IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v19y2016i5p664-685.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert judgements of sea-level rise at the local scale

Author

Listed:
  • Merryn Thomas
  • Nick Pidgeon
  • Lorraine Whitmarsh
  • Rhoda Ballinger

Abstract

Whilst local projections of sea-level rise (SLR) are necessary to facilitate targeted climate change adaptation and communication strategies, downscaling from global climate models can be problematic. Here, we use expert probability judgement to elicit a suite of local projections, and associated uncertainties, for future SLR on the Severn Estuary in the south-west of the UK. Eleven experts from a range of policy and academic backgrounds took part in a structured probability elicitation exercise for the years 2050, 2100 and 2200. In addition to the quantitative elicitation, the experts’ reasoning during the task was qualitatively analysed. Quantitative analyses show that although there is consensus that sea levels will rise on the Estuary in future, there is wide variation between judgements and much uncertainty regarding the magnitude of future rise. For example, median estimates of SLR (compared to the 2011 level) range from 9.6 to 40 cm in the year 2050; 20 to 100 cm in 2100; and 35 to 300 cm in 2200. Fifty per cent confidence intervals and ninety per cent confidence intervals vary even more. Qualitative analyses indicate that experts’ judgements may have been influenced by their choice of methods and information sources, the ways in which they thought about the future, and heuristics. The study shows the merits of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods to explore the reasoning behind uncertainty judgements. We conclude that where expert probability judgements are to be used to characterise uncertainty such reasoning should be made explicit.

Suggested Citation

  • Merryn Thomas & Nick Pidgeon & Lorraine Whitmarsh & Rhoda Ballinger, 2016. "Expert judgements of sea-level rise at the local scale," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(5), pages 664-685, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:19:y:2016:i:5:p:664-685
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2015.1043568
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2015.1043568
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2015.1043568?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:19:y:2016:i:5:p:664-685. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.