<?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" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \bartext{Research article}?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">ACP</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">ACP</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Chem. Phys.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1680-7324</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/acp-23-3435-2023</article-id><title-group><article-title>The dependence of aerosols' global and local precipitation impacts on the
emitting region</article-title><alt-title>The dependence of aerosols' global and local precipitation impacts on
the emitting region</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{The dependence of aerosols' global and local precipitation impacts on
the emitting region}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{G. G. Persad}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
          <name><surname>Persad</surname><given-names>Geeta G.</given-names></name>
          <email>geeta.persad@jsg.utexas.edu</email>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><institution>Department of Geological Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, Texas 78712, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Geeta G. Persad (geeta.persad@jsg.utexas.edu)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>20</day><month>March</month><year>2023</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>23</volume>
      <issue>6</issue>
      <fpage>3435</fpage><lpage>3452</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>5</day><month>February</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>9</day><month>March</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>20</day><month>December</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>2</day><month>February</month><year>2023</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2023 </copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2023</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://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html">This article is available from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e79">The influence of the geographic distribution of aerosol emissions on the
magnitude and spatial pattern of their precipitation impacts remains poorly
understood. In this study, the global climate model NCAR CESM1 (National Center for Atmospheric Research Community Earth System Model version 1.2) is used in
coupled atmosphere–slab ocean mode to simulate the global hydrological-cycle
response to a fixed amount and composition of aerosol emitted from eight key
source regions. The results indicate that the location of aerosol emissions
is a strong determinant of both the magnitude and spatial distribution of
the hydrological response. The global-mean precipitation response to aerosol
emissions is found to vary over a 6-fold range depending solely on source
location. Mid-latitude sources generate larger global-mean precipitation
responses than do tropical and sub-tropical sources, driven largely by the
former's stronger global-mean temperature influence. However, the spatial
distribution of precipitation responses to some (largely tropical and
sub-tropical) regional emissions is almost entirely localized within the
source region, while responses to other (primarily mid-latitude) regional
emissions are almost entirely remote. It is proposed that this diversity
arises from the differing strength with which each region's emissions
generate fast precipitation responses that remain largely localized. The
findings highlight that tropical regions are particularly susceptible to
hydrological-cycle change from either local or remote aerosol emissions,
encourage greater investigation of the processes controlling localization of
the precipitation response to regional aerosols, and demonstrate that the
geographic distribution of anthropogenic aerosol emissions must be
considered when estimating their hydrological impacts.</p>
  </abstract>
    
<funding-group>
<award-group id="gs1">
<funding-source>National Science Foundation</funding-source>
<award-id>715557</award-id>
</award-group>
</funding-group>
</article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e91">The geographic distribution of anthropogenic aerosol emissions has evolved
continuously over the industrial era and is projected to continue to do so.
Emissions have transitioned from a locus in western Europe and North America
in the late 19th and early 20th century to southern and eastern Asia in the
present day due to changing patterns of industrialization and air quality
regulation  (Hoesly et al., 2018).
Future projections of aerosol emissions, while highly uncertain
(Samset et al., 2019), contemplate new growth of emissions
in regions like South America and East Africa as industrialization of these
regions accelerates  (Lund et al.,
2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e94">With this redistribution of aerosol emissions comes the potential
redistribution of aerosols' impact on the hydrological cycle, which is
known to be substantial. Aerosols have been shown to have strong in situ and
remote hydrological-cycle impacts via their influence on the dynamics,
thermodynamics, and microphysics that control precipitation
(Boucher et al., 2013). Anthropogenic aerosols' (AAs) rapid spatiotemporal evolution
over the 20th and early 21st century and their effect on the large-scale
circulation have been identified as the dominant driver of an observed
southward shift in the tropical Pacific rain belt
(Allen et al., 2015) and the collapse and
recent recovery in Sahel precipitation  (Marvel et al.,
2020). Observed weakening of the South Asian monsoon and East Asian monsoon, meanwhile,
has been attributed to both large-scale and local-scale aerosol forcing
(Bollasina
et al., 2011, 2014; B. Dong et al., 2019; Li et al., 2016; Singh et al.,
2019).</p>
      <?pagebreak page3436?><p id="d1e97">A range of studies have established that the precipitation response to
aerosols is dependent on the spatial distribution of aerosol forcing. The
ongoing evolution in the spatial distribution of global aerosol emissions
has been associated with an evolution in the spatial pattern of the
corresponding global precipitation response
(Deser et al., 2020; Kang et al., 2021).
A range of studies isolating the response to historical emissions in
individual regions or latitude bands have identified common underlying
features of this geographic dependence. Multi-model and single-model studies
applying both idealized and historical regional aerosol perturbations
generally find that higher-latitude aerosol sources (Europe, North America)
produce a stronger global-mean precipitation response than lower-latitude
sources (southern or eastern Asia) when normalized by radiative forcing or
atmospheric concentration
(Kasoar
et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2018; Shindell et al., 2012; Westervelt et al.,
2018). However, some studies show strongly differing spatial distributions
of precipitation response
(Ishizaki
et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2018; Shindell et al., 2012), while others argue
that the spatial patterns of response are similar regardless of source
region  (Kasoar et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e100">Identifying the specific role of emissions location in the climate response
to aerosol, however, remains difficult based on the existing literature.
Previous studies use actual or scaled historical emissions, which are
unequal across regions, latitude bands, and/or time periods. Responses can
be normalized by emissions, concentrations, or forcing to approximate the
role of source location. For example,
Shindell et al. (2012) proposed and
estimated a set of “regional precipitation potentials” based on their
analysis of the response to historical aerosol emissions in separate
latitude bands, which quantify the precipitation response per unit of
radiative forcing for aerosol emissions in a given latitude band. However,
these approaches assume linearity in the response to different amounts of
aerosol. Additionally, existing studies tend to sample the effects of a
relatively small subset of regions (generally confined to southern and eastern
Asia, North America, and Europe). Given the high uncertainty and potential
for growth in aerosol emissions within individual regions outside of this
subset  (Lund et al., 2019),
understanding the relative importance of aerosol emissions from a larger
range of regions may be potentially beneficial for near-term climate
prediction as well as for fundamental understanding of the climate system
response to heterogeneous forcing.</p>
      <p id="d1e104">In Persad and Caldeira (2018), we designed a set of simulations in a coupled
atmosphere–slab ocean global climate model (GCM) to evaluate the
global-scale temperature response to identical aerosols (equal to year 2000
Chinese sulfate, black carbon, and organic carbon emissions) emitted from eight
different regions and found a 14-fold range in the global-mean temperature
response due solely to differences in emissions source location. By fixing
the amount of aerosol based on a historical reference but varying the
source location, the simulations isolate the role of the geographic location
of emissions in setting the climate response to aerosols within a
quasi-realistic framework. This strategy is analogous to Green's function
approaches, in which a climate model is perturbed with an identical anomaly
in several different locations one by one, which have been used to evaluate
radiative feedbacks
(Y. Dong et al.,
2019; Zhou et al., 2017). In Persad and Caldeira (2018), the anomaly – i.e., fixed emissions of aerosol – is structured to
match the national boundaries along which the policy and technological
shifts that determine aerosol trends typically occur
(O'Neill
et al., 2015; Rao et al., 2017; Riahi et al., 2017). The goal is to achieve
an experimental setup that provides fundamental physical insight within a
framework that is directly translatable to policy-relevant tools like
emulators, emissions metrics, or social cost calculations that scale based
on national emissions. This allows for an approach for understanding the
importance of aerosols' geographic distribution to their climate response
that is complementary to the unequal historical emissions or highly
idealized forcing experiment designs that have previously been pursued.</p>
      <p id="d1e107">In this study, the simulations from Persad and Caldeira (2018) are analyzed
to understand the dependence of the hydrological-cycle response to aerosols
on emissions source location. Section 2 describes the simulations and
analysis techniques used to assess the influence of identical aerosol
emissions from different regions on global precipitation. Section 3 presents
results assessing impacts on both global-mean precipitation and the spatial
distribution of precipitation and explores a potential theory for why
certain source regions produce strongly localized precipitation responses
and others do not. Section 4 places the findings in the context of existing
understanding, and Sect. 5 summarizes and explores the implications of the
results in the context of the continuing spatial redistribution of
anthropogenic aerosol emissions.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e118">Simulations designed to test the global climate response to identical
aerosol emissions in different source regions are conducted in the National
Center for Atmospheric Research Community Earth System Model version 1.2
(CESM1) using the Community Atmosphere Model version 5 (CAM5) coupled to the
Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4) and a mixed-layer ocean
(Hurrell et
al., 2013). The three lognormal mode (MAM3) modal aerosol module is used in
CAM5, which allows for interactive transport, growth, internal mixing, and
removal of aerosol emissions by the internal physics of the model
(Liu et al., 2012). This
version of the model has been shown to produce minimal (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> 10 %)
biases in aerosol concentrations and aerosol radiative forcing compared to
more complicated atmospheric chemistry models
(Ghan
et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2012). Simulations in CESM1 (CAM5) using historical
aerosol emissions compare well<?pagebreak page3437?> with observations of spatial and temporal
patterns of aerosol optical depth (AOD), though low biases in AOD are
apparent over southern and eastern Asia. CAM5 allows for simulation of
aerosol–cloud interactions within the model's two-moment microphysical
parameterization (Liu et al.,
2012). Microphysical aerosol–precipitation interactions are permitted within
the stratiform cloud microphysics representation but are excluded from the
cumulus cloud parameterization
(Ghan et al., 2012). The
fully coupled CESM1 consistently performs among the top 10 fifth-generation Coupled
Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) models in simulation of
historical temperature and precipitation trends and spatial patterns
(Koutroulis et al., 2016).</p>
      <p id="d1e128">The simulation suite consists of a control simulation and eight perturbation
experiments. In the control simulation, year 2000 conditions are imposed for
all external and internal forcers, with the exception of non-biomass-burning
anthropogenic emissions of black carbon, organic carbon, sulfur dioxide,
and sulfate. These are set to 1850 values using CAM5's standard historical
emissions fields  (Lamarque
et al., 2010). In the eight perturbation experiments, these fields of anthropogenic
aerosol emissions are modified only within the relevant region to
impose additional total annual emissions of black carbon, organic carbon,
and sulfate precursor equivalent to China's total year 2000 values (1.61, 4.03, and 22.4 Tg, respectively). This is achieved by scaling that
region's year 2000 CAM5 standard historical emissions fields at each grid
point by a fixed factor such that the total change in anthropogenic aerosol
emissions between each of the eight perturbation experiments and the control is
identical. The spatial distribution of the emissions perturbation thus
follows the realistic year 2000 spatial pattern within a given region
(Appendix Fig. A1). The eight perturbation regions chosen (Brazil, China, East Africa
India, Indonesia, South Africa, the US, and western Europe) are selected
to sample a range of past, present, and projected future major emissions
source regions as well as a range of climate regimes (e.g., tropical,
monsoonal, and extratropical in both hemispheres). A comparable set of
simulations are run in atmosphere-only mode with sea surface temperatures
(SSTs) and sea ice fixed. Further discussion of simulation characteristics
and behavior can be found in Persad and Caldeira (2018).</p>
      <p id="d1e131">The atmosphere-only simulations are used to calculate effective radiative
forcing (ERF) and atmospheric absorption and to decompose the fast and slow
precipitation responses. ERF is calculated as the change in global-mean
top-of-atmosphere energy balance in each of the eight atmosphere-only
perturbation experiments compared to the atmosphere-only control, following
the standard fixed SST definition of ERF
(Ramaswamy et al., 2018). The fast
precipitation response is calculated as the precipitation response within
the atmosphere-only simulation. Atmospheric absorption values shown are also
calculated within the atmosphere-only simulation. The slow precipitation
response is calculated as the residual of the precipitation response in the
slab ocean simulations minus the fast precipitation response.</p>
      <p id="d1e134">Model output is produced at a nominal 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 2<inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> longitude–latitude
resolution. Slab ocean simulations are run for 100 years, and
atmosphere-only simulations are run for 60 years. The initial 40 (slab ocean
simulations) or 20 (atmosphere-only simulations) years are treated as the
transient response (based on analysis of trends in the top-of-atmosphere
energy imbalance) and discarded. The simulation design used here, in which a
signal from a given perturbation (e.g., regional aerosol emissions) is
characterized by imposing that perturbation as the only modification to a
control simulation and running the resulting simulation in repeating annual-cycle mode for an extended period, is a standard methodology used across the
aerosol–climate interaction literature. Examples include simulations
conducted as part of the Precipitation Driver and Response Model
Intercomparison Project (PDRMIP)
(Liu
et al., 2018; Myhre et al., 2016; Samset et al., 2016) with idealized
regional aerosol perturbations and within multi-model
(Westervelt
et al., 2017, 2018) and single-model experiment designs
(Kasoar et al., 2018) simulating removal of present-day
aerosol emissions in individual regions. In this experiment design, the
perturbation signal is characterized as the difference between the long-term
mean of the perturbation and control experiments after they have reached
quasi-equilibrium, and the effects of internal variability are estimated
using the interannual variability between individual years of the
simulation.</p>
      <p id="d1e163">One concern with this approach not addressed in prior studies is that
persistent modes of internal variability may emerge within the equilibrium
simulations and could be conflated with the perturbation signal. While
atmosphere-only simulations cannot sustain long-term modes of internal
variability, this concern may apply to the slab ocean coupled simulations
used here. To address this concern, two approaches are applied in this
study. First, statistical significance is estimated using either the last 60 years (slab ocean simulations) or the last 40 years (atmosphere-only) of the
simulations as the sample, but effective sample size is adjusted to account
for autocorrelation between simulation years following the methodology of
Santer et al. (2000). The 95 % confidence level (i.e., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.96</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) based on
year-to-year variability in the difference between the control simulation
and each perturbation experiment is provided for all global-mean values, and
statistical significance for maps is estimated at the 95 % confidence
level using a two-tailed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test, both using this adjusted effective sample
size. Second, the slab ocean coupled experiments are repeated with slightly
adjusted initial conditions (initial conditions drawn from a different year
of the control simulation), allowing for a different trajectory of internal
variability to emerge within the equilibrium simulation. Results from this
second experiment set are provided in Appendix A and demonstrate that the
central findings of the study are unlikely to be the result of persistent
modes of internal variability emerging in either equilibrium simulation<?pagebreak page3438?> set
but rather can robustly be assumed to result from perturbations of the regional aerosol emissions imposed.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e185">Spatial distribution of the change in precipitation rate (mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" 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>)
due to the addition of an identical amount and composition of aerosol
emissions in each of the eight regions. Grid lines indicate regions where the
changes are not statistically significant at the 95 % confidence level via
a two-sided <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test. Global-mean precipitation rate change and 95 %
confidence intervals (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.96</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" 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 shown in the
bottom left corner of each map.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f01.jpg"/>

