S. Noone, A. Brody, Sasha Brown, Niamh Cantwell, M. Coleman, Louise Sarsfield Collins, Caoilfhionn D’Arcy, D. Dee, S. Donegan, R. Fealy, Padraig Flattery, R. McGovern, Caspar Menkman, M. Murphy, Christopher Phillips, M. Roche, P. Thorne
Abstract. The Global Land and Marine Observations Database aims to produce a comprehensive land-based meteorological data archive and inventory. This requires the compilation of available information on data from land-based meteorological stations from all known available in situ meteorological data repositories/sources at multiple timescales (e.g. sub-daily, daily, and monthly). During this process the service team members have identified that many of the data sources contain stations with incorrect location coordinates. These stations cannot be included in the processing to be served via the Copernicus Climate Change Service until the issues are satisfactorily resolved. Many of these stations are in regions of the world where a sparsity of climate data currently exists, such as Southeast Asia and South America. As such, resolving these issues would provide important additional climate data, but this is a very labour-intensive task. Therefore, we have developed the Geo-locate project – that enrols the help of undergraduate geography students at Maynooth University, Ireland – to resolve some of the land-based station geolocation issues. To date, we have run two Geo-locate projects: the first in the 2017/2018 academic year and the second in the 2018/2019 academic year. Both iterations have been very successful with 1926 of the 2168 total candidate stations ostensibly resolved, which equates to an 88 % success rate. At the same time, students have gained critical skills that helped to meet the expected pedagogical outcomes of the second-year curriculum, while producing a lasting scientific legacy. We asked the class of 2018/2019 to reflect critically upon the outcomes, and we present the results herein; these results provide important feedback on what students felt that they gained from their participation and how we may improve the experience and learning outcomes in future. We will be continuing to run Geo-locate projects over the next few years. We encourage other organizations to investigate the potential for engaging university students to help resolve similar data issues while enriching the student experience and aiding in the delivery of learning outcomes. This paper provides details of the project, and all supporting information such as project guidelines and templates to enable other organizations to instigate similar programmes.
{"title":"Geo-locate project: a novel approach to resolving meteorological station location issues with the assistance of undergraduate students","authors":"S. Noone, A. Brody, Sasha Brown, Niamh Cantwell, M. Coleman, Louise Sarsfield Collins, Caoilfhionn D’Arcy, D. Dee, S. Donegan, R. Fealy, Padraig Flattery, R. McGovern, Caspar Menkman, M. Murphy, Christopher Phillips, M. Roche, P. Thorne","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-157-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-157-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The Global Land and Marine Observations Database aims to produce a\u0000comprehensive land-based meteorological data archive and inventory. This\u0000requires the compilation of available information on data from land-based\u0000meteorological stations from all known available in situ meteorological data\u0000repositories/sources at multiple timescales (e.g. sub-daily, daily, and\u0000monthly). During this process the service team members have identified that\u0000many of the data sources contain stations with incorrect location\u0000coordinates. These stations cannot be included in the processing to be\u0000served via the Copernicus Climate Change Service until the issues are\u0000satisfactorily resolved. Many of these stations are in regions of the world\u0000where a sparsity of climate data currently exists, such as Southeast Asia\u0000and South America. As such, resolving these issues would provide important\u0000additional climate data, but this is a very labour-intensive task.\u0000Therefore, we have developed the Geo-locate project – that enrols the help of\u0000undergraduate geography students at Maynooth University, Ireland – to resolve\u0000some of the land-based station geolocation issues. To date, we have run two\u0000Geo-locate projects: the first in the 2017/2018 academic year and the second\u0000in the 2018/2019 academic year. Both iterations have been very successful with\u00001926 of the 2168 total candidate stations ostensibly resolved, which equates\u0000to an 88 % success rate. At the same time, students have gained critical skills that\u0000helped to meet the expected pedagogical outcomes of the second-year\u0000curriculum, while producing a lasting scientific legacy. We asked the class\u0000of 2018/2019 to reflect critically upon the outcomes, and we present the results\u0000herein; these results provide important feedback on what students felt that they\u0000gained from their participation and how we may improve the experience and\u0000learning outcomes in future. We will be continuing to run Geo-locate\u0000projects over the next few years. We encourage other organizations to\u0000investigate the potential for engaging university students to help resolve\u0000similar data issues while enriching the student experience and aiding in the delivery of learning outcomes. This paper provides details of the project,\u0000and all supporting information such as project guidelines and templates to\u0000enable other organizations to instigate similar programmes.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78667277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
L. Cumiskey, Matthew Lickiss, Robert Šakić Trogrlić, Javed Ali
Abstract. This article presents a “pressure cooker” approach for building interdisciplinary risk communication capacity in young professionals via an intensive 24 h workshop. The event successfully brought together 35 participants from around the world to work on real-world environmental hazard/risk communication challenges for two areas in Mexico. Participants worked in interdisciplinary teams, following a three-step iterative process, with support from mentors and a range of specialists to develop risk communication outputs. Feedback surveys indicate that the workshop met its goal of improving participants' knowledge of risk communication and interdisciplinary working. The workshop resulted in an interdisciplinary community of researchers and practitioners, including organisers, participants and supporting specialists, which was still active after the event. It is recommended that such interdisciplinary workshops are used to build the capacity to tackle complex challenges, such as risk communication, but they require further testing. Insights into the design and implementation of such interdisciplinary workshops are given (e.g. team design, use of preparatory materials, and engagement of specialists and local stakeholders are presented), including critiques of challenges raised by the workshop participants. Guidance is provided to those interested in applying a pressure cooker approach and further adaptations of the approach are welcomed.
