The European CORDEX (EURO-CORDEX) initiative is a large voluntary effort that seeks to advance regional climate and Earth system science in Europe. As part of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) - Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX), it shares the broader goals of providing a model evaluation and climate projection framework and improving communication with both the General Circulation Model (GCM) and climate data user communities. EURO-CORDEX oversees the design and coordination of ongoing ensembles of regional climate projections of unprecedented size and resolution (0.11° EUR-11 and 0.44° EUR-44 domains). Additionally, the inclusion of empirical-statistical downscaling allows investigation of much larger multi-model ensembles. These complementary approaches provide a foundation for scientific studies within the climate research community and others. The value of the EURO-CORDEX ensemble is shown via numerous peer-reviewed studies and its use in the development of climate services. Evaluations of the EUR-44 and EUR-11 ensembles also show the benefits of higher resolution. However, significant challenges remain. To further advance scientific understanding, two flagship pilot studies (FPS) were initiated. The first investigates local-regional phenomena at convection-permitting scales over central Europe and the Mediterranean in collaboration with the Med-CORDEX community. The second investigates the impacts of land cover changes on European climate across spatial and temporal scales. Over the coming years, the EURO-CORDEX community looks forward to closer collaboration with other communities, new advances, supporting international initiatives such as the IPCC reports, and continuing to provide the basis for research on regional climate impacts and adaptation in Europe.

Here we present the first multi-model ensemble of regional climate simulations at kilometer-scale horizontal grid spacing over a decade long period. A total of 23 simulations run with a horizontal grid spacing of $$\sim $$∼ 3 km, driven by ERA-Interim reanalysis, and performed by 22 European research groups are analysed. Six different regional climate models (RCMs) are represented in the ensemble. The simulations are compared against available high-resolution precipitation observations and coarse resolution ( $$\sim $$∼ 12 km) RCMs with parameterized convection. The model simulations and observations are compared with respect to mean precipitation, precipitation intensity and frequency, and heavy precipitation on daily and hourly timescales in different seasons. The results show that kilometer-scale models produce a more realistic representation of precipitation than the coarse resolution RCMs. The most significant improvements are found for heavy precipitation and precipitation frequency on both daily and hourly time scales in the summer season. In general, kilometer-scale models tend to produce more intense precipitation and reduced wet-hour frequency compared to coarse resolution models. On average, the multi-model mean shows a reduction of bias from $$\sim \,$$∼ −40% at 12 km to $$\sim \,$$∼ −3% at 3 km for heavy hourly precipitation in summer. Furthermore, the uncertainty ranges i.e. the variability between the models for wet hour frequency is reduced by half with the use of kilometer-scale models. Although differences between the model simulations at the kilometer-scale and observations still exist, it is evident that these simulations are superior to the coarse-resolution RCM simulations in the representing precipitation in the present-day climate, and thus offer a promising way forward for investigations of climate and climate change at local to regional scales.

VALUE is an open European collaboration to intercompare downscaling approaches for climate change research, focusing on different validation aspects (marginal, temporal, extremes, spatial, process‐based, etc.). Here we describe the participating methods and first results from the first experiment, using “perfect” reanalysis (and reanalysis‐driven regional climate model (RCM)) predictors to assess the intrinsic performance of the methods for downscaling precipitation and temperatures over a set of 86 stations representative of the main climatic regions in Europe. This study constitutes the largest and most comprehensive to date intercomparison of statistical downscaling methods, covering the three common downscaling approaches (perfect prognosis, model output statistics—including bias correction—and weather generators) with a total of over 50 downscaling methods representative of the most common techniques.Overall, most of the downscaling methods greatly improve (reanalysis or RCM) raw model biases and no approach or technique seems to be superior in general, because there is a large method‐to‐method variability. The main factors most influencing the results are the seasonal calibration of the methods (e.g., using a moving window) and their stochastic nature. The particular predictors used also play an important role in cases where the comparison was possible, both for the validation results and for the strength of the predictor–predictand link, indicating the local variability explained. However, the present study cannot give a conclusive assessment of the skill of the methods to simulate regional future climates, and further experiments will be soon performed in the framework of the EURO‐CORDEX initiative (where VALUE activities have merged and follow on).Finally, research transparency and reproducibility has been a major concern and substantive steps have been taken. In particular, the necessary data to run the experiments are provided at http://www.value‐cost.eu/data and data and validation results are available from the VALUE validation portal for further investigation: http://www.value‐cost.eu/validationportal.

In the current work we present six hindcast WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting model) simulations for the EURO-CORDEX (European Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment) domain with different configurations in microphysics, convection and radiation for the time period 1990–2008. All regional model simulations are forced by the ERA-Interim reanalysis and have the same spatial resolution (0.44°). These simulations are evaluated for surface temperature, precipitation, short- and longwave downward radiation at the surface and total cloud cover. The analysis of the WRF ensemble indicates systematic temperature and precipitation biases, which are linked to different physical mechanisms in the summer and winter seasons. Overestimation of total cloud cover and underestimation of downward shortwave radiation at the surface, mostly linked to the Grell–Devenyi convection and CAM (Community Atmosphere Model) radiation schemes, intensifies the negative bias in summer temperatures over northern Europe (max −2.5 °C). Conversely, a strong positive bias in downward shortwave radiation in summer over central (40–60%) and southern Europe mitigates the systematic cold bias over these regions, signifying a typical case of error compensation. Maximum winter cold biases are over northeastern Europe (−2.8 °C); this location suggests that land–atmosphere rather than cloud–radiation interactions are to blame. Precipitation is overestimated in summer by all model configurations, especially the higher quantiles which are associated with summertime deep cumulus convection. The largest precipitation biases are produced by the Kain–Fritsch convection scheme over the Mediterranean. Precipitation biases in winter are lower than those for summer in all model configurations (15–30%). The results of this study indicate the importance of evaluating not only the basic climatic parameters of interest for climate change applications (temperature and precipitation), but also other components of the energy and water cycle, in order to identify the sources of systematic biases, possible compensatory or masking mechanisms and suggest pathways for model improvement.