Evaluation of global fire simulations in CMIP6 Earth system models

Abstract. Fire is the primary form of terrestrial ecosystem disturbance on a global scale and an important Earth system process. Most Earth system models (ESMs) have incorporated fire modeling, with 19 of them submitting model outputs of fire-related variables to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). This study provides the first comprehensive evaluation of CMIP6 historical fire simulations by comparing them with multiple satellite-based products and charcoal-based historical reconstructions. Our results show that most CMIP6 models simulate the present-day global burned area and fire carbon emissions within the range of satellite-based products. They also capture the major features of observed spatial patterns and seasonal cycles, the relationship of fires with precipitation and population density, and the influence of the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) on the interannual variability of tropical fires. Regional fire carbon emissions simulated by the CMIP6 models from 1850 to 2010 generally align with the charcoal-based reconstructions, although there are regional mismatches, such as in southern South America and eastern temperate North America prior to the 1910s and in temperate North America, eastern boreal North America, Europe, and boreal Asia since the 1980s. The CMIP6 simulations have addressed three critical issues identified in CMIP5: (1) the simulated global burned area being less than half of that of the observations, (2) the failure to reproduce the high burned area fraction observed in Africa, and (3) the weak fire seasonal variability. Furthermore, the CMIP6 models exhibit improved accuracy in capturing the observed relationship between fires and both climatic and socioeconomic drivers and better align with the historical long-term trends indicated by charcoal-based reconstructions in most regions worldwide. However, the CMIP6 models still fail to reproduce the decline in global burned area and fire carbon emissions observed over the past 2 decades, mainly attributed to an underestimation of anthropogenic fire suppression, and the spring peak in fires in the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes, mainly due to an underestimation of crop fires. In addition, the model underestimates the fire sensitivity to wet–dry conditions, indicating the need to improve fuel wetness estimation. Based on these findings, we present specific guidance for fire scheme development and suggest a post-processing methodology for using CMIP6 multi-model outputs to generate reliable fire projection products.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Geoscientific model development
Published
2024-12-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8751-2024
Citations
15
Primary Topic
Fire effects on ecosystems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.24

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluation of global fire simulations in CMIP6 Earth system models

Xiao Dong, Jennifer R. Marlon, Roland Séférian, Jörg Schwinger et al.
15 citations
Geoscientific model development
Fire effects on ecosystems
4.24
article

Evaluation of global fire simulations in CMIP6 Earth system models

Xiao Dong, Jennifer R. Marlon, Roland Séférian, Jörg Schwinger, Sam S. Rabin, Hanna Lee, Lars Nieradzik, Virginie Marécal, Sandy P. Harrison, Zhongda Lin, D. S. Ward, Lai-Yung Ruby Leung, Fang Li, Xiang Song, Shiyu Wang
article en
15 citations

Abstract

Abstract. Fire is the primary form of terrestrial ecosystem disturbance on a global scale and an important Earth system process. Most Earth system models (ESMs) have incorporated fire modeling, with 19 of them submitting model outputs of fire-related variables to the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). This study provides the first comprehensive evaluation of CMIP6 historical fire simulations by comparing them with multiple satellite-based products and charcoal-based historical reconstructions. Our results show that most CMIP6 models simulate the present-day global burned area and fire carbon emissions within the range of satellite-based products. They also capture the major features of observed spatial patterns and seasonal cycles, the relationship of fires with precipitation and population density, and the influence of the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) on the interannual variability of tropical fires. Regional fire carbon emissions simulated by the CMIP6 models from 1850 to 2010 generally align with the charcoal-based reconstructions, although there are regional mismatches, such as in southern South America and eastern temperate North America prior to the 1910s and in temperate North America, eastern boreal North America, Europe, and boreal Asia since the 1980s. The CMIP6 simulations have addressed three critical issues identified in CMIP5: (1) the simulated global burned area being less than half of that of the observations, (2) the failure to reproduce the high burned area fraction observed in Africa, and (3) the weak fire seasonal variability. Furthermore, the CMIP6 models exhibit improved accuracy in capturing the observed relationship between fires and both climatic and socioeconomic drivers and better align with the historical long-term trends indicated by charcoal-based reconstructions in most regions worldwide. However, the CMIP6 models still fail to reproduce the decline in global burned area and fire carbon emissions observed over the past 2 decades, mainly attributed to an underestimation of anthropogenic fire suppression, and the spring peak in fires in the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes, mainly due to an underestimation of crop fires. In addition, the model underestimates the fire sensitivity to wet–dry conditions, indicating the need to improve fuel wetness estimation. Based on these findings, we present specific guidance for fire scheme development and suggest a post-processing methodology for using CMIP6 multi-model outputs to generate reliable fire projection products.

Geoscientific model developmentVol. 17(23)
NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research (US), Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SE), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (US), Université Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées (FR), Lund University (SE), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN), Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO), Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research (NO), Yale University (US), Centre National de Recherches Météorologiques (FR), NORCE Research AS (NO), Météo-France (FR), NSF NCAR Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory (US), Institute of Atmospheric Physics (CN), University of Reading (GB)
U.S. Department of Energy, European Commission, Norges Forskningsråd, Office of Science, EarthLab, University of Washington, Horizon 2020, National Key Research and Development Program of China, Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong Province, Biological and Environmental Research, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Fire effects on ecosystems
4.24
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.