Making Science Useful to Decision Makers: Climate Forecasts, Water Management, and Knowledge Networks

Feldman, David L.; Ingram, Helen

doi:10.1175/2009wcas1007.1

Cited by 165 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The accuracy and reliability of the information being provided, its credibility and salience, and the relevance and usability of that information in the organisation are all factors that can facilitate the uptake of SCF (Cash et al 2003;Pagano et al 2002;Lemos and Morehouse 2005;Feldman and Ingram 2009). Interplay regards how well this new information relates to, and interacts with, other forms of knowledge or information already available in the organisation.…”

Section: Usable Climate Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The availability of such information however, does not necessarily guarantee its use in decision-making processes (McNie 2007;Dilling and Lemos 2011;Feldman and Ingram 2009). In fact, the conventional linear model of science (also known as loading-dock model) where information is developed in the confinements of the scientific community with the expectation that users will find that information useful and usable has been challenged as ineffectual for decision-making (Feldman and Ingram 2009;Cash et al 2006;Lemos 2015). Sarewitz and Pielke (2007) argue the need to reconcile the supply and demand of science by bringing together scientists and decision-makers to frame and develop scientific information that is useful and usable for decision-making (McNie 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Barriers and enablers to the use of seasonal climate forecasts amongst organisations in Europe

Soares

Dessai

2016

Climatic Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seasonal climate forecasts (SCF) provide information about future climate variability that has the potential to benefit organisations and their decision-making. However, the production and availability of SCF does not guarantee its use in decision-making per se as a range of factors and conditions influence its use in different decision-making contexts. The aim of this paper is to identify the barriers and enablers to the use of SCF across organisations in Europe. To achieve that, we conducted 75 in-depth interviews with organisations working across eight sectors (including energy, transport, water and agriculture) and 16 countries. The majority of the organisations interviewed do not currently use SCF. This was due to the low reliability and skill of SCF in Europe but also with other non-technical aspects such as the lack of relevance and awareness of SCF in the organisations. Conversely, the main enabler to the use of SCF was the interactions with the providers of SCF. In addition, the level of organisational resources, capacity and expertise were also significant enablers to the use of SCF in organisations. This paper provides the first empirical assessment of the use of SCF in Europe. Such insights provide not only an overview of the existing barriers and enablers to the use of SCF in Europe and how these can be overcome and negotiated to enhance the usability of SCF, but can also help inform the broader and emerging context of climate services development in Europe.

show abstract

Section: Usable Climate Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers and enablers to the use of seasonal climate forecasts amongst organisations in Europe

Soares

Dessai

2016

Climatic Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We focused our literature search (see literature review) on research concentrating on evaluation or assessment of collaborative research, coproduction of knowledge, or societal impacts of science-using a process analogous to snowball sampling (Given 2008) by using the search tool ''Web of Knowledge'' to identify journal articles and books cited by or within several key works in the field (e.g., Lemos and Morehouse 2005;Dilling and Lemos 2011;Bellamy et al 2001;Reed 2008;Fazey et al 2014;Walter et al 2007;Cvitanovic et al 2015;Feldman and Ingram 2009;McNie 2007) that helped us trace the similarities and differences in proposed metrics and indicators as ideas evolved through the literature. We also used keyword searches on several terms (i.e., evaluation, assessing science, participatory methods, coproduction, collaborative research, usability of science, observation theory, program theory, and utilization theory).…”

Section: A Literature Search and Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Evaluation Indicators to Improve the Process of Coproducing Usable Climate Science

Wall

Meadow

Horganic

2017

Weather, Climate, and Society

158

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resource managers and decision-makers are increasingly tasked with integrating climate change science into their decisions about resource management and policy development. This often requires climate scientists, resource managers, and decision-makers to work collaboratively throughout the research processes, an approach to knowledge development that is often called ''coproduction of knowledge.'' The goal of this paper is to synthesize the social science theory of coproduction of knowledge, the metrics currently used to evaluate usable or actionable science in several federal agencies, and insights from experienced climate researchers and program managers to develop a set of 45 indicators supporting an evaluation framework for coproduced usable climate science. Here the proposed indicators and results from two case studies that were used to test the indicators are presented, as well as lessons about the process of evaluating the coproduction of knowledge and collaboratively producing climate knowledge.

show abstract

“…There is value in providing users with climate change-related information at online locations where they already go for decision support, such as pest management DSS (McNie, 2012;Kirchhoff et al, 2013). Integrating climate change-related DSS with other agricultural DSS creates opportunities to engage users who may not seek out climate change-related tools on their own, or who are skeptical about climate change (Feldman and Ingram, 2009;Akerlof et al, 2012). Integrated tools enable producers to consider climate as one of many risks that they need to plan for and manage McNie, 2012;Kirchhoff et al, 2013).…”

Section: Priorities For Decision Support Systems To Inform Climate Chmentioning

confidence: 99%

Northwest U.S. Agriculture in a Changing Climate: Collaboratively Defined Research and Extension Priorities

Yorgey

Hall

Allen

et al. 2017

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order for agricultural systems to successfully mitigate and adapt to climate change there is a need to coordinate and prioritize next steps for research and extension. This includes focusing on "win-win" management practices that simultaneously provide short-term benefits to farmers and improve the sustainability and resiliency of agricultural systems with respect to climate change. In the Northwest U.S., a collaborative process has been used to engage individuals spanning the research-practice continuum. This collaborative approach was utilized at a 2016 workshop titled "Agriculture in a Changing Climate," that included a broad range of participants including university faculty and students, crop and livestock producers, and individuals representing state, tribal and federal government agencies, industry, nonprofit organizations, and conservation districts. The Northwest U.S. encompasses a range of agro-ecological systems and diverse geographic and climatic contexts. Regional research and science communication efforts for climate change and agriculture have a strong history of engaging diverse stakeholders. These features of the Northwest U.S. provide a foundation for the collaborative research and extension prioritization presented here. We focus on identifying research and extension actions that can be taken over the next 5 years in four areas identified as important areas by conference organizers and participants: (1) cropping systems, (2) livestock systems, (3) decision support systems to support consideration of climate change in agricultural management decisions; and (4) partnerships among researchers and stakeholders. We couple insights from the workshop and a review of current literature to articulate current scientific understanding, and priorities recommended by workshop participants that target existing knowledge Yorgey et al.Priorities for U.S. Northwest Agriculture in a Changing Climate gaps, challenges, and opportunities. Priorities defined at the Agriculture in a Changing Climate workshop highlight the need for ongoing investment in interdisciplinary research integrating social, economic, and biophysical sciences, strategic collaborations, and knowledge sharing to develop actionable science that can support informed decision-making in the agriculture sector as the climate changes.

show abstract

Making Science Useful to Decision Makers: Climate Forecasts, Water Management, and Knowledge Networks

Cited by 165 publications

References 36 publications

Barriers and enablers to the use of seasonal climate forecasts amongst organisations in Europe

Barriers and enablers to the use of seasonal climate forecasts amongst organisations in Europe

Developing Evaluation Indicators to Improve the Process of Coproducing Usable Climate Science

Northwest U.S. Agriculture in a Changing Climate: Collaboratively Defined Research and Extension Priorities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About