well as applications of the same model to both weather and climate.9 The investment in common software infrastructures has clearly benefited these European laboratories.
Finding 2.2: Previous investments and efforts in common software infrastructure have paid substantial dividends and have helped to support social integration of the diverse climate modeling community by supporting bottom-up community cooperation.
Need for Climate Information
The reports from the late 1990s and early 2000s called for the development of capabilities that were specifically focused on regular delivery of a set of user-driven climate products and the need for some type of organizational or institutional entity responsible and accountable for their delivery. High-End Climate Science made the specific recommendation of “two major core simulation activities”: one center formed from existing operational capabilities in the National Weather Service and another center to be federated from existing climate modeling assets; this recommendation did not get adopted, but it did heighten awareness of the need to coordinate research-driven and user-driven modeling. An issue with which both Improving the Effectiveness and HighEnd Climate Science wrestled was the need to provide a home and adequate emphasis for seasonal and El Niño-Southern Oscillation-scale prediction. This type of modeling activity fell between larger existing efforts for weather prediction and long-term climate simulations and was fragmented between two parts of NOAA—GFDL and the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP)—as well as other agencies. In response to these perceived needs, new capabilities have been developed, for example, NCEP’s Climate Forecast System (Saha et al., 2006) and a new NOAA-supported National Multi-Model Ensemble10 seasonal prediction project.
Although many positive changes to address issues of resources, coordination, and structuring of the U.S. climate enterprise were initiated by these reports, large systemic challenges remain. The article “An Earth Systems Science Agency” (Schaefer et al., 2008) pointed to the same types of organizational shortcomings as were outlined in both Improving the Effectiveness and High-End Climate Science. Improving the Effectiveness also noted that the United States needs to improve the capabilities of climate models to address the following societal needs:
9 A. Brown, UKMO, personal communication.