      </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Global-mean precipitation response</title>
      <p id="d1e260">The results indicate that differences in source location alone can produce a
more than 6-fold difference in global-mean precipitation response to
aerosol emissions (Figs. 1,  A2). Aerosols from all regions decrease
global-mean precipitation. However, western European emissions produce by
far the strongest global-mean precipitation reduction (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">21.3</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" 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> or an approximately 1 % decrease), a full 50 % larger than
the next strongest precipitation response (to US emissions), while southern
Asian emissions produce the weakest (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.6</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" 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> or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">&lt;</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> 0.2 % decrease). In general, mid-latitude sources (western
Europe, the US, China, and South Africa) generate larger global-mean
precipitation responses than do the tropical and sub-tropical sources. The
global-mean precipitation response to Indian and East African emissions,
which constitute the weakest of the precipitation responses, are
statistically indistinguishable from zero and from each other in the
presence of internal variability. All other global-mean precipitation
responses are statistically significant at the 95 % confidence level and
thus highly unlikely to arise from internal variability alone. Although the
95 % confidence interval in the global-mean response to some regional
emissions is overlapping, it is clear that there is statistically
significant diversity in the global-mean response to identical aerosol
emissions from different regions.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e341">The total global-mean precipitation response to emissions from
each region can be decomposed in the <bold>(a)</bold> global-mean fast precipitation
response (mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" 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>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), which is strongly correlated with the global-mean
change in atmospheric absorption (W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), and the <bold>(b)</bold> global-mean slow precipitation response (mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" 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>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), which is strongly
correlated with the global-mean change in surface temperature (K, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis).
Error bars provide the 95 % confidence interval (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.96</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e433">Global-mean precipitation changes can be separated into a fast
(atmosphere-only) portion that scales strongly with the change in
global-mean atmospheric absorption (Fig. 2a) and a slow (atmosphere–slab
ocean coupled) portion that scales strongly with the slab ocean coupled
change in global-mean temperature (Figs. 2b,  A3). Increased
atmospheric absorption of radiative energy under fixed sea surface
temperature conditions enhances atmospheric stability, suppressing
evaporation, convection, and precipitation – producing the so-called
“fast” precipitation response
(Andrews et al.,
2010; Dagan et al., 2019, 2021). Once sea surface temperatures are allowed
to respond, feedbacks in moist convection and horizontal moist transport and
thermodynamic constraints on precipitation and evaporation result in a slow
precipitation response that is estimated as a 2 %–3 % increase in
precipitation per kelvin of global-mean warming, regardless of
forcing  (Samset et
al., 2016; Sillmann et al., 2017). For most emitting regions simulated in
this study, the slow precipitation response contributes the majority of the
total precipitation response (Figs. 3,  A4). The exceptions are East
African and Indian emissions, whose total global-mean precipitation response
is almost entirely contributed (or, in the case of Indian emissions,
outpaced) by the fast precipitation response, and Indonesian emissions,
whose total precipitation response results from roughly equal slow and fast
precipitation responses.</p>
      <p id="d1e437">The diversity in the slow precipitation response, which in turn drives the
majority of the diversity in the total precipitation response, is largely
explained by the divergence in global-mean temperature responses (Figs. 2b,
A3). Indeed, the slow precipitation response to regional aerosol
perturbations seen here follows the 2 %–3 % K<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" 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> scaling previously identified
in both fully dynamical ocean and slab ocean coupled setups
(Held and
Soden, 2006; Samset et al., 2016; Sillmann et al., 2017). This temperature
dependence also provides an explanation for the larger total global-mean
precipitation responses generated by higher-latitude sources. The
temperature response to identical aerosols emitted from these source regions
spans a 14-fold range. As detailed in Persad and Caldeira (2018), the
differences in global-mean temperature response stem from a combination of
the differing strengths of effective radiative forcing generated by the
individual source regions and the different ability of the forcing to
generate climate feedbacks (see Fig. 3b of Persad and Caldeira, 2018). The
higher-latitude source regions generally produce larger effective radiative
forcing than the lower-latitude sources. Forcing from higher-latitude
sources, in turn, is also more effective at generating cloud and sea ice
feedbacks that amplify the efficacy at generating temperature change
relative to the lower-latitude sources (see Fig. 4 of Persad and Caldeira, 2018).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e454">Decomposition of the global-mean total precipitation response
(mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" 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>, blue) to identical emissions from each of the eight regions into the
slow (orange) and fast (green) precipitation response. Error bars provide
the 95 % confidence interval (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.96</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e487">Emitting regions that demonstrate a substantial or dominant contribution
from global-mean fast precipitation responses are those in which the
aerosols produce a strong increase in global-mean atmospheric absorption in
the atmosphere-only simulations (Figs. 3 and 2a). Increased
atmospheric absorption in the atmosphere-only simulations may result from
direct radiative effects of the aerosols or from thermodynamic or fast
dynamical responses in clouds and water vapor. While the emissions amount
is identical across simulations, differences in the depositional environment
into which the aerosols are emitted results in varying total atmospheric
concentrations in response to each region's emissions (Persad
and Caldeira, 2018). Emissions from India, East Africa, South Africa, and
Brazil sustain the largest steady-state atmospheric burdens of black carbon
and organic carbon compared to identical emissions from the other regions
(see supplementary Fig. 4 of Persad and Caldeira, 2018). This partially
explains the relatively high atmospheric absorption rates associated with
these regional emissions and, consequently, the relatively large fast
precipitation response.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Spatial patterns of precipitation response</title>
      <p id="d1e498">The identical emissions from each region also produce differing spatial
patterns of global precipitation change. A key difference in the spatial
pattern of response is a divergence<?pagebreak page3439?> in whether the regional emissions
generate a strong in situ precipitation response. In all cases,
precipitation decreases within the emitting region (Figs. 1,  4a,
A2,  A5a). However, emissions from India, East Africa,
Indonesia, and Brazil generate strong precipitation responses within source
region boundaries, while emissions from Europe, the US, and China show
only a minimal signature of within-region precipitation change. This signal
persists when the precipitation response is normalized by the climatological
precipitation (Fig. A6), indicating that it is not merely a function of
larger climatological precipitation rates across the tropics and
sub-tropics.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e503"><bold>(a)</bold> Regional-mean changes in precipitation rate (mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" 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 each
of the eight regions (columns) due to emissions from each of the eight regions
(rows) are shown. <bold>(b)</bold> Shifts in the location of the Intertropical
Convergence Zone, quantified as the change in the meridional centroid of
zonally averaged precipitation between 20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S and 20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> latitude, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi>y</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis), correlate with the change in
interhemispheric temperature gradient, quantified as the differences between
Northern Hemisphere (NH) and Southern Hemisphere (SH) mean surface temperature (K,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi>x</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> axis). Error bars in panel <bold>(b)</bold> provide the 95 % confidence interval
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.96</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Black asterisks in panel <bold>(a)</bold> indicate regional-mean
precipitation changes that are significantly different than zero with 95 %
confidence. Grey asterisks in panel <bold>(a)</bold> indicate regions with no
statistically significant precipitation response in any grid cell; all
others show statistically significant precipitation responses in some grid
boxes within the region (see Fig. 1), although the regional-mean change is
not statistically significant.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=369.885827pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e592">Further, the maximum precipitation response does not always occur within the
aerosol source region. The combination of a negligible in situ precipitation
response and strong remote precipitation response to emissions from certain
regions means that aerosols from those source regions impact remote regions
more strongly than themselves (Figs. 1, 4a). In the case of Chinese,
western European, and US emissions, the maximum precipitation decline
occurs away from the source region over the tropical oceans, whereas it
occurs within the source boundaries for the other regions. In all cases, the
maximum precipitation increases – which are of similar size to the maximum
precipitation reductions – are dislocated from the source region and are
associated with tropical precipitation shifts.</p>
      <p id="d1e596">The large remote precipitation responses generated by the mid-latitude
source regions result from their strong influence on the location of the
Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), which arises from their impact on the
interhemispheric temperature gradient. Figure 4b (Fig. A5b) shows the
change in the meridional location of the ITCZ centroid – calculated as the
center of mass of the zonally averaged precipitation between 20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N
and 20<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> S – versus the change in the interhemispheric temperature
gradient – calculated as the<?pagebreak page3440?> difference between the Northern and Southern
Hemisphere mean surface temperatures – in response to emissions from each of
the eight source regions. Higher-latitude sources produce larger
interhemispheric temperature gradients rather than lower-latitude sources due to
their larger total temperature effect, which manifests primarily in the
source hemisphere. Northern Hemisphere mid-latitude sources (Europe, the
US, and China) produce the largest southward migration of the ITCZ,
associated with their strong preferential cooling of the Northern
Hemisphere. The Southern Hemisphere mid-latitude source included in these
simulations (South Africa), meanwhile, generates a northward migration of
the ITCZ centroid consistent with its preferential cooling of the Southern
Hemisphere. The Northern Hemisphere lower-latitude sources (India and
Indonesia) generate minimal (consistent with zero) shifts in either the
interhemispheric temperature gradient or the ITCZ centroid.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Potential processes underlying the presence or absence of a local
precipitation response</title>
      <p id="d1e625">A critical question arising from these results is why aerosol emissions from
certain source regions produce a large in situ precipitation response and
others produce only a negligible one. Given the strong in situ radiative,
microphysical, and thermodynamics effects of aerosols on precipitation
(e.g., B. Dong et al., 2019; Persad et al., 2017; Ramanathan et al., 2001), one might
expect the local response to dominate the precipitation response to regional
aerosol emissions even when remote responses occur. However, these results
indicate that for several source regions remote impacts may be more
substantial. Aerosol emissions tend to be controlled by policy and
technological decisions made at the national or subnational scale, often
motivated by societally immediate and highly localized impacts on air
quality
(Hoesly
et al., 2018; Rao et al., 2017; Riahi et al., 2017). Thus, it is important
to understand whether concomitant impacts on the hydrological cycle will be
similarly concentrated or will be largely borne by others, for which source
regions, and driven by what mechanisms.</p>
      <p id="d1e628">One possibility investigated here is that regions with strongly localized
precipitation responses are those for which the fast precipitation response
contributes strongly to the total precipitation response. Because the fast
precipitation response is largely the result of in situ stabilization and
suppression of convection, evaporation, and precipitation by atmospheric
absorption
(Andrews
et al., 2010; Dagan et al., 2021; Samset et al., 2016), it is expected to
be maximized in the same regions as changes in atmospheric absorption.<?pagebreak page3441?> The
changes in atmospheric absorption may result either (1) from the direct,
semi-direct, and indirect radiative effects of the aerosol, which will be
localized within and downwind of the emitting region due to aerosols' short
atmospheric lifetime, or (2) from large-scale responses in clouds or water
vapor, which are expected to be secondary to radiative effects when SSTs are
fixed (Andrews
et al., 2010; Samset et al., 2016). The slow precipitation response,
meanwhile, results largely from the response of the large-scale circulation
and moisture transport to sea surface temperature changes, which can produce
large, remote precipitation responses (Andrews et
al., 2010). Thus, for emitting regions for which atmospheric absorption and
fast precipitation responses are strong but slow precipitation responses
are weak, the total precipitation response should be localized to the
emitting region. Conversely, emitting regions for which atmospheric
absorption and the fast precipitation response are weak but equilibrium
temperature change and the slow precipitation response are strong should
primarily generate remote precipitation responses.</p>
      <p id="d1e631">This theoretical framework is borne out in the spatial patterns of response
to the regional emissions imposed in this study. The fast precipitation
response follows a similar spatial pattern to the changes in atmospheric
absorption (Figs. 5,  6) and tends to be concentrated within and
proximal to the emitting region. Some weaker large-scale features are
evident, likely generated by the land surface temperature changes permitted
in the fixed SST simulations used to characterize the fast precipitation
response (Samset et al., 2016).
For all emitting regions, atmospheric absorption increases within and
surrounding the emitting region – associated with the radiative effects of
the combined sulfate, black carbon, and organic carbon emissions
