Coordination of Europe’s climate-related knowledge base: Networking and collaborating through interactive events, social media and focussed groups

Hewitt, Chris; Bessembinder, Janette; Buonocore, Mauro; Dunbar, Tyrone; Garrett, Natalie; Kotova, Lola; New, Stacey; Newton, Paula; Parfitt, Rebecca; Buontempo, Carlo; Doblas-Reyes, Francisco; Guglielmo, Francesca; Jacob, Daniela; Kjellström, Erik; Kržič, Aleksandra; Martins, Helena; Pietrosanti, Alessia; Terrado, Marta

doi:10.1016/j.cliser.2021.100264

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are numerous ongoing efforts to improve the usability and user-orientation of climate information and climate services (e.g., Alexander and Bruno Soares, 2017;Buontempo et al, 2018;Le et al, 2020;Williams and Jacob, 2021), particularly within the Global Framework on Climate Services (Hewitt et al, 2012). We particularly welcome and support the efforts of transdisciplinary research, of co-production of climate knowledge and of integration of local knowledge to understanding climate change and its impacts (e.g., Buontempo et al, 2018;Hewitt et al, 2021;Neset et al, 2021;Williams and Jacob, 2021). The example presented here may be considered as a small contribution within the field of spatial integration of climate data and information for use in climate impact research (as discussed in the review paper, Giuliani et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is considerable ongoing activity to improve the communication between climate modeling communities and climate impact or other user communities (e.g., Lemos et al, 2012;Huebener et al, 2017b;Rössler et al, 2017;Chimani et al, 2020;Tart et al, 2020;Hewitt et al, 2021;Suhari et al, 2022). There are also numerous activities to provide suitable usertailored climate simulation information and climate services (e.g., Goddard, 2016;Buontempo et al, 2018;Bülow et al, 2019) or tools to generate said information (e.g., Raoult et al, 2017;Pérez-Zanón et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Improved representativeness of simulated climate using natural units and monthly resolution

Huebener¹,

Gelhardt²,

Lang³

2022

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a considerable discrepancy between the temporal and spatial resolution required by climate impact researchers, policy makers, and adaptation planners on the one hand and climate data providers on the other hand. While the spatial and temporal aggregation of climate data is necessary to increase the reliability and robustness of climate information, this often counteracts or even prohibits their use in adaptation planning. The problem is twofold (i.e., space and time) and needs to be approached accordingly. Climate impact research and adaptation planning are the domain of impact experts, politicians, and planners, rather than climate experts. Thus, besides the spatial and temporal resolution, information also needs to be provided on platforms and in data formats that are easily accessible, easy to handle, and easy to understand. We discuss possible steps toward bridging the gap using an example from the federal state Hesse (Germany) as illustration. We aggregate the climate data at a level of “natural units” and provide them as monthly data. We discuss the pros and cons of this kind of processed data for impact research and decision making. The spatial aggregation to “natural units” delivers suitable spatial aggregation, while maintaining physical geographic structures and their climatic characteristics. Within these “natural units,” single grid cell values are usable for climate impact analyses or decision making. The temporal resolution is monthly values, i.e., deviations of single month values for the scenario period from climatological monthly values in the (simulated) reference period. This resolution allows analyzing compound events or consecutive events on a monthly scale within a climatological (30-year) period.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improved representativeness of simulated climate using natural units and monthly resolution

Huebener¹,

Gelhardt²,

Lang³

2022

Front. Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although there are many different styles of user engagement, here the four most important ones for GERICS will be presented in detail. These four styles are oriented toward the general idea of the increasing degree of empowerment by Arnstein (1969), but are inspired by further references (UNEP 2005;Stauffacher et al 2008;Hewitt et al 2017) and-most importantly-by GERICS's real-world experiences.…”

Section: Switzerlandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, conference speeches and public presentations can be classified into the information style. To maximize the style's impact, it is of utmost importance to incorporate user-guided and intuitive design principles (Hewitt et al 2017). Our experience has shown that the easier a product is to use, the wider its application and greater its benefit.…”

Section: Switzerlandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To optimize followup activities, it is highly recommended to evaluate the dialog performance. Furthermore, the multiway communication between the involved parties enables colearning and codevelopment of climate services and products, although a hierarchical relation between those being involved and those involving exists (Hewitt et al 2017;Stauffacher et al 2008). Engagement approaches that belong to this style include, e.g., advisory panels, multistakeholder forums, interactive group activities, or participatory decision-making processes (UNEP 2005).…”

Section: Switzerlandmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fashionable Climate Services: The Hats and Styles of User Engagement

Steuri

Viktor

Zohbi

et al. 2022

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, climate service has emerged as a new field to better connect climate data providers and users of climate change–related information. The aim is to transform climate-related information into customized, user-centered products. This transformation of data is increasingly sought after by decision-makers due to public and regulatory pressure. As one of the first institutions to provide climate services, the Climate Service Center Germany (GERICS) has collected a wide range of different experiences in the field of climate services. Based on this know-how, GERICS has identified three distinct roles—we call them hats—that the institute commonly assumes as a climate service provider: the facilitator, the developer, and the trendsetter. The definition and tasks related to each of these distinct hats is presented alongside examples. The key ingredient for the success of a service product heavily depends on successful user engagement. While wearing any of the three hats and depending on a project’s context as well as the project stage, GERICS makes use of several methods to codevelop services with users. Based on past experiences, four different styles of user engagement, distinguished by the degree of intensity of participation, were established: information, consultation, dialog, and partnership. The connection of the three hats and the four styles of user engagement creates a structure in which climate service providers operate. It may help other climate service providers to reflect upon the general outline of their services and enhance the effectiveness of their engagement with users in transdisciplinary research settings.

show abstract