An alternative to radiative forcing for estimating the relative importance of climate change mechanisms

By K. Shine, Jolene Cook, E. Highwood, M. Joshi. 2003

150 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Atmospheric Science, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b9d43b9c544b50207490035ce43f63b1b9a5830b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Atmospheric Science

1. M. Webb
2. J. Gregory
3. Andrew Gettelman
4. Piers M. Forster
5. T. Andrews
6. Hugh Morrison
7. C. Hoose
8. M. Zelinka

In Global and Planetary Change

1. M. Webb
2. J. Gregory
3. Piers M. Forster
4. Andrew Gettelman
5. T. Andrews
6. M. Zelinka
7. Hugh Morrison
8. C. Hoose

Citations in the corpus

• Arctic amplification of climate change: a review of underlying mechanisms (2021, background): “Additional discussion of these different types of radiative forcing can be found in Hansen et al (1997), Shine et al (2003), Hansen et al (2005), IPCC (2013), and Forster et al (2016), among others.”
• Polar amplification of surface warming on an aquaplanet in “ghost forcing” experiments without sea ice feedbacks (2005, methodology): “Shine et al. (2003) demonstrated that using the total forcing calculated with fixed SST gives better results in sensitivity experiments with various forcings.”
• Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing (2014, background): “3) that are not amenable to characterization by RF (e.g., Rotstayn and Penner, 2001; Shine et al., 2003; Hansen et al., 2005; Lohmann et al., 2010; Ban-Weiss et al., 2012).”
• A new method for diagnosing radiative forcing and climate sensitivity (2004, methodology): “ Senior and Mitchell, 2000; Voss and Mikolajewicz, 2001], passing the steady-state for the 4 � CO2 HadSM3 experiment.”
• Origins of differences in climate sensitivity, forcing and feedback in climate models (2013, result): “We can however assess the ability of the models to reproduce the negative gradient in net CRE in the 80–100 % percentile range in our observational spatio-temporal composites in Fig. 11. This will be due to the combined effect of interannual, seasonal and spatial covariations in CRE and LTS, and mig”
• Forcing, feedbacks and climate sensitivity in CMIP5 coupled atmosphere‐ocean climate models (2012, methodology): “[17] We use the CMIP5 experiments with fixed SSTs (sstClim and sstClim4xCO2, described in Section 2.1) to derive an alternative estimate of the adjusted radiative forcing [Shine et al., 2003; Hansen et al., 2005], which we denote by FSST.”
• Dependence of climate forcing and response on the altitude of black carbon aerosols (2012, background): “’’ Note that a potentially better approach than (1) is to fix both sea surface and land surface temperatures (Shine et al. 2003), though this is more difficult in practice.”
• Equilibrium Response of an Atmosphere–Mixed Layer Ocean Model to Different Radiative Forcing Agents: Global and Zonal Mean Response (2008, background): “In addition, it has been shown that climate sensitivity, defined here as the global and annual mean surface air temperature change per unit radiative forcing, depends on types of the forcing agent (Hansen et al. 1997a; Shine et al. 2003; Hansen et al. 2005; NRC 2005).”
• Time-Varying Climate Sensitivity from Regional Feedbacks (2012, background): “Overall, our findings highlight the importance of fixed surface temperature experiments (e.g., Shine et al. 2003; Hansen et al. 2005) for calculation of the troposphereadjusted CO2 forcing since they avoid the biases associated with regression methods.”
• Bounding Global Aerosol Radiative Forcing of Climate Change (2020, background): “These responses are called rapid adjustments and occur independently117 of surface temperature change (Shine et al., 2003; J. Hansen et al., 2005).”
• CO2 forcing induces semi‐direct effects with consequences for climate feedback interpretations (2008, background): “Including such processes in forcing definitions should result in a forcing that is proportional to the equilibrium global temperature response, with the same proportionality (the climate feedback parameter) for different forcing agents [Shine et al., 2003; Hansen et al., 2005].”
• Global indirect aerosol effects: a review (2004, unknown): “This concept was extended by Shine et al. (2003) to fixing land surface temperatures in addition to sea surface temperatures (fixed ground temperature forcing, see also Hansen et al. (2005) 3 ).”
• Tropospheric Adjustment Induces a Cloud Component in CO2 Forcing (2008, methodology): “We have shown that this definition of forcing agrees fairly well with results from the method introduced by Hansen et al. (2002), and developed by Shine et al. (2003) and Hansen et al. (2005), of preventing climate feedback by fixing surface conditions in an experiment with the forcing agent…”
• Aerosol indirect effects – general circulation model intercomparison and evaluation with satellite data (2009, background): “The short-wave total aerosol effect (all effects combined) is diagnosed as a radiative flux perturbation or fixed-SST forcing (Rotstayn and Penner, 2001; Shine et al., 2003; Quaas et al., 2009), where in the case of the nudged simulations the tropospheric profiles also were kept fixed by constructio”