Decision support for climate change adaptation planning in the US: Why it needs a coordinated internet-based practitioners' network

Climatic Change

Volumn 106, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 507-536

  Romsdahl, Rebecca J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH DAKOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION; CLIMATE SCIENCE; CLIMATE VARIABILITY AND CHANGE; COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIPS; DECISION MAKERS; DECISION MAKING PROCESS; DECISION SUPPORTS; FEDERAL PROGRAMS; GLOBAL CHANGE; INTERNET BASED; RESEARCH PROGRAMS; WIDE GAP;

DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; DECISION THEORY; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; TELECOMMUNICATION NETWORKS;

CLIMATE CHANGE;

CLIMATE CHANGE; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH; FEDERAL SYSTEM; GLOBAL CHANGE; INFORMATION SYSTEM; INTERNET; RESEARCH PROGRAM;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 79955818191     PISSN: 01650009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10584-010-9947-x     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. Adger N (2006) Vulnerability. Glob Environ Change 16: 268-281.
2. Adger N, Agrawala S, Mirza MMQ, Conde C, O'Brien K, Pulhin J, Pulwarty R, Smit B, Kiyoshi T (2007) Assessment of adaptation practices, option, constraints and capacity. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 717-743.
3. AgroClimate (2010) Website, http://www. agroclimate. org/. Accessed 20 October 2010.
4. Agrawala S, Broad K (2002) Technology transfer perspective on climate forecast applications. In: De Laet M (ed) Research in science and technology studies: knowledge and technology transfer. JAI Press, Greenwich, pp 45-69.
5. Agrawala S, Broad K, Guston DH (2001) Integrating climate forecasts and societal decision making: challenges to an emergent boundary organization. Sci Technol Human Values 26: 454-477.
6. Barham J, Gichon Y, Humphries S, Rossi F, Alvira D, Rios A (2004) Assessment of the format, content, and potential uses of the AgClimate website and crop yield risk assessment tool by extension agents in North Florida. Southeast Climate Consortium Technical Report Series, Gainsville.
7. Beierle TC, Cayford J (2002) Democracy in practice: public participation in environmental decisions. Resources for the Future, Washington D. C.
8. Bell M, Hobbs BF, Ellis H (2003) The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in the integrated assessment of climate change: implications for IA practitioners. Socio-Econ Plann Sci 37: 289-316.
9. Bos N, Zimmerman A, Olson J, Yew J, Yerkie J, Dahl E, Olson G (2007) From shared databases to communities of practice: a taxonomy of collaboratories. J Comput-Mediat Commun 12: 652-672.
10. Breuer NE, Cabrera VE, Ingram KT, Broad K, Hildebrand PE (2007) AgClimate: a case study in participatory decision support system development. Clim Change 87: 385-403.
11. Brewer GD, Stern PC (eds) (2005) Decision making for the environment: social and behavioral science research priorities, panel on social and behavior science research priorities for environmental decision making, committee on the human dimensions of global change. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, p 281.
12. Cabrera VE, Breuer NE, Bellow JG, Fraisse CW (2006a) Extension agent knowledge and perceptions of seasonal climate forecasts in florida. Southeast Climate Consortium Technical Report Series, Gainsville, FL.
13. Cabrera VE, Breuer NE, Hildebrand PE (2006b) North Florida dairy farmer perceptions toward the use of seasonal climate forecast technology. Clim Change 78: 479-491.
14. Canales G, Coles B, Cornejo C, Fletcher T, Manganyi T, Owuso K, Painter K, Pellish H, Stonerook E, Wilsey D (2005) Perceptions and attitudes of smallholder farmers in North Central Florida regarding the potential usefulness of seasonal climate forecasts. Southeast Climate Consortium Technical Report Series, Gainsville, FL.
15. CARA (2010) Consortium for atlantic regional assessment. Website, http://www. cara. psu. edu/. Accessed 20 October 2010.
16. Carter RH, Morehouse BJ (2003) Climate and urban water providers in Arizona: an analysis of vulnerability perceptions and climate information use. Climas Report Series CL 1-03, Institute for the Study of the Planet, University of Arizona.
17. Cash DW (2001) In order to aid in diffusing useful and practical information: agricultural extension and boundary organizations. Sci Technol Human Values 26: 431-453.
18. Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jager J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. PNAS 100: 8086-8091.
19. Cash DW, Borck JC, Patt AG (2006) Countering the loading-dock approach to linking science and decision making: comparative analysis of El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) forecasting systems. Sci Technol Human Values 31: 465-494.
