<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ESD</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Earth System Dynamics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ESD</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Earth Syst. Dynam.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2190-4987</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/esd-11-377-2020</article-id><title-group><article-title>The impact of regional climate model formulation and resolution on simulated precipitation in Africa</article-title><alt-title>The impact of RCM formulation and resolution on simulated rainfall in Africa</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{The impact of RCM formulation and resolution on simulated rainfall in Africa}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{M. Wu et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff4">
          <name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>Minchao</given-names></name>
          <email>minchaowu.acd@gmail.com</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3557-8462</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Nikulin</surname><given-names>Grigory</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4226-8713</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Kjellström</surname><given-names>Erik</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6495-1038</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Belušić</surname><given-names>Danijel</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5665-3866</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Jones</surname><given-names>Colin</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Lindstedt</surname><given-names>David</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, Folkborgsvägen 17, 60176 Norrköping, Sweden</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Department of Meteorology and the Bolin Centre for Climate Research,<?xmltex \hack{\break}?> Stockholm University, 10691, Stockholm, Sweden</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>National Centre for Atmospheric Science (NCAS), University of Leeds, Leeds, UK</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>a</label><institution>present address: Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University,
Uppsala, Sweden</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Minchao Wu (minchaowu.acd@gmail.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>29</day><month>April</month><year>2020</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>11</volume>
      <issue>2</issue>
      <fpage>377</fpage><lpage>394</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>20</day><month>September</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>23</day><month>October</month><year>2019</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>16</day><month>March</month><year>2020</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>24</day><month>March</month><year>2020</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2020 Minchao Wu et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2020</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020.html">This article is available from https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>
    <p id="d1e148">We investigate the impact of model formulation and horizontal resolution on
the ability of Regional Climate Models (RCMs) to simulate precipitation in
Africa. Two RCMs (SMHI-RCA4 and HCLIM38-ALADIN) are utilized for downscaling
the ERA-Interim reanalysis over Africa at four different resolutions: 25,
50, 100, and 200 km. In addition to the two RCMs, two different parameter
settings (configurations) of the same RCA4 are used. By contrasting
different downscaling experiments, it is found that model formulation has
the primary control over many aspects of the precipitation climatology in
Africa. Patterns of spatial biases in seasonal mean precipitation are mostly
defined by model formulation, while the magnitude of the biases is controlled
by resolution. In a similar way, the phase of the diurnal cycle in
precipitation is completely controlled by model formulation (convection
scheme), while its amplitude is a function of resolution. However, the impact
of higher resolution on the time-mean climate is mixed. An improvement in
one region/season (e.g. reduction in dry biases) often corresponds to a
deterioration in another region/season (e.g. amplification of wet biases).
At the same time, higher resolution leads to a more realistic distribution
of daily precipitation. Consequently, even if the time-mean climate is not
always greatly sensitive to resolution, the realism of the simulated
precipitation increases as resolution increases. Our results show that
improvements in the ability of RCMs to simulate precipitation in Africa
compared to their driving reanalysis in many cases are simply related to
model formulation and not necessarily to higher resolution. Such model
formulation related improvements are strongly model dependent and can, in
general, not be considered as an added value of downscaling.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e160">Regional climate modelling is a dynamical downscaling method widely used for
downscaling coarse-scale global climate models (GCMs) to provide richer
regional spatial information for climate assessments and for impact and
adaptation studies (Giorgi and Gao, 2018; Giorgi and Mearns, 1991; Laprise,
2008; Rummukainen, 2010). It is well established that regional climate
models (RCMs) are able to provide added value (understood as improved
climatology) compared to their driving GCMs. This includes better
representation of regional and local weather and climate features as a
result of better capturing small-scale processes, including those influenced
by topography, coast lines, and mesoscale atmospheric phenomena (Flato et
al., 2013; Prein et al., 2016). However, perceived added value from RCMs may
have different causes, and it may not always be for the right reason where
“right reason” would result from an improved representation of regional
processes at smaller scales. Such improvement leads to more accurate
simulations on local scales, and can, to some extent, also reduce
large-scale GCM biases<?pagebreak page378?> (Caron et al., 2011; Diaconescu and Laprise, 2013;
Sørland et al., 2018). Contrastingly, added value may be attributed to
different reasons, not directly related to higher resolution in RCMs but to
different model formulation in the RCMs and their driving GCMs. It is
possible that the physics of a RCM has been targeted for processes specific
to the region it is being run for, giving it a local advantage over GCMs
that may have had their physics developed for global application. However,
it is questionable if improvements of such “downscaling” via physics can
be considered as an added value. In general, RCMs can either reduce or
amplify GCM biases, sometimes even changing their signs (Chan et al., 2013).</p>
      <p id="d1e163">Issues such as those mentioned above, have raised substantial concerns among
regional climate modellers (e.g., Castro, 2005; Xue et al., 2014). It has
been pointed out that understanding of the added value remains challenging.
It would become even more complicated taking into account the effects of
different realizations, such as the size of domain, lateral boundary
conditions, geographical location, model resolution, and its internal
variability (Di Luca et al., 2015; Hong and Kanamitsu, 2014; Rummukainen,
2016). All the above factors potentially influence RCM simulations, leading
to different interpretations of the downscaling effects, therefore the
robustness of added value. For example, it was shown that over the Alps,
downscaling with multiple RCMs at increasing resolutions in general is able
to provide a more realistic precipitation pattern than the forcing GCMs, and
it is regarded as added values from RCMs (Giorgi et al., 2016; Torma et al.,
2015). Similarly, Lucas-Picher et al. (2017) found added value over the Rocky
Mountains, another region with strong topographic influence on hydrological
processes. However, the results are not unambiguous, and sometimes limited
added value is found when comparing to the forcing data (e.g. Wang and
Kotamarthi, 2014) over North America. This implies that the understanding of
downscaling effects is context-dependent, and one should carefully interpret
GCM and RCM simulations in order to detect robust added value.</p>
      <p id="d1e166">Africa is foreseen to be vulnerable to future climate change, which early on
inspired efforts to employ RCMs for impact and adaptation studies (e.g.
Challinor et al., 2007). Further to previous coordinated downscaling
activities over Africa as for example the African Monsoon Multidisciplinary
Analyses (AMMA) (Van der Linden and Mitchell, 2009), the Coordinated
Regional climate Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) provides a large ensemble
of RCM projections for Africa (Giorgi et al., 2009; Jones et al., 2011). All
CORDEX RCMs follow a common experiment protocol including a predefined
domain at 50 km resolution and common output variables and format that
facilitates assessment of projected climate changes in Africa. Under this
framework, RCMs at 50 km horizontal resolution are found to have the
capability of providing added value in representing African climatological
features compared to their forcing GCMs, which generally have the resolution
coarser than 100 km (Dosio et al., 2015; Moufouma-Okia and Jones, 2015;
Nikulin et al., 2012).</p>
      <p id="d1e169">However, a number of common challenges to accurately simulate precipitation
climatology in Africa have also been identified for the RCMs. Individual
RCMs may exhibit substantial biases in different aspects of the
precipitation climatology such as seasonal mean (Endris et al., 2013; Kalognomou
et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2014; Shongwe et al., 2015; Tamoffo et al., 2019),
annual cycle (Favre et al., 2016; Kisembe et al., 2019), onset and cessation
of the rainy season (Akinsanola and Ogunjobi, 2017; Gbobaniyi et al., 2014),
number of wet days, and their intensity (Klutse et al., 2016). At the same
time, most of these studies found that such biases often strongly depend on
region and season. A RCM with a substantial bias in one region and/or season
may accurately simulate precipitation in other regions and seasons. It was
also found that the multimodel ensemble usually outperforms individual RCMs,
but it is a result of the cancellation of opposite-signed biases in different
RCMs.</p>
      <p id="d1e173">A number of possible explanations for such RCM precipitation-related biases
in Africa were suggested as for example, different convection schemes (see
discussion in Kalognomou et al., 2013), land-atmosphere coupling (e.g. Sylla
et al., 2013b), and biases in moisture transport (Tamoffo et al., 2019).
However, most of the CORDEX-Africa studies are still descriptive and
process-based evaluation studies like Tamoffo et al. (2019) are mostly
lacking. An additional barrier for more process-based evaluation studies is
that the CORDEX requires atmospheric variables at three pressure levels
(850, 500, and 200 mbar) to be provided, which seriously limits evaluation of
large-scale and regional circulation (e.g. jet streams) and moisture
transport in the troposphere.</p>
      <p id="d1e176">Another common problem for almost all RCMs in Africa is the phase of the
diurnal cycle of precipitation. The majority of RCMs simulate a maximum
precipitation intensity around local noon that is too early compared to late
afternoon or even late evening maximum evident in observations (Nikulin et
al., 2012). This deficiency of the RCMs is related to the convective
parameterization used, and some convection schemes, as for example the
Kain–Fritsch (KF), may outperform others, producing a more realistic
diurnal cycle (Nikulin et al., 2012).</p>
      <p id="d1e179">All the above deficiencies in the RCMs show that higher resolution does not
necessarily lead to a better performance of the RCMs in terms of
precipitation climatology in Africa. It is also not always clear if
differences between the CORDEX-Africa RCMs and their driving GCMs are
related to higher RCM resolution, RCM internal formulation, or the
combination of both. A thorough understanding of such differences and the
added value of the CORDEX-Africa RCMs is necessary for robust regional
assessments of future climate change and its impacts in Africa.</p>
      <p id="d1e182">In this study, we aim to separate the impact of model formulation and
resolution on the ability of RCMs to<?pagebreak page379?> simulate precipitation in Africa. We
conduct a series of sensitivity, reanalysis-driven, experiments by applying
two different RCMs, one of them in two different configurations, at four
horizontal resolutions. Contrasting the different experiments allows us to
separate the impact of model formulation and resolution. We present an
overview and the first results of the experiments conducted and leave
in-depth detailed process studies for different regions to forthcoming
papers.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methods and data</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>The regional climate models</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>2.1.1</label><title>RCA4</title>
      <p id="d1e207">The Rossby Centre atmospheric regional climate model – RCA (Jones et al.,
2004; Kjellström et al., 2005; Räisänen et al., 2004;
Rummukainen et al., 2001; Samuelsson et al., 2011) – is based on the numerical
weather prediction model HIRLAM (Undén et al., 2002). To improve model
transferability, the latest fourth generation of RCA, RCA4, has a number of
modifications for specific physical parameterizations. This includes the
modification of convective scheme based on the Bechtold–Kain–Fritsch scheme
(Bechtold et al., 2001) with a revised calculation of convective available
potential energy (CAPE) profile according to Jiao and Jones (2008) and the
introduction of turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) scheme (Lenderink and
Holtslag, 2004). The RCA4 model has been applied in many regions worldwide,
among them Europe (Kjellström et al., 2016, 2018; Kotlarski et al.,
2015), the Arctic (Berg et al., 2013; Koenigk et al., 2015; Zhang et al.,
2014), Africa (Nikulin et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2016), South America
(Collazo et al., 2018; Wu et al., 2017), South East (Tangang et al., 2018)
and South Asia (Iqbal et al., 2017; Rana et al., 2020).</p>
      <p id="d1e210">RCA4 has three configurations used for CORDEX simulations that are available
through the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF). They are named (so called
RCM version) as v1 (Europe, Arctic, Africa, South East Asia, and Central and
North America), v2 (South Asia), and v3 (South America) and differ in some
domain-specific retuning. In this study we also include a new configuration
– v4. The RCA4-v4 is based on RCA4-v1 but with a change in one parameter
leading to reduced turbulent mixing in stable situations (especially
momentum mixing). Such a change in the parameter was applied to reduce a
prominent dry bias found in the RCA4-v1 CORDEX-Africa simulations over
Central Africa (Wu et al., 2016; Tamoffo et al., 2019). Using two
parameter settings of RCA4 allows us to examine how sensitive our results
are to such small tuning of the same RCM.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>2.1.2</label><title>HCLIM</title>
      <p id="d1e221">HARMONIE-Climate (HCLIM) is a regional climate modelling system designed for
a range of horizontal resolutions from tens of kilometres to convection
permitting scales of 1–3 km (Belušić et al., 2020; Lindstedt et al.,
2015). It is based on the ALADIN-HIRLAM numerical weather prediction system
(Belušić et al., 2020; Bengtsson et al., 2017; Termonia et al.,
2018). The HCLIM system includes three atmospheric physics packages AROME,
ALARO, and ALADIN, which are designed for different horizontal resolutions.
The ALADIN model configuration used in this study employs the hydrostatic
ARPEGE-ALADIN dynamical core (Temperton et al., 2001), a mass-flux scheme
based on moisture convergence closure for parameterizing deep convection
(Bougeault, 1985), and SURFEX as the surface scheme (Masson et al., 2013).
