Importance of information transfer and facilitating effective dialogue

Background/Question/Methods

The combination of sustained drought, rapid ecosystem changes, such as widespread forest mortality across western North America, and land use changes associated with rapid urban population growth has motivated concern among ecosystem managers about the implications of future climate changes for the landscapes which they manage. Through literature review, surveys, and workshop discussions, we assess the process of moving from concern, to planning, to action, with a particular emphasis on science communication and questions, such as: What are the roles of boundary organizations in facilitating knowledge exchange? Which practices lead to effective interactions between scientists, decision-makers, and knowledge brokers?

Results/Conclusions

Although there is no “one size fits all” science communication method, we argue that the co-production of science and policy by research scientists, science translators, and decision-makers, as co-equals, is a resource intensive, but effective practice for moving adaptation planning forward. We give examples from seasonal forecast communication, drought planning, and processes of climate adaptation planning. In general, we find that constructive approaches make use of alliances with early adopters and opinion leaders, and make strong communication links between predictions, impacts and solutions. Resource managers need (a) information on the basics of regional climate variability and global climate change, (b) region-specific projections of climate changes and their impacts, (c) frank discussion of an array of uncertainties, and (d) opportunities for candid exploration of these topics with peers and subject experts. Research scientists play critical roles in adaptation planning discussions, because the results of their research forms a basis to inform policy change, they assist resource managers in clarifying the cascade of interactions leading to potential impacts and, importantly, because decision-makers want to hear the information straight from the scientists conducting the research – which bolsters credibility. Climate change projections and research alone are not enough to motivate change, because the peer-reviewed literature requires interpretation and decision-makers lack the time to keep up with the sheer volume of publications. We find that uncertainty, formerly a topic to avoided, forms the foundation for constructive progress in adaptation planning. Candid exploration of the array of uncertainties, which includes those due to modeling, institutional, policy and economic factors – with decision-making peers, science translators, and subject experts, stimulates constructive thinking on adaptation strategies. A combination of estimates of future climate/environment states and discussion support to explore multiple future scenarios and research nuances advances the discussion beyond “uncertainty paralysis.”