• Aalto, J., P. Pirinen, J. Heikkinen, and A. Venäläinen, 2013: Spatial interpolation of monthly climate data for Finland: Comparing the performance of kriging and generalized additive models. Theor. Appl. Climatol., 112, 99111, doi:10.1007/s00704-012-0716-9.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Becker, A., P. Finger, A. Meyer-Christoffer, B. Rudolf, K. Schamm, U. Schneider, and M. Ziese, 2013: A description of the global land-surface precipitation data products of the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre with sample applications including centennial (trend) analysis from 1901–present, Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 5, 7199, doi:10.5194/essd-5-71-2013.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bosilovich, M. G., J. Kennedy, D. Dee, R. Allan, and A. O’Neill, 2013: On the reprocessing and reanalysis of observations for climate. Climate Science for Serving Society: Research, Modelling and Prediction Priorities, A. Ghassem and J. W. Hurrell, Eds., Springer, 5171, doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6692-1_3.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bradwell, P., and S. Marr, 2008: Making the most of collaboration: An international survey of public service co-design. DEMOS Rep. 23, 53 pp. [Available online at www.demos.co.uk/files/CollabWeb.pdf.]

  • Dee, D. P., and Coauthors, 2011: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553597, doi:10.1002/qj.828.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dee, D. P., M. Balmaseda, G. Balsamo, R. Engelen, A. J. Simmons, and J.-N. Thépaut, 2014: Toward a consistent reanalysis of the climate system. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 95, 12351248, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00043.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gregow, H., and Coauthors, 2015: User awareness concerning reanalysis feedback data and input observations. Adv. Sci. Res., 12, 6367, doi:10.5194/asr-12-63-2015.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hartmann, D. L., and Coauthors, 2013: Observations: Atmosphere and surface. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, T. F. Stocker et al., Eds., Cambridge University Press, 159–254.

  • Hewitt, C., S. Mason, and D. Walland, 2012: The Global Framework for Climate Services. Nat Climate Change, 2, 831832, doi:10.1038/nclimate1745.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hofstra, N., M. Haylock, M. New, P. Jones, and C. Frei, 2008: Comparison of six methods for the interpolation of daily, European climate data, J. Geophys. Res., 113, doi:10.1029/2008JD010100.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hofstra, N., M. New, and C. McSweeney, 2010: The influence of interpolation and station network density on the distributions and trends of climate variables in gridded daily data. J. Climate Dyn., 35, 841858, doi:10.1007/s00382-009-0698-1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hollingsworth, A., and C. Pfrang, 2005: A preliminary survey of ERA-40 users developing applications of relevance to GEO (Group on Earth Observations). ECMWF Newsletter, No. 104, ECMWF, Reading, United Kingdom, 5–9.

  • McNie, E. C., 2013: Delivering climate services: Organizational strategies and approaches for producing useful climate-science information. Wea. Climate Soc., 5, 1426, doi:10.1175/WCAS-D-11-00034.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Menne, M. J., I. Durre, R. S. Vose, B. E. Gleason, and T. G. Houston, 2012: An overview of the Global Historical Climatology Network-Daily database. J. Atmos. Oceanic Technol., 29, 897910, doi:10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00103.1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oksanen, J., R. Kindt, P. Legendre, B. O’Hara, L. G. Simpson, and M. H. H. Stevens, 2008: Vegan: Community Ecology Package. R-Forge. [Available online at http://vegan.r-forge.r-project.org/.]

  • Poli, P., and Coauthors, 2013: The data assimilation system and initial performance evaluation of the ECMWF pilot reanalysis of the 20th-century assimilating surface observations only (ERA-20C). ERA Rep. Series 14, 59 pp. [Available from ECMWF, Shinfield Park, Reading, United Kingdom.]

  • R Development Core Team, 2013: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 409 pp.

  • Street, R., M. Parry, J. Scott, D. Jacob, T. Runge, 2015: A European research and innovation roadmap for climate services. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, doi:10.2777/750202.

  • Tall, A., J. Hansen, A. Jay, B. Campbell, J. Kinyangi, P. K. Aggarwal, and R. Zougmoré, 2014: Scaling up climate services for farmers: Mission possible. Learning from good practice in Africa and South Asia. CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security Rep. 13, 44 pp. [Available online athttps://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/42445.]

  • Uppala, and Coauthors, 2005: The ERA-40 re-analysis. Quart. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 131, 29613012, doi:10.1256/qj.04.176.

  • WMO, 2011: Climate knowledge for action: A global framework for climate services—Empowering the most vulnerable—Frequently asked questions relating to the report of the high-level taskforce for the Global Framework for Climate Services. World Meteorological Organization Rep. 1065, 20 pp. [Available online at www.gfcs-climate.org/sites/default/files/FAQ/HLT/HLT_FAQ_en.pdf.]