imposed – and atmospheric absorption changes remote from the emitting region
are minimal. However, the strength of the atmospheric absorption response
differs. The emitting regions generating the strongest localized atmospheric
absorption (India, Indonesia, East Africa, South Africa) are also those for
which the fast precipitation response dominates (India, East Africa) or
substantially contributes to (Indonesia, South Africa) the total
precipitation response. These are also the regions in which large in situ
total precipitation responses arise (Fig. 4a). Conversely, the regions
that exhibit minimal in situ precipitation responses (the US, Europe, and
China) are also those whose emissions produce the least atmospheric
absorption and the weakest fast precipitation response.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e637">Spatial distribution of the change in the rate of fast precipitation response
(mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" 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>) due to the addition of an identical aerosol emissions amount and composition
in each of the eight regions. Grid lines indicate regions
where the changes are not statistically significant at the 95 % confidence
level via a two-sided <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test. Global-mean change in the rate and
95 % confidence intervals (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.96</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>m d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" 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>) of fast precipitation response are shown
in the bottom left corner of each map.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f05.jpg"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e699">Spatial distribution of the change in atmospheric absorption
(W m<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>) due to the addition of an identical aerosol emissions amount and composition
in each of the eight regions. Grid lines indicate regions
where the changes are not statistically significant at the 95 % confidence
level via a two-sided <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> test.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f06.jpg"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e736">These findings highlight that understanding the processes that control the
relative contribution of fast versus slow precipitation response to the total
precipitation response is important for constraining the magnitude and
spatial distribution of precipitation response to regional aerosol forcing.
In particular, understanding the processes controlling the fast
precipitation response, namely atmospheric absorption, may provide an
important constraint on the expected prevalence of localized precipitation
responses to regional aerosol<?pagebreak page3442?> emissions. The dependence of the atmospheric
absorption and strength of the fast precipitation response on aerosol location seen
here aligns with results from highly idealized studies.
Dagan et al. (2019) forced an aquaplanet atmospheric
general circulation model (ICON, ICOsahedral Nonhydrostatic) with equivalent, radially symmetric
absorbing aerosol optical depth plumes in the deep tropics versus mid-latitudes and found higher resulting atmospheric absorption in the deep
tropics due to stronger cloud feedbacks. However, the aquaplanet formulation
reduces the comparability of the resulting fast precipitation responses with
those seen in this study. A follow-on study in the same atmosphere-only
model with a realistic land surface found a stronger local reduction in fast
precipitation response over land in response to a tropical scattering AOD
plume than to a comparable higher-latitude plume, though the use of a purely
scattering plume as opposed to the mixed scattering and absorbing aerosols
used in this study again limits direct comparison
(Dagan et al., 2021). Regardless, the results of
this analysis indicate that, particularly for tropical aerosol sources, the
resulting amount of atmospheric absorption – and, consequently, the strength
of the fast precipitation response – can be a strong determinant of the
overall precipitation response. The importance of the atmospheric absorption
for the precipitation response is particularly notable, since scattering
rather than absorption by the mixed aerosol emissions in this study
dominates the temperature and overall radiative response (Fig. 2b and
Persad and Caldeira, 2018). There are known model biases and limited
observational constraints on atmospheric absorption, particularly at the
regional scale (Samset et al., 2018). The importance to
the hydrological response seen here, however, reinforces the need for
improved observations and modeling of the processes that control atmospheric
absorption.</p>
      <?pagebreak page3443?><p id="d1e739">The regions that manifest local fast versus slow precipitation responses in
the simulations analyzed here also overlap with regions identified in
existing studies, including those utilizing Precipitation Driver and
Response Model Intercomparison Project simulations
(PDRMIP; Myhre et al., 2016). Samset et al. (2018) evaluated the regions
for which fast precipitation responses dominate slow precipitation responses
for PDRMIP multi-model simulations of idealized global forcings, including
10 times present-day global black carbon emissions and 5 times present-day
global sulfate emissions. Although the spatial pattern of imposed
perturbation differs from this study (i.e., globally distributed versus
regionally confined perturbations), they also find that the total
precipitation response to both global black carbon (BC) and global sulfate is dominated
by the fast response over parts of southern Asia and most of the African
continent. High-latitude precipitation responses to these two forcers,
meanwhile, are dominated by the slow precipitation response in the
multi-model simulations  (Samset
et al., 2016), though individual models show conflicting results
(Zhang et al., 2021). Similar
PDRMIP multi-model simulations with regional idealized aerosol emissions
over Asia and Europe (Liu et al., 2018), however, also showed a strong local
fast precipitation response to Asian aerosols and almost no fast
precipitation response to European aerosols. The appearance of a fast
precipitation response in low-latitude continental regions in response to
both localized and global-scale aerosol forcing and the absence of one at
high latitudes thus appears to be a robust feature across models and aerosol
perturbation setups.</p>
      <p id="d1e742">The latitudinal dependence of the strength of the fast precipitation
response and consequently the total local precipitation response to
regional aerosol emissions may bear the signature of other processes that
differentiate between the tropics and extratropics. For example, differences
in local energy budget closure and the strength of horizontal energy and
moisture gradients between the tropics and<?pagebreak page3444?> extratropics, associated with
poleward strengthening of the Coriolis force, have been leveraged to explain
the latitudinal dependence of fast precipitation responses to idealized
aerosol forcing  (Dagan et al., 2019,
2021). The relative role of local- versus large-scale precipitation
processes in supplying precipitation to a region may also play a role in its
susceptibility to in situ aerosol forcing. The tropics and extratropics
differ strongly in the proportion of total precipitation that is supplied by
convective versus large-scale precipitation (Fig. A7), though specific
patterns are highly model dependent
(Dai, 2006;
Kyselý et al., 2016). To the (imperfect) extent to which these two
model-derived flavors of precipitation correspond with precipitation that is
controlled by local- versus large-scale processes in the real world
(Norris et al., 2021), regions with
climatological precipitation dominated by convective (i.e., local-scale)
precipitation may be more susceptible to local aerosol forcing. Large-scale
precipitation processes, meanwhile, may be relatively insensitive to
localized forcing from regional aerosol emissions, since they are more
strongly controlled by large-scale moisture and energy gradients
(Wang et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d1e745">The plausibility of this process is hinted at by the fact that regions that
exhibit strong in situ precipitation responses to local aerosol emissions
(Figs. 1,  4a) are also those whose climatological precipitation is
overwhelmingly supplied by convective precipitation (Fig. A7). Conversely,
the regions that show a negligible local response are those in which
climatological precipitation is partly or primarily supplied by large-scale
precipitation. Additionally, the local precipitation response is dominated
by convective precipitation change in all cases (Fig. A8). However, it
should be noted that CAM5, like many CMIP5 and CMIP6 generation models,
includes aerosol microphysical effects on precipitation in its convective
precipitation scheme but not its large-scale precipitation scheme
(Hurrell et
al., 2013). Thus, this signal may be largely dependent on the parameterization
approach. Applying well-established energetic analysis approaches
(Dagan
et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2018; Ming et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2021) to
more realistic aerosol perturbations in combination with moisture-tracking
algorithms  (Mei et al., 2015) that allow for better
characterization of precipitation sources could help further clarify the
potential role of local- versus large-scale precipitation controls in
determining the emergence of in situ precipitation responses to regional
aerosols.</p>
      <p id="d1e749">The greater capability of higher-latitude emissions sources at generating
total global-mean precipitation change also appears to be a robust feature
of the response to aerosols. Studies analyzing the global-mean precipitation
response to removal of present-day aerosols from individual regions find
that removal of European or North American emissions generates stronger
global-mean precipitation per unit of radiative forcing than removal of
southern or eastern Asian emissions
(via
fully coupled HadGEM3-GA4 simulations in Kasoar et al., 2018; via fully
coupled GISS – Goddard Institute for Space Studies – E2, GFDL – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory – CM3, and NCAR – National Center for Atmospheric Research – CESM1 simulations in Westervelt et al.,
2018), in line with the findings here. This reinforces the latitudinal
dependence in the climate response to heterogeneous regional forcing found
in earlier studies
(Shindell and Faluvegi,
2009; Shindell et al., 2012) and indicates that it continues to apply as the
forcings become more regionalized.</p>
      <p id="d1e752">Despite the promising alignment of this study's findings with prior single-
and multi-model work, the single-model, slab ocean setup used here for
computational tractability may create biases that encourage future
multi-model coupled investigation of these questions. The regional aerosol
response in the fully coupled model NCAR CESM1 is comparable with results
from other contemporary coupled models, such as GFDL CM3, but the ITCZ
response to aerosols is somewhat stronger
(Westervelt et al., 2018).
Ocean dynamical adjustments present in the fully coupled model but not in
the slab ocean configuration used here can either damp or amplify the
response to aerosols, depending on the spatial pattern of forcing
(Kang et al., 2021). In particular, they may damp
ITCZ shifts relative to those seen in a slab ocean model
(Zhao and Suzuki, 2019). Nevertheless, slab ocean
models can provide valuable insights into hydrological-cycle responses to
anthropogenic forcings when computational efficiency is needed
(Held and Soden, 2006; Ming and Ramaswamy, 2009). The strong
dependence of the hydrological response to aerosols on regional distribution
seen here and in other studies, across perturbation setups and models,
highlights the importance of continued investment in developing a
comprehensive and consensus theory of what drives this dependence.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e764">This study identifies a strong dependence of the global-mean precipitation
response and its spatial distribution on the geographic location of given
aerosol emissions. Coupled atmosphere–slab ocean GCM simulations, in which an
identical, quasi-realistic amount and composition of aerosol is separately
placed into a range of emitting regions, are used to isolate the importance
of source location in determining aerosols' hydrological effects. A 6-fold
difference in global-mean precipitation response emerges, largely driven by
a 14-fold difference in global-mean temperature response. This arises
from a combination of differing strengths of global-mean radiative forcing
generated by each region's emissions and diversity in the efficacy of that
radiative forcing at generating cloud and ice albedo feedbacks
(Persad and Caldeira, 2018). Major distinctions in the
geographic distribution of the precipitation response, particularly the
prevalence of local versus remote responses, also arise. Tropical regions,
which also tend to have the greatest societal vulnerability to precipitation
disruption, are the most susceptible to dynamically driven precipitation
changes generated by both local<?pagebreak page3445?> and remote aerosol emissions, as has been
highlighted elsewhere
(e.g., Scannell et al., 2019; Westervelt et al., 2018; Zanis et al., 2020).
However, these regions are also the least effective at generating remote
precipitation responses. Conversely, mid-latitude emissions sources are
highly effective at generating global-mean precipitation change, but these
changes occur almost entirely outside of the source region. These results
indicate that the time-evolving geographic distribution of global aerosol
emissions may have substantial implications for the precipitation stability
of vulnerable regions outside of key past or projected emissions hotspots.
Building a comprehensive theory of what determines the relative strength of
local versus remote hydrological impacts of changes in regional aerosol emissions
will be important to understanding and predicting these trends.</p>
      <p id="d1e767">The continuous spatial redistribution of aerosol emissions constitutes an
ongoing source of uncertainty and variability in the global hydrological
cycle    (Deser et al., 2020), and near-term regional aerosol
trends may be a major determinant of climate risk over the next several
decades  (Luo et al., 2020; Samset et
al., 2019). Notably, the regions identified in this study to have the
strongest global-mean and remote precipitation impacts (Europe and the US)
have seen strongly declining aerosol emissions since the mid-20th
century (Hoesly et al., 2018).
Conversely, those with the weakest global-mean but the strongest local
precipitation impacts (e.g., India, Indonesia, East Africa) are among those
in which emissions could continue to increase substantially through the
mid-21st century  (Lund et al.,
2019). This implies that the future spatial distribution of aerosol
emissions may have a lower overall effectiveness at changing global-mean
precipitation but may preferentially concentrate precipitation impacts into
vulnerable regions. Known nonlinearity in the climate response to
simultaneous regional aerosol variations (Herbert et
al., 2021) limits the direct application of the regional dependence
quantified here to estimate how ongoing spatial redistribution of aerosol
emissions will affect global precipitation patterns. However, the strong
dependence on source location seen in this study demonstrates that the
geographic distribution of aerosol emissions must be accounted for when
quantifying the human influence on global precipitation patterns.</p><?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<?pagebreak page3446?><app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title>Additional figures</title>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F7"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A1</label><caption><p id="d1e784">An identical total change in emissions is distributed within each
of the eight perturbation regions according to patterns shown above.
Distributions are shown in terms of the percent of the identical total
emissions change that occurs within a given model grid cell within the
region and follows the year 2000 realistic distribution of emissions within
that region.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f07.png"/>