All details about the version of HCLIM used in this study (HCLIM38), and its
applications over different regions can be found in (Belušić et al.,
2020). We note that HCLIM38-ALADIN used in the study is not the same model
as ALADIN-Climate used in CORDEX (Daniel et al., 2019). We refer to
HCLIM38-ALADIN as HCLIM-ALADIN hereafter.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Experimental design</title>
      <p id="d1e233">To investigate the response of both RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN to horizontal
resolution, we conduct a set of sensitivity experiments driven by the
ERA-Interim reanalysis (denoted as ERAINT hereafter; Dee et al., 2011) at
four different resolutions. These resolutions are 1.76, 0.88, 0.44, and
0.22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for RCA4 with the rotated coordinate system and 200, 100, 50,
and 25 km for HCLIM-ALADIN with the Lambert Conformal projection. The
0.44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> or 50 km resolution is recommended by the CORDEX experiment
design and used in the CORDEX-Africa ensemble. Hereafter, the resolution in
kilometres is used unless otherwise specified.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e257">The full domain configuration and time step for the RCA4 and
HCLIM-ALADIN simulations. The full domain includes the eight grid point
relaxation zone.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Experiment name</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Horizontal resolution</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Domain size</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center">Geographical area (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Time step</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>/km)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">(long <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> lat)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">south, north</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">west, east</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(s)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">RCA4-v<inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> 1.76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1.76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">66</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">67</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60.5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 55.66</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">38.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 76.34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1200</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">RCA4-v<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.88<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.88<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">126</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">121</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">54.78</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 50.82</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">33.22</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 76.78</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1200</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">RCA4-v<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">222</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">222</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50.16</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 47.08</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">29.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 68.20</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1200</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">RCA4-v<inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∗</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">406</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">422</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">48.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 44.55</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">26.95</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 62.15</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">600</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HCLIM-ALADIN 200 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">200 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">80</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">58.34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 56.71</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">46.98</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 82.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1800</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HCLIM-ALADIN 100 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">100 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">128</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">53.89</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 51.70</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">37.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 73.01</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1800</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HCLIM-ALADIN 50 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">50 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">240</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">270</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">51.56</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 48.98</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">35.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 71.85</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">1200</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">HCLIM-ALADIN 25 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25 km</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">450</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">512</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">50.43</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 47.73</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">33.64</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 69.64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">600</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e849">There are two approaches to set up a RCM experiment with simulations at
different resolutions. The first approach is to use the same full domain
(including the relaxation zone) for all simulations at different
resolutions. Size of the full domain is defined by the coarsest resolution
in the experiment (200 km in our case). A benefit of such an experiment setup is
a consistent lateral boundary forcing for all simulations, given the same
full domain. However, an unnecessary large full domain for resolutions finer
than 200 km (i.e. 100, 50, and 25 km) leads to larger RCM internal variability
(IV) compared to simulations at the same resolutions but with a minimum size
full domain. Computational demands at the finer resolutions are also higher
in the case of the large full domain. The second approach is to use
different (minimum) full domains for different resolutions defined only by
size of the active domain (the same for all resolutions) and a necessary
relaxation zone (smaller in kilometre for higher resolution). An advantage of this
approach is less IV and less computational demand for high-resolution
simulations, while a shortcoming is inconsistent lateral boundary forcing
(different size of the full domain). We decided to use the second approach
with the minimum size of the full domain (less IV and computational demand),
although we note that a perfect<?pagebreak page380?> experiment has to include both approaches,
if resources allow. The setup of the simulations at the four resolutions is
identical apart from the time step (adjusted to ensure numerical simulation
stability) and the size of the full computational domain with the relaxation
zone (see Table 1). The relaxation zone has eight grid points in all directions
and increases (in kilometres) at coarser resolution, while the interior CORDEX-Africa
domain is the same.</p>
      <p id="d1e853">As mentioned above, larger size of the computational domain at coarser
resolution in our experiment setup may have a potential impact on the
simulated climatology, leading to larger IV developed by the RCMs and weaker
constraints on the ERAINT forcing. As a simple test for domain-dependent RCM
IV we perform an additional experiment with RCA4 at 0.88<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
resolution taking the full computational domain from the 1.76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
RCA4 simulation. Indeed, for the 1981–2010 climatology, seasonal mean
precipitation differences between the two experiments can reach up to
1.25 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (up to 25 %) at a few individual grid boxes, often at the edges of
the tropical rain belt, although in general they stay below 0.5 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (not
shown). Seasonal mean temperature also differs with up to 1.25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C
regionally (not shown). We do not focus on this single additional
sensitivity experiment in the study. A full set of simulations with the same
full domain for all RCMs and resolutions is necessary for robust
conclusions.</p>
      <p id="d1e907">Another source of IV in RCMs is related to different initialization or
starting time (e.g. Lucas-Picher et al., 2008; Sanchez-Gomez and Somot,
2018). We perform two additional experiments in order to see how different
initialization time impacts the IV in the RCMs. Both RCA4-v1 and ALADIN at
50 km were initialized on 1 January 1980 instead of 1 January 1979 as for
all other simulations in the study. It was found that the impact of the
different starting time is much smaller than the impact of the larger
domain. For both seasonal mean precipitation and temperature, differences
between the experiments are small over the African continent, in general,
less than 0.5 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> for precipitation and 0.25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C for temperature
(not shown). Similar to the domain-dependent sensitivity experiment above,
we do not focus on these two additional initialization sensitivity
experiments in the study. A full investigation of the initialization-related
RCM IV needs generation of a larger (up to 10 members) ensemble for all RCMs
and resolutions.</p>
      <p id="d1e931">We note that in general, both regional models – RCA and HCLIM-ALADIN – were
developed to operate at a range of tens of kilometres resolution, and their
performance at 100 and especially at 200 km may not be optimal. A potential
caveat here is that very few RCM physical parameterizations are
automatically scaled to run at very coarse resolution. Thus, RCM
deficiencies at the coarser resolutions may be partly related to the lack of
model retuning. We think that such coarse-resolution simulations are a
useful supplement to simulations at a RCM comfortable resolution zone and
help us to understand RCM behaviour without additional resolution-dependent
tuning. All simulations are conducted without spectral nudging similar to
the CORDEX-Africa RCMs (Nikulin et al., 2012) allowing each RCM to develop
its own climatology as much as possible. Analysis is done for the
CORDEX-Africa domain shown in Fig. 1.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e936">Topography (m) for the CORDEX-Africa domain in RCA4 at
50 km resolution. Boxes indicate the four subregions used for spatially
averaged analysis: West Africa (WA), East Africa (EA), the southern Central
Africa (CA-S), and eastern South Africa (SA-E).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=184.942913pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e945">The difference between a RCM and its driving GCM can, in general, be
attributed to three sources, namely (i) different resolution, (ii) different
physical formulation, and (iii) artefacts of the one-way nesting approach
including size of the RCM domain and application of spectral nudging (e.g.
Scinocca et al., 2016). The RCA4 0.88<inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> simulations and the
HCLIM-ALADIN 100 km one represent a slight upscaling of ERAINT (about
0.7<inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> or about 77 km at the Equator), and we refer to them as “no
added value experiment” (NAVE). No resolution-dependent added value of the
RCMs is expected for these NAVE simulations, and all differences between the
RCMs and their driving ERAINT are attributed to different physical
formulations and to the artefacts of the one-way nesting. Spectral nudging
is not used in our experiment, and the one-way nesting term is basically
reduced to domain configuration. In contrast, if spectral nudging is used,
technical aspects of the nudging (e.g. which wavelengths should be nudged
and at what altitudes) also contribute to the one-way nesting term. In
practice, it is not straightforward (if possible<?pagebreak page381?> at all) to separate the
impact of different physical formulation and artefacts of the one-way
nesting approach. Hereafter, we use “RCM formulation” as a term that
includes both RCM physical formulation and domain-dependent RCM
configuration (e.g. size of the full domain).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Observations and reanalysis</title>
      <p id="d1e974">Observational datasets in Africa, in general, agree well for large-scale
climate features but can deviate substantially at regional and local scales
(Fekete et al., 2004; Gruber et al., 2000; Nikulin et al., 2012). To take
into account the observational uncertainties, we utilize a number of gridded
precipitation datasets. They include three gauged-based datasets: the Global
Precipitation Climatology Centre, GPCC, version 7 (Schneider et al., 2014);
the Climate Research Unit Time Series, CRU TS, version 3.23 (Harris et al.,
2014); and University of Delaware, UDEL, version 4.01 (Legates and Willmott,
1990). All these three datasets are at 0.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal resolution.
For the evaluation of precipitation extremes and diurnal cycle simulated by
RCMs, we utilize a satellite-based precipitation dataset from the Tropical
Rainfall Measuring Mission, TRMM 3B42 version 7 (Huffman et al., 2007),
which is at 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal resolution and 3-hourly temporal
resolution. The TRMM product starts in 1998, and for evaluation of
precipitation extremes and diurnal cycle we use a shorter period (1998–2010)
in contrast to 1981–2010 used for evaluation of seasonal means and annual
cycle. We also note that the TRMM 3B42-v7 precipitation product provides
satellite-based precipitation estimates adjusted by the GPCC gauge-based
precipitation. This means that monthly mean TRMM 3B42 and GPCC precipitation
are almost the same if remapped to the same resolution or averaged over a
region.</p>
      <p id="d1e995">ERAINT as the driving reanalysis is also used for analysis. In contrast to
climate models, ERAINT precipitation is a short term forecast product, and
there are several ways to derive ERAINT precipitation (e.g. different
spin-up, base time, and forecast steps), which can lead to different
precipitation estimates (Dee et al., 2011). ERAINT precipitation for this
study is derived by the simplest method, without spin-up as in some of the
previous studies (Dosio et al., 2015; Moufouma-Okia and Jones, 2015; Nikulin
et al., 2012): 3-hourly precipitation uses the base times of 00:00/12:00 and forecast
steps 3/6/9/12 h, while daily precipitation uses base times of 00:00/12:00 and
forecast steps of 12 h. The RCMs and ERAINT represent 3-hourly mean
precipitation for the 00:00–03:00, 03:00–06:00, ..., 21:00–00:00
intervals, while TRMM precipitation averages represent approximately the
22:30–01:30, 01:30–04:30, ..., 19:30–22:30 UTC intervals.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e1006">The coarsest resolution of 200 km is used as a reference resolution for spatial
maps. The higher-resolution simulations are aggregated to the 200 km grid by
the first-order conservative remapping method (Jones, 1999). In this way we
expect that the difference among the aggregated simulations at common
resolution should mainly be caused by the different treatment for fine-scale
processes (Di Luca et al., 2012). For the regional analyses, such as the
analysis of annual cycle, diurnal cycle, and daily precipitation intensity,
we focus on four subregions, presenting different climate zones in Africa:
West Africa (10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> W–10<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 7.5–15<inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N), East Africa (30–40<inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 15–0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S),  southern Central Africa (10–25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E, 10–0<inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S), and
eastern South Africa (20–36<inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E,
35–22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S) as defined in Fig. 1. The
period 1981–2010 is used for the analysis in this study, unless otherwise
specified.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results and discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Seasonal mean</title>
      <p id="d1e1107">In the boreal summer defined here as July–September (JAS), the tropical rain
belt (TRB) associated with the intertropical convergence zone (ITCZ) is
positioned to its northernmost location with the maximum precipitation north
of the Equator (Fig. 2a). CRU, UDEL, and GPCC aggregated to the 200 km
resolution, generally agree well with each other, with only slight local
differences (Fig. 2a–c). ERAINT overestimates precipitation over Central
Africa and along the Guinea coast, while underestimating it over West Africa,
north of the Guinea coast (Fig. 2d). All RCA4-v1 simulations have a
pronounced dry bias (Fig. 2e–h) that spatially almost coincides with the wet
bias in ERAINT and increases at coarser<?pagebreak page382?> resolution (Fig. 2e–f). RCA4-v4 shows
a similar pattern compared to RCA4-v1 but substantially reduces the dry bias
over Central Africa at all four resolutions (Fig. 2i–l). For both
configurations of RCA4, the smallest dry bias is found at the highest 25 km
resolution. At the same time, an overestimation of precipitation north of
the central dry-bias region becomes more pronounced, especially for RCA4-v4.
HCLIM-ALADIN, in general, shows some similarities to RCA4 with a pronounced
dry bias in West and Central Africa at 200 km that is strongly reduced with
increasing resolution. However, a wet bias emerges on the northern flank of
the rain belt at 50 and 25 km. For JAS there is a common tendency for both
RCMs to generate more precipitation at higher resolution, leading to a
reduction in the dry biases over Central Africa. Such a bias reduction may be
considered as a resolution-related improvement. However, the RCM simulations
clearly show that the added value of higher resolution can be
region-dependent. An improvement in the simulated precipitation climatology
over one region corresponds to deterioration of the climatology over another
region. Moufouma-Okia and Jones (2015) found a mixed response to resolution
in simulated seasonal mean precipitation over West Africa. Their RCM
simulations at 50 and 12 km bear a great deal of similarity with each other,
while a simulation at 25 km shows wetter conditions in the Sahel and drier
ones near the coastal area in the south (see their Fig. 8). In contrast,
Panitz et al. (2014) found almost no difference in seasonal rainfall over
West Africa between two RCM simulations at 50 and 25 km. We conclude that for
both RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN, spatial bias patterns are similar and more
related to model formulation, while magnitude of biases are more sensitive to
resolution. For example, the sign of the bias pattern in our no added value
RCM simulations at 100 km in JAS (Fig. 2f, j, n) is almost opposite to the
sign of the bias pattern in the driving ERAINT (Fig. 2d).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1112">GPCC7 mean JAS precipitation for 1981–2010 and
differences compared to GPCC7 in <bold>(b–d)</bold> the other gridded observations, <bold>(e–h)</bold> the RCA4-v1, <bold>(i–l)</bold> RCA4-v4, and <bold>(m–p)</bold> HCLIM-ALADIN simulations. All datasets
are aggregated to the coarsest 200 km grid.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1133">In boreal winter (December–February, DJF), the TRB migrates to its most
southerly position covering the latitudes from southern to Central Africa,
with the maximum over southern tropical Africa and Madagascar (Fig. 3a).
Similar to JAS, observational uncertainties are generally small in DJF, and
there is a pronounced wet bias in ERAINT over Central Africa (Fig. 3d). At
25 and 50 km RCA4-v1 has a dipole bias pattern with an underestimation of
rainfall over Central Africa and an overestimation over South Africa. At
200 km there is a pronounced deterioration in the simulated rainfall: a
strong dry bias appears along the eastern coast and Madagascar, while the wet
bias is amplified over large parts of southwestern Africa. At 25 and 50 km
RCA4-v4 shows a large-scale dipole bias pattern similar in some degree to
RCA4-v1. The RCA4-v4 biases are smaller than the RCA4-v1 ones showing an
impact of the retuning (reducing mixing in the boundary layer). The
behaviour of RCA4-v4 at coarser resolution is also similar to RCA4-v1. A
similar strong dry bias is emerging along the eastern coast at 200 km.