  • Woodruff, S. D., and Coauthors, 2011: ICOADS release 2.5: Extensions and enhancements to the surface marine meteorological archive. Int. J. Climatol., 31, 951967, doi:10.1002/joc.2103.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 361 119 10
PDF Downloads 191 67 4

Worldwide Survey of Awareness and Needs Concerning Reanalyses and Respondents Views on Climate Services

H. GregowFinnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Search for other papers by H. Gregow in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
K. JylhäFinnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Search for other papers by K. Jylhä in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
H. M. MäkeläFinnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Search for other papers by H. M. Mäkelä in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
J. AaltoFinnish Meteorological Institute, and Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

Search for other papers by J. Aalto in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
T. ManninenFinnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Search for other papers by T. Manninen in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
P. KarlssonFinnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Search for other papers by P. Karlsson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
A. K. Kaiser-WeissDeutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach, Germany

Search for other papers by A. K. Kaiser-Weiss in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
F. KasparDeutscher Wetterdienst, Offenbach, Germany

Search for other papers by F. Kaspar in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
P. PoliEuropean Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by P. Poli in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
D. G. H. TanEuropean Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, Reading, United Kingdom

Search for other papers by D. G. H. Tan in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
A. ObregonGroup on Earth Observations Secretariat, Geneva, Switzerland

Search for other papers by A. Obregon in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Z. SuUniversity of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands

Search for other papers by Z. Su in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

A worldwide online survey about user awareness of reanalyses and climate services was conducted in the period from November 2013 to February 2014 by the Coordinating Earth Observation Data Validation for Re-Analysis for Climate Services (CORE-CLIMAX) project. The 2,578 respondents were mostly users of global reanalyses [particularly the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) reanalyses]. They answered queries arranged in 11 sections by choosing from preprepared check-box responses and left several hundred free comments. Here, we analyze responses related to characteristics of reanalysis data and the perceived obstacles for using reanalysis in climate services. After examining responses from all survey participants, we focus on the answers from subgroups working in specific disciplines related to natural resource management: freshwater, agriculture and food production, forestry, and energy. Although the survey attracted mostly self-selected respondents from the education and public research and development (R&D) sectors, one-third of the energy-related subgroup were from the private sector. A large majority (91%) of the respondents use ECMWF reanalyses, but other reanalysis products are also widely used by them. Respondents expressed desire for reanalysis development in the areas of 1) training and online plotting tools, 2) more frequent updates, 3) explanations about uncertainties (the energy subgroup emphasizes this), 4) smaller biases, 5) less restrictive data policy, and 6) higher temporal and spatial resolution (the energy and water subgroups highlight this). Additionally, the subgroups (excluding energy) expressed interest in including in future climate services activities for applied weather and climate research for impact assessment and/or statistical impact analyses for improving weather warnings and their criteria.

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Hilppa Gregow, Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 503, FI-00101 Helsinki, Finland, E-mail: hilppa.gregow@fmi.fi

Abstract

A worldwide online survey about user awareness of reanalyses and climate services was conducted in the period from November 2013 to February 2014 by the Coordinating Earth Observation Data Validation for Re-Analysis for Climate Services (CORE-CLIMAX) project. The 2,578 respondents were mostly users of global reanalyses [particularly the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) reanalyses]. They answered queries arranged in 11 sections by choosing from preprepared check-box responses and left several hundred free comments. Here, we analyze responses related to characteristics of reanalysis data and the perceived obstacles for using reanalysis in climate services. After examining responses from all survey participants, we focus on the answers from subgroups working in specific disciplines related to natural resource management: freshwater, agriculture and food production, forestry, and energy. Although the survey attracted mostly self-selected respondents from the education and public research and development (R&D) sectors, one-third of the energy-related subgroup were from the private sector. A large majority (91%) of the respondents use ECMWF reanalyses, but other reanalysis products are also widely used by them. Respondents expressed desire for reanalysis development in the areas of 1) training and online plotting tools, 2) more frequent updates, 3) explanations about uncertainties (the energy subgroup emphasizes this), 4) smaller biases, 5) less restrictive data policy, and 6) higher temporal and spatial resolution (the energy and water subgroups highlight this). Additionally, the subgroups (excluding energy) expressed interest in including in future climate services activities for applied weather and climate research for impact assessment and/or statistical impact analyses for improving weather warnings and their criteria.

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Hilppa Gregow, Finnish Meteorological Institute, P.O. Box 503, FI-00101 Helsinki, Finland, E-mail: hilppa.gregow@fmi.fi

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplemental Materials (PDF 548.66 KB)
Save