al., 2000). These were replaced in 2002 by the so-called UKCIP02 scenarios (Hulme et al., 2002). The UKCIP02 scenarios have been used in all UKCIP studies initiated since their release and have proved to be a critical means of enabling study methods and results to be integrated. They have been used extensively elsewhere in the UK to assess climate change impacts, and are referenced in key research findings and policy documents such as Defra’s flood management policy guidance (Defra, 2003), the Pitt Review (Pitt, 2008) and the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change (Stern, 2008). As noted in an external review of UKCIP in 2004, the UKCIP02 scenarios have become the de facto UK standard for climate change impacts and adaptation work (ESYS, 2004). They have also been a powerful driver for engagement in UKCIP, enabling decision-makers at all levels to take ownership of the climate change issue (West and Gawith, 2005). The UKCIP scenarios marked an important departure from the previous UK climate change scenarios in two respects: the way in which they were produced, and the way in which they were used. Previous UK climate change scenarios, such as those used by the Climate Change Impacts Review Group (CCIRG) (CCIRG, 1991, 1996) and those distributed through the Climate Impacts LINK Project (known as LINK), were developed by scientists for scientists. However, the purpose of UKCIP was to help decisionmakers in the public and private sector assess their vulnerability to climate change so they could plan to adapt. As well as being scientifically robust and reflecting the current state-of-the-art, climate change information provided by UKCIP had to also be relevant to, and applicable by, specialist climate scientists and impacts modellers, and a much broader decision- and policymaking community, many of whom had little or no direct experience of climate change impacts research. The process whereby both sets of the UKCIP scenarios were generated is an interesting story in its own right. This subject has been covered in detail by Hulme and Dessai (2008) and is not the focus of this paper. It is worth noting though, that by the time UKCIP02 was being planned, UKCIP was a well established institution with an active stakeholder community engaged in considering the implications of climate change for their businesses and decision-making (Hedger et al., 2006). A Steering Committee was established to oversee delivery of the UKCIP02 scenarios, and a Stakeholder Panel of key users set up to represent their needs to the scenario development team. UKCIP02 was generated through a novel process of negotiation between policy-makers, decisionmakers and scientists designed to produce policy-relevant climate information (Hulme and Dessai, 2008). The result was a package of climate change information that was more accessible than ever before, and which was available to a broader range of users than had previously been the case. Importantly, it was, and continues to be, free of charge. Much has been learnt through the application of UKCIP02 that has not yet been formally reported in the literature. With a new package of climate change information (UKCIP08) due for release at the end of 2008, a critical review of the application of UKCIP02 is now timely. Furthermore, while much has been written on scenario generation, there is little that reflects on how scenarios have actually been used (Hulme and Dessai, submitted). This paper aims to address that imbalance. Case studies of the application of UKCIP02 will be analysed to identify how the scenarios have been used, by whom, and to do what. Strengths and weaknesses of the UKCIP02 scenarios package will be analysed. Finally, lessons from that could inform the development and application of future generations of climate change scenarios, including UKCIP08, will be extracted.

2. The UKCIP02 scenarios 2.1. Description of UKCP02 The UKCIP02 climate change scenarios provide four alternative descriptions of how the climate of the UK might evolve over the course of this century. These alternative descriptions are offered as we cannot be entirely certain about future trends in factors such as population growth, socio-economic development and technological progress, nor can we be certain about how differing trends in these factors might influence future global emissions of greenhouse gases. To address this so-called ‘emissions uncertainty’, four alternative futures are described in UKCIP02 ranging from a world in which there is rapid economic growth with intensive use of fossil fuels (creating a ‘High Emissions’ scenario – the SRES A1F1 emissions scenario) to one in which there is increased economic, social and environmental sustainability with cleaner energy technologies (yielding a ‘Low Emissions’ scenario – the SRES B1 emissions scenario). Each of these four emissions scenarios produces its own climate change scenario, ranging from High (based on the SRES A1F1 emissions scenario), through MediumHigh and Medium-Low, to Low (based on the SRES B1 emissions scenario). For each of the four resultant UKCIP02 climate change scenarios, changes are described for three future 30-year time-slices: 2011– 2040 (the 2020s), 2041–2070 (the 2050s) and 2071–2100 (the 2080s). All changes in climate are given relative to the baseline period of 1961–1990. The climate change scenarios are presented at a 50 km2 resolution (as opposed to 300 km2 in UKCIP98), based on outputs from the Hadley Centre’s global and regional climate models (HadCM3 and HadRM3, respectively), reflecting expressed user requirements for data at a higher spatial resolution and advances in modelling capabilities (ESYS, 2004). At the time, no other climate model output was available at the 50 km2 resolution, so all results were drawn from a single model (HadCM3). This was a recognised weakness of the scenarios, as it meant that model uncertainty could not be included directly in the scenarios. As a result, information on other climate model projections was provided to show users how the UKCIP02 scenarios compared within the range of results from other models (West and Gawith, 2005). Uncertainty in the UKCIP02 scenarios was illustrated using maps and diagrams of scenarios from other climate models and through a table of ‘‘semi-quantitative’’ uncertainty margins (Hulme et al., 2002). In addition, the described changes in future climate were assigned a relative confidence level of ‘‘High’’, ‘‘Medium’’ or ‘‘Low’’ based on both expert judgement and comparison with results from other global climate models (Hulme et al., 2002). The UKCIP02 climate change scenarios were made available in a number of formats, each with varying amounts of detail. The headline messages provided a national overview of the main changes described by UKCIP02. They also included historic trends, to allow recent observations to be compared with future projections. A set of published material was also produced. The 14 paged Briefing report presented key findings to a broad, nonspecialist audience. The 112 paged Scientific report contained more detailed information and was written with a more technical and specialised audience in mind. Both reports examined historic climate trends in the UK, explained how the UKCIP02 scenarios were produced and provided a commentary to the changes they describe, albeit in differing levels of detail. They also included a range of pre-prepared maps and graphs to help users visualise the described changes. Numerical information, in the form of underlying model output, was available for those wishing to undertake

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

further processing and analysis. All information was freely available pending completion of a licence agreement form.