However, in contrast to RCA4-v1, the dry bias over the Democratic Republic
of the Congo almost completely disappears at both 100 and 200 km. HCLIM-ALADIN
simulates almost the same bias pattern at all resolutions, strongly
underestimating rainfall over southeastern Africa and overestimating it over
the Guinea coast, parts of Central Africa, and southern Africa. There is a
tendency to an increase in precipitation with higher resolution in
HCLIM-ALADIN: the wet biases are amplified, and the dry biases are reduced.
Both RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN show a common feature – intensification of the
dry bias along the eastern coast of Africa at 200 km. Even if both RCMs have
this dry bias in common, there are also differences showing the importance
of model formulation. HCLIM-ALADIN has about the same bias pattern at all
four resolutions, while the RCA4 bias pattern substantially changes across
the resolutions. Such resolution dependency in RCA4 may be related to the
fact that RCA4 is based on a limited area model and not developed to operate
at 100–200 km resolution. Contrastingly, HCLIM-ALADIN, which is based on a
global model, shows more consistent results even at 100–200 km resolution.
This indicates that HCLIM-ALADIN parameterizations may be better suited to
work also at coarser resolution. Although, we also note that the resolution
dependency of the RCA4 bias pattern over southern Africa is similar to that
found for the CMIP5 GCMs (Munday and Washington, 2018). They show that the
GCMs with the coarsest resolution and respectively the lowest topography
have the wettest bias over the Kalahari basin and the driest bias over the
southeast African coast, the Mozambique Channel, and Madagascar. Such a bias
pattern is related to a smoother barrier to northeasterly moisture transport
from the Indian Ocean that penetrates across the high topography of Tanzania
and Malawi into subtropical southern Africa. However, in our analysis,
HCLIM-ALADIN does not show such resolution-related dependency. In general,
similar to JAS, the added value of higher resolution in DJF is
region dependent, with higher-resolution biases reduced over one region
but amplified over another.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e1139">As Fig. 2 but for DJF.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Annual cycle</title>
      <p id="d1e1156">The annual cycle of precipitation over the four subregions is shown in Fig. 4. The observed annual cycle of precipitation over West Africa depicts the
West African monsoon (WAM) rainfall, with maximum precipitation in August
(Fig. 4a). All observational datasets (CRU and UDEL are not shown) and
ERAINT agree well with each other, with only a small underestimation of
rainfall by ERAINT in June–August. In contrast to the observations, RCA4-v1
has a bimodal annual cycle with a too early onset of the rainy season (Fig. 4b). The simulated rainfall is overestimated in March–May, underestimated in
July–August during the active WAM period and is well in line with the
observations during the cessation of the WAM rainfall in September–November.
RCA4-v4 shows a similar behaviour, but the first rainfall peak in May is
reduced, and the annual cycle has a more unimodal shape (Fig. 4c).
HCLIM-ALADIN, in general, shows similar features as both configurations of
RCA4, although it has more similarities with RCA4-v4 (Fig. 4d). The too early
onset of the rainy season is a common problem for many RCMs reported by
Nikulin et al. (2012). Our results show that this is not dependent on
resolution but instead related to model formulation. Higher resolution
reduces the wet bias during the onset of the rainy season for RCA-v1, has no
impact for RCA-v4, and amplifies the wet bias in HCLIM-ALADIN. Nevertheless,
the impact of higher resolution is more consistent during the rainy season.
Increasing resolution tends to increase monsoon rainfall for both RCMs,
resulting in smaller dry biases and a pattern closer to the unimodal one in
the observations. East and Central Africa have a bimodal annual cycle of
rainfall with two peaks around November and May (Fig. 4e, i). GPCC, CRU, and
UDEL (both not shown) agree well on the phase and magnitude of the annual
cycle for both subregions. ERAINT has a weaker bimodality overestimating
precipitation in December–February over East Africa and all year round
over Central Africa with the largest wet bias during October–April. Both
configurations of RCA4 fail to reproduce the bimodal annual cycle in East
Africa at 200 km, underestimating precipitation all year round and showing a
single rainfall peak in December (Fig. 4j, k). Increasing resolution reduces
the dry bias and leads to an improvement in the shape of the annual cycle.
The bimodal shape begins to appear at 100 km and becomes much closer to the
observation at 50 and 25 km. Despite some mixed dry and wet biases in
different seasons, the 25 and 50 km RCA4 simulations show the best agreement
with the observations. In contrast to RCA4, HCLIM-ALADIN simulates the
unimodal annual cycle at all four resolutions, and some signs of bimodality
only appear at 25 km (Fig. 4h). Similar to RCA4, increasing resolution leads
to an increase in precipitation in HCLIM-ALADIN, although a dry bias is a
prominent feature from November to May in all HCLIM-ALADIN<?pagebreak page384?> simulations. For
Central Africa, the bimodality of the annual cycle is reproduced well by
both RCMs at all resolutions (Fig. 4j–l). HCLIM-ALADIN maintains similar
behaviour to that in East Africa, although the difference in precipitation
across the resolutions is small (Fig. 4l). On the other hand, for both
configurations of RCA4 in Central Africa, increasing resolution leads to
decreasing precipitation during the rainy seasons, especially in January.
Both RCMs strongly reduce the ERAINT wet bias even in the NAVE at 100 km.
Such improvement indicates that model formulation plays a more important
role than resolution over Central Africa. For eastern South Africa,
the annual cycle of precipitation is unimodal with its maximum during
austral summer (Fig. 4m). Similar to West Africa, uncertainties between
observational datasets and reanalysis are small. RCA4 in general
overestimates rainfall during the rainy season with the largest wet bias at
200 km. Surprisingly, the simulated rainfall is almost the same at 25 and
100 km, while the smallest bias is found at 50 km for both RCA4 configurations.
HCLIM-ALADIN also overestimates precipitation during the rainy season at all
four resolutions (Fig. 4p). However, the smallest wet bias in the
HCLIM-ALADIN simulations is found at 50 and 100 km.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e1161">Annual cycle of precipitation over the four subregions
for 1981–2010 in observations/ERAINT and as simulated by RCA4 and
HCLIM-ALADIN at the four different resolutions. Only land grid boxes are
used for averaging over the subregions. Units are in millimetres per day.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Diurnal cycle</title>
      <p id="d1e1178">The diurnal cycle is a prominent feature of forced atmospheric variability
with a strong impact on regional- and local-scale thermal and hydrological
regimes. The diurnal cycle of precipitation in the tropics is well
documented and includes a late afternoon/evening maximum over land (Dai et
al., 2007). However, it is still a common challenge for GCMs (Dai, 2006;
e.g. Dai and Trenberth, 2004; Dirmeyer et al., 2012), RCMs (e.g. Da Rocha et
al., 2009; Jeong et al., 2011; Nikulin et al., 2012), and reanalyses (Nikulin
et al., 2012) to accurately represent the diurnal cycle of precipitation.</p>
      <p id="d1e1181">The TRMM diurnal cycle of precipitation generally shows an increase in
rainfall starting around noon with maximum reached at around 18:00 local
solar time (LST) (Fig. 5). The<?pagebreak page385?> ERAINT diurnal cycle is completely out of
phase over all subregions with the occurrence of maximum precipitation
intensity around local noon. A common feature of ERAINT is an overestimation
of precipitation around local noon and an underestimation during the rest of
the day. HCLIM-ALADIN shows exactly the same behaviour as ERAINT. Both
configurations of RCA4 simulate the diurnal cycle of precipitation more
accurately compared to ERAINT and HCLIM-ALADIN. The phase of the diurnal
cycle, in general, is pretty well captured over all four subregions. In
terms of precipitation intensity RCA4 underestimates rainfall from afternoon
to morning over West (Fig. 5b, c) and Central Africa (Fig. 5j, k). Reducing
mixing in the boundary layer results in flattening of the diurnal cycle over
West Africa (Fig. 5b, c), while there are almost no changes over Central
Africa (Fig. 5j, k). RCA4-v1 simulates very well the diurnal cycle over
East Africa with only some underestimation in early morning and afternoon
(Fig. 5f). RCA4-v4 improves rainfall intensity in early morning but at the
same time shows a slightly larger underestimation in afternoon than RCA4-v1
(Fig. 5g). Over southern Africa the RCA4 simulations at 200 km are the
closest to the observation (Fig. 5n, o), while the simulations at higher
resolutions underestimate the amplitude of the diurnal cycle in the
afternoon.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e1186">Diurnal cycle of 3-hourly mean precipitation over the
four subregions for 1998–2010 in observations/ERAINT and as simulated by
RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN at the four different resolutions. Only land grid
boxes are used for averaging over the subregions and only wet days with more
than 1 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> are taken for estimations of the diurnal cycle.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1208">Figure 5 clearly shows that the phase of the diurnal cycle of precipitation
in Africa does not depend on resolution but instead depends on model
formulation. Both ERAINT, with the Tiedtke convection scheme (Tiedtke,
1989), and HCLIM-ALADIN, with the Bougeault scheme (Bougeault, 1985), trigger
precipitation too early during the diurnal cycle, while both configurations
of RCA4 with the same Kain–Fritsch (KF) scheme (Bechtold et al., 2001)
simulate a much more realistic diurnal cycle. It has previously been shown
that the KF scheme is able to reproduce late afternoon rainfall peaks for
the regions where moist convection is governed by the local forcing, for
example in the southeast US (Liang, 2004) and in tropical South America
and Africa (e.g. Bechtold et al., 2004; Da Rocha et al., 2009). Nikulin et
al. (2012)<?pagebreak page386?> also found that a subset of RCMs that employ the KF scheme show
an improved representation of the phase of the diurnal cycle in Africa. Our
results indicate that the impact of resolution is only seen in the amplitude
of the diurnal cycle. However, such impact is not homogeneous across the
subregions and the RCMs. For HCLIM-ALADIN, increasing resolution leads to
increasing rainfall intensity in all regions but eastern South Africa. RCA4 shows
a similar behaviour over West Africa, while there is a mixed response over
East and Central Africa. These findings are in line with previous studies
investigating resolution effects for GCMs (Covey et al., 2016; Dirmeyer et
al., 2012) and for RCMs (Walther et al., 2013). In coarser-scale models (e.g
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> km), increasing resolution only leads to changes in the
magnitude but not in the phase of the diurnal cycle of precipitation over
land.</p>
      <p id="d1e1221">Nevertheless, studies conducting sensitivity experiments using resolutions
finer than 10 km do find improvements in the representation of the phase
(Dirmeyer et al., 2012; Sato et al., 2009; Walther et al., 2013).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Frequency and intensity of daily precipitation</title>
      <p id="d1e1232">Figure 6 shows the empirical probability density function (PDF) of daily
precipitation intensities over the four subregions. The TRMM7-0.25 dataset,
aggregated to the common 1.76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> resolution (TRMM7-1.76), as
expected has a shorter right tail with no precipitation intensities larger
than 100 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and higher frequency for lower intensities less than
25 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 6a, e, i, m). The two TRMM7 PDFs provide reference
bounds for datasets with resolution between 0.25 and
1.76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. However, uncertainties in gridded daily precipitation
products in Africa are large (Sylla et al., 2013a), and we take the TRMM
bounds as an observational approximation focusing more on differences in the
simulated PDFs across the four resolutions. Over West, East, and Central
Africa ERAINT overestimates the frequency of low (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and extremely high (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">150</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>)<?pagebreak page387?> intensities,
while it underestimates the frequency of precipitation intensities in
between (Fig. 6a, e, i), especially over West Africa (Fig. 6a). In South
Africa (Fig. 6m) ERAINT represents the frequency of daily mean precipitation
more accurately compared to the other three regions but shows almost no
events with more than 150 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> in contrast to the observations.
Both RCMs, in general, have the same tendency to generate more
higher-intensity precipitation events with increasing resolution over all
four subregions. In West Africa RCA4-v1 strongly underestimates the
frequency of intensities with more than 20 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> at 200, 100, and
50 km (Fig. 6b). A substantial improvement appears only at 25 km where the
right tail of the PDF extends up to 250 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, although the
frequency of precipitation events from about 50 to 150 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> is
still underestimated.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e1373">Probability distribution function of daily precipitation
intensities pooled over the four subregions for 1998–2010 in
observations/ERAINT and as simulated by RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN at the four
different resolutions. TRMM7-1.76 represents TRMM7-0.25 aggregated from its
native 0.25<inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> resolution to 1.76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>. A base-10 log scale
is used for the frequency axis, and the first bin (0–1 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) is
divided by 10. Only land grid boxes are used for pooling over the subregions,
and the season is different for the different regions.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=355.659449pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/11/377/2020/esd-11-377-2020-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e1412">The RCA4-v4 configuration markedly reduces the RCA4-v1 biases and shows more
realistic PDFs at all four resolutions (Fig. 6c). The RCA4-v4 50 km
simulation generates precipitation events up to 250 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, strongly
contrasting the RCA4-v1 simulation at the same resolution (no events for
more than 100 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). However, RCA4-v4 overestimates frequencies of
high intensities at 25 km. Such sharp difference between two configurations
of RCA4 at the same resolution shows that model formulation also plays an
important role for accurately reproducing daily precipitation. Over West
Africa all HCLIM-ALADIN simulations overestimate the frequency of low
precipitation intensities (less than 10 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) and underestimate
the frequency of intensities in the range of 10–150 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 6d).
Similar to RCA4, higher resolution leads to more high-intensity
precipitation events in the HCLIM-ALADIN simulations.</p>
      <p id="d1e1464">However, RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN behave in a different way with increasing
resolution.
Both RCMs change the PDFs by adding more higher-intensity precipitation
events, extending the righthand tail towards higher intensities. In
addition, RCA4 also increases the frequency of medium- and high-intensity
events, especially going from 50 to 25 km. In East Africa both RCA4
configurations reproduce the observed PDFs almost perfectly (Fig. 6f, g).