20. CCSP (2003) Strategic plan for the US climate change science program. Climate Change Science Program, Washington, D. C., p 211.
21. CCSP: FY (2006) Our changing planet. US Climate Change Science Program, Washington, DC.
22. CCSP: FY (2007) Our changing planet. US Climate Change Science Program, Washington, DC, p 272.
23. CCSP: FY (2008) Our changing planet. US Climate Change Science Program, Washington, DC.
24. Changnon D (2004) Improving outreach in atmospheric scienes: assessment of users of climate products. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 85: 601-606.
25. Correspondence (2006) Telephone interviews and emails.
26. Correspondence (2007) Telephone interviews and emails.
27. Daniels SE, Walker GB (1996) Collaborative learning: improving public deliberation in ecosystem-based management. Environ Impact Assess Rev 16: 71-102.
28. Daniels SE, Walker GB (2001) Working through environmental conflict: the collaborative learning approach. Praeger, Westport, Conn., p xxii, 299.
29. Dempsey R, Fisher A (2005) Consortium for Atlantic Regional assessment: information tools for community adaptation to changes in climate or land use. Risk Anal 22: 1495-1509.
30. Dietz T (1994) What should we do? Human ecology and collective decision making. Hum Ecol Rev 1: 301-309.
31. Dietz T (2003) What is a good decision? Criteria for environmental decision making. Hum Ecol Rev 10: 33-39.
32. Dilling L (2006) Workshop on decision support and carbon cycle science: practical strategies to reconciling the supply of and demand for carbon cycle science. Final Workshop Report', Boulder, Colorado.
33. Dilling L (2007a) The opportunities and responsibility for carbon cycle science in the U. S. Environ Sci Policy 10: 1-4.
34. Dilling L (2007b) Towards science in support of decision making: characterizing the supply of carbon cycle science. Environ Sci Policy 10: 48-61.
35. Dow K, Carbone G (2007) Climate science and decision making. Geogr Compass 1/3: 302-324.
36. Fankhauser S, Smith JB, Tol RSJ (1999) Weather climate change: some simple rules to guide adaptation decisions. Ecol Econo 30: 67-78.
37. Fragidis G, Tarabanis K (2006) From repositories of best practices to networks of best practices. IEEE International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology. IEEE Xplore, Singapore, China.
38. Fraisse C, Bellow J, Breuer N, Cabrera J, Jones J, Ingram KT, Hoogenboom G, Paz J (2005) Strategic plan for the Southeast Climate consortium extension program. Southeast Climate Consortium Technical Report Series, Gainesville, FL.
39. Fraisse CW, Breuer NE, Zierden D, Bellow JG, Paz J, Cabrera VE, Garcia y Garcia A, Ingram KT, Hatch U, Hoogenboom G, Jones JW, O'Brien JJ (2006) AgClimate: a climate forecast information system for agricultural risk management in the Southeastern USA. Comput Electron Agric 53: 13-27.
40. Franz NK, Peterson RS, Dailey AL (2002) Leading organizational change: a comparison of county and campus views of extension engagement. J Ext 40.
41. Gamble JL, Furlow J, Snover AK, Hamlet AF, Morehouse BJ, Hartmann H, Pagano T (2004) Assessing the impact of climate variability and change on regional water resources: the implications for stakeholders. Water Resources Monograph 16 Water: Science Policy, and Management 341-368.
42. GAO (2008) Natural resource management: opportunities exist to enhance federal participation in collaborative efforts to reduce conflicts and improve natural resource conditions. Government Accountability Office, Washington, DC.
43. Gray B (1989) Collaborating: finding common ground for multiparty problems. Josey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
44. Gregory R, McDaniels T (2005) Improving environmental decision processes. In: Brewer GD, Stern PC (eds) Decision making for the environment: social and behavioral science research priorities. National Research Council, Washington, DC, pp 175-199.
45. Guston DH (2001) Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: an introduction. Sci Technol Human Values 26: 399-408.
46. Hinkey LM, Ellenberg KT, Kessler B (2005) Strategies for engaging scientists in collaborative processes. J Ext 43.
47. Ingram HM, Stern PC (eds) (2007) Research and Networks for Decision Support in the NOAA Sectoral Applications Research Program Panel on Design for NOAA Sectoral Applications Research Program, Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change, National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
48. IPCC (2007) Summary for policymakers. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 22.
49. Jager J, Farrell AE (2006) Improving the practice of environmental assessment. In: Jager J, Farrell AE (eds) Assessments of regional and global environmental risks. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, pp 278-293.