Table 1 Profile of UKCIP02 licensees: (a) by Organisation type and (b) by Sector of interest. (Source: West and Gawith, 2005). Percentage licensees

2.2. Uptake and dissemination Six years after their release, the UKCIP02 scenarios are widely recognised as the standard reference for UK climate impacts and adaptation assessments (ESYS, 2004). They have been used in climate impact scoping studies in all English regions and the Devolved Administrations, and for qualitative and quantitative assessments of impacts on more than a dozen sectors including human health (Department of Health, 2001; Kovats, 2008), gardens (Bisgrove and Hadley, 2002), biodiversity (Walmsley et al., 2007), heritage (Cassar, 2005), the built environment (BKCC, 2005), tourism (McEvoy et al., 2006) and the marine environment (e.g., Mieszkowska et al., 2005). The UKCIP02 report is widely referenced: Google scholar records 291 citations for the Scientific report and 26 for the Briefing report. It maps and graphs have been reproduced in numerous documents and presentations, and the underlying model output has been interrogated to support climate change impacts and adaptation work in a wide range of sectors. To date around 1800 copies of the scientific report and around 9500 copies of the briefing report have been distributed by UKCIP, necessitating a re-print. Many more copies of the report and maps have been downloaded in electronic form from the UKCIP website (currently estimated at 200 per month). 3. Description of UKCIP02 users UKCIP02 users range from decision-makers in organisations that are going to be, or already are, affected by the changing climate and are in a position to decide on adaptation actions that are important on a local, regional or national scale (West and Gawith, 2005), through individual researchers from secondary school to post-doctorate level, to those who are beginning to appreciate that climate change might affect them, but who have not yet determined what they ought to do to about it. Of UKCIP02 users, more than 600 have registered for electronic access to the underlying model output in order to conduct quantitative analyses. A profile of licensees is provided in Table 1. Information on the use of UKCIP02 has been obtained through a consultation exercise conducted by UKCIP between 2004 and 2006 to learn lessons from the application and delivery of UKCIP02, and to elicit stakeholder preferences for the next package of climate information. Sixteen consultation events were held around the UK, each involving a cross-section of users (UKCIP, 2006). An online consultation was also conducted over the summer of 2006, yielding 130 responses. Three broad uses of UKCIP02 were identified:  ‘Communication’ including awareness-raising, staff briefings, and educating.  ‘Research’ including academic (i.e., conducted at an academic institution as opposed to a consultancy) and applied research, dissertations and impacts modelling assessments conducted as part of regional or sectoral scoping studies.  ‘Decision- and policy-making’ comprising actions undertaken on the basis of the climate change information. This includes strategic studies, management or action plans, design decisions (e.g., infrastructure or flood defence) or policy formulation. Of the three uses, the most common was for communication purposes (38%), followed by research (27%) and then decisionmaking (18%). This is reflected in use of the published materials.

115

(a) Organisation type Higher/further education Private sector Government agency Local government Voluntary Central government Regional organisations Other

51 22 13 5 3 1 1 4

(b) Sector of interest Water Regional Biodiversity Agriculture Build environment Local government policy/strategy Land use/spatial planning Forestry Methodology Tourism Soils Health Other

32 11 10 9 8 5 4 2 2 2 2 1 12

The majority (70%) of UKCIP02 users have used the Briefing report, while approximately two thirds have used the Scientific report (61%) and electronic maps (60%). Around one third of UKCIP02 users (36%) accessed the underlying model output (UKCIP, 2006). The way in which they have been used in each of these contexts will now be explored. 4. Application of the UKCIP02 scenarios 4.1. Communication activities The most common application of UKCIP02 has been to raise awareness of climate change and its impacts to engage practitioners and decision-makers in the need to adapt (West and Gawith, 2005). In addition to the distribution of the UKCIP02 reports (see Section 2.2) a key vehicle for awarenessraising has been the delivery of Powerpoint presentations to particular audiences on how the UK’s climate is likely to change, and what the impacts could be. Audiences have ranged from allotment societies to institutional investors. The headline messages and maps have been the most powerful resources here, helping people visualise the climatic changes UKCIP02 describes. As these resources are freely available we have no means of quantifying the number of presentations that have been given by users outside of UKCIP. However, internal records show that UKCIP staff have collectively delivered about 700 such presentations over the past 5 years. As a core part of the message UKCIP delivers, UKCIP02 have been instrumental in raising awareness. 4.2 Research The second most common usage of UKCIP02 has been for research. With over 600 licensees and many more users of the UKCIP02 scenarios, not all research studies can be described. Instead, two projects which demonstrate the breadth of application of UKCIP will be presented as case studies.

