Journal cover Journal topic
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 4.936 IF 4.936
  • IF 5-year value: 5.615 IF 5-year
    5.615
  • CiteScore value: 4.94 CiteScore
    4.94
  • SNIP value: 1.612 SNIP 1.612
  • IPP value: 4.70 IPP 4.70
  • SJR value: 2.134 SJR 2.134
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 107 Scimago H
    index 107
  • h5-index value: 63 h5-index 63
Volume 20, issue 2
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 685–696, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-685-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 20, 685–696, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-685-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Technical note 12 Feb 2016

Technical note | 12 Feb 2016

Technical Note: The impact of spatial scale in bias correction of climate model output for hydrologic impact studies

E. P. Maurer1, D. L. Ficklin2, and W. Wang3 E. P. Maurer et al.
  • 1Santa Clara University, Civil Engineering Department, Santa Clara, CA 95053-0563, USA
  • 2Indiana University, Department of Geography, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA
  • 3California State University at Monterey Bay, Department of Science and Environmental Policy and NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA

Abstract. Statistical downscaling is a commonly used technique for translating large-scale climate model output to a scale appropriate for assessing impacts. To ensure downscaled meteorology can be used in climate impact studies, downscaling must correct biases in the large-scale signal. A simple and generally effective method for accommodating systematic biases in large-scale model output is quantile mapping, which has been applied to many variables and shown to reduce biases on average, even in the presence of non-stationarity. Quantile-mapping bias correction has been applied at spatial scales ranging from hundreds of kilometers to individual points, such as weather station locations. Since water resources and other models used to simulate climate impacts are sensitive to biases in input meteorology, there is a motivation to apply bias correction at a scale fine enough that the downscaled data closely resemble historically observed data, though past work has identified undesirable consequences to applying quantile mapping at too fine a scale. This study explores the role of the spatial scale at which the quantile-mapping bias correction is applied, in the context of estimating high and low daily streamflows across the western United States. We vary the spatial scale at which quantile-mapping bias correction is performed from 2° ( ∼  200 km) to 1∕8° ( ∼  12 km) within a statistical downscaling procedure, and use the downscaled daily precipitation and temperature to drive a hydrology model. We find that little additional benefit is obtained, and some skill is degraded, when using quantile mapping at scales finer than approximately 0.5° ( ∼  50 km). This can provide guidance to those applying the quantile-mapping bias correction method for hydrologic impacts analysis.

Publications Copernicus
Download
Short summary
To translate climate model output from its native coarse scale to a finer scale more representative of that at which societal impacts are experienced, a common method applied is statistical downscaling. A component of many statistical downscaling techniques is quantile mapping (QM). QM can be applied at different spatial scales, and here we study how skill varies with spatial scale. We find the highest skill is generally obtained when applying QM at approximately a 50 km spatial scale.
To translate climate model output from its native coarse scale to a finer scale more...
Citation