{"title":"Interdisciplinary pressure cooker: environmental risk communication skills for the next generation","authors":"L. Cumiskey, Matthew Lickiss, Robert Šakić Trogrlić, Javed Ali","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-173-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-173-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. This article presents a “pressure cooker” approach for building\u0000interdisciplinary risk communication capacity in young professionals via\u0000an intensive 24 h workshop. The event successfully brought together 35\u0000participants from around the world to work on real-world environmental\u0000hazard/risk communication challenges for two areas in Mexico. Participants\u0000worked in interdisciplinary teams, following a three-step iterative process,\u0000with support from mentors and a range of specialists to develop risk\u0000communication outputs. Feedback surveys indicate that the workshop met its\u0000goal of improving participants' knowledge of risk communication and\u0000interdisciplinary working. The workshop resulted in an interdisciplinary\u0000community of researchers and practitioners, including organisers,\u0000participants and supporting specialists, which was still active after the event. It is\u0000recommended that such interdisciplinary workshops are used to build the capacity\u0000to tackle complex challenges, such as risk communication, but they require\u0000further testing. Insights into the design and implementation of such\u0000interdisciplinary workshops are given (e.g. team design, use of preparatory\u0000materials, and engagement of specialists and local stakeholders are\u0000presented), including critiques of challenges raised by the workshop\u0000participants. Guidance is provided to those interested in applying a\u0000pressure cooker approach and further adaptations of the approach are\u0000welcomed.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"214 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73308675","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. The politicization of and societal debate on climate change science have increased over the last decades. Here, the authors argue that the role of climate scientists in our society needs to adapt in accordance with this development. We share our experiences from the awareness campaign Pole to Paris, which engaged non-academic audiences on climate change issues on the roads from the polar regions to Paris and through conventional and social media. By running and cycling across a third of the globe, the scientists behind the initiative established connections on the audiences' terms. Propitiously for other outreach efforts, the exertions were not in themselves the most attractive; among our social media followers, the messages of climate change science and action were more favourable, as measured by video statistics and a follower survey. Communicating climate action in itself challenges our positions as scientists, and here we discuss the impact such messages have on our credibility as researchers. Based on these reflections, as well as those from other science communication initiatives, we suggest a way forward for climate scientists in the post-factual society, who should be better trained in interaction with non-academic audiences and pseudoscepticism.