All four resolutions are located within the TRMM-1.76 and TRMM-0.25
boundaries, and the coarsest and finest resolutions coincide with the
respective TRMM PDFs. Contrastingly, HCLIM-ALADIN strongly underestimates
the frequency of precipitation events with more than 20 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 6h) over East Africa, and even the highest 25 km resolution is located
below the coarse TRMM-1.76 dataset. In Central Africa both RCMs overestimate
the occurrence of intensities less than 20 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 6j, k, l),
especially HCLIM-ALADIN (Fig. 6l), and strongly underestimate the frequency
of higher-intensity events. The PDFs at all four resolutions for both RCMs
are located below the coarsest TRMM-1.76 PDF. We note that observational
uncertainties in precipitation are very large over Central Africa, and we
should be careful in the interpretation of Fig. 6j–l. Seasonal mean
precipitation, for example, can differ by more than 50 % across different
observational datasets (Washington et al., 2013). Additionally, the TRMM
dataset is scaled by the gauge-based GPCC precipitation product, while almost
no long-term gauges are available in the region (Nikulin et al., 2012). In
eastern South Africa RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN simulate the precipitation PDFs quite
accurately (Fig. 6n–p). An interesting detail is that the 50 km HCLIM-ALADIN
simulation shows higher frequency for intensities in the range of 50 to
about 200 mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> than the 25 km simulation.</p>
      <p id="d1e1503">In general, we see the improvement of simulated daily rainfall intensities
with increasing resolution across the African continent. There are many
studies showing a similar resolution-dependent improvement over both
complex terrains and flat regions (e.g. Chan et al., 2013; Huang et al.,
2016; Lindstedt et al., 2015; Olsson et al., 2015; Prein et al., 2016; Torma
et al., 2015; Walther et al., 2013). Our results are in agreement with the
above studies and confirm increasing fidelity of simulated daily rainfall
intensities with increasing resolution.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>4</label><title>Summary and conclusion</title>
      <p id="d1e1515">In this study we have investigated the impact of model formulation and
spatial resolution on simulated precipitation in Africa. A series of
sensitivity, ERA-Interim reanalysis-driven experiments, were conducted by
applying two different RCMs (RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN) at four resolutions
(about 25, 50, 100, and 200 km). The 100 km experiment, at a resolution a bit
coarser than the driving ERA-Interim reanalysis, by default does not provide
any resolution-dependent added value, while such added value is expected for
the 50 and 25 km experiments. The 200 km experiment is an about 3 times upscaling
of ERAINT to a resolution of many CMIP5 GCMs and should only be considered as a supplementary experiment since RCMs do not aim to operate at such a coarse
resolution. In addition to the two different RCMs, the standard CORDEX
configuration of RCA4 is supplemented by another configuration with reduced
mixing in the boundary layer. Such a configuration was developed to deal with
a strong dry bias of RCA4 in Central Africa. Contrasting the two different
RCMs and the two different configurations of the same RCM at the four
different resolutions allows us to separate the impact of model formulation
and resolution on simulated rainfall in Africa.</p>
      <p id="d1e1518">Even if the results often depend on region and season and a clear separation
of the impact of model formulation and resolution is not always
straightforward, we found that model formulation has the primary control
over many aspects of the precipitation climatology in Africa.
The 100 km NAVE shows that patterns of spatial biases in seasonal mean
precipitation are mostly defined by model formulation. These patterns are
very different between the driving ERAINT and RCMs, sometimes even with
opposite signs, exemplified by<?pagebreak page388?> the two configurations of RCA4 in JAS (Fig. 1e–l). Resolution in general controls the magnitude of biases, and for both
RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN higher resolution usually leads to an increase in
precipitation amount while preserving large-scale bias patterns. A side
effect of such an increase in precipitation amount is that an improvement in
one region (e.g. reduction in dry biases) often corresponds to a
deterioration in another region (amplification of wet biases) as for
HCLIM-ALADIN in JAS (Fig. 1m–p). Nevertheless, on average the smallest
biases in seasonal means are found for the simulations at 50 and 25 km
resolution.</p>
      <p id="d1e1521">The impact of model formulation and resolution on the annual cycle of
precipitation is mixed and strongly depends on region and season. For
example, in both West and Central Africa the shape of the annual cycle for
the 100 km NAVE is different from ERAINT. However, the impact of model
formulation is opposite between these two regions. In West Africa both RCMs
deteriorate the ERAINT annual cycle by simulating a too early onset of the
rainy season. In contrast, over Central Africa, both models improve the
ERAINT annual cycle by reducing a strong wet bias and changing the unimodal
annual cycle to a bimodal one similar to the observations. The impact of
resolution can also be different. In West and East Africa, higher resolution
(50 and 25 km) leads to an improvement in the annual cycle (more realistic
shape and smaller biases). In contrast, over Central Africa, the 25 km RCA4
simulations show the largest biases, while the HCLIM-ALADIN simulations at
all four resolutions are almost similar. In general, it is difficult to draw a
conclusion about a common impact of model formulation and resolution on the annual cycle.</p>
      <p id="d1e1524">The phase of the diurnal cycle in Africa is completely controlled by model
formulation (convection scheme), while its amplitude is a function of
resolution. Both ERAINT and HCLIM-ALADIN show a too early precipitation
maximum around noon, while RCA4 simulates a much more realistic<?pagebreak page389?> diurnal cycle
with an evening maximum. Higher resolution does not change the phase of the
diurnal cycle but rather its amplitude, although the impact of resolution on the
amplitude is mixed across the four subregions and time of the day.</p>
      <p id="d1e1528">A pronounced and well-known impact of higher resolution on daily
precipitation intensities is a more realistic distribution of daily
precipitation. Our results also show that higher resolution, in general,
improves the distribution of daily precipitation. This includes reduced
overestimation of the number of days with low precipitation intensities and
reduced underestimation of the number of days with high intensities. The
latter results in extending the righthand tail of the distribution towards
higher intensities similar to observations. This also means that at higher
resolutions the time-mean climate (e.g. seasonal mean and annual cycle) is
made up of more realistic underpinning daily precipitation than at lower
resolutions. It is also worth emphasizing that if low resolution models are
not able to simulate high-rainfall days, then it will be difficult for them
to say anything robust about projected climate changes in high-rainfall
events. However, regionally, model formulation can also play an important
role in the distribution of daily precipitation. For example, in West Africa
the 50 km RCA4-v4 configuration with reduced mixing in the boundary layer
shows a remarkable improvement in the shape of the PDF (Fig. 6c) compared to
the standard RCA4-v1 configuration at the same resolution (Fig 6b).
Moreover, the RCA4-v4 configuration at 50 km shows almost the same PDF as
RCA4-v1 at 25 km. Such contrast indicates that for daily precipitation
intensities model formulation can have the same impact as doubled
resolution.</p>
      <p id="d1e1531">Improvements in simulated precipitation in high-resolution RCMs relative to
coarse-scale GCMs are often attributed as being a resolution-dependent added
value of downscaling. Our results show that for Africa improvements are not only related to higher resolution but also to different model formulation
between the RCMs and their driving reanalysis. A common framework for
quantifying added value of downscaling is to evaluate some aspects of the
climate in high-resolution RCM simulations and in their coarse-resolution
driving reanalysis or GCMs over a historical period (Di Luca et al., 2015;
e.g. Hong and Kanamitsu, 2014; Rummukainen, 2016). If the RCM simulations
show smaller biases compared to reference observations than the driving
GCMs, one can conclude that RCMs provide an added value and vice versa.
However, such a framework does not separate the impact of different model
formulation between RCMs and their driving GCMs and higher resolution in the
RCM simulations. Our results indicate that improvements in RCM simulations
may simply be related to different model formulation and not necessarily to
higher resolution. In general, model formulation related improvements cannot
be considered as an added value of downscaling as such improvements are
strongly model dependent and cannot be generalized. However, such
formulation-related and region-specific improvements from RCMs could in
principle be also used in GCMs.</p>
      <p id="d1e1534">Within the commonly used RCM evaluation framework, e.g. the CORDEX
evaluation experiment, it is not straightforward, if possible at all, to
isolate the impact of model formulation and resolution in RCM simulations.
We show that running RCMs at about the same resolution as a driving
reanalysis (e.g. ERAINT at about 80 km or ERA5 at about 30 km) helps to
separate the impacts of model formulation and higher resolution in dynamical
downscaling. We propose that such a simple additional experiment can be an
integral part of the RCM evaluation framework in order to elucidate the
added value of downscaling. In our study, as the first step, we focus only
on precipitation that has large relevance for climate change impact studies.
As the next step, we foresee similar studies looking also at other variables
and especially at processes and drivers relevant for regional climate.</p>
      <p id="d1e1537">Moreover, the same NAVE framework can be used for quantifying the added
value in RCM-based future climate projections. For this, one needs to
downscale GCMs at their native resolution in addition to the standard CORDEX
resolutions (25 or 50 km). The RCM projections at the native GCM resolution
serve as the NAVE in the climate change context. A potential caveat, already
mentioned in our study, is that RCMs are generally developed and tuned to
operate at resolution of tens of kilometres. “Downscaling” a GCM at its native
resolution, for example 150 or 200 km, may lead to artefacts related to a
lack of RCM retuning for coarser resolution. Nerveless, more and more GCMs,
for example in CMIP6, have resolution finer than 100 km that allows
application of the NAVE.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e1545">The analysis is done in MATLAB, and IDL and codes can be provided by request
as they are but without support on implementing them in another computing
environment.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e1551">The ERA-Interim reanalysis is available at <uri>https://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/</uri> (ECMWF, 2019);
the GPCC dataset is available at
<uri>https://www.dwd.de/EN/ourservices/gpcc/gpcc.html</uri> (GPCC, 2019); the CRU dataset is available at
<uri>https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/5dca9487dc614711a3a933e44a933ad3</uri> (UEA, 2019); the UDEL dataset is available at <uri>http://climate.geog.udel.edu/~climate/html_pages/download.html</uri> (University of Delaware, 2019); the TRMM dataset is available at <uri>https://pmm.nasa.gov/data-access/downloads/trmm</uri> (GSFC, 2019). The RCA4 and HCLIM-ALADIN data can be provided by request.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e1572">MW performed RCA4 simulations and all the analysis and wrote the initial
draft. GN developed the experiment design and provided guidance for the
analysis. EK and GN revised the initial draft. CJ is responsible for setting
up the new RCA4 configuration (v4). DB and DL are responsible for<?pagebreak page390?> performing
the HCLIM-ALADIN simulations over Africa. All the authors contributed with
discussions and revisions.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e1578">The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e1584">We thank one anonymous reviewer and John Scinocca for their very helpful comments. The authors also thank the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre (GPCC), the British Atmospheric Data Centre (BADC), the University of East Anglia (UEA), the University of Delaware, and the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) for providing data. All simulations were conducted on the supercomputer in the National Supercomputer Centre, Linköping, Sweden.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e1589">This research has been supported by the FRACTAL (<uri>http://www.fractal.org.za</uri>, last access: 25 April 2020) and the
AfriCultuReS (<uri>http://africultures.eu/</uri>, last access: 25 April 2020) projects. FRACTAL (grant agreement no. NE/M020088/1) is part of the multi-consortia Future Climate for Africa (FCFA) programme – jointly funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). AfriCultuReS has received funding from the European Union Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 774652.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e1601">This paper was edited by Vivek Arora and reviewed by John Scinocca and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Akinsanola, A. A. and Ogunjobi, K. O.: Evaluation of present-day rainfall
simulations over West Africa in CORDEX regional climate models, Environ.
Earth Sci., 76, 366, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6691-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s12665-017-6691-9</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bechtold, P., Bazile, E., Guichard, F., Mascart, P., and Richard, E.: A
mass-flux convection scheme for regional and global models, Q. J. Roy. Meteor.
Soc., 127, 869–886, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bechtold, P., Chaboureau, J. P., Beljaars, A., Betts, K., Köhler, M.,
Miller, M., and Redelsperger, J. L.: The simulation of the diurnal cycle of
convective precipitation over land in a global model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor.
