More intense daily precipitation in CORDEX‐SEA regional climate models than their forcing global climate models over Southeast Asia

Abstract The ability of regional climate models (RCMs) to accurately simulate the current climate is increasingly important for impact assessments over Southeast Asia (SEA), identified as one of the world's most vulnerable regions to climate change. In this study, we evaluate the performance of a set of regional high‐resolution simulations from the Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment‐SEA (CORDEX‐SEA) in simulating rainfall over the region. Simulations of the 1982–2005 seasonal mean climatology of daily precipitation and precipitation distribution over land are compared to observations from different sources (i.e., in situ‐based and satellite‐based). We also evaluate to what extent the precipitation distribution in RCMs is closer to observations than their associated forcing global climate models (GCMs). Observational estimates of precipitation over SEA have large uncertainties, making the model evaluations complicated. Despite these difficulties, our results highlight that RCMs can reproduce some complexities in the spatial distribution of seasonal rainfall but generally have a larger wet bias than GCMs. This is particularly true for the extremes in which RCMs show a large overestimation of rainfall intensity. There are some precipitation quantiles and grid points in which RCMs show limited reductions in biases compared to observations, but there is no consistency across all simulations and RCMs are generally further away from observations than their forcing GCMs. We find that greater intensity in RCMs over CORDEX‐SEA compared to their associated forcing GCMs is firstly associated with the increased supply of moisture from both local and large‐scale sources. Second, a widespread increase in convective precipitation is found across the region in RCMs. Our findings suggest that a model's ability to simulate precipitation over the region relies more on the RCM setup itself (e.g., parameterization scheme), rather than its forcing GCM. This should be considered when assessing the reliability of RCM precipitation simulations for future projections.