116

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

4.2.1 Simulating the effects of future climate and socio-economic change in East Anglia and NorthWest England: the RegIS and RegIS2 projects The Defra-funded project on regional climate change impact and response studies in East Anglia and NorthWest England (RegIS) developed an integrated modelling methodology for researchers to identify how agriculture, biodiversity, coasts and floodplains, and water resources would be differentially impacted by climate and socio-economic change (Holman and Loveland, 2002). The project aimed to develop an integrated assessment model, RegIS, that could be used to simulate the impacts of climate and socio-economic change on the target sectors and explore the potential of adaptation. While RegIS demonstrated the importance of cross-sectoral impacts, the methodology it produced could not be easily applied by stakeholders as it was considered by many to be too detailed and time consuming to run (Holman and Harman, 2008; UKCIP, 2001a). Analysis also revealed that stakeholders involved in the study wanted to be able to perform their own climate impacts investigations of relevance to them, and did not want to have to rely solely on outputs generated from a limited number of simulations chosen by researchers (Holman and Harman, 2008; UKCIP, 2001a). A follow-on project called RegIS2 was thus initiated to create a simplified version of RegIS that could be more readily employed by stakeholders. An important feature of RegIS2 was its user-friendly interface that allowed the user to rapidly identify the sensitivity of an indicator to climate and/or socio-economic change, investigate the effects of uncertainty in the future scenarios, and investigate regional adaptive response to future change. RegIS and RegIS2 made full use of UKCIP02. The underlying model output was used to provide future climate and regional sea level rise information needed for the development of the RegIS2 models. Information in the Scientific Report on the scientific uncertainty associated with the climate and sea level rise scenarios was also used to define the uncertainty bounds in the Regional Impact Simulator (see Holman and Loveland, 2002; Holman et al., 2005a,b, 2007; Holman and Harman, 2008 for a fuller description of the project). The RegIS projects also made use of UKCIP’s socio-economic scenarios (UKCIP, 2001b) to examine the impact of combined socio-economic and climate changes. These socio-economic scenarios were found to have a major influence on the scale of likely impacts in each region, suggesting that many climate impacts could be managed through effective adaptation (Holman and Loveland, 2002). The RegIS projects revealed a number of lessons pertinent to the application of UKCIP02. Guidance on how to pair the climate and socio-economic scenarios was found to be important. The socioeconomic scenarios information had a large bearing on the results, yet users were not very familiar with such information and how to handle it (UKCIP, 2007). Guidance on how to handle uncertainty was also found to be important. Decision-makers need to know how to interpret results if they are to make robust decisions as a result. It was felt that uncertainty relating to model outputs could be a major barrier to the application of climate change information for decisionmaking (UKCIP, 2001a), and that making such uncertainties more explicit in future could facilitate decision-making. The value of a user-friendly interface was made clear. RegIS2 has seen much better uptake than RegIS, demonstrating that enabling people to easily manipulate and obtain the information they need greatly facilitates application and uptake of information (Holman and Harman, 2008). 4.2.2 Climate change and the visitor economy (CCVE) The central question addressed in this study by McEvoy et al. (2006) was ‘‘how can the visitor economy (or NorthWest England)

realise the opportunities presented by climate change, whilst ensuring that the resource base is sustained under growing visitor demand and climate related reductions in environmental capacity’’. The UKCIP02 scenarios were used in conjunction with UKCIP’s socio-economic scenarios and the risk framework. The potential impact of climate change on landscape types and visitor demand at four sites in the North-West was evaluated: the Sefton dune system on the Merseyside Coast; moorland wildfires in the Peak District National Park; footpath erosion in the Lake District National Park, and public space in Manchester city centre. Use of UKCIP02 ranged from qualitative analysis to detailed quantitative modelling:  The underlying UKCIP02 model output was used to obtain the summer maximum temperature projections for the Merseyside coast. This variable was considered to be a determinant of whether the coast would become a more attractive visitor destination in future or not.  UKCIP02 projections of evapotranspiration and rainfall from the underlying model output were used to perturb the observed historical data to assess potential changes in variability in water levels. These variables would have implications for the nature and sustainability of the dune system.  UKCIP02’s headline messages were used to assess the risk of natural fires in the Peak District with climate change.  The summary changes in climate available from the UKCIP02 briefing report were used to qualitatively assess the increased amount and intensity of rainfall, and decreased levels of snow fall, projected under climate change. These variables were important for the Lake District site study as, together with other variables such as slope and footfall, they could exacerbate footpath erosion.  Scenarios of average summer maximum temperature were used to qualitatively suggest measures that could be taken to improve public spaces in Manchester city centre in response to projected climate change impacts. All UKCIP02 resources, from the headline messages to the underlying model output, were used in completing this study. This clearly demonstrates the value of making a range of scenario information available to users, in a range of differing formats. 4.3 Policy- and decision-making The least prevalent application of the UKCIP02 climate change scenarios information has been for policy and decision-making purposes (UKCIP, 2006). This is perhaps not surprising. Stakeholders need to first engage with the issue of climate change before they can begin to explore its implications for their activities or be in a position to make decisions on the basis of their findings. It therefore follows that a greater number of stakeholders would employ UKCIP02 for communication and research purposes before they would able to do so for decision-making. It is nevertheless a pertinent finding, given the functions of UKCIP02. Of many possible examples just two are selected here to demonstrate the diverse ways in which UKCIP02 supported decision-making. The first describes a simple tool (LCLIP) that can be readily applied by non-specialists to support decisionmaking in Local Authorities; the other is a more quantitative and technically demanding application of UKCIP02 to inform policymaking in the built environment. 4.3.1 Local climate impacts profile (LCLIP) in Oxfordshire Decisions related to operations and service provision by a County Council can be informed by an understanding of their

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

current and future vulnerabilities to weather and climate. For example, it may be known that tarred roads start to melt when maximum daily temperatures reach 34.8 8C for a duration of 2 days, or that a certain volume of rainfall over a certain period of time is highly likely to cause widespread flooding. With such knowledge, councils can begin to examine their vulnerability to future climate change by establishing how the frequency of such events may change in future. They can also consider how best to prepare for future events by evaluating their experience of, and response to, relevant past events. UKCIP has developed a tool that helps Local Authorities to better understand their vulnerability to climate variability and extremes (UKCIP, 2008). The Local Climate Impacts Profile (LCLIP) is a method for gathering information about the impacts of past weather events in a given locality and for a given organisation. LCLIP is based on the recognition that understanding vulnerability to current weather is a good starting point for better understanding impacts of a future climate. An LCLIP encourages users to systematically record information on recent weather events, and creates the opportunity for them to consider the nature and impacts of those events in a particular locality, and to evaluate the organisational response to those events. Information may be obtained from local journalistic sources, organisation records, personal experience and so on. The information captured in an LCLIP serves as a precursor to judging risks associated with future climate changes described in the UKCIP02 climate change scenarios. Ten local authorities and one NHS facilitator have begun their own LCLIPs to date (UKCIP, 2008). UKCIP is in the process of developing an LCLIP with Oxfordshire County Council (OCC) to examine the consequences of a high temperature event for summer road maintenance in the county. The following UKCIP02 components were used in the study. Information on daily temperatures at the time of the given events was required to analyse the individual ‘hot’ weather events. Supplementary data were obtained to help identify thresholds that made the event unusual or particularly significant. The UKCIP02 graphs of Daily Maximum Temperature probability of exceedance, available from the pre-prepared maps and graphs in the scientific report, were used to explore the projections of the likelihoods of these temperatures in future. Finally, temperature changes from the Oxfordshire grid square in the UKCIP02 2020s time-slice were added to actual daily temperatures from the 1960–1990 baseline to give an indication of number of days when particular thresholds might be exceeded in future. The 2020s was chosen as the timeslice which most closely matched that of OCC’s planning horizons. This example provides a number of insights into the application of scenarios information. First, the LCLIP approach has proved popular, partly because it can be completed relatively easily at low cost and with non-specialist skills, but also because the timescales of an LCLIP match the timescales of decision-making more closely than scenario timeframes do. This pre-occupation with nearer term timescales is an important issue to consider for future scenario development. Second, LCLIP demonstrates the value of high quality observed data as an entry point for engaging organisations in climate change. Finally, it illustrates the tension that can exist between what stakeholders want and what the science can deliver. The scenarios were not able to deliver the high resolution daily data required for examining thresholds for different weather variables or combinations thereof. 4.3.2 Climate change and the indoor environment The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE), Arup and Department of Trade and Industry commissioned a piece of work to provide guidance on measures that could be taken to ensure summertime thermal comfort in new and