Soc., 130, 3119–3137, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Belušić, D., de Vries, H., Dobler, A., Landgren, O., Lind, P., Lindstedt, D., Pedersen, R. A., Sánchez-Perrino, J. C., Toivonen, E., van Ulft, B., Wang, F., Andrae, U., Batrak, Y., Kjellström, E., Lenderink, G., Nikulin, G., Pietikäinen, J.-P., Rodríguez-Camino, E., Samuelsson, P., van Meijgaard, E., and Wu, M.: HCLIM38: a flexible regional climate model applicable for different climate zones from coarse to convection-permitting scales, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1311–1333, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1311-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-13-1311-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bengtsson, L., Andrae, U., Aspelien, T., Batrak, Y., Calvo, J., de Rooy, W.,
Gleeson, E., Hansen-Sass, B., Homleid, M., Hortal, M., Ivarsson, K.-I.,
Lenderink, G., Niemelä, S., Nielsen, K. P., Onvlee, J., Rontu, L.,
Samuelsson, P., Muñoz, D. S., Subias, A., Tijm, S., Toll, V., Yang, X., and Køltzow, M. Ø.: The HARMONIE–AROME Model Configuration in the
ALADIN–HIRLAM NWP System, Mon. Weather Rev., 145, 1919–1935, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Berg, P., Döscher, R., and Koenigk, T.: Impacts of using spectral nudging on regional climate model RCA4 simulations of the Arctic, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 849–859, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-849-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-6-849-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Bougeault, P.: A Simple Parameterization of the Large-Scale Effects of
Cumulus Convection, Mon. Weather Rev., 113, 2108–2121, 1985.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Caron, L.-P., Jones, C. G., and Winger, K.: Impact of resolution and
downscaling technique in simulating recent Atlantic tropical cylone
activity, Clim. Dynam., 37, 869–892, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Castro, C. L., Pielke Sr., R. A., and Leoncini, G.: Dynamical downscaling: Assessment of value retained and added
using the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS), J. Geophys. Res.,
110, D05108, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004721" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004JD004721</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Challinor, A., Wheeler, T., Garforth, C., Craufurd, P., and Kassam, A.:
Assessing the vulnerability of food crop systems in Africa to climate
change, Climatic Change, 83, 381–399, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Chan, S. C., Kendon, E. J., Fowler, H. J., Blenkinsop, S., Ferro, C. A. T., and Stephenson, D. B.: Does increasing the spatial resolution of a regional
climate model improve the simulated daily precipitation?, Clim. Dynam., 41,
1475–1495, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Collazo, S., Lhotka, O., Rusticucci, M., and Kyselỳ, J.:
Capability of the SMHI-RCA4 RCM driven by the ERA-Interim reanalysis to
simulate heat waves in Argentina, Int. J. Climatol., 38, 483–496, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Covey, C., Gleckler, P. J., Doutriaux, C., Williams, D. N., Dai, A.,
Fasullo, J., Trenberth, K., and Berg, A.: Metrics for the Diurnal Cycle of
Precipitation: Toward Routine Benchmarks for Climate Models, J. Climate,
29, 4461–4471, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dai, A.: Precipitation Characteristics in Eighteen Coupled Climate Models,
J. Climate, 19, 4605–4630, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dai, A. and Trenberth, K. E.: The Diurnal Cycle and Its Depiction in the
Community Climate System Model, J. Climate, 17, 930–951, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dai, A., Lin, X., and Hsu, K.-L.: The frequency, intensity, and diurnal cycle
of precipitation in surface and satellite observations over low- and
mid-latitudes, Clim. Dynam., 29, 727–744, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Daniel, M., Lemonsu, A., Déqué, M., Somot, S., Alias, A., and Masson,
V.: Benefits of explicit urban parameterization in regional climate modeling
to study climate and city interactions, Clim. Dynam., 52, 2745–2764, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Da Rocha, R. P., Morales, C. A., Cuadra, S. V., and Ambrizzi, T.:
Precipitation diurnal cycle and summer climatology assessment over South
America: An evaluation of Regional Climate Model version 3 simulations,
J. Geophys. Res., 114, D10108, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010212" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2008JD010212</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P.,
Kobayashi, S., Andrae, U., Balmaseda, M. A., Balsamo, G., Bauer, P., Bechtold, P., Beljaars, A. C. M., van de Berg, L., Bidlot, J., Bormann, N., Delsol, C., Dragani, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A. J., Haimberger, L., Healy, S. B., Hersbach, H., Hólm, E. V., Isaksen, L., Kållberg, P., Köhler, M., Matricardi, M., McNally<?pagebreak page391?>, A. P., Monge-Sanz, B. M., Morcrette, J.-J., Park, B.-K., Peubey, C., de Rosnay, P., Tavolato, C., Thépaut, J. N., and Vitart, F.: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the
data assimilation system, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553–597,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Diaconescu, E. P. and Laprise, R.: Can added value be expected in
RCM-simulated large scales?, Clim. Dynam., 41, 1769–1800, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Di Luca, A., de Elía, R., and Laprise, R.: Potential for added value in
precipitation simulated by high-resolution nested Regional Climate Models
and observations, Clim. Dynam., 38, 1229–1247, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1068-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-011-1068-3</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Di Luca, A., de Elía, R., and Laprise, R.: Challenges in the Quest for
Added Value of Regional Climate Dynamical Downscaling, Current Climate
Change Reports, 1, 10–21, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dirmeyer, P. A., Cash, B. A., Kinter, J. L., Jung, T., Marx, L., Satoh, M.,
Stan, C., Tomita, H., Towers, P., Wedi, N., Achuthavarier, D., Adams, J. M.,
Altshuler, E. L., Huang, B., Jin, E. K., and Manganello, J.: Simulating the
diurnal cycle of rainfall in global climate models: resolution versus
parameterization, Clim. Dynam., 39, 399–418, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Dosio, A., Panitz, H.-J., Schubert-Frisius, M., and Lüthi, D.: Dynamical
downscaling of CMIP5 global circulation models over CORDEX-Africa with
COSMO-CLM: evaluation over the present climate and analysis of the added
value, Clim. Dynam., 44, 2637–2661, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Endris, H. S., Omondi, P., Jain, S., Lennard, C., Hewitson, B., Chang'a, L.,
Awange, J. L., Dosio, A., Ketiem, P., Nikulin, G., Panitz, H.-J.,
Büchner, M., Stordal, F., and Tazalika, L.: Assessment of the Performance
of CORDEX Regional Climate Models in Simulating East African Rainfall, J. Climate, 26, 8453–8475, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF): ECMWF Re-Analysis datasets, available at: <uri>https://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/</uri>, last access: 20 September 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Favre, A., Philippon, N., Pohl, B., Kalognomou, E.-A., Lennard, C.,
Hewitson, B., Nikulin, G., Dosio, A., Panitz, H.-J., and Cerezo-Mota, R.:
Spatial distribution of precipitation annual cycles over South Africa in 10
CORDEX regional climate model present-day simulations, Clim. Dynam., 46,
1799–1818, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Fekete, B. M., Vörösmarty, C. J., Roads, J. O., and Willmott, C. J.:
Uncertainties in Precipitation and Their Impacts on Runoff Estimates, J. Climate, 17, 294–304, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S. C., Collins,
W., Cox, P., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P.,
Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., and Rummukainen, M.:
Evaluation of Climate Models, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science
Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 741–866, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1017/CBO9781107415324</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gbobaniyi, E., Sarr, A., Sylla, M. B., Diallo, I., Lennard, C., Dosio, A.,
Dhiédiou, A., Kamga, A., Klutse, N. A. B., Hewitson, B., Nikulin, G., and
Lamptey, B.: Climatology, annual cycle and interannual variability of
precipitation and temperature in CORDEX simulations over West Africa, Int.
J. Climatol., 34, 2241–2257, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Giorgi, F. and Gao, X.-J.: Regional earth system modeling: review and future
directions, Atmos. Ocean. Sci. Lett., 11, 189–197, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Giorgi, F. and Mearns, L. O.: Approaches to the simulation of regional
climate change: A review, Rev. Geophys., 29, 191–216, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/90RG02636" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/90RG02636</ext-link>, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Giorgi, F., Jones, C., and Asrar, G. R.: Addressing climate
information needs at the regional level: the CORDEX framework, WMO Bull.,
58, 175–183, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Giorgi, F., Torma, C., Coppola, E., Ban, N., Schär, C., and Somot, S.:
Enhanced summer convective rainfall at Alpine high elevations in response to
climate warming, Nat. Geosci., 9, 584–589, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Global Precipitation Climatology Centre (GPCC): GPCC Landsurface Monitoring Monthly Product, available at: <uri>https://www.dwd.de/EN/ourservices/gpcc/gpcc.html</uri>, last access: 20 September 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC): The Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) Multi-satellite Precipitation Analysis, available at: <uri>https://pmm.nasa.gov/data-access/downloads/trmm</uri>, last access: 20 September 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Gruber, A., Su, X., Kanamitsu, M., and Schemm, J.: The Comparison of Two
Merged Rain Gauge–Satellite Precipitation Datasets, B. Am. Meteorol.
Soc., 81, 2631–2644, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Harris, I., Jones, P. D., Osborn, T. J., and Lister, D. H.: Updated
high-resolution grids of monthly climatic observations – the CRU TS3. 10
Dataset, Int. J. Climatol., 34, 623–642, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Hong, S. Y. and Kanamitsu, M.: Dynamical downscaling: Fundamental issues
from an NWP point of view and recommendations, Asia-Pac. J.
Atmos. Sci., 50, 83–104, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Huang, X., Rhoades, A. M., Ullrich, P. A., and Zarzycki, C. M.: An evaluation
of the variable-resolution CESM for modeling California's climate, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 8, 345–369, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Huffman, G. J., Bolvin, D. T., Nelkin, E. J., Wolff, D. B., Adler, R. F.,
Gu, G., Hong, Y., Bowman, K. P., and Stocker, E. F.: The TRMM Multisatellite
Precipitation Analysis (TMPA): Quasi-Global, Multiyear, Combined-Sensor
Precipitation Estimates at Fine Scales, J. Hydrometeorol., 8, 38–55,
2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Iqbal, W., Syed, F. S., Sajjad, H., Nikulin, G., Kjellström, E., and
Hannachi, A.: Mean climate and representation of jet streams in the CORDEX
South Asia simulations by the regional climate model RCA4, Theor. Appl.
Climatol., 129, 1–19, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jeong, J.-H., Walther, A., Nikulin, G., Chen, D., and Jones, C.: Diurnal
cycle of precipitation amount and frequency in Sweden: observation versus
model simulation, Tellus  A, 63, 664–674,
2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jiao, Y. and Jones, C.: Comparison Studies of Cloud- and Convection-Related
Processes Simulated by the Canadian Regional Climate Model over the Pacific
Ocean, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 4168–4187, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jones, C., Willén, U., Ullerstig, A., and Hansson, U.: The Rossby
Centre Regional Atmospheric Climate Model part I: model climatology and
performance for the present climate over Europe, Ambio, 33, 199–210,
2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jones, C., Giorgi, F., and Asrar, G.: The Coordinated Regional Downscaling
Experiment: CORDEX – an international downscaling link to CMIP5, CLIVAR
exchanges, 16, 34–40, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Jones, P. W.: First- and Second-Order Conservative Remapping Schemes for
Grids in Spherical Coordinates, Mon. Weather Rev., 127, 2204–2210, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page392?><ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kalognomou, E.-A., Lennard, C., Shongwe, M., Pinto, I., Favre, A., Kent, M.,
Hewitson, B., Dosio, A., Nikulin, G., Panitz, H.-J., and Büchner, M.: A
Diagnostic Evaluation of Precipitation in CORDEX Models over Southern
Africa, J. Climate, 26, 9477–9506, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kim, J., Waliser, D. E., Mattmann, C. A., Goodale, C. E., Hart, A. F.,
Zimdars, P. A., Crichton, D. J., Jones, C., Nikulin, G., Hewitson, B., Jack,
C., Lennard, C., and Favre, A.: Evaluation of the CORDEX-Africa multi-RCM
hindcast: systematic model errors, Clim. Dynam., 42, 1189–1202, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kisembe, J., Favre, A., Dosio, A., Lennard, C., Sabiiti, G., and Nimusiima,
A.: Evaluation of rainfall simulations over Uganda in CORDEX regional
climate models, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 137, 1117–1134, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kjellström, E., Bärring, L., Gollvik, S., Hansson, U., Jones, C.,
Samuelsson, P., Ullerstig, A., Willén, U., and Wyser, K.: A 140-year
simulation of European climate with the new version of the Rossby Centre
regional atmospheric climate model (RCA3), available at:
<uri>http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:947602</uri> (last access: 19 November 2018), 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kjellström, E., Bärring, L., Nikulin, G., Nilsson, C., Persson, G., and Strandberg, G.: Production and use of regional climate model projections
– A Swedish perspective on building climate services, Clim. Serv., 2–3,
15–29, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kjellström, E., Nikulin, G., Strandberg, G., Christensen, O. B., Jacob, D., Keuler, K., Lenderink, G., van Meijgaard, E., Schär, C., Somot, S., Sørland, S. L., Teichmann, C., and Vautard, R.: European climate change at global mean temperature increases of 1.5 and 2 °C above pre-industrial conditions as simulated by the EURO-CORDEX regional climate models, Earth Syst. Dynam., 9, 459–478, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-459-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/esd-9-459-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Klutse, N. A. B., Sylla, M. B., Diallo, I., Sarr, A., Dosio, A., Diedhiou,
A., Kamga, A., Lamptey, B., Ali, A., Gbobaniyi, E. O., Owusu, K., Lennard,
C., Hewitson, B., Nikulin, G., Panitz, H.-J., and Büchner, M.: Daily
characteristics of West African summer monsoon precipitation in CORDEX
simulations, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 123, 369–386, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Koenigk, T., Berg, P., and Döscher, R.: Arctic climate change in an
ensemble of regional CORDEX simulations, Polar Res., 34, 24603, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/polar.v34.24603" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/polar.v34.24603</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Kotlarski, S., Lüthi, D., and Schär, C.: The elevation dependency of
21st century European climate change: an RCM ensemble perspective, Int. J.
Climatol., 35, 3902–3920, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Laprise, R.: Regional climate modelling, J. Comput. Phys., 227,
3641–3666, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Legates, D. R. and Willmott, C. J.: Mean seasonal and spatial variability in
global surface air temperature, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 41, 11–21, 1990.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lenderink, G. and Holtslag, A. A. M.: An updated length-scale formulation
for turbulent mixing in clear and cloudy boundary layers, Q. J. Roy.