      </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A2</label><caption><p id="d1e798">As in Fig. 1 but for the second simulation set conducted with
adjusted initial conditions (see Sect. 2).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f08.jpg"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F9"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A3</label><caption><p id="d1e812">As in Fig. 2b but for the second simulation set conducted with
adjusted initial conditions (see Sect. 2).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=199.169291pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f09.png"/>

      </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F10"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A4</label><caption><p id="d1e826">As in Fig. 3 but for the second simulation set conducted with
adjusted initial conditions (see Sect. 2).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f10.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F11"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A5</label><caption><p id="d1e839">As in Fig. 4 but for the second simulation set conducted with
adjusted initial conditions (see Sect. 2).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=398.338583pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f11.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{h!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A6</label><caption><p id="d1e852">Annual-mean precipitation responses to identical total aerosol
emissions within each of the eight perturbation regions are given in terms of
percent change relative to the climatological precipitation in each grid
cell taken from the control simulation.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=497.923228pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f12.png"/>

      </fig>

<?xmltex \hack{\clearpage}?><?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A7</label><caption><p id="d1e867">The percent of total precipitation in each grid cell in the
control simulation that is derived from convective precipitation as opposed
to large-scale precipitation is shown.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f13.png"/>

      </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F14"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A8</label><caption><p id="d1e878">The relative contribution of convective precipitation change
(mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" 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>, orange) and large-scale precipitation change (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>, green) to the
total local precipitation response (mm d<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" 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>, blue) within each of the eight
perturbation regions in response to emissions within that region are shown.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=236.157874pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/3435/2023/acp-23-3435-2023-f14.png"/>