117

existing buildings in the UK throughout their lifetime. The intention was to identify measures that did not incur excessive additional energy use for cooling. CIBSE currently provides its members with a present-time hourly weather series for thermal simulation of buildings. There is an expressed concern that the CIBSE Design Summer Year (DSY) (the third hottest summer over the baseline of 1983–2002) currently used to assess overheating in buildings does not account for changes in climate. This commissioned work combined the present-time observed weather data (DSY) with results from UKCIP02 to produce new weather time series. These new weather time series provide scenarios of future weather conditions at the spatial and temporal resolution required for building thermal simulation (Belcher et al., 2005). Various components of the UKCIP02 package were used in this work. The scientific report was used to explain emissions scenarios and model uncertainty to practitioners. The GIS-format files were used to abstract monthly averages for the variables needed to create design summer years at three locations: London, Manchester, and Edinburgh. The underlying model output was used to ‘‘morph’’ present-day weather time series (CIBSE Design Summer Years) to produce new weather time series with the required monthly climate change statistics (CIBSE TM36, 2005). The resulting publication, CIBSE TM36 (2005), helped raise awareness amongst CIBSE members and the building industry more generally of the potential impacts of climate change on the thermal performance of new and existing buildings. It also provided a methodology for assessing such impacts and possible adaptation options. However, the methodology developed to generate the weather data necessary to assess building performance from UKCIP02 could only really be applied with specialist expertise that was available at few building design practices. Uptake of the approach was therefore limited. Furthermore, readily available data from UKCIP02 that could be used for steady state calculations (CIBSE, 2004) was not widely used by practitioners, possibly owing to limited awareness and data dissemination. A number of lessons emerge from this experience. The higher resolution of the UKCIP02 information increased the application of climate change scenarios among building professionals as it enabled users to consider the climate of their particular location. This is vital in building design. However, data at yet a higher spatial resolution would be even more valuable, especially if it included information on the urban heat island effect. Similarly, data on a higher temporal resolution, such as daily and hourly weather series, would be welcomed to enable detailed analysis of building performance. The availability of information on extreme events with attached probabilities of projected occurrence, as well as joint probabilities of events, would also increase the value of the climate change scenarios used for building design. Information on extreme events matters to for building professionals because buildings, and in particular their services, are designed to accommodate extreme events. Attached probabilities would enable a client to make a decision on building design solutions based on the risk associated with a particular extreme event occurring, and the return period of such an event. Finally, the building industry is a highly technical sector that uses weather related information at various levels of sophistication. The manner in which that information is presented and made available plays an important role in the extent to which it is used by building professionals. 5. Lessons learnt With UKCIP02 due to be replaced in 2008 by a forthcoming next package of climate change information, it is vital that lessons learnt

118

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

from the application of UKCIP02 be synthesised and used to inform the development of these, and other, climate change scenarios. These will be examined below. 5.1. Strengths UKCIP02 scenarios have much to be proud of. They have been the most widely used of all the UKCIP tools (West and Gawith, 2005), and have reached a much wider audience than previous climate scenarios. Their widespread application has gone some way to ensuring a consistent approach, and achieved a degree of integration between studies that was not previously possible. In a recent independent survey of UKCIP02 users, 39% of respondents described the scenarios as extremely or very useful, and more than half felt that using the scenarios had brought significant benefits to their organisation (Defra, 2008). UKCIP02 has played a critical role in engaging organisations in climate change. The headline messages and maps have been particularly important communication devices. These have raised awareness of climate change and its impacts, and helped make the case for climate adaptation. Through dissemination of the scenarios, UKCIP has also developed networks of users and acted as a conduit of information between climate scientists, researchers and users. As Hulme and Turnpenny (2004) note, UKCIP has been enormously influential in the UK in raising awareness of climate change in sections and sectors of society which would not normally be reached by conventional scientific research programmes. As a central part of the message UKCIP delivers, UKCIP02 deserves some credit for this achievement. The UKCIP02 material was well presented. Respondents to the user consultation praised the ‘‘clear and concise accompanying documents’’ for being written ‘‘in simple language’’ that was ‘‘easy to relate to lay persons who do not have scientific backgrounds’’ (UKCIP, 2006). The existence of two separate reports and their availability online were also identified as positive aspects of UKCIP02. Many users valued the accompanying maps highly, stating that they were ‘‘very useful to portray changes’’, ‘‘easy for people to understand’’ and ‘‘an essential aid to communication’’ (UKCIP, 2006). The range of products provided is to be commended. The diverse range of applications described in Section 4 demonstrates that design of climate change information for UKCIP cannot assume a uniform audience. A variety of products is required to meet the needs and skills of different users. UKCIP should build on these successes in future to ensure the continued utility of the scenarios as a communication device and means of engagement. 5.2. Weaknesses addressed by UKCIP: ‘‘UKCIP02 extras’’ A number of perceived technical weaknesses emerged in the first few years after the release of UKCIP02. These related to expressed difficulties in accessing and using the scenarios and the underlying datasets, in managing uncertainty, scale issues, and the need to take more recent research into account. Concerns were also raised over the lack of specific weather variables, limited information on extreme events and near-term changes, and overuse of technical language (UKCIP, 2006). Some of these issues have been addressed through the development of a collection of resources called ‘‘UKCIP02 extras’’, described below. 5.2.1. Ease of access and use Streamlining of the licence agreement process – While the underlying model output from UKCIP02 was provided free of charge, users were required to complete an application form before

