提高利益相关者对气候变化风险评估的参与度:来自欧洲六项联合生产倡议的见解

IF 3.3 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Frontiers in Climate Pub Date : 2023-06-15 DOI:10.3389/fclim.2023.1120421
Karin André, Åsa Gerger Swartling, Mathilda Englund, L. Petutschnig, Emmanuel M. N. A. N. Attoh, Katharina Milde, Daniel Lückerath, Adeline Cauchy, Tara Botnen Holm, Mari Hanssen Korsbrekke, Muriel Bour, Erich Rome
{"title":"提高利益相关者对气候变化风险评估的参与度:来自欧洲六项联合生产倡议的见解","authors":"Karin André, Åsa Gerger Swartling, Mathilda Englund, L. Petutschnig, Emmanuel M. N. A. N. Attoh, Katharina Milde, Daniel Lückerath, Adeline Cauchy, Tara Botnen Holm, Mari Hanssen Korsbrekke, Muriel Bour, Erich Rome","doi":"10.3389/fclim.2023.1120421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is increasingly recognized that effective climate risk assessments benefit from well-crafted processes of knowledge co-production involving key stakeholders and scientists. To support the co-production of actionable knowledge on climate change, a careful design and planning process is often called for to ensure that relevant perspectives are integrated and to promote shared understandings and joint ownership of the research process. In this article, we aim to further refine methods for co-producing climate services to support risk-informed decision-support and adaptation action. By drawing on insights and lessons learned from participatory processes in six case studies in Northern and Central Europe, we seek to better understand how associated challenges and opportunities arising in co-production processes play out in different case-specific contexts. All cases have applied a standardized framework for climate vulnerability and risk assessment, the impact chain method. The analysis builds on multiple methods including a survey among case study researchers and stakeholders, interviews with researchers, as well as a project workshop to develop collective insights and synthesize results. The results illustrate case studies' different approaches to stakeholder involvement as well as the outputs, outcomes, and impacts resulting from the risk assessments. Examples include early indications of mutual learning and improved understanding of climate risks, impacts and vulnerability, and local and regional decision contexts, as well as actual uptake in planning and decision contexts. Other outcomes concern scientific progress and contribution to methodological innovations. Overall, our study offers insights into the value of adopting good practices in knowledge co-production in impact chain-based climate risk assessments, with wider lessons for the climate services domain. While collaborations and interactions have contributed to a number of benefits some practical challenges remain for achieving effective co-production processes in the context of climate change and adaptation. To overcome these challenges, we propose a carefully designed but flexible and iterative participatory approach that enables joint learning; reassessment of stakeholder needs and capacities; and co-produced, actionable climate services with the potential to catalyze climate action.","PeriodicalId":33632,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Climate","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving stakeholder engagement in climate change risk assessments: insights from six co-production initiatives in Europe\",\"authors\":\"Karin André, Åsa Gerger Swartling, Mathilda Englund, L. Petutschnig, Emmanuel M. N. A. N. Attoh, Katharina Milde, Daniel Lückerath, Adeline Cauchy, Tara Botnen Holm, Mari Hanssen Korsbrekke, Muriel Bour, Erich Rome\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fclim.2023.1120421\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is increasingly recognized that effective climate risk assessments benefit from well-crafted processes of knowledge co-production involving key stakeholders and scientists. To support the co-production of actionable knowledge on climate change, a careful design and planning process is often called for to ensure that relevant perspectives are integrated and to promote shared understandings and joint ownership of the research process. In this article, we aim to further refine methods for co-producing climate services to support risk-informed decision-support and adaptation action. By drawing on insights and lessons learned from participatory processes in six case studies in Northern and Central Europe, we seek to better understand how associated challenges and opportunities arising in co-production processes play out in different case-specific contexts. All cases have applied a standardized framework for climate vulnerability and risk assessment, the impact chain method. The analysis builds on multiple methods including a survey among case study researchers and stakeholders, interviews with researchers, as well as a project workshop to develop collective insights and synthesize results. The results illustrate case studies' different approaches to stakeholder involvement as well as the outputs, outcomes, and impacts resulting from the risk assessments. Examples include early indications of mutual learning and improved understanding of climate risks, impacts and