Browsing by Author "Cojocaru, George"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Combining qualitative and quantitative understanding for exploring cross-sectoral climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability in Europe
    (Springer, 2013-08-01) Harrison, Paula A.; Holman, Ian P.; Cojocaru, George; Kok, Kasper; Kontogianni, Areti; Metzger, Marc J.; Gramberger, Marc
    Climate change will affect all sectors of society and the environment at all scales, ranging from the continental to the national and local. Decision-makers and other interested citizens need to be able to access reliable science-based information to help them respond to the risks of climate change impacts and assess opportunities for adaptation. Participatory integrated assessment (IA) tools combine knowledge from diverse scientific disciplines, take account of the value and importance of stakeholder ‘lay insight’ and facilitate a two-way iterative process of exploration of ‘what if’s’ to enable decision-makers to test ideas and improve their understanding of the complex issues surrounding adaptation to climate change. This paper describes the conceptual design of a participatory IA tool, the CLIMSAVE IA Platform, based on a professionally facilitated stakeholder engagement process. The CLIMSAVE (climate change integrated methodology for cross-sectoral adaptation and vulnerability in Europe) Platform is a user-friendly, interactive web-based tool that allows stakeholders to assess climate change impacts and vulnerabilities for a range of sectors, including agriculture, forests, biodiversity, coasts, water resources and urban development. The linking of models for the different sectors enables stakeholders to see how their interactions could affect European landscape change. The relationship between choice, uncertainty and constraints is a key cross-cutting theme in the conduct of past participatory IA. Integrating scenario development processes with an interactive modelling platform is shown to allow the exploration of future uncertainty as a structural feature of such complex problems, encouraging stakeholders to explore adaptation choices within real-world constraints of future resource availability and environmental and institutional capacities, rather than seeking the ‘right’ answers.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Differences between low-end and high-end climate change impacts in Europe across multiple sectors
    (Springer, 2018-05-18) Harrison, Paula A.; Dunford, Rob W.; Holman, Ian P.; Cojocaru, George; Madsen, Marianne S.; Chen, Pei-Yuan; Pedde, Simona; Sandars, Daniel
    The Paris Agreement established the 1.5 and 2 °C targets based on the recognition “that this would significantly reduce the risks and impacts of climate change”. We tested this assertion by comparing impacts at the regional scale between low-end (< 2 °C; RCP2.6) and high-end (> 4 °C; RCP8.5) climate change scenarios accounting for interactions across six sectors (agriculture, forestry, biodiversity, water, coasts and urban) using an integrated assessment model. Results show that there are only minor differences in most impact indicators for the 2020s time slice, but impacts are considerably greater under high-end than low-end climate change in the 2050s and 2080s. For example, for the 2080s, mitigation consistent with the Paris Agreement would reduce aggregate Europe-wide impacts on the area of intensive agriculture by 21% (on average across climate models), on the area of managed forests by 34%, on water stress by 14%, on people flooded by 10% and on biodiversity vulnerability by 16%. Including socio-economic scenarios (SSPs 1, 3, 4, 5) results in considerably greater variation in the magnitude, range and direction of change of the majority of impact indicators than climate change alone. In particular, socio-economic factors much more strongly drive changes in land use and food production than changes in climate, sometimes overriding the differences due to low-end and high-end climate change. Such impacts pose significant challenges for adaptation and highlight the importance of searching for synergies between adaptation and mitigation and linking them to sustainable development goals.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    An enhanced version of the D-Risk decision support webtool for multi-scale management of water abstraction and drought risks in irrigated agriculture
    (Elsevier, 2022-11-26) Chengot, Rishma; Knox, Jerry W.; Coxon, Gemma; Cojocaru, George; Holman, Ian P.
    Due to it having the lowest priority for water allocation during drought events and the consequent agronomic and economic impacts of abstraction restrictions, UK irrigated agriculture has been identified as a key business sector ‘at risk’. An enhanced version of the D-Risk webtool has been developed to help agricultural stakeholders and catchment water managers to evaluate the joint multi-scale risks of abstraction restrictions (voluntary and mandatory) and having insufficient irrigation volumes during drought events. The webtool uses annual maximum potential soil moisture deficit as the agroclimate index to calculate monthly and annual volumetric irrigation demand for the selected crop mix, soil available water capacity and location. Simulated river flows are used to identify days not under abstraction restrictions. Annual probability distributions of irrigation deficit and licence utilisation (headroom) are derived from a monthly time-step water balance model that calculates whether the farm irrigation demand in each month can be met, taking account of river flow-based abstraction restrictions, daily and annual volumetric licensed abstraction limits, the licenced abstraction period(s) and any on-farm reservoir storage. The enhanced D-Risk tool provides a more holistic understanding of drought risk on irrigated agriculture from individual farm to catchment scales and supports improved collaborative decision-making regarding future water sharing, water trading and on-farm reservoir investment to reduce business vulnerability to drought and regulatory change.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Implementing land-based mitigation to achieve the Paris Agreement in Europe requires food system transformation
    (IOP, 2019-10-04) Lee, Heera; Brown, Calum; Seo, Bumsuk; Holman, Ian P.; Audsley, Eric; Cojocaru, George; Rounsevell, Mark
    Land-based mitigation, particularly through afforestation, reforestation and avoided deforestation, is an important component of the 'Paris Agreement' to limit average global temperature increases to between 1.5 and 2 ◦C. However, the specific actions that would ensure sufficient carbon sequestration in forests remain unclear, as do their trade-offs against other land-based objectives. We use a regional integrated assessment model to identify the conditions under which European forests reach the extent required by mitigation targets. We compare stylised scenarios of changes in meat demand, bioenergy crop production, irrigation efficiency, and crop yield improvement. Only 42 out of 972 model simulations achieved minimum levels of food provision and forest extent without the need to change dietary preferences, but relied on crop yield improvements within Europe of at least 30%. Maintaining food imports at today's levels to avoid the potential displacement of food production and deforestation required at least a 15 % yield improvement, or a drastic reduction in meat consumption (avg. 57 %). The results suggest that the large-scale afforestation/reforestation planned in European targets is virtually impossible to achieve without transformation of the food system, making it unlikely that Europe will play its required role in global efforts to limit climate change without utilising land beyond its borders.