access can be granted. Initially, this form had to be printed off and sent or faxed back to the UKCIP office—a cumbersome process that likely turned many potential users away. From January 2006, the application process was streamlined, with an online application form available from the UKCIP Scenarios Gateway web-pages. Provision of GIS-format files – The UKCIP02 underlying model output was initially provided as a series of text files (commaseparated variables). This reflects, to some extent, the historical legacy that the majority of uses of the underlying model output were researchers and academics. However, the larger audience that UKCIP02 has gained since its launch, and the increased prominence of climate change across society as a whole, has led to UKCIP02 being used by a far wider range of stakeholders. Spatial information, such as the UKCIP02 underlying model output is typically handled via Geographical Information Systems (GIS). The UKCIP02 text files could be translated into GIS format, but users were required to do so themselves. This served as a barrier to their use. Consequently, from January 2006 all of the UKCIP02 underlying model output was converted into GIS format (ESRI1 shapefiles) and made available through the UKCIP website, facilitating access to the data. UKCIP02 Excel viewer – Another consequence of the wider range of stakeholders has been that many stakeholders increasingly want more detail than is provided by the UKCIP02 published material, but do not possess the software or expertise to interrogate the UKCIP02 underlying model output using specialist methods (e.g., GIS). This issue has been addressed through the development and provision of an Excel-based tool for displaying the 50 km resolution UKCIP02 scenarios, such that the underlying model output text files can be viewed directly in Excel. In this way, the projected changes associated with specific locations (i.e., individual 50 km  50 km grid squares) or regions (i.e., English government office regions and the Devolved Administrations) can be more readily be explored by a wider range of stakeholders. 5.2.2. Managing uncertainty Because each scenario was considered equally likely, decisionmakers found them difficult to use in decision-making. In response to user demand (Hulme and Dessai, 2008), a Technical note on handling uncertainty was produced by the Hadley Centre (Jenkins and Lowe, 2003) to explore the different types of uncertainties associated with climate change projections, and suggest ways of managing them. For example, those making major investments or considering long-term infrastructural projects were advised to look wider than just UKCIP02. 5.2.3. Scale issues UKCIP02 provides information on historical climate and future climate change based on two regular grids (50 km  50 km and 5 km  5 km) that cover the UK. The 50 km  50 km grid resolution was considered by many users to be too coarse to allow for meaningful studies at the local level, while others felt that changes at the regional scale would be more useful than those on a grid (UKCIP, 2006). Following several queries about the location and orientation of these grids, and in particular how these grids relate to particular areas of interest (e.g., regional boundaries, major towns and cities), a series of maps was produced to show the UKCIP02 grid overlain with additional geographic information to help address these concerns. 5.2.4 Updating data UKCIP02 has now been available for 6 years. This has required certain information to be updated. Updates to the projections of sea level change around the UK coast – In the UKCIP02 scientific report (Hulme et al., 2002), future

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

changes in regional net sea level were estimated for Wales, the regions of Scotland and the administrative regions of England. These estimations were based on two components: (i) projections in absolute changes in global-average sea level and (ii) land level changes associated with post-glacial adjustments in the absolute elevation of the land. Information on land level changes was based on work by Shennan (1989). As a result of an update to this work in 2002 (Shennan and Horton, 2002) updated estimates of sea level change were also made available online as stand-alone document. This document also contained maps showing the projections of sea level change around the UK coast (maps were not provided in the UKCIP02 scientific report) as well as a guidance note explaining the relationship between the UKCIP02 estimates of sea level change and the Defra policy guidance on sea level rise. Updated gridded observed climate datasets – When UKCIP02 was launched, the Met Office made available a series of 5 km gridded datasets providing monthly observed climate records for the period 1914–2000 (depending on weather variable), which provided an important baseline observed climatology for the UK. In 2006, UKCIP stakeholders requested climate information for the years since 2000, as these included some notable weather events, such as the heatwave experienced in southern England in August 2003. As result, the Met Office released further datasets for the period 2001–2005, which were made available from their website. 5.3. Outstanding challenges and weaknesses A number of non-technical challenges and weaknesses remain which should be addressed in future. 5.3.1. Process of scenario generation: supply- versus demand-led scenarios UKCIP’s work with stakeholders has shown that there is clearly some tension between what stakeholders want – or deem desirable – and what the science can deliver. UKCIP stakeholders have consistently called for more detailed information in terms, for example, of climatic extremes, higher temporal and spatial resolution and geographic aggregations to suit their needs, and for more quantification, transparency and guidance about the uncertainties involved in future climate projections (ESYS, 2004; UKCIP, 2000, 2006). Development of scenarios through consultation with users means there is likely to be pressure on climate scientists to address their requests. However, there are clearly limits to what the science can deliver and to what climate scientists would consider to be robust, credible and appropriate application of scenarios information. Satisfying user requirements can also result in tradeoffs. For example, in UKCIP02, satisfying demands for data at a higher spatial resolution meant that treatment of modelling uncertainties had to be compromised, as only one model was available at the scale preferred by users. There is a need, therefore, in future to reconcile user requirements and expectations with what the climate science and modelling community can provide. Delivery of future climate scenarios should be guided by a Project Steering Committee representing all relevant key players. User input should ideally be formally captured through a User Panel or Advisory Committee. Where it is not possible for user requirements to be met, reasons should be fully explained and possible alternatives explored. The boundaries of stakeholder engagement should also be made clear at the outset so users know what they can and cannot influence, and expectations can be properly managed. Maintaining such structures over the lifetime of the application of the scenarios could help ensure that the scenarios continue to be used appropriately.

