Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of Small-Scale Fishers’ Perceptions on Climate Change and Their Coping Strategies: Insights from Lake Malawi
Next Article in Special Issue
Spatial and Temporal Rainfall Variability over the Mountainous Central Pindus (Greece)
Previous Article in Journal
The Effects of Changing Climate and Market Conditions on Crop Yield and Acreage Allocation in Nepal
Previous Article in Special Issue
Projected Changes in Precipitation, Temperature, and Drought across California’s Hydrologic Regions in the 21st Century
Open AccessArticle

Intercomparison of Univariate and Joint Bias Correction Methods in Changing Climate From a Hydrological Perspective

1
Institute for Atmospheric and Earth System Research (INAR), University of Helsinki, 00100 Helsinki, Finland
2
Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI), 60176 Norrköping, Sweden
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Climate 2018, 6(2), 33; https://doi.org/10.3390/cli6020033
Received: 26 February 2018 / Revised: 20 April 2018 / Accepted: 23 April 2018 / Published: 26 April 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Climate variability and change in the 21th Century)
In this paper, the ability of two joint bias correction algorithms to adjust biases in daily mean temperature and precipitation is compared against two univariate quantile mapping methods when constructing projections from years 1981–2010 to early (2011–2040) and late (2061–2090) 21st century periods. Using both climate model simulations and the corresponding hydrological model simulations as proxies for the future in a pseudo-reality framework, these methods are inter-compared in a cross-validation manner in order to assess to what extent the more sophisticated methods have added value, particularly from the hydrological modeling perspective. By design, bi-variate bias correction methods improve the inter-variable relationships in the baseline period. Cross-validation results show, however, that both in the early and late 21st century conditions the additional benefit of using bi-variate bias correction methods is not obvious, as univariate methods have a comparable performance. From the evaluated hydrological variables, the added value is most clearly seen in the simulated snow water equivalent. Although not having the best performance in adjusting the temperature and precipitation distributions, quantile mapping applied as a delta change method performs well from the hydrological modeling point of view, particularly in the early 21st century conditions. This suggests that retaining the observed correlation structures of temperature and precipitation might in some cases be sufficient for simulating future hydrological climate change impacts. View Full-Text
Keywords: regional climate modeling; hydrological modeling; bias correction; multivariate; pseudo reality regional climate modeling; hydrological modeling; bias correction; multivariate; pseudo reality
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Räty, O.; Räisänen, J.; Bosshard, T.; Donnelly, C. Intercomparison of Univariate and Joint Bias Correction Methods in Changing Climate From a Hydrological Perspective. Climate 2018, 6, 33.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map

1
Back to TopTop