Meteor. Soc., 130, 3405–3427, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liang, X.-Z.: Regional climate model simulation of summer precipitation
diurnal cycle over the United States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, 2033, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021054" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2004GL021054</ext-link>,
2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lindstedt, D., Lind, P., Kjellström, E., and Jones, C.: A new regional
climate model operating at the meso-gamma scale: Performance over Europe,
Tellus A, 67, 24138,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v67.24138" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3402/tellusa.v67.24138</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lucas-Picher, P., Caya, D., de Elía, R., and Laprise, R.: Investigation
of regional climate models' internal variability with a ten-member ensemble
of 10-year simulations over a large domain, Clim. Dynam., 31, 927–940,
2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Lucas-Picher, P., Laprise, R., and Winger, K.: Evidence of added value in
North American regional climate model hindcast simulations using
ever-increasing horizontal resolutions, Clim. Dynam., 48, 2611–2633, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Masson, V., Le Moigne, P., Martin, E., Faroux, S., Alias, A., Alkama, R., Belamari, S., Barbu, A., Boone, A., Bouyssel, F., Brousseau, P., Brun, E., Calvet, J.-C., Carrer, D., Decharme, B., Delire, C., Donier, S., Essaouini, K., Gibelin, A.-L., Giordani, H., Habets, F., Jidane, M., Kerdraon, G., Kourzeneva, E., Lafaysse, M., Lafont, S., Lebeaupin Brossier, C., Lemonsu, A., Mahfouf, J.-F., Marguinaud, P., Mokhtari, M., Morin, S., Pigeon, G., Salgado, R., Seity, Y., Taillefer, F., Tanguy, G., Tulet, P., Vincendon, B., Vionnet, V., and Voldoire, A.: The SURFEXv7.2 land and ocean surface platform for coupled or offline simulation of earth surface variables and fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 929–960, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-929-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-6-929-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Moufouma-Okia, W. and Jones, R.: Resolution dependence in simulating the
African hydroclimate with the HadGEM3-RA regional climate model, Clim. Dynam.,
44, 609–632, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Munday, C. and Washington, R.: Systematic Climate Model Rainfall Biases over
Southern Africa: Links to Moisture Circulation and Topography, J. Climate,
31, 7533–7548, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Nikulin, G., Jones, C., Giorgi, F., Asrar, G., Büchner, M., Cerezo-Mota,
R., Christensen, O. B., Déqué, M., Fernandez, J., Hänsler, A.,
van Meijgaard, E., Samuelsson, P., Sylla, M. B., and Sushama, L.:
Precipitation climatology in an ensemble of CORDEX-Africa regional climate
simulations, J. Climate, 25, 6057–6078, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Nikulin, G., Lennard, C., Dosio, A., Kjellström, E., Chen, Y.,
Hänsler, A., Kupiainen, M., Laprise, R., Mariotti, L., Maule, C. F., van
Meijgaard, E., Panitz, H.-J., Scinocca, J. F., and Somot, S.: The effects of
1.5 and 2 degrees of global warming on Africa in the CORDEX ensemble,
Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 065003, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aab1b1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/aab1b1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Olsson, J., Berg, P., and Kawamura, A.: Impact of RCM Spatial Resolution on
the Reproduction of Local, Subdaily Precipitation, J. Hydrometeorol., 16,
534–547, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Panitz, H.-J., Dosio, A., Büchner, M., Lüthi, D., and Keuler, K.:
COSMO-CLM (CCLM) climate simulations over CORDEX-Africa domain: analysis of
the ERA-Interim driven simulations at 0.44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and 0.22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
resolution, Clim. Dynam., 42, 3015–3038, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Prein, A. F., Gobiet, A., Truhetz, H., Keuler, K., Goergen, K., Teichmann,
C., Maule, C. F., Van Meijgaard, E., Déqué, M., Nikulin, G.,
Vautard, R., Colette, A., Kjellström, E., and Jacob, D.:
Precipitation in the EURO-CORDEX 0. 11<inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> and 0. 44<inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>
simulations: high resolution, high benefits?, Clim. Dynam., 46, 383–412,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Räisänen, J., Hansson, U., Ullerstig, A., Döscher, R., Graham,
L. P., Jones, C., Meier, H. E. M., Samuelsson, P., and Willén, U.:
European climate in the late twenty-first century: regional simulations with
two driving global models and two forcing scenarios, Clim. Dynam., 22,
13–31, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rana, A., Nikulin, G., Kjellström, E., Strandberg, G., Kupiainen, M.,
Hansson, U., and Kolax, M.: Contrasting regional and globa<?pagebreak page393?>l climate
simulations over South Asia, Clim. Dynam., 54, 2883–2901, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05146-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-020-05146-0</ext-link>,
2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Rummukainen, M.: State-of-the-art with regional climate models, WIREs Clim.
Change, 1, 82–96, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Rummukainen, M.: Added value in regional climate modeling, WIREs Clim.
Change, 7, 145–159, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Rummukainen, M., Räisänen, J., Bringfelt, B., Ullerstig, A.,
Omstedt, A., Willén, U., Hansson, U., and Jones, C.: A regional climate
model for northern Europe: model description and results from the
downscaling of two GCM control simulations, Clim. Dynam., 17, 339–359,
2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Samuelsson, P., Jones, C. G., Willén, U., Ullerstig, A.,
Gollvik, S., Hansson, U., Jansson, E., Kjellström, C.,
Nikulin, G., and Wyser, K.: The Rossby Centre Regional Climate model RCA3:
model description and performance, Tellus A,
63, 4–23, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sanchez-Gomez, E. and Somot, S.: Impact of the internal variability on the
cyclone tracks simulated by a regional climate model over the Med-CORDEX
domain, Clim. Dynam., 51, 1005–1021, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sato, T., Miura, H., Satoh, M., Takayabu, Y. N., and Wang, Y.: Diurnal Cycle
of Precipitation in the Tropics Simulated in a Global Cloud-Resolving Model,
J. Climate, 22, 4809–4826, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Schneider, U., Becker, A., Finger, P., Meyer-Christoffer, A., Ziese, M., and
Rudolf, B.: GPCC's new land surface precipitation climatology based on
quality-controlled in situ data and its role in quantifying the global water
cycle, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 115, 15–40, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Scinocca, J. F., Kharin, V. V., Jiao, Y., Qian, M. W., Lazare, M., Solheim,
L., Flato, G. M., Biner, S., Desgagne, M., and Dugas, B.: Coordinated Global
and Regional Climate Modeling, J. Climate, 29, 17–35, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Shongwe, M. E., Lennard, C., Liebmann, B., Kalognomou, E.-A., Ntsangwane, L., and Pinto, I.: An evaluation of CORDEX regional climate models in simulating
precipitation over Southern Africa: CORDEX simulation of rainfall over
Southern Africa, Atmos. Sci. Lett., 16, 199–207, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sørland, S. L., Schär, C., Lüthi, D., and Kjellström, E.: Bias
patterns and climate change signals in GCM-RCM model chains, Environ. Res.
Lett., 13, 074017, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aacc77" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/aacc77</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sylla, M. B., Giorgi, F., Coppola, E., and Mariotti, L.: Uncertainties in
daily rainfall over Africa: assessment of gridded observation products and
evaluation of a regional climate model simulation, Int. J. Climatol., 33,
1805–1817, 2013a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Sylla, M. B., Diallo, I., and Pal, J. S.: West African Monsoon in
State-of-the-Science Regional Climate Models, in Climate Variability –
Regional and Thematic Patterns, edited by: Tarhule, A., InTech., London, UK, 2013b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tamoffo, A. T., Moufouma-Okia, W., Dosio, A., James, R., Pokam, W. M.,
Vondou, D. A., Fotso-Nguemo, T. C., Guenang, G. M., Kamsu-Tamo, P. H.,
Nikulin, G., Longandjo, G.-N., Lennard, C. J., Bell, J.-P., Takong, R. R.,
Haensler, A., Tchotchou, L. A. D., and Nouayou, R.: Process-oriented
assessment of RCA4 regional climate model projections over the Congo Basin
under 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C and 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C global warming levels: influence
of regional moisture fluxes, Clim. Dynam., 53, 1911–1935, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04751-y" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-019-04751-y</ext-link>,
2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Tangang, F., Supari, S., Chung, J. X., Cruz, F., Salimun, E., Ngai, S. T.,
Juneng, L., Santisirisomboon, J., Santisirisomboon, J., Ngo-Duc, T.,
Phan-Van, T., Narisma, G., Singhruck, P., Gunawan, D., Aldrian, E.,
Sopaheluwakan, A., Nikulin, G., Yang, H., Remedio, A. R. C., Sein, D., and
Hein-Griggs, D.: Future changes in annual precipitation extremes over
Southeast Asia under global warming of 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, APN Science Bulletin,
8,  3–8,, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.30852/sb.2018.436" ext-link-type="DOI">10.30852/sb.2018.436</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Temperton, C., Hortal, M., and Simmons, A.: A two-time-level semi-Lagrangian
global spectral model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 127, 111–127, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Termonia, P., Fischer, C., Bazile, E., Bouyssel, F., Brožková, R., Bénard, P., Bochenek, B., Degrauwe, D., Derková, M., El Khatib, R., Hamdi, R., Mašek, J., Pottier, P., Pristov, N., Seity, Y., Smolíková, P., Španiel, O., Tudor, M., Wang, Y., Wittmann, C., and Joly, A.: The ALADIN System and its canonical model configurations AROME CY41T1 and ALARO CY40T1, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 257–281, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-257-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-257-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Tiedtke, M.: A Comprehensive Mass Flux Scheme for Cumulus Parameterization
in Large-Scale Models, Mon. Weather Rev., 117, 1779–1800, 1989.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Torma, C., Giorgi, F., and Coppola, E.: Added value of regional climate
modeling over areas characterized by complex terrain-Precipitation over the
Alps, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 3957–3972, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Undén, P., Rontu, L., Jäarvinen, H., Lynch, P., and Calvo, J.:
HIRLAM-5 scientific documentation, SMHI, SMHI, SE-601 76 Norrköping, Sweden,
2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>University of Delaware: Terrestrial Air Temperature and Precipitation: Monthly Climatologies (V 4.01), available at: <uri>http://climate.geog.udel.edu/~climate/html_pages/download.html</uri>, last access: 20 September 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>University of East Anglia (UEA): Climatic Research Unit (CRU) Time-Series (TS) Version 3.23 of High Resolution Gridded Data of Month-by-month Variation in Climate, available at: <uri>https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/5dca9487dc614711a3a933e44a933ad3</uri>, last access: 20 September 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Van der Linden, P. and Mitchell, J. F.: ENSEMBLES: Climate change and its
impacts-Summary of research and results from the ENSEMBLES project, Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Walther, A., Jeong, J.-H., Nikulin, G., Jones, C., and Chen, D.: Evaluation
of the warm season diurnal cycle of precipitation over Sweden simulated by
the Rossby Centre regional climate model RCA3, Atmos. Res., 119, 131–139,
2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Wang, J. and Kotamarthi, V. R.: Downscaling with a nested regional climate
model in near-surface fields over the contiguous United States: WRF
dynamical downscaling, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 8778–8797,
2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Washington, R., James, R., Pearce, H., Pokam, W. M., and Moufouma-Okia, W.:
Congo Basin rainfall climatology: can we believe the climate models?,
Philos. T. Roy. Soc. B, 368, 1625, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0296" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1098/rstb.2012.0296</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, M., Schurgers, G., Rummukainen, M., Smith, B., Samuelsson, P., Jansson, C., Siltberg, J., and May, W.: Vegetation–climate feedbacks modulate rainfall patterns in Africa under future climate change, Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 627–647, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-627-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/esd-7-627-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page394?><ref id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wu, M., Schurgers, G., Ahlström, A., Rummukainen, M., Miller, P. A.,
Smith, B., and May, W.: Impacts of land use on climate and ecosystem
productivity over the Amazon and the South American continent, Environ. Res.
Lett., 12, 054016, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6fd6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/aa6fd6</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Xue, Y., Janjic, Z., Dudhia, J., Vasic, R., and De Sales, F.: A review on
regional dynamical downscaling in intraseasonal to seasonal
simulation/prediction and major factors that affect downscaling ability,
Atmos. Res., 147–148, 68–85, 2014.
 </mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, W., Jansson, C., Miller, P. A., Smith, B., and Samuelsson, P.: Biogeophysical feedbacks enhance the Arctic terrestrial carbon sink in regional Earth system dynamics, Biogeosciences, 11, 5503–5519, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-5503-2014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-11-5503-2014</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>The impact of regional climate model formulation and resolution on simulated precipitation in Africa</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p>We investigate the impact of model formulation and horizontal resolution on
the ability of Regional Climate Models (RCMs) to simulate precipitation in
Africa. Two RCMs (SMHI-RCA4 and HCLIM38-ALADIN) are utilized for downscaling
the ERA-Interim reanalysis over Africa at four different resolutions: 25,
50, 100, and 200&thinsp;km. In addition to the two RCMs, two different parameter
settings (configurations) of the same RCA4 are used. By contrasting
different downscaling experiments, it is found that model formulation has
the primary control over many aspects of the precipitation climatology in
Africa. Patterns of spatial biases in seasonal mean precipitation are mostly
defined by model formulation, while the magnitude of the biases is controlled
by resolution. In a similar way, the phase of the diurnal cycle in
precipitation is completely controlled by model formulation (convection
scheme), while its amplitude is a function of resolution. However, the impact
of higher resolution on the time-mean climate is mixed. An improvement in
one region/season (e.g. reduction in dry biases) often corresponds to a
deterioration in another region/season (e.g. amplification of wet biases).
At the same time, higher resolution leads to a more realistic distribution
of daily precipitation. Consequently, even if the time-mean climate is not
always greatly sensitive to resolution, the realism of the simulated
precipitation increases as resolution increases. Our results show that
improvements in the ability of RCMs to simulate precipitation in Africa
compared to their driving reanalysis in many cases are simply related to
model formulation and not necessarily to higher resolution. Such model
formulation related improvements are strongly model dependent and can, in
general, not be considered as an added value of downscaling.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
Akinsanola, A. A. and Ogunjobi, K. O.: Evaluation of present-day rainfall
simulations over West Africa in CORDEX regional climate models, Environ.
Earth Sci., 76, 366, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6691-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6691-9</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
Bechtold, P., Bazile, E., Guichard, F., Mascart, P., and Richard, E.: A
mass-flux convection scheme for regional and global models, Q. J. Roy. Meteor.
Soc., 127, 869–886, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
Bechtold, P., Chaboureau, J. P., Beljaars, A., Betts, K., Köhler, M.,
Miller, M., and Redelsperger, J. L.: The simulation of the diurnal cycle of
convective precipitation over land in a global model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor.