119

5.3.2. Ease of access and use The UKCIP02 climate change scenarios have suffered from a real or perceived belief that they are difficult to use. Although supported by the Scenarios Gateway – a section of the UKCIP website dedicated to the climate change scenarios – users of UKCIP02 would have benefited from guidance material explaining how they can be used, and from case study examples demonstrating particular uses. As the user community grows and evolves, it is important that future climate information is more easily accessible and is supported by good guidance and case study material. UKCIP has recognised this need and will endeavour to provide the required access, guidance and supportive materials for future UKCIP climate information. Responding to this need, however, will require the engagement of the academic community and users, and will be an on-going process. UKCIP does not have the resources to meet every request for further information and recognises that the need for specific guidance will increasingly be met by others building on the generic material provided by UKCIP. Efforts should be made in future to provide non-specialist users with an easy way to access data and to generate their own customised images, based on self-selected variables, time scales, spatial scales and so on. While numerous maps were available in UKCIP02, users often wanted more detail, or information on different variables or scales, than was available from the printed maps. Users were able to access the underlying model data in UKCIP02 to produce higher resolution maps for their own specific purposes. But the process of accessing this data was difficult for some and served as a barrier to their exploring the information further (UKCIP, 2006). In future, users should be able to access data on demand, and in an intuitive manner that does not require direct support or intervention from UKCIP. This could be achieved through the development of an inter-active user interface through which users could interrogate the climate scenario data, as was done in the RegIS2 project. Critically, future climate information provided by UKCIP should only appear as complex to the users as necessary, given that the majority of users are non-specialists in terms of managing large quantities of complex climate change information. While the scenario reports were praised for their accessibility, some users found them too dense to be useful (UKCIP, 2006). Experience suggests that some users would rather have access to rapid, scientifically sound overviews than to detailed scenario outputs. It is not uncommon for users to apply only the very top level of climate scenario information to support making decisions or policy recommendations. This practise highlights the need for clear and meaningful high-level information (e.g., headline messages) that can support decision-making in a robust manner. 5.3.3. Handling uncertainty in decision-making The least common application of UKCIP02 has been to inform policy and decision-making (UKCIP, 2006). A key reason for this appears to be that for many stakeholders, the level of confidence which could be placed in the scenarios information was not sufficient to justify major adaptation decisions (ESYS, 2004). UKCIP02 advises users to consider a range of scenarios (i.e., ‘‘low’’ to ‘‘high’’) in their assessments so that emissions uncertainties, at least, can be considered (Hulme et al., 2002). However, users frequently chose the Medium-High climate change scenario only because it had the most detailed information, and because it was seen by some as representing a ‘middle road or a ‘safe’ choice. It was also less resource-intensive than having to apply four scenarios. Many users have called for better quantification of the likelihood of climate scenarios, including the associated uncertainties, arguing that this type of information would facilitate

120

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

decision-making. This is evident in some of the examples presented in Section 4, as well as in the literature (see, for example, Tribbia and Moser (2008) and IPCC (2007)). These calls reflect a growing recognition that there is limited practicality and utility in developing optimal adaptation strategies based on a single scenario that is deemed to be sufficiently ‘‘accurate’’, when the drivers of change are uncertain. Facing up to the ever-present uncertainties, users are embracing assessment methodologies that result in adaptation strategies (e.g., resilient and adaptive strategies) that recognise and therefore require a better understanding the associated uncertainties. In recent years, UKCIP has developed a risk-based approach to climate impacts assessment (Willows and Connell, 2003), which urges users to consider climate risks as one of many other risks that affect them. This approach to managing climate risk has been helpful, but it remains true that many users familiar with risk management are still be uncomfortable in dealing with uncertainty. This is neatly illustrated in Cabantous and Pearman’s (2006) work in the built environment. They show that engineers are used to using data from which they can extract statistical probability, and do not feel comfortable with climate change information because they face ‘‘soft’’ or ‘‘controversial’’ data. They observe that ‘‘the presence of a ‘hard data’ culture among civil engineers is a strong cultural barrier to the management of climate change’’ (Cabantous and Pearman, 2006). This is illustrated in the response from one individual in the user consultation who expressed frustration that no prediction was available for use in routine studies requiring a single number to apply. Sea levels in 100 years time could be between a few centimetres and a metre or more higher than at present: ‘‘What is a coastal engineer supposed to do in design of a seawall?’’ (UKCIP, 2006). Advances in climate modelling will allow future climate change scenarios, such as UKCIP08, to provide an estimate of the associated uncertainties. Such information expressed as likely ranges, likelihoods of exceedance of thresholds and probabilistic projections can be readily used in risk management methodologies. The availability of probabilistic projections could facilitate the use of climate information in decision-making (Goodess et al., 2007; UKCIP, 2001a, 2006), and enhance the assessment and management of climate risks. 5.3.4. Training and support Experience in the application of UKCIP02 and other UKCIP tools (e.g., the risk framework and socio-economic scenarios) has revealed that providing a tool is no guarantee of its successful uptake or appropriate use (West and Gawith, 2005). Many professionals who employ the scenarios do so without a technical or environmental background. Training and support is vital to encourage uptake. This finding is consistent with those of others (e.g., Goodess et al., 2007) and should inform future developments. UKCIP has already responded to this need, appointing a full time Training Officer and planning a help-desk to support the uptake and application of UKCIP08. 5.3.5. Resolution of data As evident from the case studies above, users have consistently called for high resolution data (McKenzie-Hedger et al., 2000; UKCIP, 2004, 2005). This will remain the case in future, with many users now requesting daily time-series data at 25 km2 resolution. The mismatch between the timescales of climate scenarios and that of most decision-making is another issue that has been identified in many UKCIP studies. Many decision-makers are more concerned about the next 5–10 years than they are with the next 50–100 years (UKCIP, 2006). However, there has been a reluctance