      </fig>

</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e927">NCAR CESM1 is an open-source model and is publicly available at
<uri>https://www.cesm.ucar.edu/models/cesm1.2/</uri> (University Center for Atmospheric Research (UCAR), 2020).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e936">Input emissions data files developed for the perturbation simulations are
citeable and available for download via the Texas Data Repository at
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/Z87COZ" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18738/T8/Z87COZ</ext-link> (Persad, 2022a). All output data analyzed as
part of this study are also citeable and available for download via the
Texas Data Repository at <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/WBNQZE" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18738/T8/WBNQZE</ext-link> (Persad, 2022b).
All other input data used are available as part of the standard public
release of NCAR CESM1 (see “Code availability”).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e948">The author has declared that there are no competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e954">Publisher’s note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e960">This research has been supported by the US National Science Foundation (grant no. 715557).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e966">This paper was edited by Philip Stier and reviewed by two anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Allen, R. J., Evan, A. T., and Booth, B. B. B.: Interhemispheric Aerosol
Radiative Forcing and Tropical Precipitation Shifts during the Late
Twentieth Century, J. Climate, 28, 8219–8246,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0148.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0148.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Andrews, T., Forster, P. M., Boucher, O., Bellouin, N., and Jones, A.:
Precipitation, radiative forcing and global temperature change, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 37, L14701, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043991" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL043991</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bollasina, M. A., Ming, Y., and Ramaswamy, V.: Anthropogenic Aerosols and
the Weakening of the South Asian Summer Monsoon, Science, 334, 502–505,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204994" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1204994</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Bollasina, M. A., Ming, Y., Ramaswamy, V., Schwarzkopf, M. D., and Naik, V.:
Contribution of local and remote anthropogenic aerosols to the twentieth
century weakening of the South Asian Monsoon, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41,
680–687, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058183" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2013GL058183</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster, P., Kerminen, V.-M., Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann, U., Rasch, P., Satheesh, S. K., Sherwood, S., Stevens, B., and Zhang, X. Y.: Clouds
and aerosols, in: 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 University Press,
571–657, <uri>https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter07_FINAL-1.pdf</uri>
(last access: 10 August 2018), 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dagan, G., Stier, P., and Watson-Parris, D.: Contrasting Response of
Precipitation to Aerosol Perturbation in the Tropics and Extratropics
Explained by Energy Budget Considerations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46,
7828–7837, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083479" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2019GL083479</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dagan, G., Stier, P., and Watson-Parris, D.: An Energetic View on the
Geographical Dependence of the Fast Aerosol Radiative Effects on
Precipitation, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD033045,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033045" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2020JD033045</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dai, A.: Precipitation Characteristics in Eighteen Coupled Climate Models,
J. Climate, 19, 4605–4630, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3884.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI3884.1</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Deser, C., Phillips, A. S., Simpson, I. R., Rosenbloom, N., Coleman, D.,
Lehner, F., Pendergrass, A. G., DiNezio, P., and Stevenson, S.: Isolating
the Evolving Contributions of Anthropogenic Aerosols and Greenhouse Gases: A
New CESM1 Large Ensemble Community Resource, J. Climate, 33, 7835–7858,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0123.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0123.1</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dong, B., Wilcox, L. J., Highwood, E. J., and Sutton, R. T.: Impacts of
recent decadal changes in Asian aerosols on the East Asian summer monsoon:
roles of aerosol–radiatio<?pagebreak page3450?>n and aerosol–cloud interactions, Clim. Dynam., 53,
3235–3256, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04698-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-019-04698-0</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Dong, Y., Proistosescu, C., Armour, K. C., and Battisti, D. S.: Attributing
Historical and Future Evolution of Radiative Feedbacks to Regional Warming
Patterns using a Green's Function Approach: The Preeminence of the Western
Pacific, J. Climate, 32, 5471–5491, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0843.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0843.1</ext-link>,
2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ghan, S. J., Liu, X., Easter, R. C., Zaveri, R., Rasch, P. J., Yoon, J.-H.,
and Eaton, B.: Toward a Minimal Representation of Aerosols in Climate
Models: Comparative Decomposition of Aerosol Direct, Semidirect, and
Indirect Radiative Forcing, J. Climate, 25, 6461–6476,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00650.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00650.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Held, I. M. and Soden, B. J.: Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to
global warming, J. Climate, 19, 5686–5699, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Herbert, R., Wilcox, L. J., Joshi, M., Highwood, E., and Frame, D.:
Nonlinear response of Asian summer monsoon precipitation to emission
reductions in South and East Asia, Environ. Res. Lett., 17, 014005,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac3b19" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/ac3b19</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S. J., Feng, L., Klimont, Z., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Pitkanen, T., Seibert, J. J., Vu, L., Andres, R. J., Bolt, R. M., Bond, T. C., Dawidowski, L., Kholod, N., Kurokawa, J.-I., Li, M., Liu, L., Lu, Z., Moura, M. C. P., O'Rourke, P. R., and Zhang, Q.: Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 369–408, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Hurrell, J. W., Holland, M. M., Gent, P. R., Ghan, S., Kay, J. E., Kushner,
P. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Large, W. G., Lawrence, D., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb,
W. H., Long, M. C., Mahowald, N., Marsh, D. R., Neale, R. B., Rasch, P.,
Vavrus, S., Vertenstein, M., Bader, D., Collins, W. D., Hack, J. J., Kiehl,
J., and Marshall, S.: The Community Earth System Model: A Framework for
Collaborative Research, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 1339–1360,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00121.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00121.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ishizaki, Y., Shiogama, H., Emori, S., Yokohata, T., Nozawa, T., Takahashi,
K., Ogura, T., Yoshimori, M., and Nagashima, T.: Dependence of Precipitation
Scaling Patterns on Emission Scenarios for Representative Concentration
Pathways, J. Climate, 26, 8868–8879,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00540.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00540.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kang, S. M., Xie, S.-P., Deser, C., and Xiang, B.: Zonal mean and shift
modes of historical climate response to evolving aerosol distribution, Sci.
Bull.,  66, 2405–2411, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2021.07.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scib.2021.07.013</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kasoar, M., Shawki, D., and Voulgarakis, A.: Similar spatial patterns of
global climate response to aerosols from different regions, Npj Clim.
Atmospheric Sci., 1, 12, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-018-0022-z" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41612-018-0022-z</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Koutroulis, A. G., Grillakis, M. G., Tsanis, I. K., and Papadimitriou, L.:
Evaluation of precipitation and temperature simulation performance of the
CMIP3 and CMIP5 historical experiments, Clim. Dynam., 47, 1881–1898,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2938-x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-015-2938-x</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Kyselý, J., Rulfová, Z., Farda, A., and Hanel, M.: Convective and
stratiform precipitation characteristics in an ensemble of regional climate
model simulations, Clim. Dynam., 46, 227–243,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2580-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-015-2580-7</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z., Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D., Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M., Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7017–7039, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Li, Z., Lau, W. K.-M., Ramanathan, V., Wu, G., Ding, Y., Manoj, M. G., Liu,
J., Qian, Y., Li, J., Zhou, T., Fan, J., Rosenfeld, D., Ming, Y., Wang, Y.,
Huang, J., Wang, B., Xu, X., Lee, S.-S., Cribb, M., Zhang, F., Yang, X.,
Zhao, C., Takemura, T., Wang, K., Xia, X., Yin, Y., Zhang, H., Guo, J.,
Zhai, P. M., Sugimoto, N., Babu, S. S., and Brasseur, G. P.: Aerosol and
monsoon climate interactions over Asia, Rev. Geophys., 54, 866–929,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000500" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015RG000500</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, L., Shawki, D., Voulgarakis, A., Kasoar, M., Samset, B. H., Myhre, G.,
Forster, P. M., Hodnebrog, Ø., Sillmann, J., Aalbergsjø, S. G.,
Boucher, O., Faluvegi, G., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F.,
Olivié, D., Richardson, T., Shindell, D., and Takemura, T.: A PDRMIP
Multimodel Study on the Impacts of Regional Aerosol Forcings on Global and
Regional Precipitation, J. Climate, 31, 4429–4447,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0439.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0439.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Liu, X., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zaveri, R., Rasch, P., Shi, X., Lamarque, J.-F., Gettelman, A., Morrison, H., Vitt, F., Conley, A., Park, S., Neale, R., Hannay, C., Ekman, A. M. L., Hess, P., Mahowald, N., Collins, W., Iacono, M. J., Bretherton, C. S., Flanner, M. G., and Mitchell, D.: Toward a minimal representation of aerosols in climate models: description and evaluation in the Community Atmosphere Model CAM5, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 709–739, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-709-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/gmd-5-709-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Lund, M. T., Myhre, G., and Samset, B. H.: Anthropogenic aerosol forcing under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13827–13839, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13827-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-19-13827-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Luo, F., Wilcox, L., Dong, B., Su, Q., Chen, W., Dunstone, N., Li, S., and
Gao, Y.: Projected near-term changes of temperature extremes in Europe and
China under different aerosol emissions, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 034013,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6b34" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/ab6b34</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Marvel, K., Biasutti, M., and Bonfils, C.: Fingerprints of external forcings
on Sahel rainfall: aerosols, greenhouse gases, and model-observation
discrepancies, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 084023,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab858e" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/1748-9326/ab858e</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Mei, R., Ashfaq, M., Rastogi, D., Leung, L. R., and Dominguez, F.:
Dominating Controls for Wetter South Asian Summer Monsoon in the
Twenty-First Century, J. Climate, 28, 3400–3419,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00355.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00355.1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ming, Y. and Ramaswamy, V.: Nonlinear Climate and Hydrological Responses to
