Institution
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Nonprofit•Laxenburg, Austria•
About: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis is a nonprofit organization based out in Laxenburg, Austria. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Greenhouse gas. The organization has 1369 authors who have published 5075 publications receiving 280467 citations. The organization is also known as: IIASA.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
University College London1, Chinese Academy of Sciences2, University of East Anglia3, University of Groningen4, Masaryk University5, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis6, Tsinghua University7, London School of Economics and Political Science8, Beijing Normal University9, Beijing Institute of Technology10
TL;DR: Li et al. as mentioned in this paper applied an environmentally extended multiregional input-output approach to estimate household carbon footprints for 12 different income groups of China's 30 regions and measured carbon inequality for households across provinces.
Abstract: There are substantial differences in carbon footprints across households. This study applied an environmentally extended multiregional input–output approach to estimate household carbon footprints for 12 different income groups of China’s 30 regions. Subsequently, carbon footprint Gini coefficients were calculated to measure carbon inequality for households across provinces. We found that the top 5% of income earners were responsible for 17% of the national household carbon footprint in 2012, while the bottom half of income earners caused only 25%. Carbon inequality declined with economic growth in China across space and time in two ways: first, carbon footprints showed greater convergence in the wealthier coastal regions than in the poorer inland regions; second, China’s national carbon footprint Gini coefficients declined from 0.44 in 2007 to 0.37 in 2012. We argue that economic growth not only increases income levels but also contributes to an overall reduction in carbon inequality in China.
169 citations
••
TL;DR: This work uses extensive individual-based simulations to compare scoring, standing and other forms of assessing defections, and shows that several forms of indirect reciprocation can robustly sustain cooperation.
169 citations
••
14 Dec 2018
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors show that compared to current animal-source foods, future foods have major environmental benefits while safeguarding the intake of essential micronutrients, and if produced with renewable energy, they also offer greenhouse gas benefits.
Abstract: Altering diets is increasingly acknowledged as an important solution to feed the world’s growing population within the planetary boundaries. In our search for a planet-friendly diet, the main focus has been on eating more plant-source foods, and eating no or less animal-source foods, while the potential of future foods, such as insects, seaweed or cultured meat has been underexplored. Here we show that compared to current animal-source foods, future foods have major environmental benefits while safeguarding the intake of essential micronutrients. The complete array of essential nutrients in the mixture of future foods makes them good-quality alternatives for current animal-source foods compared to plant-source foods. Moreover, future foods are land-efficient alternatives for animal-source foods, and if produced with renewable energy, they also offer greenhouse gas benefits. Further research on nutrient bioavailability and digestibility, food safety, production costs and consumer acceptance will determine their role as main food sources in future diets.
169 citations
••
TL;DR: Examination of crowdsourced data from the Geo-Wiki crowdsourcing tool for land cover validation showed that there was little difference between experts and non-experts in identifying human impact although results varied by land cover while experts were better than non- experts in identifying the land cover type.
Abstract: There is currently a lack of in-situ environmental data for the calibration and validation of remotely sensed products and for the development and verification of models. Crowdsourcing is increasingly being seen as one potentially powerful way of increasing the supply of in-situ data but there are a number of concerns over the subsequent use of the data, in particular over data quality. This paper examined crowdsourced data from the Geo-Wiki crowdsourcing tool for land cover validation to determine whether there were significant differences in quality between the answers provided by experts and non-experts in the domain of remote sensing and therefore the extent to which crowdsourced data describing human impact and land cover can be used in further scientific research. The results showed that there was little difference between experts and non-experts in identifying human impact although results varied by land cover while experts were better than non-experts in identifying the land cover type. This suggests the need to create training materials with more examples in those areas where difficulties in identification were encountered, and to offer some method for contributors to reflect on the information they contribute, perhaps by feeding back the evaluations of their contributed data or by making additional training materials available. Accuracies were also found to be higher when the volunteers were more consistent in their responses at a given location and when they indicated higher confidence, which suggests that these additional pieces of information could be used in the development of robust measures of quality in the future.
168 citations
••
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis1, Utrecht University2, George Mason University3, Jet Propulsion Laboratory4, National Institute for Environmental Studies5, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign6, South University of Science and Technology of China7, Goethe University Frankfurt8, University of Tokyo9, United Nations University10, Michigan State University11, Lehigh University12, Australian National University13, Delft University of Technology14, Princeton University15, Wageningen University and Research Centre16, City College of New York17, City University of New York18, University of Saskatchewan19
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide a synthesis of progress in the development and application of human impact modelling in hydrological models and highlight a number of key challenges and discuss possible improvements in order to better represent the human-water interface.
Abstract: Over recent decades, the global population has been rapidly increasing and human activities have altered terrestrial water fluxes to an unprecedented extent. The phenomenal growth of the human footprint has significantly modified hydrological processes in various ways (e.g. irrigation, artificial dams, and water diversion) and at various scales (from a watershed to the globe). During the early 1990s, awareness of the potential for increased water scarcity led to the first detailed global water resource assessments. Shortly thereafter, in order to analyse the human perturbation on terrestrial water resources, the first generation of largescale hydrological models (LHMs) was produced. However, at this early stage few models considered the interaction between terrestrial water fluxes and human activities, including water use and reservoir regulation, and even fewer models distinguished water use from surface water and groundwater resources. Since the early 2000s, a growing number of LHMs have incorporated human impacts on the hydrological cycle, yet the representation of human activities in hydrological models remains challenging. In this paper we provide a synthesis of progress in the development and application of human impact modelling in LHMs. We highlight a number of key challenges and discuss possible improvements in order to better represent the human-water interface in hydrological models.
168 citations
Authors
Showing all 1418 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Martin A. Nowak | 148 | 591 | 94394 |
Paul J. Crutzen | 130 | 461 | 80651 |
Andreas Richter | 110 | 769 | 48262 |
David G. Streets | 106 | 364 | 42154 |
Drew Shindell | 102 | 340 | 49481 |
Wei Liu | 102 | 2927 | 65228 |
Jean-Francois Lamarque | 100 | 385 | 55326 |
Frank Dentener | 97 | 220 | 58666 |
James W. Vaupel | 89 | 434 | 34286 |
Keywan Riahi | 87 | 318 | 58030 |
Larry W. Horowitz | 85 | 253 | 28706 |
Robert J. Scholes | 84 | 253 | 37019 |
Mark A. Sutton | 83 | 423 | 30716 |
Brian Walsh | 82 | 233 | 29589 |
Börje Johansson | 82 | 871 | 30985 |