on the part of the climate modelling community to provide such near-term predictions or scenarios due to the predominance of natural variability in that time period. Appropriate strategies that can be used to address climate risks in the near-term would be helpful. Approaches that have shown some promise include those based on a better understanding of current vulnerability (IPCC, 2007) using current and historical climate, as LCLIP does. Recent moves by the climate forecasting community towards developing decadal predictions (Smith et al., 2007) may with time offer an alternative approach to identifying near-term vulnerability. Further research is needed though to progress these types of predictions to a point where they could be applied to support decision-making. 6. Conclusions The UKCIP02 scenarios have been very successful. They have been an invaluable communication device, acting as a powerful mechanism for engagement and awareness-raising. They have stimulated research and, to a lesser degree, have informed policy and decision-making on adaptation. Successes in communicating, presenting and disseminating the scenarios information should be built upon. Effective and informed engagement of the user community from scenario development through to their delivery will be vital in ensuring this role continues and strengthens. Such engagement will also help to shape an end product that better meets user needs and expectations for research and policy-making within the capabilities and limitations of climate science and modelling. Ongoing resources are required to support a broadening user community. With increasing numbers of stakeholders using scenario information for purposes other than pure research, ongoing support will be required, and the manner in which the information is presented will continue to be important. Care should be taken to present scenario information in an accessible, customisable and user-friendly format. Clear guidance and training on the appropriate use of scenarios, including case studies, will be vital, particularly as the science moves towards the presentation of probabilistic climate information. Guidance and training should be developed in conjunction with users, and should reflect their diverse nature and capabilities. The key outstanding challenge for future scenarios will be to encourage their use to inform decision- and policy-making. The uncertainty associated with projections of future climate has evidently been a barrier to their application to date. It is hoped that the emergence of probabilistic climate information, in conjunction with the continued application of a risk-based approach to climate change, will address this barrier, and that with on-going support and a user-friendly style of presentation, climate change will assume the important place it deserves in long-term planning and decision-making. Lessons learnt through this evaluation of UKCIP02 should have resonance for users of deterministic climate projections in the UK and elsewhere. There have been calls, for example, for the gap between information providers and users to be bridged in order to facilitate adaptation in African countries (Ziervogel, 2008). As a world leader in the provision and dissemination of climate change information for stakeholder-led impacts and adaptation assessments, we hope that sharing our experience will benefit others seeking to bridge that gap. Acknowledgements UKCIP is funded by the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and is based at the Oxford University

M. Gawith et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 113–121

Centre for the Environment. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Defra. Several UKCIP colleagues have contributed to the preparation of this paper. Anastasia Mylona and Liz Greenhalgh prepared useful case study material, while Alex Harvey and Alastair Brown provided helpful comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. Former colleagues, Michelle Colley and Jacqui Harman, are thanked for their respective roles in conducting the user consultation and in supporting the uptake of UKCIP02. Anonymous referees provided constructive criticisms which improved the paper. We thank them for their input. References Belcher, S.E., Hacker, J.N., Powell, D.S., 2005. Constructing design weather data for future climates. Building Services Engineering Research and Technology 26 (1), 49–61. Bisgrove, R., Hadley, P., 2002. Gardening in the global greenhouse. In: UKCIP Technical Report, UKCIP, Oxford. BKCC (Building Knowledge for a Changing Climate), 2005. Building Knowledge for a Changing Climate. The Impacts of Climate Change on the Built Environment. Mid-Project Update. UKCIP, Oxford. Cabantous, L. and Pearman, A., 2006. Climate change information in search of decision-makers: Why do managers (not) consider climate change in their longterm projects. Nottingham University Business School, Working Paper. Cassar, M., 2005. Climate Change and the Historic Environment. UCL Centre for Sustainable Heritage, London. CCIRG (1991). The potential effects of climate change in the United Kingdom. Prepared at the request of the Department of the Environment, Jan 1991. HMSO, London. CCIRG (1996). Review of the potential effects of climate change in the United Kingdom. Prepared at the request of the Department of the Environment, March 1996. HMSO, London. CIBSE, 2004. Weather Data with Climate Change Scenarios: CIBSE TM34. Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, London. CIBSE, 2005. Climate Change and the Indoor Environment: Impacts and Adaptation: CIBSE TM36. Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers, London. Defra (2003). Supplementary note on climate change considerations for flood and coastal management. (www.defra.gov.uk/environ/fcd/pubs/pagn/climatechangeupdate.pdf). Defra (2008). UKCIP mid-contract review. Defra (unpublished report). Department of Health, 2001. Health Effects of Climate Change in the UK. Department of Health, London. ESYS Consulting (2004). Review of UKCIP – Final Report. Goodess, C.M., Hall, J., Best, M., Betts, R., Cabantous, L., Jones, P.D., Kilsby, C.G., Pearman, A., Wallace, C.J., 2007. Climate scenarios and decision making under uncertainty. Built Environment 33 (1), 10–30. Hedger, M.M., Connell, R., Bramwell, P., 2006. Bridging the gap: empowering decision-making for adaptation through the UK climate impacts programme. Climate Policy 6 (2), 201–215. Holman, I.P., Loveland, P.J., 2002. Technical Report on the REGIS Project to Develop an Integrated Assessment of Climate Change Impacts on East Anglia and the North West of England. UKCIP, Oxford. Holman, I.P., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Shackley, S., Harrison, P.A., Nicholls, R.J., Berry, P.M., Audsley, E., 2005a. A regional, multi-sectoral and integrated assessment of the impacts of climate and socio-economic change in the UK: I methodology. Climatic Change 71, 9–41. Holman, I.P., Nicholls, R.J., Berry, P.M., Harrison, P.A., Audsley, E., Shackley, S., Rounsevell, M.D.A., 2005b. A regional, multi-sectoral and integrated assessment of the impacts of climate and socio-economic change in the UK: II results. Climatic Change 71, 43–73. Holman, I.P., Berry, P.M., Mokrech, M., Richards, J.A., Audsley, E., Harrison, P.A., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Nicholls, R.J., Shackley, S., Henriques, C., 2007. Simulating the effects of future climate and socio-economic change in East Anglia and North West England: the REGIS2 project. In: Summary Report, UKCIP, Oxford. Holman, I.P., Harman, J., 2008. Preliminary evaluation of the benefits of a participatory regional integrated assessment software. Climatic Change 90, 169–187. Hulme, M., Dessai, S. (submitted). Predicting, deciding, learning: can one evaluate the ‘‘success’’ of national climate scenarios? Submitted April 2008 to Environmental Research Letters.

