Population - MESSAGE-GLOBIOM

From IAMC-Documentation
Jump to: navigation, search
Model Documentation - MESSAGE-GLOBIOM
Corresponding documentation
Model information
Institution International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Austria, http://data.ene.iiasa.ac.at/message-globiom/.
main users: IIASA, the MESSAGE model is distributed via the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to member countries
Solution concept
Solution method
Anticipation Myopic/Perfect Foresight (MESSAGE can be run both with perfect foresight and myopically, while GLOBIOM runs myopically)

Demographic development has, next to economic growth, strong implications for the anticipated mitigation and adaptation challenges. For example, a larger, poorer population will have more difficulties to adapt to the detrimental effects of climate change (O’Neill et al., 2014 1). The primary drivers of future energy demand in MESSAGE are projections of total population and GDP at purchasing power parity, denoted as GDP (PPP). In addition to total population, the urban/rural split of population is relevant for the MESSAGE-Access version of the model which distinguishes rural and urban population with different household incomes in developing country regions.

Demographic projections used in MESSAGE-GLOBIOM are based on the Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSPs) at the country level SSP database. Population growth evolves in response to how fertility, mortality, migration, and education of various social strata are assumed to change over time. In SSP2, global population peaks at 9.4 billion people around 2070, and slowly declines thereafter (KC and Lutz, 2015 2). However, modest improvements of educational attainment levels result in declines in education-specific fertility rates, leading to incomplete economic convergence across different world regions. This is particularly an issue for Africa. Overall, the population development in SSP2 is designed to be situated in the middle of the road between SSP1 and SSP3, see KC and Lutz (2015) 2 for details. (Fricko et al., 2016 3)

References

  1. ^  Brian C O’Neill, Elmar Kriegler, Keywan Riahi, Kristie L Ebi, Stephane Hallegatte, Timothy R Carter, Ritu Mathur, Detlef P van Vuuren (2014). A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Climatic Change, 122 (3), 387--400.
  2. a b  Samir KC, Wolfgang Lutz (2014). The human core of the shared socioeconomic pathways: {Population} scenarios by age, sex and level of education for all countries to 2100. Global Environmental Change, ().
  3. ^  Oliver Fricko, Petr Havlik, Joeri Rogelj, Zbigniew Klimont, Mykola Gusti, Nils Johnson, Peter Kolp, Manfred Strubegger, Hugo Valin, Markus Amann, Tatiana Ermolieva, Nicklas Forsell, Mario Herrero, Chris Heyes, Georg Kindermann, Volker Krey, David L McCollum, Michael Obersteiner, Shonali Pachauri, Shilpa Rao, Erwin Schmid, Wolfgang Schoepp, Keywan Riahi (2016). The marker quantification of the shared socioeconomic pathway 2: a middle-of-the-road scenario for the 21st century. Global Environmental Change, In press ().