Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 5 of 5 items for :

  • Author or Editor: Simon Mason x
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society x
  • All content x
Clear All Modify Search
Simon J. Mason and Lisa Goddard

Extreme phases of the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon have been blamed for precipitation anomalies in many areas of the world. In some areas the probability of above-normal precipitation may be increased during warm or cold events, while in others below-normal precipitation may be more likely. The percentages of times that seasonal precipitation over land areas was above, near, and below normal during the eight strongest El Niño and La Nina episodes are tabulated, and the significance levels of the posterior probabilities are calculated using the hypergeometric distribution. These frequencies may provide a useful starting point for probabilistic climate forecasts during strong ENSO events. Areas with significantly high or low frequencies or above- or below-normal precipitation are highlighted, and attempts are made to estimate the proportion of land areas with significant ENSO-related precipitation signals.

There is a danger of overstating the global impact of ENSO events because only about 20%–30% of land areas experience significantly increased probabilities of above- or below-normal seasonal precipitation during at least some part of the year. Since different areas are affected at different times of the year, the fraction of global land affected in any particular season is only about 15%—25%. The danger of focusing on the impact of only warm-phase events is emphasized also: the global impact of La Nina seems to be at least as widespread as that of El Niño. Furthermore, there are a number of notable asymmetries in precipitation responses to El Niño and La Nina events. For many areas it should not be assumed that the typical climate anomaly of one ENSO extreme is likely to be the opposite of the other extreme. A high frequency of above-normal precipitation during strong El Niño conditions, for example, does not guarantee a high frequency of below-normal precipitation during La Nina events, or vice versa. On a global basis El Niño events are predominantly associated with below-normal seasonal precipitation over land, whereas La Nina events result in a wider extent of above-normal precipitation.

Full access
Simon J. Mason, Lisa Goddard, Nicholas E. Graham, Elena Yulaeva, Liqiang Sun, and Philip A. Arkin

The International Research Institute for Climate Prediction (IRI) was formed in late 1996 with the aim of fostering the improvement, production, and use of global forecasts of seasonal to interannual climate variability for the explicit benefit of society. The development of the 1997/98 El Niño provided an ideal impetus to the IRI Experimental Forecast Division (IRI EFD) to generate seasonal climate forecasts on an operational basis. In the production of these forecasts an extensive suite of forecasting tools has been developed, and these are described in this paper. An argument is made for the need for a multimodel ensemble approach and for extensive validation of each model's ability to simulate interannual climate variability accurately. The need for global sea surface temperature forecasts is demonstrated. Forecasts of precipitation and air temperature are presented in the form of “net assessments,” following the format adopted by the regional consensus forums. During the 1997/98 El Niño, the skill of the net assessments was greater than chance, except over Europe, and in most cases was an improvement over a forecast of persistence of the latest month's climate anomaly.

Full access
Anthony G. Barnston, Simon J. Mason, Lisa Goddard, David G. DeWitt, and Stephen E. Zebiak

The International Research Institute (IRI) for Climate Prediction seasonal forecast system is based largely on the predictions of ensembles of several atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs) forced by two versions of an SST prediction—one consisting of persisted SST anomalies from the current observations and one of evolving SST anomalies as predicted by a set of dynamical and statistical SST prediction models. Recently, an objective multimodel ensembling procedure has replaced a more laborious and subjective weighting of the predictions of the several AGCMs. Here the skills of the multimodel predictions produced retrospectively over the first 4 years of IRI forecasts are examined and compared with the skills of the more subjectively derived forecasts actually issued. The multimodel ensemble predictions are generally found to be an acceptable replacement, although the precipitation forecasts do benefit from inclusion of empirical forecast tools. Planned pattern-level model output statistics (MOS) corrections for systematic biases in the AGCM forecasts may render them more sufficient in their own right.

Full access
Andrea K. Gerlak, Simon J. Mason, Meaghan Daly, Diana Liverman, Zack Guido, Marta Bruno Soares, Catherine Vaughan, Chris Knudson, Christina Greene, James Buizer, and Katharine Jacobs

Abstract

Little has been documented about the benefits and impacts of the recent growth in climate services, despite a growing call to justify their value and stimulate investment. Regional Climate Outlook Forums (RCOFs), an integral part of the public and private enterprise of climate services, have been implemented over the last 20 years with the objectives of producing and disseminating seasonal climate forecasts to inform improved climate risk management and adaptation. In proposing guidance on how to measure the success of RCOFs, we offer three broad evaluative categories that are based on the primary stated goals of the RCOFs: 1) quality of the climate information used and developed at RCOFs; 2) legitimacy of RCOF processes focused on consensus forecasts, broad user engagement, and capacity building; and 3) usability of the climate information produced at RCOFs. Evaluating the quality of information relies largely on quantitative measures and statistical techniques that are standardized and transferrable, but assessing the RCOF processes and perceived usability of RCOF products will necessitate a combination of quantitative and qualitative social science methods that are sensitive to highly variable regional contexts. As RCOFs have taken up different formats and procedures to adapt to diverse institutional and political settings and varied technical and scientific capacities, objective evaluation methods adopted should align with the goals and intent of the evaluation and be performed in a participatory, coproduction manner where producers and users of climate services together design the evaluation metrics and processes. To fully capture the potential benefits of the RCOFs, it may be necessary to adjust or recalibrate the goals of these forums to better fit the evolving landscape of climate services development, needs, and provision.

Full access
Chris Hewitt, Erica Allis, Simon Mason, Meredith Muth, Roger Pulwarty, Joy Shumake-Guillemot, Ana E. Bucher, Manola Brunet, Andreas M. Fischer, Angela M. Hama, Rupa Kumar Kolli, Filipe Lucio, Ousmane Ndiaye, and Barbara Tapia
Full access