121

Hulme, M., Jenkins, G.J., 1998. Climate change scenarios for the UK: scientific report. In: UKCIP Technical Report No. 1, Climatic Research Unit, Norwich, UK, 80 pp. Hulme, M., Jenkins, G.J., Lu, X., Turnpenny, J.R., Mitchell, T.D., Jones, R.G., Lowe, J., Murphy, J.M., Hassell, D., Boorman, P., McDonald, R., Hill, S., 2002. Climate Change Scenarios for the United Kingdom: The UKCIP02 Scientific Report. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 120 pp. Hulme, M., Dessai, S., 2008. Negotiating future climates for public policy: a critical assessment of the development of climate scenarios for the UK. Environmental Science and Policy 11, 54–70. Hulme, M., Turnpenny, J., 2004. Understanding and managing climate change: the UK experience. The Geographical Journal 170 (2), 105–115. IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007. Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Working Group II contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Jenkins, G., Lowe, J. (2003). Handling uncertainties in the UKCIP02 scenarios of climate change. Hadley Centre Technical Note 44. Kovats, S. (2008). Health effects of climate change in the UK 2008: an update of the Department of Health report 2001/2002. Department of Health and Health Protection Agency, London. Lorenzoni, I., Jones, M., Turnpenny, J.J., 2007. Climate change, human genetics, and post-normality in the UK. Futures 39, 65–82. McEvoy, D., Handley, J.F., Cavan, G., Aylen, J., Lindley, S., McMorrow, J., Glynn, S. (2006). Climate change and the visitor economy challenges and opportunities for England’s Northwest. Sustainability Northwest, Manchester. McKenzie-Hedger, M., Gawith, M., Brown, I., Connell, R., Downing, T.E., 2000. Climate Change: Assessing the Impacts-Identifying Responses. The first Three Years of the UK Climate Impacts Programme. UKCIP and DETR, Oxford. Mieszkowska, N., Leaper, R., Moore, P., Kendall, M.A., Burrows, M.T., Lear, D., Poloczanska, E., Hiscock, K., Moschella, P.S., Thompson, R.C., Herbert, R.J., Laffoley, D., Baxter, J., Southward, A.J., Hawkins, S.J., 2005. Marine Biodiversity and Climate Change: Assessing and Predicting the Influence of Climatic Change Using Intertidal Rocky Shore Biota, vol. 20. Occasional Publications, Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 53 p. Pitt, M. (2008). Learning lessons from the 2007 floods. The Pitt Review. Cabinet Office, London. http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/thepittreview/final_report.aspx. Shennan, I., 1989. Holocene crustal movements and sea-level changes in Great Britain. Journal of Quaternary Science 4, 77–89. Shennan, I., Horton, B., 2002. Holocene land- and sea-level changes in Great Britain. Journal of Quaternary Science 17, 511–526. SPA, ESYS, 1996. Proposal for a UK Integrated Climate Change Impacts Assessment. Environment Agency and Department of the Environment, London. Smith, D.M., Cusak, S., Colman, A.W., Folland, C.K., Harris, G.R., Murphy, J.M., 2007. Improved surface temperature prediction for the coming decade from a global climate model. Science 317, 796–799. Stern, N. (2008). The Economics of Climate Change. The Stern Review (2008). Cabinet Office, HM Treasury, London. http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/ stern_review_economics_climate_change/stern_review_report.cfm. Tribbia, J., Moser, S., 2008. More than information: what coastal managers need to plan for climate change. Environmental Science and Policy 11 (4), 315–328. UKCIP, 2000. In: Proceedings of the Second UKCIP User Forum. UKCIP, Oxford. UKCIP (2001a). Report of the REGIS Technical Workshop held at DEFRA, Nobel House, London on 26 June 2001. UKCIP, Oxford. UKCIP, 2001b. Socio-Economic Scenarios for Climate Change Impact Assessment: A Guide to Their Use in the UK. UKCIP, Oxford. UKCIP (2004). UKCIPnext: what do users want? UKCIP User Forum, 24th February 2004, Workshop Report. UKCIP, 2005. Report on the CLIFFS workshop. In: Internal Report, UKCIP, Oxford. UKCIP, 2006. Expressed preferences for the next package of UK climate change information. In: Final Report on the User Consultation, UKCIP, Oxford. UKCIP, 2007. Guidance on pairing climate and socio-economic scenarios. In: UKCIP Guidance Note, UKCIP, Oxford. UKCIP, 2008. LCLIP. A Local Climate Impacts Profile: Summary Report of Ongoing Case Studies. UKCIP, Oxford. Walmsley, C.A., Smithers, R.J., Berry, P.M., Harley, M., Stevenson, M.J., Catchpole, R. (Eds.), 2007. MONARCH – Modelling Natural Resource Responses to Climate Change – A Synthesis for Biodiversity Conservation. UKCIP, Oxford. West, C., Gawith, M., 2005. Measuring Progress. UKCIP, Oxford. Willows, R., Connell, R., 2003. Climate Adaptation: Risk, Uncertainty and DecisionMaking. UKCIP, Oxford. Ziervogel, G. (2008). Effective Use of Climate Science to Improve Adaptation in Africa. AdaptNet Policy Forum 08-05-E-Ad, 24 June 2008.