vulnerability, and local and regional decision contexts, as well as actual uptake in planning and decision contexts. Other outcomes concern scientific progress and contribution to methodological innovations. Overall, our study offers insights into the value of adopting good practices in knowledge co-production in impact chain-based climate risk assessments, with wider lessons for the climate services domain. While collaborations and interactions have contributed to a number of benefits some practical challenges remain for achieving effective co-production processes in the context of climate change and adaptation. To overcome these challenges, we propose a carefully designed but flexible and iterative participatory approach that enables joint learning; reassessment of stakeholder needs and capacities; and co-produced, actionable climate services with the potential to catalyze climate action.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Climate\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Climate\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1120421\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Climate","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1120421","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

人们越来越认识到,有效的气候风险评估得益于关键利益攸关方和科学家精心制定的知识合作过程。为了支持共同产生关于气候变化的可操作知识,通常需要仔细的设计和规划过程,以确保相关观点得到整合,并促进对研究过程的共同理解和共同所有权。在这篇文章中,我们旨在进一步完善共同生产气候服务的方法,以支持风险知情的决策支持和适应行动。通过借鉴北欧和中欧六个案例研究中参与过程的见解和经验教训,我们试图更好地了解合作生产过程中出现的相关挑战和机遇在不同的具体案例中是如何发挥作用的。所有案例都采用了气候脆弱性和风险评估的标准化框架,即影响链方法。该分析建立在多种方法的基础上,包括对案例研究人员和利益相关者的调查、对研究人员的采访,以及开发集体见解和综合结果的项目研讨会。结果说明了案例研究对利益相关者参与的不同方法,以及风险评估产生的产出、结果和影响。例子包括相互学习的早期迹象,以及对气候风险、影响和脆弱性、地方和区域决策背景的更好理解,以及对规划和决策背景的实际理解。其他成果涉及科学进步和对方法创新的贡献。总的来说,我们的研究深入了解了在基于影响链的气候风险评估中采用知识协同生产的良好做法的价值,并为气候服务领域提供了更广泛的经验教训。尽管合作和互动带来了一些好处,但在气候变化和适应的背景下,要实现有效的合作生产过程,仍然存在一些实际挑战。为了克服这些挑战,我们提出了一种精心设计但灵活迭代的参与式方法,使联合学习成为可能;重新评估利益攸关方的需求和能力;以及共同制作、可操作的气候服务,具有催化气候行动的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Improving stakeholder engagement in climate change risk assessments: insights from six co-production initiatives in Europe
It is increasingly recognized that effective climate risk assessments benefit from well-crafted processes of knowledge co-production involving key stakeholders and scientists. To support the co-production of actionable knowledge on climate change, a careful design and planning process is often called for to ensure that relevant perspectives are integrated and to promote shared understandings and joint ownership of the research process. In this article, we aim to further refine methods for co-producing climate services to support risk-informed decision-support and adaptation action. By drawing on insights and lessons learned from participatory processes in six case studies in Northern and Central Europe, we seek to better understand how associated challenges and opportunities arising in co-production processes play out in different case-specific contexts. All cases have applied a standardized framework for climate vulnerability and risk assessment, the impact chain method. The analysis builds on multiple methods including a survey among case study researchers and stakeholders, interviews with researchers, as well as a project workshop to develop collective insights and synthesize results. The results illustrate case studies' different approaches to stakeholder involvement as well as the outputs, outcomes, and impacts resulting from the risk assessments. Examples include early indications of mutual learning and improved understanding of climate risks, impacts and vulnerability, and local and regional decision contexts, as well as actual uptake in planning and decision contexts. Other outcomes concern scientific progress and contribution to methodological innovations. Overall, our study offers insights into the value of adopting good practices in knowledge co-production in impact chain-based climate risk assessments, with wider lessons for the climate services domain. While collaborations and interactions have contributed to a number of benefits some practical challenges remain for achieving effective co-production processes in the context of climate change and adaptation. To overcome these challenges, we propose a carefully designed but flexible and iterative participatory approach that enables joint learning; reassessment of stakeholder needs and capacities; and co-produced, actionable climate services with the potential to catalyze climate action.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Climate
Frontiers in Climate Environmental Science-Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
233
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Consumption-based emission inventories in Nordic municipalities—a quest to develop support for local climate action Transnational governance standards in ensuring sustainable development and operation of hydropower projects in transboundary basins Modeling the measurement of carbon dioxide removal: perspectives from the philosophy of measurement How well can we predict climate migration? A review of forecasting models Treatment of uncertainty in determining the UK's path to Net Zero
×
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