Not all carbon dioxide emission scenarios are equally likely: a subjective expert assessment

Emily Ho, David V. Budescu, Valentina Bosetti, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Klaus Keller

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Climate researchers use carbon dioxide emission scenarios to explore alternative climate futures and potential impacts, as well as implications of mitigation and adaptation policies. Often, these scenarios are published without formal probabilistic interpretations, given the deep uncertainty related to future development. However, users often seek such information, a likely range or relative probabilities. Without further specifications, users sometimes pick a small subset of emission scenarios and/or assume that all scenarios are equally likely. Here, we present probabilistic judgments of experts assessing the distribution of 2100 emissions under a business-as-usual and a policy scenario. We obtain the judgments through a method that relies only on pairwise comparisons of various ranges of emissions. There is wide variability between individual experts, but they clearly do not assign equal probabilities for the total range of future emissions. We contrast these judgments with the emission projection ranges derived from the shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs) and a recent multi-model comparison producing probabilistic emission scenarios. Differences on long-term emission probabilities between expert estimates and model-based calculations may result from various factors including model restrictions, a coverage of a wider set of factors by experts, but also group think and inability to appreciate long-term processes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)545-561
Number of pages17
JournalClimatic Change
Volume155
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2019

Fingerprint

carbon dioxide
climate
mitigation

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Atmospheric Science

Cite this

Ho, Emily ; Budescu, David V. ; Bosetti, Valentina ; van Vuuren, Detlef P. ; Keller, Klaus. / Not all carbon dioxide emission scenarios are equally likely : a subjective expert assessment. In: Climatic Change. 2019 ; Vol. 155, No. 4. pp. 545-561.
@article{0a6619388d4d4920bbd079ad0222ffee,
title = "Not all carbon dioxide emission scenarios are equally likely: a subjective expert assessment",
abstract = "Climate researchers use carbon dioxide emission scenarios to explore alternative climate futures and potential impacts, as well as implications of mitigation and adaptation policies. Often, these scenarios are published without formal probabilistic interpretations, given the deep uncertainty related to future development. However, users often seek such information, a likely range or relative probabilities. Without further specifications, users sometimes pick a small subset of emission scenarios and/or assume that all scenarios are equally likely. Here, we present probabilistic judgments of experts assessing the distribution of 2100 emissions under a business-as-usual and a policy scenario. We obtain the judgments through a method that relies only on pairwise comparisons of various ranges of emissions. There is wide variability between individual experts, but they clearly do not assign equal probabilities for the total range of future emissions. We contrast these judgments with the emission projection ranges derived from the shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs) and a recent multi-model comparison producing probabilistic emission scenarios. Differences on long-term emission probabilities between expert estimates and model-based calculations may result from various factors including model restrictions, a coverage of a wider set of factors by experts, but also group think and inability to appreciate long-term processes.",
author = "Emily Ho and Budescu, {David V.} and Valentina Bosetti and {van Vuuren}, {Detlef P.} and Klaus Keller",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10584-019-02500-y",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "155",
pages = "545--561",
journal = "Climatic Change",
issn = "0165-0009",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "4",

}

Not all carbon dioxide emission scenarios are equally likely : a subjective expert assessment. / Ho, Emily; Budescu, David V.; Bosetti, Valentina; van Vuuren, Detlef P.; Keller, Klaus.

In: Climatic Change, Vol. 155, No. 4, 01.08.2019, p. 545-561.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Not all carbon dioxide emission scenarios are equally likely

T2 - a subjective expert assessment

AU - Ho, Emily

AU - Budescu, David V.

AU - Bosetti, Valentina

AU - van Vuuren, Detlef P.

AU - Keller, Klaus

PY - 2019/8/1

Y1 - 2019/8/1

N2 - Climate researchers use carbon dioxide emission scenarios to explore alternative climate futures and potential impacts, as well as implications of mitigation and adaptation policies. Often, these scenarios are published without formal probabilistic interpretations, given the deep uncertainty related to future development. However, users often seek such information, a likely range or relative probabilities. Without further specifications, users sometimes pick a small subset of emission scenarios and/or assume that all scenarios are equally likely. Here, we present probabilistic judgments of experts assessing the distribution of 2100 emissions under a business-as-usual and a policy scenario. We obtain the judgments through a method that relies only on pairwise comparisons of various ranges of emissions. There is wide variability between individual experts, but they clearly do not assign equal probabilities for the total range of future emissions. We contrast these judgments with the emission projection ranges derived from the shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs) and a recent multi-model comparison producing probabilistic emission scenarios. Differences on long-term emission probabilities between expert estimates and model-based calculations may result from various factors including model restrictions, a coverage of a wider set of factors by experts, but also group think and inability to appreciate long-term processes.

AB - Climate researchers use carbon dioxide emission scenarios to explore alternative climate futures and potential impacts, as well as implications of mitigation and adaptation policies. Often, these scenarios are published without formal probabilistic interpretations, given the deep uncertainty related to future development. However, users often seek such information, a likely range or relative probabilities. Without further specifications, users sometimes pick a small subset of emission scenarios and/or assume that all scenarios are equally likely. Here, we present probabilistic judgments of experts assessing the distribution of 2100 emissions under a business-as-usual and a policy scenario. We obtain the judgments through a method that relies only on pairwise comparisons of various ranges of emissions. There is wide variability between individual experts, but they clearly do not assign equal probabilities for the total range of future emissions. We contrast these judgments with the emission projection ranges derived from the shared socio-economic pathways (SSPs) and a recent multi-model comparison producing probabilistic emission scenarios. Differences on long-term emission probabilities between expert estimates and model-based calculations may result from various factors including model restrictions, a coverage of a wider set of factors by experts, but also group think and inability to appreciate long-term processes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071566006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071566006&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10584-019-02500-y

DO - 10.1007/s10584-019-02500-y

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85071566006

VL - 155

SP - 545

EP - 561

JO - Climatic Change

JF - Climatic Change

SN - 0165-0009

IS - 4

ER -