50. Jones SA, Fischhoff B, Lach D (1999) Evaluating the science-policy interface for climate change research. Clim Change 581-599.
51. Jurgens I (2004) Science-stakeholder dialogue and climate change: towards a participatory notion of communication. In: Berlin conference on the human dimensions of global environmental change "Knowledge for the sustainability transition: the challenge for social science". Global Governance Project: Amsterdam, Berlin, Potsdam and Oldenburg, Berlin, Germany, pp 87-101.
52. Kasperson RE (2006) Editorial: rerouting the stakeholder express. Glob Environ Change 16: 320-322.
53. Klein R, Kenney DS (2005) Use of climate information in municipal drought planning in Colorado. Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, Boulder.
54. Koku E, Nazer N, Wellman B (2001) Netting scholars: online and offline. Am Behav Sci 44: 1752-1774.
55. Lachapelle PR, McCool SF (2005) Exploring the concept of "Ownership" in natural resource planning. Soc Nat Resour 18: 279-285.
56. McNie EC (2007) Reconciling the supply of scientific information with user demands: an analysis of the problem and review of the literature. Environ Sci Policy 10: 17-38.
57. Miles EL, Snover AK, Whitely Binder LC, Sarachik ES, Mote PW, Mantua N (2006) An approach to designing a national climate service. PNAS 103: 19616-19623.
58. Morello L (2008) NOAA: agency planning 'National Climate Service. E& E News, Washington, DC.
59. Morello L (2009) Adaptation: NOAA chief seeks white house blueprint for climate service. E& E News, Washington, DC.
60. Morgan MG, Kandlikar M, Risbey J, Dowlatabadi H (1999) Why conventional tools for policy analysis are often inadequate for problems of global change. Clim Change 41: 271-281.
61. Morgan MG, Cantor R, Clark WC, Fisher A, Jacoby HD, Janetos AC, Kinzig AP, Mellilo J, Street RB, Wilbanks TJ (2005) Learning from the U. S. National Assessment of Climate Change Impact. Environ Sci Technol 39: 9023-9032.
62. NOAA (2007a) Sea grant program history. http://www. seagrant. noaa. gov/aboutsg/historyofsg. html2007a. Accessed 20 October 2010.
63. NAST (2001) National assessment synthesis team. Climate change impacts on the United States: the potential consequences of climate variability and change. Report for the US Global Change Research Program. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p 620.
64. NRC (1996) Colleges of Agriculture at the Land Grant Universities: public service and public policy. Committee on the Future of the Colleges of Agriculture in the Land Grant University System, Board on Agriculture, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, p 140
65. NRC (2001) A climate services vision: first steps toward the future, board on atmospheric sciences and climate. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, p 84.
66. NRC (2007a) Analysis of global change assessments: lessons learned. Committee on Analysis of Global Change Assessments, Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, p 148.
67. NRC (2007b) Evaluating progress of the U. S. climate change science program: methods and preliminary results, committee on strategic advice on the U. S. climate change science program, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. National Research Council, National Academies Press, Washington, DC, p 170.
68. NRC (2009) Informing decisions in a changing climate, panel on strategies and methods for climate-related decision support, Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Climate Change, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, p 188.
69. Pandey N, Prakash C, Pandey DN (2007) Linking knowledge to action for sustainable development in India'. National Conference on Avenues for Empowering the Poor and Enhancing their Growth in the Era of Knowledge Economy, New Dehli, India.
70. Pielke RA Jr (1998) Rethinking the role of adaptation in climate policy. Glob Environ Change 8: 159-170.
71. Pielke RA Jr (1999) Who decides? forecasts and responsibilities in the 1997 Red River Flood. Am Behav Sci Rev 7: 83-101.
72. Pielke RA Jr (2007) The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press, New York, p 188.
73. Pyke CR, Bierwagen BG, Furlow J, Gamble J, Johnson T, Julius S, West J (2007) A decision inventory approach for improving decision support for climate change impact assessment and adaptation. Environ Sci Policy 10: 610-621.
74. Rayner S, Malone EL (eds) (1998) Human choice and climate change: volume 1. Batelle Press, Columbus.
75. Rayner S, Lach D, Ingram H (2005) Weather forecasts are for wimps: why water resource managers do not use climate forecasts. Clim Change 69: 197-227.