Aerosol Effects, J. Climate, 22, 1329–1339,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2362.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2008JCLI2362.1</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ming, Y., Ramaswamy, V., and Persad, G.: Two Opposing Effects of Absorbing
Aerosols on Global-Mean Precipitation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L13701,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL042895" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2010GL042895</ext-link>, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Myhre, G., Forster, P. M., Samset, B. H., Hodnebrog, Ø., Sillmann, J.,
Aalbergsjø, S. G., Andrews, T., Boucher, O., Faluvegi, G., Fläschner,
D., Iversen, T., Kasoar, M., Kharin, V., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F.,
Olivié, D., Richardson, T. B., Shindell, D., Shine, K. P., Stjern, C.
W., Takemura, T.<?pagebreak page3451?>, Voulgarakis, A., and Zwiers, F.: PDRMIP: A Precipitation
Driver and Response Model Intercomparison Project – Protocol and Preliminary
Results, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 1185–1198,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0019.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0019.1</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Norris, J., Hall, A., Neelin, J. D., Thackeray, C. W., and Chen, D.:
Evaluation of the Tail of the Probability Distribution of Daily and Subdaily
Precipitation in CMIP6 Models, J. Climate, 34, 2701–2721,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0182.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0182.1</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>O'Neill, B. C., Kriegler, E., Ebi, K. L., Kemp-Benedict, E., Riahi, K.,
Rothman, D. S., van Ruijven, B. J., van Vuuren, D. P., Birkmann, J., Kok,
K., Levy, M., and Solecki, W.: The roads ahead: Narratives for shared
socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century, Global
Environ. Chang.,  42, 169–180, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.004</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Persad, G.: Emissions Input Data, V1, Texas Data Repository [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/Z87COZ" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18738/T8/Z87COZ</ext-link>, 2022a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Persad, G.: Simulation Output Data, V1, Texas Data Repository [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/WBNQZE" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18738/T8/WBNQZE</ext-link>, 2022b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Persad, G. G. and Caldeira, K.: Divergent global-scale temperature effects
from identical aerosols emitted in different regions, Nat. Commun., 9, 1–9,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05838-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41467-018-05838-6</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Persad, G. G., Paynter, D. J., Ming, Y., and Ramaswamy, V.: Competing
Atmospheric and Surface-Driven Impacts of Absorbing Aerosols on the East
Asian Summertime Climate, J. Climate, 30, 8929–8949,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0860.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0860.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ramanathan, V., Crutzen, P. J., Kiehl, J. T., and Rosenfeld, D.: Aerosols,
Climate, and the Hydrological Cycle, Science, 294, 2119–2124,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1064034" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1126/science.1064034</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Ramaswamy, V., Collins, W., Haywood, J., Lean, J., Mahowald, N., Myhre, G.,
Naik, V., Shine, K. P., Soden, B., Stenchikov, G., and Storelvmo, T.:
Radiative Forcing of Climate: The Historical Evolution of the Radiative
Forcing Concept, the Forcing Agents and their Quantification, and
Applications, Meteorol. Monogr., 59, 14.1–14.101,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-19-0001.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-19-0001.1</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Rao, S., Klimont, Z., Smith, S. J., Van Dingenen, R., Dentener, F., Bouwman,
L., Riahi, K., Amann, M., Bodirsky, B. L., van Vuuren, D. P., Aleluia Reis,
L., Calvin, K., Drouet, L., Fricko, O., Fujimori, S., Gernaat, D., Havlik,
P., Harmsen, M., Hasegawa, T., Heyes, C., Hilaire, J., Luderer, G., Masui,
T., Stehfest, E., Strefler, J., van der Sluis, S., and Tavoni, M.: Future
air pollution in the Shared Socio-economic Pathways, Global Environ. Chang.,
42, 346–358, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.012</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Riahi, K., van Vuuren, D. P., Kriegler, E., Edmonds, J., O'Neill, B. C.,
Fujimori, S., Bauer, N., Calvin, K., Dellink, R., Fricko, O., Lutz, W.,
Popp, A., Cuaresma, J. C., KC, S., Leimbach, M., Jiang, L., Kram, T., Rao,
S., Emmerling, J., Ebi, K., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Humpenöder, F., Da
Silva, L. A., Smith, S., Stehfest, E., Bosetti, V., Eom, J., Gernaat, D.,
Masui, T., Rogelj, J., Strefler, J., Drouet, L., Krey, V., Luderer, G.,
Harmsen, M., Takahashi, K., Baumstark, L., Doelman, J. C., Kainuma, M.,
Klimont, Z., Marangoni, G., Lotze-Campen, H., Obersteiner, M., Tabeau, A.,
and Tavoni, M.: The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land
use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview, Global Environ.
Chang., 42, 153–168, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Samset, B. H., Myhre, G., Forster, P. M., Hodnebrog, Ø., Andrews, T.,
Faluvegi, G., Fläschner, D., Kasoar, M., Kharin, V., Kirkevåg, A.,
Lamarque, J.-F., Olivié, D., Richardson, T., Shindell, D., Shine, K. P.,
Takemura, T., and Voulgarakis, A.: Fast and slow precipitation responses to
individual climate forcers: A PDRMIP multimodel study, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
43, 2016GL068064, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL068064" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2016GL068064</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Samset, B. H., Stjern, C. W., Andrews, E., Kahn, R. A., Myhre, G., Schulz,
M., and Schuster, G. L.: Aerosol Absorption: Progress Towards Global and
Regional Constraints, Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 4, 65–83,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-018-0091-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s40641-018-0091-4</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Samset, B. H., Lund, M. T., Bollasina, M., Myhre, G., and Wilcox, L.:
Emerging Asian aerosol patterns, Nat. Geosci., 12, 582–584,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0424-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41561-019-0424-5</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Santer, B. D., Wigley, T. M. L., Boyle, J. S., Gaffen, D. J., Hnilo, J. J.,
Nychka, D., Parker, D. E., and Taylor, K. E.: Statistical significance of
trends and trend differences in layer-average atmospheric temperature time
series, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 7337–7356,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD901105" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/1999JD901105</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Scannell, C., Booth, B. B. B., Dunstone, N. J., Rowell, D. P., Bernie, D.
J., Kasoar, M., Voulgarakis, A., Wilcox, L. J., Navarro, J. C. A., Seland,
Ø., and Paynter, D. J.: The Influence of Remote Aerosol Forcing from
Industrialized Economies on the Future Evolution of East and West African
Rainfall, J. Climate, 32, 8335–8354,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0716.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0716.1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shindell, D. and Faluvegi, G.: Climate response to regional radiative
forcing during the twentieth century, Nat. Geosci., 2, 294–300,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo473" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/ngeo473</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Shindell, D. T., Voulgarakis, A., Faluvegi, G., and Milly, G.: Precipitation response to regional radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6969–6982, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6969-2012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-12-6969-2012</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Sillmann, J., Stjern, C. W., Myhre, G., and Forster, P. M.: Slow and fast
responses of mean and extreme precipitation to different forcing in CMIP5
simulations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 6383–6390,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073229" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017GL073229</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Singh, D., Bollasina, M., Ting, M., and Diffenbaugh, N. S.: Disentangling
the influence of local and remote anthropogenic aerosols on South Asian
monsoon daily rainfall characteristics, Clim. Dynam., 52, 6301–6320,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4512-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00382-018-4512-9</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>University Center for Atmospheric Research (UCAR): CESM1.2 Series Public Release, University Center for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) [code], <uri>https://www2.cesm.ucar.edu/models/cesm1.2/</uri> (last access: 2 March 2023), 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Wang, J., Wong, R. K. W., Jun, M., Schumacher, C., Saravanan, R., and Sun,
C.: Statistical and machine learning methods applied to the prediction of
different tropical rainfall types, Environ. Res. Commun., 3, 111001,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ac371f" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1088/2515-7620/ac371f</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Westervelt, D. M., Conley, A. J., Fiore, A. M., Lamarque, J.-F., Shindell,
D., Previdi, M., Faluvegi, G., Correa, G., and Horowitz, L. W.: Multimodel
precipitation responses to removal of U.S. sulfur dioxide emissions, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 5024–5038,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026756" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017JD026756</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Westervelt, D. M., Conley, A. J., Fiore, A. M., Lamarque, J.-F., Shindell, D. T., Previdi, M., Mascioli, N. R., Faluvegi, G., Correa, G., and Horowitz, L. W.: Connectin<?pagebreak page3452?>g regional aerosol emissions reductions to local and remote precipitation responses, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 12461–12475, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12461-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-18-12461-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zanis, P., Akritidis, D., Georgoulias, A. K., Allen, R. J., Bauer, S. E., Boucher, O., Cole, J., Johnson, B., Deushi, M., Michou, M., Mulcahy, J., Nabat, P., Olivié, D., Oshima, N., Sima, A., Schulz, M., Takemura, T., and Tsigaridis, K.: Fast responses on pre-industrial climate from present-day aerosols in a CMIP6 multi-model study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8381–8404, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8381-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-20-8381-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhang, S., Stier, P., and Watson-Parris, D.: On the contribution of fast and slow responses to precipitation changes caused by aerosol perturbations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10179–10197, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10179-2021" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/acp-21-10179-2021</ext-link>, 2021.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhao, S. and Suzuki, K.: Differing Impacts of Black Carbon and Sulfate
Aerosols on Global Precipitation and the ITCZ Location via Atmosphere and
Ocean Energy Perturbations, J. Climate, 32, 5567–5582,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0616.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0616.1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Zhou, C., Zelinka, M. D., and Klein, S. A.: Analyzing the dependence of
global cloud feedback on the spatial pattern of sea surface temperature
change with a Green's function approach, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 9,
2174–2189, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001096" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2017MS001096</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>The dependence of aerosols' global and local precipitation impacts on the emitting region</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Allen, R. J., Evan, A. T., and Booth, B. B. B.: Interhemispheric Aerosol
Radiative Forcing and Tropical Precipitation Shifts during the Late
Twentieth Century, J. Climate, 28, 8219–8246,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0148.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-15-0148.1</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Andrews, T., Forster, P. M., Boucher, O., Bellouin, N., and Jones, A.:
Precipitation, radiative forcing and global temperature change, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 37, L14701, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043991" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL043991</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bollasina, M. A., Ming, Y., and Ramaswamy, V.: Anthropogenic Aerosols and
