Managing a special report: Reflections on the genesis of the Austrian assessment on health, demography and climate change

IF 1.5 4区 社会学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Gaia-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society Pub Date : 2023-05-20 DOI:10.14512/gaia.32.1.5
Olivia Koland, W. Haas
{"title":"Managing a special report: Reflections on the genesis of the Austrian assessment on health, demography and climate change","authors":"Olivia Koland, W. Haas","doi":"10.14512/gaia.32.1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"National assessment reports provide a broadly accepted scientific base, for instance for climate policy-making. In this Design Report, we reflect on the 18-month process of managing the Austrian Special Report Health, Demography and Climate Change involving more than 60\n authors. We discuss the efficacy of management tools and the extent to which the assessment resonated in the policy arena.The Austrian Panel on Climate Change (APCC) was established in 2016 for the purpose of issuing comprehensive assessment reports and special reports applying standards\n and procedures like the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). All of these assessment reports essentially aim at providing an authoritative synthesis of policy-relevant knowledge, with an emphasis on undisputed statements. In this article, we describe the one-and-a-half-year process\n of generating the scientific assessment for the Austrian Special Report Health, Demography and Climate Change (ASR18). 60 authors from different disciplinary backgrounds were involved in the writing process, 30 stakeholders were consulted and raised relevant issues in two workshops,\n and two formal scientific review loops yielded more than 2,000 comments. From the perspective of the process coordinators, we reflect on the efficacy of management tools to achieve a credible, relevant and legitimate outcome. Finally, we outline the extent to which we see our Special Report\n as an effective contribution to incorporating scientific knowledge into policy debates.","PeriodicalId":49073,"journal":{"name":"Gaia-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gaia-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.32.1.5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

National assessment reports provide a broadly accepted scientific base, for instance for climate policy-making. In this Design Report, we reflect on the 18-month process of managing the Austrian Special Report Health, Demography and Climate Change involving more than 60 authors. We discuss the efficacy of management tools and the extent to which the assessment resonated in the policy arena.The Austrian Panel on Climate Change (APCC) was established in 2016 for the purpose of issuing comprehensive assessment reports and special reports applying standards and procedures like the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). All of these assessment reports essentially aim at providing an authoritative synthesis of policy-relevant knowledge, with an emphasis on undisputed statements. In this article, we describe the one-and-a-half-year process of generating the scientific assessment for the Austrian Special Report Health, Demography and Climate Change (ASR18). 60 authors from different disciplinary backgrounds were involved in the writing process, 30 stakeholders were consulted and raised relevant issues in two workshops, and two formal scientific review loops yielded more than 2,000 comments. From the perspective of the process coordinators, we reflect on the efficacy of management tools to achieve a credible, relevant and legitimate outcome. Finally, we outline the extent to which we see our Special Report as an effective contribution to incorporating scientific knowledge into policy debates.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
管理一份特别报告:对奥地利健康、人口和气候变化评估起源的思考
国家评估报告提供了广泛接受的科学基础,例如气候政策的制定。在本设计报告中,我们回顾了历时18个月、涉及60多名作者的《奥地利健康、人口和气候变化特别报告》的管理过程。我们讨论了管理工具的有效性,以及评估在政策领域产生共鸣的程度。奥地利气候变化专门委员会(APCC)成立于2016年,旨在发布综合评估报告和特别报告,采用与国际气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)类似的标准和程序。所有这些评估报告基本上都旨在提供与政策有关的知识的权威综合,并强调无可争议的陈述。在本文中,我们描述了为《奥地利健康、人口和气候变化特别报告》(ASR18)进行科学评估的一年半过程。来自不同学科背景的60位作者参与了撰写过程,在两次研讨会上咨询了30位利益相关者并提出了相关问题,两次正式的科学评审循环产生了2000多条评论。从过程协调者的角度来看,我们反思管理工具的有效性,以实现可信、相关和合法的结果。最后,我们概述了我们认为我们的特别报告在多大程度上是对将科学知识纳入政策辩论的有效贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
18.80%
发文量
43
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: GAIA is a peer-reviewed inter- and transdisciplinary journal for scientists and other interested parties concerned with the causes and analyses of environmental and sustainability problems and their solutions. Environmental problems cannot be solved by one academic discipline. The complex natures of these problems require cooperation across disciplinary boundaries. Since 1991, GAIA has offered a well-balanced and practice-oriented forum for transdisciplinary research. GAIA offers first-hand information on state of the art environmental research and on current solutions to environmental problems. Well-known editors, advisors, and authors work to ensure the high quality of the contributions found in GAIA and a unique transdisciplinary dialogue – in a comprehensible style.
期刊最新文献
DGH-Jahrestagung 2023 zum Thema Wasser Climate change perceptions in Bavaria: Revealing the influence of socio-demographic and local environmental factors Exploring fruitful links between real-world laboratory and disciplinary research: Introduction of the DKN Future Earth working group LinkLab Transformation happens in the unbelievable: Using participatory modelling to pave realistic paths towards idealistic futures Serious games for sustainability transformations: Participatory research methods for sustainability ‐ toolkit #7
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1