76. Relyea HC (2000) Paperwork reduction act reauthorization and government information management issues. Gov Inf Q 17: 367-393.
77. Rhoads BL, Wilson D, Urban M, Herricks EE (1999) Interaction between scientists and nonscientists in community-based watershed management: emergence of the concept of stream naturalization. Environ Manage 24: 297-308.
78. RISA (2007a) Regional integrated sciences & assessments. Website, http://www. climate. noaa. gov/cpo_pa/risa/. Accessed 20 October 2010.
79. RISA (2007b) RISA background. http://www. climate. noaa. gov/index. jsp?pg=./cpo_pa/cpo_pa_index. jsp& pa=risa& sub=2. Accessed 20 October 2010.
80. Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovations. Free Press, New York.
81. Rogers EM, Kincaid DL (1981) Communication networks: toward a new paradigm for research. Free Press, New York.
82. Romsdahl RJ, Pyke CR (2009) What does decision support mean to the climate change research community? Clim Change 95: 1-10.
83. Roncoli C (2006) Ethnographic and participatory approaches to research on farmers' response to climate predictions'. Clim Res 33: 81-99.
84. Roncoli C, Breuer N, Bellow J, Zierden D, Ingram KT, Broad K (2006) Potential applications of Keetch-Byram drought index forecasts for fire management decisions in Georgia and Florida. Southeast Climate Consortium Technical Report Series, Gainesville, FL.
85. Sarewitz D, Pielke RA Jr (2007) The neglected heart of science policy: reconciling supply of and demand for science. Environ Sci Policy 10: 5-16.
86. SECC (2010) Southeast climate consortium. Website, http://seclimate. org/. Accessed 20 October 2010.
87. Selin SW, Schuett MA (2000) Modeling stakeholder perceptions of collaborative initiative effectiveness. Soc Nat Resour 13: 735-745.
88. Smalley P, Herman J (2005) Creating a system to share user experience best practices at eBay. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Portland.
89. Smit B, Wandel J (2006) Adaptation, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability. Glob Environ Change 16: 282-292.
90. Smit B, Pilifosova O, Burton I, Challenger B, Huq S, Klein RJT, Yohe G (2001) Adaptation to climate change in the context of sustainable development and equity. In: McCarthy JJ, Canziani OF, Leary NA, Dokken DJ, White KS (eds) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation & vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 879-912.
91. Smith PD, McDonough MH, Mang MT (1999) Ecosystem management and public participation: lessons from the field. J For 97: 32.
92. Stern PC, Fineberg HV (eds) (1996) Understanding risk: informing decisions in a democratic society, Committee on Risk Characterization, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, p 249.
93. Stern PC, Easterling WE (eds) (1999) Making climate forecasts matter, panel on the human dimensions of seasonal-to-interannual climate variability, Committee on the Human Dimnensions of Global Change. National Research Council, Washington, DC.
94. Stokes DE (1997) Pastuer's quadrant: basic science and technological innovation. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC.
95. Thompson A, Robbins P, Sohngen B, Arvai J, Koontz T (2006) Economy, politics, and institutions: from adaptation to adaptive management in climate change. Clim Change 18: 1-5.
96. Tompkins E, Adger WN (2004) Does adaptive management of natural resources enhance resilience to climate change? Ecol Soc 9: 10.
97. Turnpenny J, Haxeltine A, O'Riordan T (2003) A scoping study of UK user needs for managing climate futures, Part 1 of the pilot-phase interactive integrated assessment process (Aurion project). Working Paper no. 31., Tyndall Centre, Norwich, UK.
98. Vedwan N, Broad K, Letson D, Ingram KT, Podestá G, Breuer NE, Jones JW, O'Brien JJ (2005) Assessment of climate information dissemination efforts by the Florida climate consortium. Southeast Climate Consortium Technical Report Series, Gainsville, FL.
99. Weber EU (2006) Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: why global warming does not scare us (Yet). Clim Change 77: 103-120.
100. Wellman B, Salaff J, Dimitrova D, Garton L, Gulia M, Haythornthwaite C (1996) Computer networks as social networks: collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annu Rev Sociology 22: 213-238.
101. Wernstedt K, Hersh R (2002) Flood planning and climate forecasts at the local level. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, p 51.
102. Wondolleck JM, Yaffee SL (2000) Making collaboration work: lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Island Press, Washington D. C.
103. Ziervogel G, Downing TE (2004) Stakeholder networks: improving seasonal climate forecasts. Clim Change 65: 73-101.