Evaluating knowledge to support climate action: A framework for sustained assessment. Report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment

R. H. Moss, S. Avery, K. Baja, M. Burkett, A. M. Chischilly, J. Dell, P. A. Fleming, K. Geil, K. Jacobs, A. Jones, K. Knowlton, J. Koh, M. C. Lemos, J. Melillo, R. Pandya, T. C. Richmond, L. Scarlett, J. Snyder, M. Stults, A. M. WapleJ. Whitehead, D. Zarrilli, B. M. Ayyub, J. Fox, A. Ganguly, L. Joppa, S. Julius, P. Kirshen, R. Kreutter, A. McGovern, R. Meyer, J. Neumann, W. Solecki, J. Smith, P. Tissot, G. Yohe, R. Zimmerman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal ‘‘climate assessment consortium’’ to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)465-487
Number of pages23
JournalWeather, Climate, and Society
Volume11
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

climate
project studies
artificial intelligence
local participation
civil society
private sector
local government
professional association
climate modeling
science
learning
decision making
resilience
community
jurisdiction
ethnic group
damages
damage
dialogue
uncertainty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Atmospheric Science

Cite this

Evaluating knowledge to support climate action : A framework for sustained assessment. Report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment. / Moss, R. H.; Avery, S.; Baja, K.; Burkett, M.; Chischilly, A. M.; Dell, J.; Fleming, P. A.; Geil, K.; Jacobs, K.; Jones, A.; Knowlton, K.; Koh, J.; Lemos, M. C.; Melillo, J.; Pandya, R.; Richmond, T. C.; Scarlett, L.; Snyder, J.; Stults, M.; Waple, A. M.; Whitehead, J.; Zarrilli, D.; Ayyub, B. M.; Fox, J.; Ganguly, A.; Joppa, L.; Julius, S.; Kirshen, P.; Kreutter, R.; McGovern, A.; Meyer, R.; Neumann, J.; Solecki, W.; Smith, J.; Tissot, P.; Yohe, G.; Zimmerman, R.

In: Weather, Climate, and Society, Vol. 11, No. 3, 01.01.2019, p. 465-487.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Moss, RH, Avery, S, Baja, K, Burkett, M, Chischilly, AM, Dell, J, Fleming, PA, Geil, K, Jacobs, K, Jones, A, Knowlton, K, Koh, J, Lemos, MC, Melillo, J, Pandya, R, Richmond, TC, Scarlett, L, Snyder, J, Stults, M, Waple, AM, Whitehead, J, Zarrilli, D, Ayyub, BM, Fox, J, Ganguly, A, Joppa, L, Julius, S, Kirshen, P, Kreutter, R, McGovern, A, Meyer, R, Neumann, J, Solecki, W, Smith, J, Tissot, P, Yohe, G & Zimmerman, R 2019, 'Evaluating knowledge to support climate action: A framework for sustained assessment. Report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment', Weather, Climate, and Society, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 465-487. https://doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0134.1
Moss, R. H. ; Avery, S. ; Baja, K. ; Burkett, M. ; Chischilly, A. M. ; Dell, J. ; Fleming, P. A. ; Geil, K. ; Jacobs, K. ; Jones, A. ; Knowlton, K. ; Koh, J. ; Lemos, M. C. ; Melillo, J. ; Pandya, R. ; Richmond, T. C. ; Scarlett, L. ; Snyder, J. ; Stults, M. ; Waple, A. M. ; Whitehead, J. ; Zarrilli, D. ; Ayyub, B. M. ; Fox, J. ; Ganguly, A. ; Joppa, L. ; Julius, S. ; Kirshen, P. ; Kreutter, R. ; McGovern, A. ; Meyer, R. ; Neumann, J. ; Solecki, W. ; Smith, J. ; Tissot, P. ; Yohe, G. ; Zimmerman, R. / Evaluating knowledge to support climate action : A framework for sustained assessment. Report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment. In: Weather, Climate, and Society. 2019 ; Vol. 11, No. 3. pp. 465-487.
@article{3e44aa5e76f840948961c1e3665b72eb,
title = "Evaluating knowledge to support climate action: A framework for sustained assessment. Report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment",
abstract = "As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal ‘‘climate assessment consortium’’ to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.",
author = "Moss, {R. H.} and S. Avery and K. Baja and M. Burkett and Chischilly, {A. M.} and J. Dell and Fleming, {P. A.} and K. Geil and K. Jacobs and A. Jones and K. Knowlton and J. Koh and Lemos, {M. C.} and J. Melillo and R. Pandya and Richmond, {T. C.} and L. Scarlett and J. Snyder and M. Stults and Waple, {A. M.} and J. Whitehead and D. Zarrilli and Ayyub, {B. M.} and J. Fox and A. Ganguly and L. Joppa and S. Julius and P. Kirshen and R. Kreutter and A. McGovern and R. Meyer and J. Neumann and W. Solecki and J. Smith and P. Tissot and G. Yohe and R. Zimmerman",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0134.1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "465--487",
journal = "Weather, Climate, and Society",
issn = "1948-8327",
publisher = "American Meteorological Society",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating knowledge to support climate action

T2 - A framework for sustained assessment. Report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment

AU - Moss, R. H.

AU - Avery, S.

AU - Baja, K.

AU - Burkett, M.

AU - Chischilly, A. M.

AU - Dell, J.

AU - Fleming, P. A.

AU - Geil, K.

AU - Jacobs, K.

AU - Jones, A.

AU - Knowlton, K.

AU - Koh, J.

AU - Lemos, M. C.

AU - Melillo, J.

AU - Pandya, R.

AU - Richmond, T. C.

AU - Scarlett, L.

AU - Snyder, J.

AU - Stults, M.

AU - Waple, A. M.

AU - Whitehead, J.

AU - Zarrilli, D.

AU - Ayyub, B. M.

AU - Fox, J.

AU - Ganguly, A.

AU - Joppa, L.

AU - Julius, S.

AU - Kirshen, P.

AU - Kreutter, R.

AU - McGovern, A.

AU - Meyer, R.

AU - Neumann, J.

AU - Solecki, W.

AU - Smith, J.

AU - Tissot, P.

AU - Yohe, G.

AU - Zimmerman, R.

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal ‘‘climate assessment consortium’’ to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.

AB - As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal ‘‘climate assessment consortium’’ to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067844306&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067844306&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0134.1

DO - 10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0134.1

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85067844306

VL - 11

SP - 465

EP - 487

JO - Weather, Climate, and Society

JF - Weather, Climate, and Society

SN - 1948-8327

IS - 3

ER -