A central aim of climate services is the design and delivery of information that is tailored and targeted to different decision-making contexts. To assess whether climate services are meeting this aim, it is necessary to take stock of the progress that has been made while also identifying where the gaps and additional needs remain. This paper provides a summary of currently available climate services in South Africa, and details the needs for new climate services, informed by the 10 priority sectors identified as part of the National Framework for Climate Services South Africa (NFCS-SA). South African stakeholders’ needs were assessed via 1,032 responses to surveys and 27 interviews conducted between March 2020 and June 2023. The existing climate services landscape in South Africa is complex. Although a range of climate services have been produced, there remain gaps, as well as the need to improve the way in which climate information is communicated, especially for disadvantaged groups such as low-income farmers. The engagement of beneficiaries in the development of public climate services in South Africa has often been superficial and true co-production has yet to take place. However, meaningful co-production of climate services comes at a cost and it remains to be seen how this challenge can be addressed given that many South African stakeholders perceive weather information as a public good and their willingness to pay for climate services is low.
People have known that El Niño events are associated with low rainfall in Southern Africa for a century, and seasonal rainfall forecasts are now available in agricultural advisories for farmers. While there is abundant theory as to how farmers might (or should) use seasonal rainfall information on their farms, little is known about whether this information has been widely used or has had widespread benefit. In this study, we use subnational data on cropping area and yield to see if we can detect any macro-level patterns in agricultural choices or outcomes that are related to knowledge of the El Niño Southern Oscillation or seasonal forecast information in Southern Africa. We find that in Lesotho and parts of South Africa, planted area of maize and sorghum is reduced when there is a dry start to the season and an El Niño event is apparent at the time of planting. Similarly, we find that in both Lesotho and most provinces of South Africa, drought years associated with El Niño have worse yields than drought years that are not associated with El Niño (controlling for rainfall). This association could indicate that people are discouraged during El Niño years by the potential for drought, and they might be reducing cropping area, reducing agricultural investments, or turning to other income-generating activities. We are unable to detect a relationship between yields and the accuracy of seasonal rainfall forecasts, therefore we are unable to observe any additional yield benefit when more accurate seasonal forecast information is available.
Acknowledging the increasing urgency of climate change, many local administrations, in Italy as well as abroad, are currently elaborating their own adaptation strategy. A key step of this process is understanding the current climate, past variability and ongoing trends. Combined with the analysis of vulnerable and exposed elements, it supports the identification of key climatic impacts and risks for the territory and the elaboration of future scenarios. Several climatic datasets are available for this purpose, ranging from station observations to interpolated products and to model reanalyses, each with its own features. The study aimed to shed light on these differences and thus help practitioners make better, more informed decisions. Three gridded datasets, offering global, European and national coverage, were compared to derive a local characterization of mean climatic features, recent trends and climate extremes for the Marche Region (Central Italy). The assessment was based on temperature and precipitation variables from the global reanalysis ERA5-Land, the European observation dataset E-OBS, and the high-resolution reanalysis dynamically downscaled for Italy VHR-REA_IT. The analysis showed that large-scale products such as E-OBS and ERA5-Land can still represent a robust complement for adaptation planning. However, important limitations in describing spatial and temporal patterns need to be properly accounted for in the decision-making process. Only an integrative approach based on a multi-source data evaluation would properly address the multi-faceted aspects of climate variability on a regional scale, derive a more comprehensive analysis of past and current conditions and better manage the underlying uncertainty.
This study tests, empirically validates and refines the Tandem framework for co-designing climate services(Daniels et al., 2019, Daniels et al., 2020), to enhance its applicability and effectiveness. Intended as an inspirational guide for ‘good practice’, Tandem is practical and non-prescriptive and is designed to be tailored to context. We apply Tandem in three different geographic and socioeconomic settings: 1) a rural community in Indonesia, where smallholder farmers are confronting climate impacts on agriculture; 2) two cities in Sweden, where planners are addressing climate-related flooding and heat stress; and 3) communities and institutions in a Colombian river basin, where climate change is leading to water scarcity, raising questions about equitable use. We find that Tandem was effective in these settings in: 1) moving from ‘useful’ to ‘usable’ information by building trust; 2) increasing institutional embedding through strengthened relationships and networks; 3) improving climate information uptake and use; 4) increasing capacity, confidence and a shared understanding of climate information by users, and the decision context by providers; and, 5) serving as a non-prescriptive guide for users, intermediaries and providers to co-design and structure an effective process for collaborative learning and action. We use insights from these case studies to enhance the original framework, enabling it to 1) scope and review climate and non-climate vulnerability and risks; 2) incorporate gender, social equity and power considerations; 3) acknowledge the value of local and traditional ecological knowledge; 4) co-explore horizontal and vertical governance at appropriate decision-making scales; and, 5) provide flexible starting points, with early identification of impact indicators.