{"title":"Communicating climate change in a “post-factual” society: lessons learned from the Pole to Paris campaign","authors":"E. M. Knudsen, Oria J. de Bolsée","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-83-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-83-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The politicization of and societal debate on climate\u0000change science have increased over the last decades. Here, the authors argue\u0000that the role of climate scientists in our society needs to adapt in\u0000accordance with this development. We share our experiences from the\u0000awareness campaign Pole to Paris, which engaged non-academic audiences on\u0000climate change issues on the roads from the polar regions to Paris and\u0000through conventional and social media. By running and cycling across a third\u0000of the globe, the scientists behind the initiative established connections\u0000on the audiences' terms. Propitiously for other outreach efforts, the\u0000exertions were not in themselves the most attractive; among our social media\u0000followers, the messages of climate change science and action were more\u0000favourable, as measured by video statistics and a follower survey.\u0000Communicating climate action in itself challenges our positions as\u0000scientists, and here we discuss the impact such messages have on our\u0000credibility as researchers. Based on these reflections, as well as those\u0000from other science communication initiatives, we suggest a way forward for\u0000climate scientists in the post-factual society, who should be better trained\u0000in interaction with non-academic audiences and pseudoscepticism.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89849337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
M. Devès, Marion Le Texier, Hugues Pécout, C. Grasland
Abstract. The capacity of individuals to cope with threatening situations depends directly on their capacity to anticipate what will come next. The media should play a key role in that respect, but an extensive analysis of earthquake media coverage by the international news reveals systematic biases. Exploring a corpus of 320 888 news articles published by 32 worldwide newspapers in 2015 in English, Spanish or French, we found that the press covers a very small number of events: 71 % of the news about seismic events was dedicated to only 3 earthquakes (among the 1559 magnitude 5+ events). A combination of frequency and content analysis reveals a typical framing of the “earthquake news”. Except for the “Nepal quake”, the duration of the coverage is usually very short. Thus, the news tends to focus on short-term issues: the event magnitude, tsunami alerts, human losses, material damage and rescue operations. Longer-term issues linked to the recovery, restoration, reconstruction, mitigation and prevention are barely addressed. Preventive safety measures are almost never mentioned. The news on impacts shows a peculiar appetency for death counts, material damage estimates and sensationalism. News on the response tends to emphasize the role played by the international community in helping the “poor and vulnerable”. The scientific content of the coverage is often restricted to mentions of the magnitude, with the concept of the seismic intensity being largely ignored. The notion of the “seismic crisis” also seems unclear, with aftershocks sometimes being treated as isolated events. Secondary hazards are barely mentioned, except in the case of tsunami alerts. Together, these biases contribute to fatalistic judgments that damage cannot be prevented. If scientific messages are to be communicated, they should be broadcast a few hours after an event. Why not take the opportunity to familiarize people with the real timeline of seismic disasters?
{"title":"Seismic risk: the biases of earthquake media coverage","authors":"M. Devès, Marion Le Texier, Hugues Pécout, C. Grasland","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-125-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-125-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The capacity of individuals to cope with threatening situations depends\u0000directly on their capacity to anticipate what will come next. The media\u0000should play a key role in that respect, but an extensive analysis of\u0000earthquake media coverage by the international news reveals systematic\u0000biases. Exploring a corpus of 320 888 news articles published by 32\u0000worldwide newspapers in 2015 in English, Spanish or French, we found that\u0000the press covers a very small number of events: 71 % of the news about\u0000seismic events was dedicated to only 3 earthquakes (among the 1559\u0000magnitude 5+ events). A combination of frequency and content analysis reveals a\u0000typical framing of the “earthquake news”. Except for the “Nepal quake”, the\u0000duration of the coverage is usually very short. Thus, the news tends to focus\u0000on short-term issues: the event magnitude, tsunami alerts, human losses,\u0000material damage and rescue operations. Longer-term issues linked to the\u0000recovery, restoration, reconstruction, mitigation and prevention are barely\u0000addressed. Preventive safety measures are almost never mentioned. The news\u0000on impacts shows a peculiar appetency for death counts, material damage\u0000estimates and sensationalism. News on the response tends to emphasize the\u0000role played by the international community in helping the “poor and\u0000vulnerable”. The scientific content of the coverage is often restricted to\u0000mentions of the magnitude, with the concept of the seismic intensity being\u0000largely ignored. The notion of the “seismic crisis” also seems unclear, with\u0000aftershocks sometimes being treated as isolated events. Secondary hazards\u0000are barely mentioned, except in the case of tsunami alerts. Together, these\u0000biases contribute to fatalistic judgments that damage cannot be prevented.\u0000If scientific messages are to be communicated, they should be broadcast a\u0000few hours after an event. Why not take the opportunity to familiarize\u0000people with the real timeline of seismic disasters?\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85102351","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. From the wilderness of Hyrule, the continent of Tamriel, and the geographies of Middle Earth, players of video games are exposed to wondrous, fantastic, but ultimately fake, landscapes. Given the time people may spend in these worlds compared to the time they spend being trained in geoscience, we wondered whether expert geoscientists would differ from non-geoscientists in whether they judge the landscapes in these video games to be “realistic”. Since video games present a great opportunity for tangential learning, it would be a missed opportunity if it turns out that features obviously fake to geoscientists are perceived as plausible by non-geoscientists. To satisfy our curiosity and answer this question, we conducted a survey where we asked people to judge both photos from real landscapes as well as screenshots from the recent The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild video game on how likely they thought the features in the picture were to exist in the real world. Since game world screenshots are easily identified based on their rendered, pixelated nature, we pre-processed all pictures with an artistic “Van Gogh” filter that removed the rendered nature but retained the dominant landscape features. We found that there is a small but significant difference between geoscientists and non-geoscientists, with geoscientists being slightly better at judging which pictures are from the real world versus from the video game world. While significant, the effect is small enough to conclude that fantastical worlds in video games can be used for tangential learning on geoscientific subjects.