Soc., 130, 3119–3137, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
Belušić, D., de Vries, H., Dobler, A., Landgren, O., Lind, P., Lindstedt, D., Pedersen, R. A., Sánchez-Perrino, J. C., Toivonen, E., van Ulft, B., Wang, F., Andrae, U., Batrak, Y., Kjellström, E., Lenderink, G., Nikulin, G., Pietikäinen, J.-P., Rodríguez-Camino, E., Samuelsson, P., van Meijgaard, E., and Wu, M.: HCLIM38: a flexible regional climate model applicable for different climate zones from coarse to convection-permitting scales, Geosci. Model Dev., 13, 1311–1333, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1311-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-13-1311-2020</a>, 2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
Bengtsson, L., Andrae, U., Aspelien, T., Batrak, Y., Calvo, J., de Rooy, W.,
Gleeson, E., Hansen-Sass, B., Homleid, M., Hortal, M., Ivarsson, K.-I.,
Lenderink, G., Niemelä, S., Nielsen, K. P., Onvlee, J., Rontu, L.,
Samuelsson, P., Muñoz, D. S., Subias, A., Tijm, S., Toll, V., Yang, X., and Køltzow, M. Ø.: The HARMONIE–AROME Model Configuration in the
ALADIN–HIRLAM NWP System, Mon. Weather Rev., 145, 1919–1935, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
Berg, P., Döscher, R., and Koenigk, T.: Impacts of using spectral nudging on regional climate model RCA4 simulations of the Arctic, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 849–859, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-849-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-849-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
Bougeault, P.: A Simple Parameterization of the Large-Scale Effects of
Cumulus Convection, Mon. Weather Rev., 113, 2108–2121, 1985.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Caron, L.-P., Jones, C. G., and Winger, K.: Impact of resolution and
downscaling technique in simulating recent Atlantic tropical cylone
activity, Clim. Dynam., 37, 869–892, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
Castro, C. L., Pielke Sr., R. A., and Leoncini, G.: Dynamical downscaling: Assessment of value retained and added
using the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS), J. Geophys. Res.,
110, D05108, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004721" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JD004721</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
Challinor, A., Wheeler, T., Garforth, C., Craufurd, P., and Kassam, A.:
Assessing the vulnerability of food crop systems in Africa to climate
change, Climatic Change, 83, 381–399, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
Chan, S. C., Kendon, E. J., Fowler, H. J., Blenkinsop, S., Ferro, C. A. T., and Stephenson, D. B.: Does increasing the spatial resolution of a regional
climate model improve the simulated daily precipitation?, Clim. Dynam., 41,
1475–1495, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
Collazo, S., Lhotka, O., Rusticucci, M., and Kyselỳ, J.:
Capability of the SMHI-RCA4 RCM driven by the ERA-Interim reanalysis to
simulate heat waves in Argentina, Int. J. Climatol., 38, 483–496, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
Covey, C., Gleckler, P. J., Doutriaux, C., Williams, D. N., Dai, A.,
Fasullo, J., Trenberth, K., and Berg, A.: Metrics for the Diurnal Cycle of
Precipitation: Toward Routine Benchmarks for Climate Models, J. Climate,
29, 4461–4471, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
Dai, A.: Precipitation Characteristics in Eighteen Coupled Climate Models,
J. Climate, 19, 4605–4630, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
Dai, A. and Trenberth, K. E.: The Diurnal Cycle and Its Depiction in the
Community Climate System Model, J. Climate, 17, 930–951, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
Dai, A., Lin, X., and Hsu, K.-L.: The frequency, intensity, and diurnal cycle
of precipitation in surface and satellite observations over low- and
mid-latitudes, Clim. Dynam., 29, 727–744, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
Daniel, M., Lemonsu, A., Déqué, M., Somot, S., Alias, A., and Masson,
V.: Benefits of explicit urban parameterization in regional climate modeling
to study climate and city interactions, Clim. Dynam., 52, 2745–2764, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
Da Rocha, R. P., Morales, C. A., Cuadra, S. V., and Ambrizzi, T.:
Precipitation diurnal cycle and summer climatology assessment over South
America: An evaluation of Regional Climate Model version 3 simulations,
J. Geophys. Res., 114, D10108, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010212" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JD010212</a>, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
Dee, D. P., Uppala, S. M., Simmons, A. J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P.,
Kobayashi, S., Andrae, U., Balmaseda, M. A., Balsamo, G., Bauer, P., Bechtold, P., Beljaars, A. C. M., van de Berg, L., Bidlot, J., Bormann, N., Delsol, C., Dragani, R., Fuentes, M., Geer, A. J., Haimberger, L., Healy, S. B., Hersbach, H., Hólm, E. V., Isaksen, L., Kållberg, P., Köhler, M., Matricardi, M., McNally, A. P., Monge-Sanz, B. M., Morcrette, J.-J., Park, B.-K., Peubey, C., de Rosnay, P., Tavolato, C., Thépaut, J. N., and Vitart, F.: The ERA-Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the
data assimilation system, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 137, 553–597,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
Diaconescu, E. P. and Laprise, R.: Can added value be expected in
RCM-simulated large scales?, Clim. Dynam., 41, 1769–1800, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
Di Luca, A., de Elía, R., and Laprise, R.: Potential for added value in
precipitation simulated by high-resolution nested Regional Climate Models
and observations, Clim. Dynam., 38, 1229–1247, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1068-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-011-1068-3</a>, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
Di Luca, A., de Elía, R., and Laprise, R.: Challenges in the Quest for
Added Value of Regional Climate Dynamical Downscaling, Current Climate
Change Reports, 1, 10–21, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
Dirmeyer, P. A., Cash, B. A., Kinter, J. L., Jung, T., Marx, L., Satoh, M.,
Stan, C., Tomita, H., Towers, P., Wedi, N., Achuthavarier, D., Adams, J. M.,
Altshuler, E. L., Huang, B., Jin, E. K., and Manganello, J.: Simulating the
diurnal cycle of rainfall in global climate models: resolution versus
parameterization, Clim. Dynam., 39, 399–418, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
Dosio, A., Panitz, H.-J., Schubert-Frisius, M., and Lüthi, D.: Dynamical
downscaling of CMIP5 global circulation models over CORDEX-Africa with
COSMO-CLM: evaluation over the present climate and analysis of the added
value, Clim. Dynam., 44, 2637–2661, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
Endris, H. S., Omondi, P., Jain, S., Lennard, C., Hewitson, B., Chang'a, L.,
Awange, J. L., Dosio, A., Ketiem, P., Nikulin, G., Panitz, H.-J.,
Büchner, M., Stordal, F., and Tazalika, L.: Assessment of the Performance
of CORDEX Regional Climate Models in Simulating East African Rainfall, J. Climate, 26, 8453–8475, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF): ECMWF Re-Analysis datasets, available at: <a href="https://apps.ecmwf.int/datasets/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 September 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
Favre, A., Philippon, N., Pohl, B., Kalognomou, E.-A., Lennard, C.,
Hewitson, B., Nikulin, G., Dosio, A., Panitz, H.-J., and Cerezo-Mota, R.:
Spatial distribution of precipitation annual cycles over South Africa in 10
CORDEX regional climate model present-day simulations, Clim. Dynam., 46,
1799–1818, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
Fekete, B. M., Vörösmarty, C. J., Roads, J. O., and Willmott, C. J.:
Uncertainties in Precipitation and Their Impacts on Runoff Estimates, J. Climate, 17, 294–304, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
Flato, G., Marotzke, J., Abiodun, B., Braconnot, P., Chou, S. C., Collins,
W., Cox, P., Driouech, F., Emori, S., Eyring, V., Forest, C., Gleckler, P.,
Guilyardi, E., Jakob, C., Kattsov, V., Reason, C., and Rummukainen, M.:
Evaluation of Climate Models, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science
Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, 741–866, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
Gbobaniyi, E., Sarr, A., Sylla, M. B., Diallo, I., Lennard, C., Dosio, A.,
Dhiédiou, A., Kamga, A., Klutse, N. A. B., Hewitson, B., Nikulin, G., and
Lamptey, B.: Climatology, annual cycle and interannual variability of
precipitation and temperature in CORDEX simulations over West Africa, Int.
J. Climatol., 34, 2241–2257, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
Giorgi, F. and Gao, X.-J.: Regional earth system modeling: review and future
directions, Atmos. Ocean. Sci. Lett., 11, 189–197, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
Giorgi, F. and Mearns, L. O.: Approaches to the simulation of regional
climate change: A review, Rev. Geophys., 29, 191–216, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/90RG02636" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/90RG02636</a>, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
Giorgi, F., Jones, C., and Asrar, G. R.: Addressing climate
information needs at the regional level: the CORDEX framework, WMO Bull.,
58, 175–183, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
Giorgi, F., Torma, C., Coppola, E., Ban, N., Schär, C., and Somot, S.:
Enhanced summer convective rainfall at Alpine high elevations in response to
climate warming, Nat. Geosci., 9, 584–589, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
Global Precipitation Climatology Centre (GPCC): GPCC Landsurface Monitoring Monthly Product, available at: <a href="https://www.dwd.de/EN/ourservices/gpcc/gpcc.html" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 September 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC): The Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) Multi-satellite Precipitation Analysis, available at: <a href="https://pmm.nasa.gov/data-access/downloads/trmm" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 September 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
Gruber, A., Su, X., Kanamitsu, M., and Schemm, J.: The Comparison of Two
Merged Rain Gauge–Satellite Precipitation Datasets, B. Am. Meteorol.
Soc., 81, 2631–2644, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
Harris, I., Jones, P. D., Osborn, T. J., and Lister, D. H.: Updated
high-resolution grids of monthly climatic observations – the CRU TS3. 10
Dataset, Int. J. Climatol., 34, 623–642, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
Hong, S. Y. and Kanamitsu, M.: Dynamical downscaling: Fundamental issues
from an NWP point of view and recommendations, Asia-Pac. J.
Atmos. Sci., 50, 83–104, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
Huang, X., Rhoades, A. M., Ullrich, P. A., and Zarzycki, C. M.: An evaluation
of the variable-resolution CESM for modeling California's climate, J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst., 8, 345–369, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
Huffman, G. J., Bolvin, D. T., Nelkin, E. J., Wolff, D. B., Adler, R. F.,
Gu, G., Hong, Y., Bowman, K. P., and Stocker, E. F.: The TRMM Multisatellite
Precipitation Analysis (TMPA): Quasi-Global, Multiyear, Combined-Sensor
Precipitation Estimates at Fine Scales, J. Hydrometeorol., 8, 38–55,
2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
Iqbal, W., Syed, F. S., Sajjad, H., Nikulin, G., Kjellström, E., and
Hannachi, A.: Mean climate and representation of jet streams in the CORDEX
South Asia simulations by the regional climate model RCA4, Theor. Appl.
Climatol., 129, 1–19, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
Jeong, J.-H., Walther, A., Nikulin, G., Chen, D., and Jones, C.: Diurnal
cycle of precipitation amount and frequency in Sweden: observation versus
model simulation, Tellus  A, 63, 664–674,
2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
Jiao, Y. and Jones, C.: Comparison Studies of Cloud- and Convection-Related
Processes Simulated by the Canadian Regional Climate Model over the Pacific
Ocean, Mon. Weather Rev., 136, 4168–4187, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
Jones, C., Willén, U., Ullerstig, A., and Hansson, U.: The Rossby
Centre Regional Atmospheric Climate Model part I: model climatology and
performance for the present climate over Europe, Ambio, 33, 199–210,
2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
Jones, C., Giorgi, F., and Asrar, G.: The Coordinated Regional Downscaling
Experiment: CORDEX – an international downscaling link to CMIP5, CLIVAR
exchanges, 16, 34–40, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
Jones, P. W.: First- and Second-Order Conservative Remapping Schemes for
Grids in Spherical Coordinates, Mon. Weather Rev., 127, 2204–2210, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
Kalognomou, E.-A., Lennard, C., Shongwe, M., Pinto, I., Favre, A., Kent, M.,
Hewitson, B., Dosio, A., Nikulin, G., Panitz, H.-J., and Büchner, M.: A
Diagnostic Evaluation of Precipitation in CORDEX Models over Southern
Africa, J. Climate, 26, 9477–9506, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
Kim, J., Waliser, D. E., Mattmann, C. A., Goodale, C. E., Hart, A. F.,
Zimdars, P. A., Crichton, D. J., Jones, C., Nikulin, G., Hewitson, B., Jack,
C., Lennard, C., and Favre, A.: Evaluation of the CORDEX-Africa multi-RCM
hindcast: systematic model errors, Clim. Dynam., 42, 1189–1202, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
Kisembe, J., Favre, A., Dosio, A., Lennard, C., Sabiiti, G., and Nimusiima,
A.: Evaluation of rainfall simulations over Uganda in CORDEX regional
climate models, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 137, 1117–1134, 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
Kjellström, E., Bärring, L., Gollvik, S., Hansson, U., Jones, C.,
Samuelsson, P., Ullerstig, A., Willén, U., and Wyser, K.: A 140-year
simulation of European climate with the new version of the Rossby Centre
regional atmospheric climate model (RCA3), available at:
<a href="http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:947602" target="_blank"/> (last access: 19 November 2018), 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
Kjellström, E., Bärring, L., Nikulin, G., Nilsson, C., Persson, G., and Strandberg, G.: Production and use of regional climate model projections
– A Swedish perspective on building climate services, Clim. Serv., 2–3,
15–29, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
Kjellström, E., Nikulin, G., Strandberg, G., Christensen, O. B., Jacob, D., Keuler, K., Lenderink, G., van Meijgaard, E., Schär, C., Somot, S., Sørland, S. L., Teichmann, C., and Vautard, R.: European climate change at global mean temperature increases of 1.5 and 2&thinsp;°C above pre-industrial conditions as simulated by the EURO-CORDEX regional climate models, Earth Syst. Dynam., 9, 459–478, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-459-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-9-459-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
Klutse, N. A. B., Sylla, M. B., Diallo, I., Sarr, A., Dosio, A., Diedhiou,
A., Kamga, A., Lamptey, B., Ali, A., Gbobaniyi, E. O., Owusu, K., Lennard,
C., Hewitson, B., Nikulin, G., Panitz, H.-J., and Büchner, M.: Daily
characteristics of West African summer monsoon precipitation in CORDEX
simulations, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 123, 369–386, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
Koenigk, T., Berg, P., and Döscher, R.: Arctic climate change in an
ensemble of regional CORDEX simulations, Polar Res., 34, 24603, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/polar.v34.24603" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/polar.v34.24603</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
Kotlarski, S., Lüthi, D., and Schär, C.: The elevation dependency of
21st century European climate change: an RCM ensemble perspective, Int. J.