the Weakening of the South Asian Summer Monsoon, Science, 334, 502–505,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204994" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204994</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bollasina, M. A., Ming, Y., Ramaswamy, V., Schwarzkopf, M. D., and Naik, V.:
Contribution of local and remote anthropogenic aerosols to the twentieth
century weakening of the South Asian Monsoon, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41,
680–687, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058183" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058183</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
Boucher, O., Randall, D., Artaxo, P., Bretherton, C., Feingold, G., Forster, P., Kerminen, V.-M., Kondo, Y., Liao, H., Lohmann, U., Rasch, P., Satheesh, S. K., Sherwood, S., Stevens, B., and Zhang, X. Y.: Clouds
and aerosols, in: 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 University Press,
571–657, <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter07_FINAL-1.pdf" target="_blank"/>
(last access: 10 August 2018), 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dagan, G., Stier, P., and Watson-Parris, D.: Contrasting Response of
Precipitation to Aerosol Perturbation in the Tropics and Extratropics
Explained by Energy Budget Considerations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 46,
7828–7837, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083479" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL083479</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dagan, G., Stier, P., and Watson-Parris, D.: An Energetic View on the
Geographical Dependence of the Fast Aerosol Radiative Effects on
Precipitation, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 126, e2020JD033045,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033045" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033045</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dai, A.: Precipitation Characteristics in Eighteen Coupled Climate Models,
J. Climate, 19, 4605–4630, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3884.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI3884.1</a>, 2006.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Deser, C., Phillips, A. S., Simpson, I. R., Rosenbloom, N., Coleman, D.,
Lehner, F., Pendergrass, A. G., DiNezio, P., and Stevenson, S.: Isolating
the Evolving Contributions of Anthropogenic Aerosols and Greenhouse Gases: A
New CESM1 Large Ensemble Community Resource, J. Climate, 33, 7835–7858,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0123.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0123.1</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dong, B., Wilcox, L. J., Highwood, E. J., and Sutton, R. T.: Impacts of
recent decadal changes in Asian aerosols on the East Asian summer monsoon:
roles of aerosol–radiation and aerosol–cloud interactions, Clim. Dynam., 53,
3235–3256, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04698-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-019-04698-0</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dong, Y., Proistosescu, C., Armour, K. C., and Battisti, D. S.: Attributing
Historical and Future Evolution of Radiative Feedbacks to Regional Warming
Patterns using a Green's Function Approach: The Preeminence of the Western
Pacific, J. Climate, 32, 5471–5491, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0843.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0843.1</a>,
2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ghan, S. J., Liu, X., Easter, R. C., Zaveri, R., Rasch, P. J., Yoon, J.-H.,
and Eaton, B.: Toward a Minimal Representation of Aerosols in Climate
Models: Comparative Decomposition of Aerosol Direct, Semidirect, and
Indirect Radiative Forcing, J. Climate, 25, 6461–6476,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00650.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00650.1</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Held, I. M. and Soden, B. J.: Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to
global warming, J. Climate, 19, 5686–5699, 2006.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Herbert, R., Wilcox, L. J., Joshi, M., Highwood, E., and Frame, D.:
Nonlinear response of Asian summer monsoon precipitation to emission
reductions in South and East Asia, Environ. Res. Lett., 17, 014005,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac3b19" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac3b19</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hoesly, R. M., Smith, S. J., Feng, L., Klimont, Z., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Pitkanen, T., Seibert, J. J., Vu, L., Andres, R. J., Bolt, R. M., Bond, T. C., Dawidowski, L., Kholod, N., Kurokawa, J.-I., Li, M., Liu, L., Lu, Z., Moura, M. C. P., O'Rourke, P. R., and Zhang, Q.: Historical (1750–2014) anthropogenic emissions of reactive gases and aerosols from the Community Emissions Data System (CEDS), Geosci. Model Dev., 11, 369–408, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hurrell, J. W., Holland, M. M., Gent, P. R., Ghan, S., Kay, J. E., Kushner,
P. J., Lamarque, J.-F., Large, W. G., Lawrence, D., Lindsay, K., Lipscomb,
W. H., Long, M. C., Mahowald, N., Marsh, D. R., Neale, R. B., Rasch, P.,
Vavrus, S., Vertenstein, M., Bader, D., Collins, W. D., Hack, J. J., Kiehl,
J., and Marshall, S.: The Community Earth System Model: A Framework for
Collaborative Research, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 1339–1360,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00121.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-12-00121.1</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ishizaki, Y., Shiogama, H., Emori, S., Yokohata, T., Nozawa, T., Takahashi,
K., Ogura, T., Yoshimori, M., and Nagashima, T.: Dependence of Precipitation
Scaling Patterns on Emission Scenarios for Representative Concentration
Pathways, J. Climate, 26, 8868–8879,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00540.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00540.1</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kang, S. M., Xie, S.-P., Deser, C., and Xiang, B.: Zonal mean and shift
modes of historical climate response to evolving aerosol distribution, Sci.
Bull.,  66, 2405–2411, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2021.07.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2021.07.013</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kasoar, M., Shawki, D., and Voulgarakis, A.: Similar spatial patterns of
global climate response to aerosols from different regions, Npj Clim.
Atmospheric Sci., 1, 12, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-018-0022-z" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-018-0022-z</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Koutroulis, A. G., Grillakis, M. G., Tsanis, I. K., and Papadimitriou, L.:
Evaluation of precipitation and temperature simulation performance of the
CMIP3 and CMIP5 historical experiments, Clim. Dynam., 47, 1881–1898,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2938-x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2938-x</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kyselý, J., Rulfová, Z., Farda, A., and Hanel, M.: Convective and
stratiform precipitation characteristics in an ensemble of regional climate
model simulations, Clim. Dynam., 46, 227–243,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2580-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-015-2580-7</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lamarque, J.-F., Bond, T. C., Eyring, V., Granier, C., Heil, A., Klimont, Z., Lee, D., Liousse, C., Mieville, A., Owen, B., Schultz, M. G., Shindell, D., Smith, S. J., Stehfest, E., Van Aardenne, J., Cooper, O. R., Kainuma, M., Mahowald, N., McConnell, J. R., Naik, V., Riahi, K., and van Vuuren, D. P.: Historical (1850–2000) gridded anthropogenic and biomass burning emissions of reactive gases and aerosols: methodology and application, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 10, 7017–7039, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-10-7017-2010</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Li, Z., Lau, W. K.-M., Ramanathan, V., Wu, G., Ding, Y., Manoj, M. G., Liu,
J., Qian, Y., Li, J., Zhou, T., Fan, J., Rosenfeld, D., Ming, Y., Wang, Y.,
Huang, J., Wang, B., Xu, X., Lee, S.-S., Cribb, M., Zhang, F., Yang, X.,
Zhao, C., Takemura, T., Wang, K., Xia, X., Yin, Y., Zhang, H., Guo, J.,
Zhai, P. M., Sugimoto, N., Babu, S. S., and Brasseur, G. P.: Aerosol and
monsoon climate interactions over Asia, Rev. Geophys., 54, 866–929,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000500" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015RG000500</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, L., Shawki, D., Voulgarakis, A., Kasoar, M., Samset, B. H., Myhre, G.,
Forster, P. M., Hodnebrog, Ø., Sillmann, J., Aalbergsjø, S. G.,
Boucher, O., Faluvegi, G., Iversen, T., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F.,
Olivié, D., Richardson, T., Shindell, D., and Takemura, T.: A PDRMIP
Multimodel Study on the Impacts of Regional Aerosol Forcings on Global and
Regional Precipitation, J. Climate, 31, 4429–4447,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0439.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-17-0439.1</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, X., Easter, R. C., Ghan, S. J., Zaveri, R., Rasch, P., Shi, X., Lamarque, J.-F., Gettelman, A., Morrison, H., Vitt, F., Conley, A., Park, S., Neale, R., Hannay, C., Ekman, A. M. L., Hess, P., Mahowald, N., Collins, W., Iacono, M. J., Bretherton, C. S., Flanner, M. G., and Mitchell, D.: Toward a minimal representation of aerosols in climate models: description and evaluation in the Community Atmosphere Model CAM5, Geosci. Model Dev., 5, 709–739, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-709-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-5-709-2012</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lund, M. T., Myhre, G., and Samset, B. H.: Anthropogenic aerosol forcing under the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 19, 13827–13839, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13827-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-13827-2019</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Luo, F., Wilcox, L., Dong, B., Su, Q., Chen, W., Dunstone, N., Li, S., and
Gao, Y.: Projected near-term changes of temperature extremes in Europe and
China under different aerosol emissions, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 034013,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6b34" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6b34</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
Marvel, K., Biasutti, M., and Bonfils, C.: Fingerprints of external forcings
on Sahel rainfall: aerosols, greenhouse gases, and model-observation
discrepancies, Environ. Res. Lett., 15, 084023,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab858e" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab858e</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mei, R., Ashfaq, M., Rastogi, D., Leung, L. R., and Dominguez, F.:
Dominating Controls for Wetter South Asian Summer Monsoon in the
Twenty-First Century, J. Climate, 28, 3400–3419,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00355.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00355.1</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ming, Y. and Ramaswamy, V.: Nonlinear Climate and Hydrological Responses to
Aerosol Effects, J. Climate, 22, 1329–1339,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2362.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2008JCLI2362.1</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ming, Y., Ramaswamy, V., and Persad, G.: Two Opposing Effects of Absorbing
Aerosols on Global-Mean Precipitation, Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L13701,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL042895" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL042895</a>, 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
Myhre, G., Forster, P. M., Samset, B. H., Hodnebrog, Ø., Sillmann, J.,
Aalbergsjø, S. G., Andrews, T., Boucher, O., Faluvegi, G., Fläschner,
D., Iversen, T., Kasoar, M., Kharin, V., Kirkevåg, A., Lamarque, J.-F.,
Olivié, D., Richardson, T. B., Shindell, D., Shine, K. P., Stjern, C.
W., Takemura, T., Voulgarakis, A., and Zwiers, F.: PDRMIP: A Precipitation
Driver and Response Model Intercomparison Project – Protocol and Preliminary
Results, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 98, 1185–1198,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0019.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-16-0019.1</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
Norris, J., Hall, A., Neelin, J. D., Thackeray, C. W., and Chen, D.:
Evaluation of the Tail of the Probability Distribution of Daily and Subdaily
Precipitation in CMIP6 Models, J. Climate, 34, 2701–2721,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0182.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-20-0182.1</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
O'Neill, B. C., Kriegler, E., Ebi, K. L., Kemp-Benedict, E., Riahi, K.,
Rothman, D. S., van Ruijven, B. J., van Vuuren, D. P., Birkmann, J., Kok,
K., Levy, M., and Solecki, W.: The roads ahead: Narratives for shared
socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century, Global
Environ. Chang.,  42, 169–180, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.004</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
      
