Abstract. Despite considerable progress in recent years, output of both global and regional circulation models is still afflicted with biases to a degree that precludes its direct use, especially in climate change impact studies. This is well known, and to overcome this problem, bias correction (BC; i.e. the correction of model output towards observations in a post-processing step) has now become a standard procedure in climate change impact studies. In this paper we argue that BC is currently often used in an invalid way: it is added to the GCM/RCM model chain without sufficient proof that the consistency of the latter (i.e. the agreement between model dynamics/model output and our judgement) as well as the generality of its applicability increases. BC methods often impair the advantages of circulation models by altering spatiotemporal field consistency, relations among variables and by violating conservation principles. Currently used BC methods largely neglect feedback mechanisms, and it is unclear whether they are time-invariant under climate change conditions. Applying BC increases agreement of climate model output with observations in hindcasts and hence narrows the uncertainty range of simulations and predictions without, however, providing a satisfactory physical justification. This is in most cases not transparent to the end user. We argue that this hides rather than reduces uncertainty, which may lead to avoidable forejudging of end users and decision makers.We present here a brief overview of state-of-the-art bias correction methods, discuss the related assumptions and implications, draw conclusions on the validity of bias correction and propose ways to cope with biased output of circulation models in the short term and how to reduce the bias in the long term. The most promising strategy for improved future global and regional circulation model simulations is the increase in model resolution to the convection-permitting scale in combination with ensemble predictions based on sophisticated approaches for ensemble perturbation.With this article, we advocate communicating the entire uncertainty range associated with climate change predictions openly and hope to stimulate a lively discussion on bias correction among the atmospheric and hydrological community and end users of climate change impact studies.

Despite considerable progress in recent years, output of both Global and Regional Circulation Models is still afflicted with biases to a degree that precludes its direct use, especially in climate change impact studies. This is well known, and to overcome this problem bias correction (BC), i.e. the correction of model output towards observations in a post processing step for its subsequent application in climate change impact studies has now become a standard procedure. In this paper we argue that bias correction, which has a considerable influence on the results of impact studies, is not a valid procedure in the way it is currently used: it impairs the advantages of Circulation Models which are based on established physical laws by altering spatiotemporal field consistency, relations among variables and by violating conservation principles. Bias correction largely neglects feedback mechanisms and it is unclear whether bias correction methods are time-invariant under climate change conditions. Applying bias correction increases agreement of Climate Model output with observations in hind casts and hence narrows the uncertainty range of simulations and predictions without, however, providing a satisfactory physical justification. This is in most cases not transparent to the end user. We argue that this masks rather than reduces uncertainty, which may lead to avoidable forejudging of end users and decision makers.

We present here a brief overview of state-of-the-art bias correction methods, discuss the related assumptions and implications, draw conclusions on the validity of bias correction and propose ways to cope with biased output of Circulation Models in the short term and how to reduce the bias in the long term. The most promising strategy for improved future Global and Regional Circulation Model simulations is the increase in model resolution to the convection-permitting scale in combination with ensemble predictions based on sophisticated approaches for ensemble perturbation.

With this article, we advocate communicating the entire uncertainty range associated with climate change predictions openly and hope to stimulate a lively discussion on bias correction among the atmospheric and hydrological community and end users of climate change impact studies

The impact of climate change on three small-to medium-sized river catchments (Ammer, Mulde, and Ruhr) in Germany is investigated for the near future (2021-50) following the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) A1B scenario. A 10-member ensemble of hydrological model (HM) simulations, based on two high-resolution regional climate models (RCMs) driven by two global climate models (GCMs), with three realizations of ECHAM5 (E5) and one realization of the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis version 3 (CCCma3; C3) is established. All GCM simulations are downscaled by the RCM Community Land Model (CLM), and one realization of E5 is downscaled also with the RCM Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF). This concerted 7-km, high-resolution RCM ensemble provides a sound basis for runoff simulations of small catchments and is currently unique for Germany. The hydrology for each catchment is simulated in an overlapping scheme, with two of the three HMs used in the project. The resulting ensemble hence contains for each chain link (GCM-realization-RCM-HM) at least two members and allows the investigation of qualitative and limited quantitative indications of the existence and uncertainty range of the change signal. The ensemble spread in the climate change signal is large and varies with catchment and season, and the results show that most of the uncertainty of the change signal arises from the natural variability in winter and from the RCMs in summer.

Abstract. On behalf of and in close collaboration with the institution of environment, measurements and conservation of the federal state of Baden-Württemberg (Landesanstalt für Umwelt, Messungen und Naturschutz Baden-Württemberg/LUBW/ see http://www.lubw.baden-wuerttemberg.de/) an innovative regionnalisation concept has been developed. This concept allows the supply of flood, mean or low flow parameters for 10 790 sites in Baden-Württemberg and an evaluation of the predicted impact of climate change on the flood situation. The extensive data basis for this regionalisation concept with numerous input parameters and varied result reporting made it necessary to select an appropriate database structure. New software was developed to help with the calculations, notably for: – upgrading the official areal water system register (Gewässerkundliches Flächenverzeichnis/GKFV) – proofing tools to maintain consistency – automatic parameter derivation with the software ESRI© ArcInfo. The results were published in electronic form and included a stand-alone geo-information software for easy and fast retrieval of data and results. The objective of this article is to describe the implementation of these new concepts for coupling Geographic Information System (GIS) and database needs to reach the identified requirements.