Abstract: BACKGROUND: Globally, pollen allergy is a major public health problem, but a fundamental unknown is the likely impact of climate change. To our knowledge, this is the first study to quantify the consequences of climate change upon pollen allergy in humans. OBJECTIVES: We produced quantitative estimates of the potential impact of climate change upon pollen allergy in humans, focusing upon common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) in Europe. METHODS: A process-based model estimated the change in ragweed’s range under climate change. A second model simulated current and future ragweed pollen levels. These findings were translated into health burdens using a dose-response curve generated from a systematic review and from current and future population data. Models considered two different suites of regional climate/pollen models, two greenhouse gas emissions scenarios [Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) 4.5 and 8.5], and three different plant invasion scenarios. RESULTS: Our primary estimates indicated that sensitization to ragweed will more than double in Europe, from 33 to 77 million people, by 2041-2060. According to our projections, sensitization will increase in countries with an existing ragweed problem (e.g., Hungary, the Balkans), but the greatest proportional increases will occur where sensitization is uncommon (e.g., Germany, Poland, France). Higher pollen concentrations and a longer pollen season may also increase the severity of symptoms. Our model projections were driven predominantly by changes in climate (66%) but were also influenced by current trends in the spread of this invasive plant species. Assumptions about the rate at which ragweed spreads throughout Europe had a large influence upon the results. CONCLUSIONS: Our quantitative estimates indicate that ragweed pollen allergy will become a common health problem across Europe, expanding into areas where it is currently uncommon. Control of ragweed spread may be an important adaptation strategy in response to climate change. Citation: Lake IR, Jones NR, Agnew M, Goodess CM, Giorgi F, Hamaoui-Laguel L, Semenov MA, Solomon F, Storkey J, Vautard R, Epstein MM. 2017. Climate change and future pollen allergy in Europe. Environ Health Perspect 125:385-391; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP173.

Abstract: To improve climate change impact estimates and to quantify their uncertainty, multi-model ensembles (MMEs) have been suggested. Model improvements can improve the accuracy of simulations and reduce the uncertainty of climate change impact assessments. Furthermore, they can reduce the number of models needed in a MME. Herein, 15 wheat growth models of a larger MME were improved through re-parameterization and/or incorporating or modifying heat stress effects on phenology, leaf growth and senescence, biomass growth, and grain number and size using detailed field experimental data from the USDA Hot Serial Cereal experiment (calibration data set). Simulation results from before and after model improvement were then evaluated with independent field experiments from a CIMMYT world-wide field trial network (evaluation data set). Model improvements decreased the variation (10th to 90th model ensemble percentile range) of grain yields simulated by the MME on average by 39% in the calibration data set and by 26% in the independent evaluation data set for crops grown in mean seasonal temperatures >24 °C. MME mean squared error in simulating grain yield decreased by 37%. A reduction in MME uncertainty range by 27% increased MME prediction skills by 47%. Results suggest that the mean level of variation observed in field experiments and used as a benchmark can be reached with half the number of models in the MME. Improving crop models is therefore important to increase the certainty of model-based impact assessments and allow more practical, i.e. smaller MMEs to be used effectively.

Abstract: Local-scale daily climate scenarios are required for assessment of climate change impacts. ELPIS is a repository of local-scale climate scenarios for Europe, which are based on the LARS-WG weather generator and future projections from 2 multi-model ensembles, CMIP3 and EU-ENSEMBLES. In ELPIS, the site parameters for the 1980-2010 baseline scenarios were estimated by LARS-WG using daily weather from the European Crop Growth Monitoring System (CGMS) used in many European agricultural assessment studies. The objective of this paper was to compare ELPIS baseline scenarios with observed daily weather obtained independently from the European Climate Assessment (ECA) data set. Several statistical tests were used to compare distributions of climatic variables derived from ECA-observed daily weather and ELPIS-generated baseline scenarios. About 30% of selected sites have a difference in altitude of > 50 m compared with the CGMS grid-cell altitude that was selected to represent agricultural land within a grid-cell. Differences in altitude can explain significant Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (KS-test) results for distribution of daily temperature and in t-tests for temperature monthly means, because of the well-known negative correlation between temperature and elevation. For daily precipitation, the KS-test showed little difference between generated and observed data; however, the more sensitive t-test showed significant results for the sites where altitude differences were large. Approximately 11% of sites showed small positive or negative bias in monthly solar radiation, although 86% sites showed > 3 significant t-test results for monthly means. These results can be explained by differences in conversion of sunshine hours to solar radiation used in CGMS and LARS-WG. We conclude that, considering the limitations above, ELPIS baseline scenarios are suitable for agricultural impact assessments in Europe.