Persad, G.: Emissions Input Data, V1, Texas Data Repository [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/Z87COZ" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/Z87COZ</a>, 2022a.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
      
Persad, G.: Simulation Output Data, V1, Texas Data Repository [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/WBNQZE" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/WBNQZE</a>, 2022b.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
      
Persad, G. G. and Caldeira, K.: Divergent global-scale temperature effects
from identical aerosols emitted in different regions, Nat. Commun., 9, 1–9,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05838-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-05838-6</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
      
Persad, G. G., Paynter, D. J., Ming, Y., and Ramaswamy, V.: Competing
Atmospheric and Surface-Driven Impacts of Absorbing Aerosols on the East
Asian Summertime Climate, J. Climate, 30, 8929–8949,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0860.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0860.1</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ramanathan, V., Crutzen, P. J., Kiehl, J. T., and Rosenfeld, D.: Aerosols,
Climate, and the Hydrological Cycle, Science, 294, 2119–2124,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1064034" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1064034</a>, 2001.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ramaswamy, V., Collins, W., Haywood, J., Lean, J., Mahowald, N., Myhre, G.,
Naik, V., Shine, K. P., Soden, B., Stenchikov, G., and Storelvmo, T.:
Radiative Forcing of Climate: The Historical Evolution of the Radiative
Forcing Concept, the Forcing Agents and their Quantification, and
Applications, Meteorol. Monogr., 59, 14.1–14.101,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-19-0001.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/AMSMONOGRAPHS-D-19-0001.1</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
      
Rao, S., Klimont, Z., Smith, S. J., Van Dingenen, R., Dentener, F., Bouwman,
L., Riahi, K., Amann, M., Bodirsky, B. L., van Vuuren, D. P., Aleluia Reis,
L., Calvin, K., Drouet, L., Fricko, O., Fujimori, S., Gernaat, D., Havlik,
P., Harmsen, M., Hasegawa, T., Heyes, C., Hilaire, J., Luderer, G., Masui,
T., Stehfest, E., Strefler, J., van der Sluis, S., and Tavoni, M.: Future
air pollution in the Shared Socio-economic Pathways, Global Environ. Chang.,
42, 346–358, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.012</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
      
Riahi, K., van Vuuren, D. P., Kriegler, E., Edmonds, J., O'Neill, B. C.,
Fujimori, S., Bauer, N., Calvin, K., Dellink, R., Fricko, O., Lutz, W.,
Popp, A., Cuaresma, J. C., KC, S., Leimbach, M., Jiang, L., Kram, T., Rao,
S., Emmerling, J., Ebi, K., Hasegawa, T., Havlik, P., Humpenöder, F., Da
Silva, L. A., Smith, S., Stehfest, E., Bosetti, V., Eom, J., Gernaat, D.,
Masui, T., Rogelj, J., Strefler, J., Drouet, L., Krey, V., Luderer, G.,
Harmsen, M., Takahashi, K., Baumstark, L., Doelman, J. C., Kainuma, M.,
Klimont, Z., Marangoni, G., Lotze-Campen, H., Obersteiner, M., Tabeau, A.,
and Tavoni, M.: The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land
use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: An overview, Global Environ.
Chang., 42, 153–168, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
      
Samset, B. H., Myhre, G., Forster, P. M., Hodnebrog, Ø., Andrews, T.,
Faluvegi, G., Fläschner, D., Kasoar, M., Kharin, V., Kirkevåg, A.,
Lamarque, J.-F., Olivié, D., Richardson, T., Shindell, D., Shine, K. P.,
Takemura, T., and Voulgarakis, A.: Fast and slow precipitation responses to
individual climate forcers: A PDRMIP multimodel study, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
43, 2016GL068064, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL068064" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL068064</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
      
Samset, B. H., Stjern, C. W., Andrews, E., Kahn, R. A., Myhre, G., Schulz,
M., and Schuster, G. L.: Aerosol Absorption: Progress Towards Global and
Regional Constraints, Curr. Clim. Change Rep., 4, 65–83,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-018-0091-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-018-0091-4</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
      
Samset, B. H., Lund, M. T., Bollasina, M., Myhre, G., and Wilcox, L.:
Emerging Asian aerosol patterns, Nat. Geosci., 12, 582–584,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0424-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-019-0424-5</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
      
Santer, B. D., Wigley, T. M. L., Boyle, J. S., Gaffen, D. J., Hnilo, J. J.,
Nychka, D., Parker, D. E., and Taylor, K. E.: Statistical significance of
trends and trend differences in layer-average atmospheric temperature time
series, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 105, 7337–7356,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD901105" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JD901105</a>, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
      
Scannell, C., Booth, B. B. B., Dunstone, N. J., Rowell, D. P., Bernie, D.
J., Kasoar, M., Voulgarakis, A., Wilcox, L. J., Navarro, J. C. A., Seland,
Ø., and Paynter, D. J.: The Influence of Remote Aerosol Forcing from
Industrialized Economies on the Future Evolution of East and West African
Rainfall, J. Climate, 32, 8335–8354,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0716.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0716.1</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
      
Shindell, D. and Faluvegi, G.: Climate response to regional radiative
forcing during the twentieth century, Nat. Geosci., 2, 294–300,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo473" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo473</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
      
Shindell, D. T., Voulgarakis, A., Faluvegi, G., and Milly, G.: Precipitation response to regional radiative forcing, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 12, 6969–6982, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6969-2012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-12-6969-2012</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
      
Sillmann, J., Stjern, C. W., Myhre, G., and Forster, P. M.: Slow and fast
responses of mean and extreme precipitation to different forcing in CMIP5
simulations, Geophys. Res. Lett., 44, 6383–6390,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073229" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073229</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
      
Singh, D., Bollasina, M., Ting, M., and Diffenbaugh, N. S.: Disentangling
the influence of local and remote anthropogenic aerosols on South Asian
monsoon daily rainfall characteristics, Clim. Dynam., 52, 6301–6320,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4512-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-018-4512-9</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
      
University Center for Atmospheric Research (UCAR): CESM1.2 Series Public Release, University Center for Atmospheric Research (UCAR) [code], <a href="https://www2.cesm.ucar.edu/models/cesm1.2/" target="_blank"/> (last access: 2 March 2023), 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang, J., Wong, R. K. W., Jun, M., Schumacher, C., Saravanan, R., and Sun,
C.: Statistical and machine learning methods applied to the prediction of
different tropical rainfall types, Environ. Res. Commun., 3, 111001,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ac371f" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ac371f</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
      
Westervelt, D. M., Conley, A. J., Fiore, A. M., Lamarque, J.-F., Shindell,
D., Previdi, M., Faluvegi, G., Correa, G., and Horowitz, L. W.: Multimodel
precipitation responses to removal of U.S. sulfur dioxide emissions, J.
Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 122, 5024–5038,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026756" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JD026756</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
      
Westervelt, D. M., Conley, A. J., Fiore, A. M., Lamarque, J.-F., Shindell, D. T., Previdi, M., Mascioli, N. R., Faluvegi, G., Correa, G., and Horowitz, L. W.: Connecting regional aerosol emissions reductions to local and remote precipitation responses, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 18, 12461–12475, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12461-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-18-12461-2018</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zanis, P., Akritidis, D., Georgoulias, A. K., Allen, R. J., Bauer, S. E., Boucher, O., Cole, J., Johnson, B., Deushi, M., Michou, M., Mulcahy, J., Nabat, P., Olivié, D., Oshima, N., Sima, A., Schulz, M., Takemura, T., and Tsigaridis, K.: Fast responses on pre-industrial climate from present-day aerosols in a CMIP6 multi-model study, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 20, 8381–8404, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8381-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-20-8381-2020</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhang, S., Stier, P., and Watson-Parris, D.: On the contribution of fast and slow responses to precipitation changes caused by aerosol perturbations, Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 10179–10197, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10179-2021" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-10179-2021</a>, 2021.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhao, S. and Suzuki, K.: Differing Impacts of Black Carbon and Sulfate
Aerosols on Global Precipitation and the ITCZ Location via Atmosphere and
Ocean Energy Perturbations, J. Climate, 32, 5567–5582,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0616.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-18-0616.1</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhou, C., Zelinka, M. D., and Klein, S. A.: Analyzing the dependence of
global cloud feedback on the spatial pattern of sea surface temperature
change with a Green's function approach, J. Adv. Model. Earth Sy., 9,
2174–2189, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001096" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2017MS001096</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
