Confidence Builders: Evaluating Seasonal Climate Forecasts from User Perspectives
Name:
bams-1520-0477_2002_083_0683_c ...
Size:
16.68Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published Version
Affiliation
Department of Hydrology and Water Resources, The University of ArizonaIssue Date
2002-05
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
American Meteorological SocietyCitation
Hartmann, H. C., T. C. Pagano, S. Sorooshian, and R. Bales, 2002: CONFIDENCE BUILDERS. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 83, 683–698, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083<0683:CBESCF>2.3.CO;2.Rights
© 2002 American Meteorological Society.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
Water managers, cattle ranchers, and wildland fire managers face several barriers to effectively using climate forecasts. Repeatedly, these decision makers state that they lack any quantitative basis for evaluating forecast credibility. That is because the evaluations currently available typically reflect forecaster perspectives rather than those of users, or are not available in forms that users can easily obtain or understand. Seasonal climate forecasts are evaluated from the perspective of distinct user groups, considering lead times, seasons, and criteria relevant to their specific situations. Examples show how results targeted for different user perspectives can provide different assessments of forecast performance. The forecasts evaluated are the official seasonal temperature and precipitation outlooks issued by the NOAA Climate Prediction Center, produced in their present format since December 1994. It is considered how forecast formats can affect the ease, accuracy, and reliability of interpretation, and suggest that the “climatology” designation be modified to better reflect complete forecast uncertainty. A graphical product is presented that tracks time evolution of the forecasts and subsequent observations. The framework for evaluation has multiple quantitative forecast performance criteria that allow individuals to choose the level of sophistication of analysis that they prefer.Note
6 month embargoISSN
0003-0007EISSN
1520-0477Version
Final published versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1175/1520-0477(2002)083<0683:cbescf>2.3.co;2