{"title":"Taking a Breath of the Wild: are geoscientists more effective than non-geoscientists in determining whether video game world landscapes are realistic?","authors":"R. Hut, C. Albers, S. Illingworth, Chris Skinner","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-117-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-117-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. From the wilderness of Hyrule, the continent of Tamriel, and the geographies of Middle Earth, players of video games are exposed to wondrous, fantastic, but ultimately fake, landscapes. Given the time people may spend in these worlds compared to the time they spend being trained in geoscience, we wondered whether expert geoscientists would differ from non-geoscientists in whether they judge the landscapes in these video games to be “realistic”. Since video games present a great opportunity for tangential learning, it would be a missed opportunity if it turns out that features obviously fake to geoscientists are perceived as plausible by non-geoscientists. To satisfy our curiosity and answer this question, we conducted a survey where we asked people to judge both photos from real landscapes as well as screenshots from the recent The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild video game on how likely they thought the features in the picture were to exist in the real world. Since game world screenshots are easily identified based on their rendered, pixelated nature, we pre-processed all pictures with an artistic “Van Gogh” filter that removed the rendered nature but retained the dominant landscape features. We found that there is a small but significant difference between geoscientists and non-geoscientists, with geoscientists being slightly better at judging which pictures are from the real world versus from the video game world. While significant, the effect is small enough to conclude that fantastical worlds in video games can be used for tangential learning on geoscientific subjects.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84102832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. CCS (carbon capture and storage) is an important issue within the context of climate-change mitigation options and has played a major role in the agendas of scientists, researchers, and engineers. While media representations of CCS in Germany from 2004 to 2014 demonstrated the significant mediatization of the topic, this cannot be ascribed to science. Instead, CCS media coverage in Germany has been dominated by other stakeholder groups. While CCS is linked to various industry sectors, such as cement and steel production, the German debate has dominantly focussed on the coal and energy branches. This study looks at the role of science and science public relations (PR) within the German public debate by analysing the media coverage of CCS in daily newspapers from 2004 to 2014. If science wishes to remain proactive within science communication, new approaches for future science PR have to be deduced to strengthen, once again, the role of science communication. Among these approaches, it is important to pursue a more differentiated understanding of target audiences and regional concerns. Science PR has to accept that science itself is no longer the only stakeholder and actor within science communication.
{"title":"The takeover of science communication: how science lost its leading role in the public discourse on carbon capture and storage research in daily newspapers in Germany","authors":"S. Schneider","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-69-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-69-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. CCS (carbon capture and storage) is an important issue within the context of\u0000climate-change mitigation options and has played a major role in the agendas\u0000of scientists, researchers, and engineers. While media representations of CCS\u0000in Germany from 2004 to 2014 demonstrated the significant mediatization of\u0000the topic, this cannot be ascribed to science. Instead, CCS media coverage in\u0000Germany has been dominated by other stakeholder groups. While CCS is linked\u0000to various industry sectors, such as cement and steel production, the German\u0000debate has dominantly focussed on the coal and energy branches. This study\u0000looks at the role of science and science public relations (PR) within the\u0000German public debate by analysing the media coverage of CCS in daily\u0000newspapers from 2004 to 2014. If science wishes to remain proactive within\u0000science communication, new approaches for future science PR have to be\u0000deduced to strengthen, once again, the role of science communication. Among\u0000these approaches, it is important to pursue a more differentiated\u0000understanding of target audiences and regional concerns. Science PR has to\u0000accept that science itself is no longer the only stakeholder and actor within\u0000science communication.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81167394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. The American Geophysical Union (AGU) is an Earth and space science professional society based in the United States. Research conducted by AGU members ranges from the Earth's deep interior to the outer planets of our solar system. However, little research exists on the AGU meeting itself. In this work, we apply network analysis and scientometrics to 17 years of AGU Fall Meetings. We are interested in the AGU network structure and what its properties can tell us about how the procedures of the AGU Fall Meeting can be enhanced to facilitate better scientific communication and collaboration. We quantify several network properties and illustrate how this type of analysis can enhance meeting planning and layout. We conclude with practical strategies for the AGU Program Committee.
