Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 10 of 16 items for
- Author or Editor: Friederike E. L. Otto x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
Abstract
Recent extreme weather events and their impacts on societies have highlighted the need for timely adaptation to the changing odds of their occurrence. Such measures require appropriate information about likely changes in event frequency and magnitude on relevant spatiotemporal scales. However, to support robust climate information for decision-making, an effective communication between scientists and stakeholders is crucial. In this context, weather event attribution studies are increasingly raising attention beyond academic circles, although the understanding of how to take it beyond academia is still evolving. This paper presents the results of a study that involved in-depth interviews with stakeholders from a range of sectors about potential applications and the general usefulness of event attribution studies. A case study of the hot and dry summer 2012 in southeast Europe is used as a concrete example, with a focus on the applicability of attribution results across sectors. An analysis of the interviews reveals an abundant interest among the interviewed stakeholders and highlights the need for information on the causes and odds of extreme events, in particular on regional scales. From this data key aspects of stakeholder engagement are emerging, which could productively feed back into how probabilistic event attribution studies are designed and communicated to ensure practical relevance and usefulness for the stakeholder community.
Abstract
Recent extreme weather events and their impacts on societies have highlighted the need for timely adaptation to the changing odds of their occurrence. Such measures require appropriate information about likely changes in event frequency and magnitude on relevant spatiotemporal scales. However, to support robust climate information for decision-making, an effective communication between scientists and stakeholders is crucial. In this context, weather event attribution studies are increasingly raising attention beyond academic circles, although the understanding of how to take it beyond academia is still evolving. This paper presents the results of a study that involved in-depth interviews with stakeholders from a range of sectors about potential applications and the general usefulness of event attribution studies. A case study of the hot and dry summer 2012 in southeast Europe is used as a concrete example, with a focus on the applicability of attribution results across sectors. An analysis of the interviews reveals an abundant interest among the interviewed stakeholders and highlights the need for information on the causes and odds of extreme events, in particular on regional scales. From this data key aspects of stakeholder engagement are emerging, which could productively feed back into how probabilistic event attribution studies are designed and communicated to ensure practical relevance and usefulness for the stakeholder community.
Abstract
Globally, decision-makers are increasingly using high-resolution climate models to support policy and planning; however, many of these users do not have the knowledge needed to use them appropriately. This problem is compounded by not having access to quality learning opportunities to better understand how to apply the models and interpret results. This paper discusses and proposes an educational framework based on two independent online courses on regional climate modeling, which addresses the accessibility issue and provides guidance to climate science professors, researchers, and institutions who want to create their own online courses.
The role of e-learning as an educational tool is well documented, highlighting the benefits of improved personal efficiency through “anywhere, anytime” learning with the flexibility to support professional development across different sectors. In addition, improved global Internet means increased accessibility. However, e-learning’s function as a tool to support understanding of atmospheric physics and high-resolution climate modeling has not been widely discussed. To date, few courses, if any, support understanding that takes full advantage of e-learning best practices.
There is a growing need for climate literacy to help inform decision-making on a range of scales, from individual households to corporate CEOs. And while there is a plethora of climate information online, educational theory suggests that people need to be guided in how to convert this information into applicable knowledge.
Here, we present how the experience of the courses we designed and ran independent of each other, both engaging learners with better understanding benefits and limitations of regional climate modeling, lead to a framework of designing e-learning for climate modeling.
Abstract
Globally, decision-makers are increasingly using high-resolution climate models to support policy and planning; however, many of these users do not have the knowledge needed to use them appropriately. This problem is compounded by not having access to quality learning opportunities to better understand how to apply the models and interpret results. This paper discusses and proposes an educational framework based on two independent online courses on regional climate modeling, which addresses the accessibility issue and provides guidance to climate science professors, researchers, and institutions who want to create their own online courses.
The role of e-learning as an educational tool is well documented, highlighting the benefits of improved personal efficiency through “anywhere, anytime” learning with the flexibility to support professional development across different sectors. In addition, improved global Internet means increased accessibility. However, e-learning’s function as a tool to support understanding of atmospheric physics and high-resolution climate modeling has not been widely discussed. To date, few courses, if any, support understanding that takes full advantage of e-learning best practices.