Climatol., 35, 3902–3920, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
Laprise, R.: Regional climate modelling, J. Comput. Phys., 227,
3641–3666, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
Legates, D. R. and Willmott, C. J.: Mean seasonal and spatial variability in
global surface air temperature, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 41, 11–21, 1990.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
Lenderink, G. and Holtslag, A. A. M.: An updated length-scale formulation
for turbulent mixing in clear and cloudy boundary layers, Q. J. Roy.
Meteor. Soc., 130, 3405–3427, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
Liang, X.-Z.: Regional climate model simulation of summer precipitation
diurnal cycle over the United States, Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, 2033, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021054" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021054</a>,
2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
Lindstedt, D., Lind, P., Kjellström, E., and Jones, C.: A new regional
climate model operating at the meso-gamma scale: Performance over Europe,
Tellus A, 67, 24138,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v67.24138" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3402/tellusa.v67.24138</a>, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
Lucas-Picher, P., Caya, D., de Elía, R., and Laprise, R.: Investigation
of regional climate models' internal variability with a ten-member ensemble
of 10-year simulations over a large domain, Clim. Dynam., 31, 927–940,
2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
Lucas-Picher, P., Laprise, R., and Winger, K.: Evidence of added value in
North American regional climate model hindcast simulations using
ever-increasing horizontal resolutions, Clim. Dynam., 48, 2611–2633, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
Masson, V., Le Moigne, P., Martin, E., Faroux, S., Alias, A., Alkama, R., Belamari, S., Barbu, A., Boone, A., Bouyssel, F., Brousseau, P., Brun, E., Calvet, J.-C., Carrer, D., Decharme, B., Delire, C., Donier, S., Essaouini, K., Gibelin, A.-L., Giordani, H., Habets, F., Jidane, M., Kerdraon, G., Kourzeneva, E., Lafaysse, M., Lafont, S., Lebeaupin Brossier, C., Lemonsu, A., Mahfouf, J.-F., Marguinaud, P., Mokhtari, M., Morin, S., Pigeon, G., Salgado, R., Seity, Y., Taillefer, F., Tanguy, G., Tulet, P., Vincendon, B., Vionnet, V., and Voldoire, A.: The SURFEXv7.2 land and ocean surface platform for coupled or offline simulation of earth surface variables and fluxes, Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 929–960, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-929-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-929-2013</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
Moufouma-Okia, W. and Jones, R.: Resolution dependence in simulating the
African hydroclimate with the HadGEM3-RA regional climate model, Clim. Dynam.,
44, 609–632, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
Munday, C. and Washington, R.: Systematic Climate Model Rainfall Biases over
Southern Africa: Links to Moisture Circulation and Topography, J. Climate,
31, 7533–7548, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
Nikulin, G., Jones, C., Giorgi, F., Asrar, G., Büchner, M., Cerezo-Mota,
R., Christensen, O. B., Déqué, M., Fernandez, J., Hänsler, A.,
van Meijgaard, E., Samuelsson, P., Sylla, M. B., and Sushama, L.:
Precipitation climatology in an ensemble of CORDEX-Africa regional climate
simulations, J. Climate, 25, 6057–6078, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
Nikulin, G., Lennard, C., Dosio, A., Kjellström, E., Chen, Y.,
Hänsler, A., Kupiainen, M., Laprise, R., Mariotti, L., Maule, C. F., van
Meijgaard, E., Panitz, H.-J., Scinocca, J. F., and Somot, S.: The effects of
1.5 and 2 degrees of global warming on Africa in the CORDEX ensemble,
Environ. Res. Lett., 13, 065003, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aab1b1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aab1b1</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
Olsson, J., Berg, P., and Kawamura, A.: Impact of RCM Spatial Resolution on
the Reproduction of Local, Subdaily Precipitation, J. Hydrometeorol., 16,
534–547, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
Panitz, H.-J., Dosio, A., Büchner, M., Lüthi, D., and Keuler, K.:
COSMO-CLM (CCLM) climate simulations over CORDEX-Africa domain: analysis of
the ERA-Interim driven simulations at 0.44° and 0.22°
resolution, Clim. Dynam., 42, 3015–3038, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
Prein, A. F., Gobiet, A., Truhetz, H., Keuler, K., Goergen, K., Teichmann,
C., Maule, C. F., Van Meijgaard, E., Déqué, M., Nikulin, G.,
Vautard, R., Colette, A., Kjellström, E., and Jacob, D.:
Precipitation in the EURO-CORDEX 0. 11° and 0. 44°
simulations: high resolution, high benefits?, Clim. Dynam., 46, 383–412,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
Räisänen, J., Hansson, U., Ullerstig, A., Döscher, R., Graham,
L. P., Jones, C., Meier, H. E. M., Samuelsson, P., and Willén, U.:
European climate in the late twenty-first century: regional simulations with
two driving global models and two forcing scenarios, Clim. Dynam., 22,
13–31, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
Rana, A., Nikulin, G., Kjellström, E., Strandberg, G., Kupiainen, M.,
Hansson, U., and Kolax, M.: Contrasting regional and global climate
simulations over South Asia, Clim. Dynam., 54, 2883–2901, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05146-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05146-0</a>,
2020.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
Rummukainen, M.: State-of-the-art with regional climate models, WIREs Clim.
Change, 1, 82–96, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
Rummukainen, M.: Added value in regional climate modeling, WIREs Clim.
Change, 7, 145–159, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
Rummukainen, M., Räisänen, J., Bringfelt, B., Ullerstig, A.,
Omstedt, A., Willén, U., Hansson, U., and Jones, C.: A regional climate
model for northern Europe: model description and results from the
downscaling of two GCM control simulations, Clim. Dynam., 17, 339–359,
2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
Samuelsson, P., Jones, C. G., Willén, U., Ullerstig, A.,
Gollvik, S., Hansson, U., Jansson, E., Kjellström, C.,
Nikulin, G., and Wyser, K.: The Rossby Centre Regional Climate model RCA3:
model description and performance, Tellus A,
63, 4–23, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
Sanchez-Gomez, E. and Somot, S.: Impact of the internal variability on the
cyclone tracks simulated by a regional climate model over the Med-CORDEX
domain, Clim. Dynam., 51, 1005–1021, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
Sato, T., Miura, H., Satoh, M., Takayabu, Y. N., and Wang, Y.: Diurnal Cycle
of Precipitation in the Tropics Simulated in a Global Cloud-Resolving Model,
J. Climate, 22, 4809–4826, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
Schneider, U., Becker, A., Finger, P., Meyer-Christoffer, A., Ziese, M., and
Rudolf, B.: GPCC's new land surface precipitation climatology based on
quality-controlled in situ data and its role in quantifying the global water
cycle, Theor. Appl. Climatol., 115, 15–40, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
Scinocca, J. F., Kharin, V. V., Jiao, Y., Qian, M. W., Lazare, M., Solheim,
L., Flato, G. M., Biner, S., Desgagne, M., and Dugas, B.: Coordinated Global
and Regional Climate Modeling, J. Climate, 29, 17–35, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
Shongwe, M. E., Lennard, C., Liebmann, B., Kalognomou, E.-A., Ntsangwane, L., and Pinto, I.: An evaluation of CORDEX regional climate models in simulating
precipitation over Southern Africa: CORDEX simulation of rainfall over
Southern Africa, Atmos. Sci. Lett., 16, 199–207, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation>
Sørland, S. L., Schär, C., Lüthi, D., and Kjellström, E.: Bias
patterns and climate change signals in GCM-RCM model chains, Environ. Res.
Lett., 13, 074017, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aacc77" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aacc77</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation>
Sylla, M. B., Giorgi, F., Coppola, E., and Mariotti, L.: Uncertainties in
daily rainfall over Africa: assessment of gridded observation products and
evaluation of a regional climate model simulation, Int. J. Climatol., 33,
1805–1817, 2013a.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation>
Sylla, M. B., Diallo, I., and Pal, J. S.: West African Monsoon in
State-of-the-Science Regional Climate Models, in Climate Variability –
Regional and Thematic Patterns, edited by: Tarhule, A., InTech., London, UK, 2013b.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation>
Tamoffo, A. T., Moufouma-Okia, W., Dosio, A., James, R., Pokam, W. M.,
Vondou, D. A., Fotso-Nguemo, T. C., Guenang, G. M., Kamsu-Tamo, P. H.,
Nikulin, G., Longandjo, G.-N., Lennard, C. J., Bell, J.-P., Takong, R. R.,
Haensler, A., Tchotchou, L. A. D., and Nouayou, R.: Process-oriented
assessment of RCA4 regional climate model projections over the Congo Basin
under 1.5&thinsp;°C and 2&thinsp;°C global warming levels: influence
of regional moisture fluxes, Clim. Dynam., 53, 1911–1935, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04751-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04751-y</a>,
2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation>
Tangang, F., Supari, S., Chung, J. X., Cruz, F., Salimun, E., Ngai, S. T.,
Juneng, L., Santisirisomboon, J., Santisirisomboon, J., Ngo-Duc, T.,
Phan-Van, T., Narisma, G., Singhruck, P., Gunawan, D., Aldrian, E.,
Sopaheluwakan, A., Nikulin, G., Yang, H., Remedio, A. R. C., Sein, D., and
Hein-Griggs, D.: Future changes in annual precipitation extremes over
Southeast Asia under global warming of 2&thinsp;°C, APN Science Bulletin,
8,  3–8,, <a href="https://doi.org/10.30852/sb.2018.436" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.30852/sb.2018.436</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation>
Temperton, C., Hortal, M., and Simmons, A.: A two-time-level semi-Lagrangian
global spectral model, Q. J. Roy. Meteor. Soc., 127, 111–127, 2001.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation>
Termonia, P., Fischer, C., Bazile, E., Bouyssel, F., Brožková, R., Bénard, P., Bochenek, B., Degrauwe, D., Derková, M., El Khatib, R., Hamdi, R., Mašek, J., Pottier, P., Pristov, N., Seity, Y., Smolíková, P., Španiel, O., Tudor, M., Wang, Y., Wittmann, C., and Joly, A.: The ALADIN System and its canonical model configurations AROME CY41T1 and ALARO CY40T1, Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 257–281, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-257-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-257-2018</a>, 2018.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation>
Tiedtke, M.: A Comprehensive Mass Flux Scheme for Cumulus Parameterization
in Large-Scale Models, Mon. Weather Rev., 117, 1779–1800, 1989.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation>
Torma, C., Giorgi, F., and Coppola, E.: Added value of regional climate
modeling over areas characterized by complex terrain-Precipitation over the
Alps, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 3957–3972, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation>
Undén, P., Rontu, L., Jäarvinen, H., Lynch, P., and Calvo, J.:
HIRLAM-5 scientific documentation, SMHI, SMHI, SE-601 76 Norrköping, Sweden,
2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation>
University of Delaware: Terrestrial Air Temperature and Precipitation: Monthly Climatologies (V 4.01), available at: <a href="http://climate.geog.udel.edu/~climate/html_pages/download.html" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 September 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation>
University of East Anglia (UEA): Climatic Research Unit (CRU) Time-Series (TS) Version 3.23 of High Resolution Gridded Data of Month-by-month Variation in Climate, available at: <a href="https://catalogue.ceda.ac.uk/uuid/5dca9487dc614711a3a933e44a933ad3" target="_blank"/>, last access: 20 September 2019.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation>
Van der Linden, P. and Mitchell, J. F.: ENSEMBLES: Climate change and its
impacts-Summary of research and results from the ENSEMBLES project, Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib96"><label>96</label><mixed-citation>
Walther, A., Jeong, J.-H., Nikulin, G., Jones, C., and Chen, D.: Evaluation
of the warm season diurnal cycle of precipitation over Sweden simulated by
the Rossby Centre regional climate model RCA3, Atmos. Res., 119, 131–139,
2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib97"><label>97</label><mixed-citation>
Wang, J. and Kotamarthi, V. R.: Downscaling with a nested regional climate
model in near-surface fields over the contiguous United States: WRF
dynamical downscaling, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 119, 8778–8797,
2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib98"><label>98</label><mixed-citation>
Washington, R., James, R., Pearce, H., Pokam, W. M., and Moufouma-Okia, W.:
Congo Basin rainfall climatology: can we believe the climate models?,
Philos. T. Roy. Soc. B, 368, 1625, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0296" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0296</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib99"><label>99</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, M., Schurgers, G., Rummukainen, M., Smith, B., Samuelsson, P., Jansson, C., Siltberg, J., and May, W.: Vegetation–climate feedbacks modulate rainfall patterns in Africa under future climate change, Earth Syst. Dynam., 7, 627–647, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-627-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-7-627-2016</a>, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib100"><label>100</label><mixed-citation>
Wu, M., Schurgers, G., Ahlström, A., Rummukainen, M., Miller, P. A.,
Smith, B., and May, W.: Impacts of land use on climate and ecosystem
productivity over the Amazon and the South American continent, Environ. Res.
Lett., 12, 054016, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6fd6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa6fd6</a>, 2017.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib101"><label>101</label><mixed-citation>
Xue, Y., Janjic, Z., Dudhia, J., Vasic, R., and De Sales, F.: A review on
regional dynamical downscaling in intraseasonal to seasonal
simulation/prediction and major factors that affect downscaling ability,
Atmos. Res., 147–148, 68–85, 2014.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib102"><label>102</label><mixed-citation>
Zhang, W., Jansson, C., Miller, P. A., Smith, B., and Samuelsson, P.: Biogeophysical feedbacks enhance the Arctic terrestrial carbon sink in regional Earth system dynamics, Biogeosciences, 11, 5503–5519, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-5503-2014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-11-5503-2014</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