{"title":"Identifying and improving AGU collaborations using network analysis and scientometrics","authors":"T. Narock, S. Hasnain, Ronie Stephan","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-55-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-55-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The American Geophysical Union (AGU) is an Earth and space science\u0000professional society based in the United States. Research conducted by AGU\u0000members ranges from the Earth's deep interior to the outer planets of our\u0000solar system. However, little research exists on the AGU meeting itself. In\u0000this work, we apply network analysis and scientometrics to 17 years of AGU\u0000Fall Meetings. We are interested in the AGU network structure and what its\u0000properties can tell us about how the procedures of the AGU Fall Meeting can\u0000be enhanced to facilitate better scientific communication and collaboration.\u0000We quantify several network properties and illustrate how this type of\u0000analysis can enhance meeting planning and layout. We conclude with practical\u0000strategies for the AGU Program Committee.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80093239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Maria Loroño-Leturiondo, P. O'hare, S. Cook, S. Hoon, S. Illingworth
Abstract. Urban centres worldwide are adversely affected by flooding and air pollution. Better-prepared citizens are crucial to limiting the impacts of these hazards, and both lay knowledge and personal experiences are important in complementing and challenging expert opinion. For the first time, this study offers a critical comparison of how different two-way communication formats have been used worldwide between experts and the public in relation to flooding and air pollution risk. Through a systematic review, we analyse social media, educational programmes, serious games, citizen science, and forums in terms of their effectiveness in respect of dealing with incidents, raising awareness, and promoting knowledge exchange in the context of flooding and air pollution risk. We find that there is neither a one-size-fits-all nor superior format of communication. No single format is effective in fulfilling all three communication purposes. All five formats analysed appear to be successful under different circumstances and are never suitable for all segments of the population. Communication between experts and the public is difficult and full of tensions; information alone is not enough. Our study shows different ways of incorporating strategies to build trust between experts and the public and make communication more fun and accessible, breaking down hierarchies and creating safe spaces for co-creation where everyone feels empowered to participate and everyone benefits.
{"title":"Building bridges between experts and the public: a comparison of two-way communication formats for flooding and air pollution risk","authors":"Maria Loroño-Leturiondo, P. O'hare, S. Cook, S. Hoon, S. Illingworth","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-39-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-39-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Urban centres worldwide are adversely affected by flooding and air pollution.\u0000Better-prepared citizens are crucial to limiting the impacts of these\u0000hazards, and both lay knowledge and personal experiences are important in\u0000complementing and challenging expert opinion. For the first time, this study\u0000offers a critical comparison of how different two-way communication formats\u0000have been used worldwide between experts and the public in relation to\u0000flooding and air pollution risk. Through a systematic review, we analyse\u0000social media, educational programmes, serious games, citizen science, and\u0000forums in terms of their effectiveness in respect of dealing with incidents,\u0000raising awareness, and promoting knowledge exchange in the context of\u0000flooding and air pollution risk. We find that there is neither a\u0000one-size-fits-all nor superior format of communication. No single format is\u0000effective in fulfilling all three communication purposes. All five formats\u0000analysed appear to be successful under different circumstances and are never\u0000suitable for all segments of the population. Communication between experts and\u0000the public is difficult and full of tensions; information alone is not\u0000enough. Our study shows different ways of incorporating strategies to build\u0000trust between experts and the public and make communication more fun and\u0000accessible, breaking down hierarchies and creating safe spaces for\u0000co-creation where everyone feels empowered to participate and everyone benefits.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81489297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. The resilience of our cities to weather extremes relies both on physical environmental factors and on socio-economic factors. The latter includes communication processes among the members of an urban community. This paper presents a study that aims at appraising how public outreach campaigns influence urban resilience. According to this research, seizing the added value of science outreach efforts calls for an assessment method that takes into consideration the interactions between communication processes and other urban resilience drivers. The paper begins by presenting examples of methods to assess urban resilience to weather extremes. We then propose an approach to comprehend the impact of communication activities on resilience in the context of urban flood resilience strategies. We use five guiding criteria to define “resilience communication indicators” and we present two communication assessment experiments based on these criteria. These experiments were undertaken to assess communication activities addressed to non-specialist audiences and tailored for a flood resilience project in the Paris region. Different research methods were tested through these experiments, with the goal of comprehending their strengths and weaknesses in the framework of urban resilience strategies.