There is a growing need for climate literacy to help inform decision-making on a range of scales, from individual households to corporate CEOs. And while there is a plethora of climate information online, educational theory suggests that people need to be guided in how to convert this information into applicable knowledge.
Here, we present how the experience of the courses we designed and ran independent of each other, both engaging learners with better understanding benefits and limitations of regional climate modeling, lead to a framework of designing e-learning for climate modeling.
Abstract
The science of extreme event attribution (EEA)—which connects specific extreme weather events with anthropogenic climate change—could prove useful for engaging the public about climate change. However, there is limited empirical research examining EEA as a climate change communication tool. To help fill this gap, we conducted focus groups with members of the U.K. public to explore benefits and challenges of utilizing EEA results in climate change advocacy messages. Testing a range of verbal and visual approaches for communicating EEA, we found that EEA shows significant promise for climate change communication because of its ability to connect novel, attention-grabbing, and event-specific scientific information to personal experiences and observations of extreme events. Communication challenges include adequately capturing nuances around extreme weather risks, vulnerability, adaptation, and disaster risk reduction; expressing scientific uncertainty without undermining accessibility of key findings; and difficulties interpreting mathematical aspects of EEA results. On the basis of our findings, we provide recommendations to help address these challenges when communicating EEA results beyond the climate science community. We conclude that EEA can help catalyze important dialogues about the links between extreme weather and human-driven climate change.
Abstract
The science of extreme event attribution (EEA)—which connects specific extreme weather events with anthropogenic climate change—could prove useful for engaging the public about climate change. However, there is limited empirical research examining EEA as a climate change communication tool. To help fill this gap, we conducted focus groups with members of the U.K. public to explore benefits and challenges of utilizing EEA results in climate change advocacy messages. Testing a range of verbal and visual approaches for communicating EEA, we found that EEA shows significant promise for climate change communication because of its ability to connect novel, attention-grabbing, and event-specific scientific information to personal experiences and observations of extreme events. Communication challenges include adequately capturing nuances around extreme weather risks, vulnerability, adaptation, and disaster risk reduction; expressing scientific uncertainty without undermining accessibility of key findings; and difficulties interpreting mathematical aspects of EEA results. On the basis of our findings, we provide recommendations to help address these challenges when communicating EEA results beyond the climate science community. We conclude that EEA can help catalyze important dialogues about the links between extreme weather and human-driven climate change.
Abstract
The science of event attribution has emerged to routinely answer the question whether and to what extent human-induced climate change altered the likelihood and intensity of recently observed extreme weather events. In Europe a pilot program to operationalize the method started in November 2019, highlighting the demand for timely information on the role of climate change when it is needed most: in the direct aftermath of an extreme event. Independent of whether studies are provided operationally or as academic studies, the necessity of good observational data and well-verified climate models imply most attributions are currently made for highly developed countries only. Current attribution assessments therefore provide very little information about those events and regions where the largest damages and socio-economic losses are incurred. Arguably, these larger damages signify a much greater need for information on how the likelihood and intensity of such high-impact events have been changing and are likely to change in a warmer world. In short, why do we not focus event attribution research efforts on the whole world, and particularly events in the developing world? The reasons are not just societal and political but also scientific. We simply cannot attribute these events in the same probabilistic framework employed in most studies today. We outline six focus areas to lessen these barriers, but we will not overcome them in the near future.
Abstract
The science of event attribution has emerged to routinely answer the question whether and to what extent human-induced climate change altered the likelihood and intensity of recently observed extreme weather events. In Europe a pilot program to operationalize the method started in November 2019, highlighting the demand for timely information on the role of climate change when it is needed most: in the direct aftermath of an extreme event. Independent of whether studies are provided operationally or as academic studies, the necessity of good observational data and well-verified climate models imply most attributions are currently made for highly developed countries only. Current attribution assessments therefore provide very little information about those events and regions where the largest damages and socio-economic losses are incurred. Arguably, these larger damages signify a much greater need for information on how the likelihood and intensity of such high-impact events have been changing and are likely to change in a warmer world. In short, why do we not focus event attribution research efforts on the whole world, and particularly events in the developing world? The reasons are not just societal and political but also scientific. We simply cannot attribute these events in the same probabilistic framework employed in most studies today. We outline six focus areas to lessen these barriers, but we will not overcome them in the near future.