{"title":"Assessing the impact of outreach strategies in cities coping with climate risks","authors":"Rosa Vicari, I. Tchiguirinskaia, D. Schertzer","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-25-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-25-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The resilience of our cities to weather extremes relies both on\u0000physical environmental factors and on socio-economic factors. The latter\u0000includes communication processes among the members of an urban community.\u0000This paper presents a study that aims at appraising how public outreach\u0000campaigns influence urban resilience. According to this research, seizing the\u0000added value of science outreach efforts calls for an assessment method that\u0000takes into consideration the interactions between communication processes and\u0000other urban resilience drivers. The paper begins by presenting examples of\u0000methods to assess urban resilience to weather extremes. We then propose an\u0000approach to comprehend the impact of communication activities on resilience\u0000in the context of urban flood resilience strategies. We use five guiding\u0000criteria to define “resilience communication indicators” and we present two\u0000communication assessment experiments based on these criteria. These\u0000experiments were undertaken to assess communication activities addressed to\u0000non-specialist audiences and tailored for a flood resilience project in the\u0000Paris region. Different research methods were tested through these\u0000experiments, with the goal of comprehending their strengths and weaknesses in\u0000the framework of urban resilience strategies.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86506049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. Humanity's situation with respect to climate change is sometimes compared to that of a frog in a slowly boiling pot of water, meaning that change will happen too gradually for us to appreciate the likelihood of catastrophe and act before it is too late. I argue that the scientific community is not yet telling the boiling frog what he needs to know. I use a review of the figures included in two reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to show that much of the climate science communicated to policymakers is presented in the form of projections of what is most likely to occur, as a function of time (equivalent to the following statement: in 5 min time, the water you are sitting in will be 2 ∘C warmer). I argue from first principles that a more appropriate means of assessing and communicating the risks of climate change would be to produce assessments of the likelihood of crossing non-arbitrary thresholds of impact, as a function of time (equivalent to the following statement: the probability of you being boiled to death will be 1 % in 5 min time, rising to 100 % in 20 min time if you do not jump out of the pot). This would be consistent with approaches to risk assessment in fields such as insurance, engineering, and health and safety. Importantly, it would ensure that decision makers are informed of the biggest risks and hence of the strongest reasons to act. I suggest ways in which the science community could contribute to promoting this approach, taking into account its inherent need for cross-disciplinary research and for engagement with decision makers before the research is conducted instead of afterwards.
{"title":"Telling the boiling frog what he needs to know: why climate change risks should be plotted as probability over time","authors":"S. Sharpe","doi":"10.5194/GC-2-95-2019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/GC-2-95-2019","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Humanity's situation with respect to climate change is\u0000sometimes compared to that of a frog in a slowly boiling pot of water,\u0000meaning that change will happen too gradually for us to appreciate the\u0000likelihood of catastrophe and act before it is too late. I argue that the\u0000scientific community is not yet telling the boiling frog what he needs to\u0000know. I use a review of the figures included in two reports of the\u0000Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to show that much of the climate\u0000science communicated to policymakers is presented in the form of projections\u0000of what is most likely to occur, as a function of time (equivalent to the following statement: in 5 min time, the water you are sitting in will be 2 ∘C warmer). I\u0000argue from first principles that a more appropriate means of assessing and\u0000communicating the risks of climate change would be to produce assessments of\u0000the likelihood of crossing non-arbitrary thresholds of impact, as a function\u0000of time (equivalent to the following statement: the probability of you being boiled to death will\u0000be 1 % in 5 min time, rising to 100 % in 20 min time if\u0000you do not jump out of the pot). This would be consistent with approaches to\u0000risk assessment in fields such as insurance, engineering, and health and\u0000safety. Importantly, it would ensure that decision makers are informed of the\u0000biggest risks and hence of the strongest reasons to act. I suggest ways in\u0000which the science community could contribute to promoting this approach,\u0000taking into account its inherent need for cross-disciplinary research and\u0000for engagement with decision makers before the research is conducted\u0000instead of afterwards.\u0000","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86986469","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：