Transcript Example - hvonstorch.de

27. November 2013 - Alfred Wegener Institut für Polar- und
Meeresforschung, Bremerhaven
Concepts, data and perspectives –
the utility of
coastal, marine and climate science
Hans von Storch
Institut für Küstenforschung
HZG
Beyond the rhetoric of societal benefits
It is nowadays a common requirement when preparing scientific
proposals that the project is generating societally useful knowledge or
skills. Thus, almost all proposals feature a section or least a paragraph
which describes "outreach", "knowledge transfer" or "stakeholderinteraction". In many if not most cases, the proposers as well as reviewers
have only lay-concepts for doing so, and the activity goes rarely beyond
giving a few talks on public events and a press release.
Thus, the reference to stakeholders and decision making is often merely
rhetorically and empty.
It is not surprising that the stakeholder-interaction is often not taken
seriously since many scientifically legitimate and valid questions or
answers have no direct bearing for any stakeholder. Some of these
provide clues for a better understanding or better modeling of the system
at hand, and this improvement may turn out of being of utility for
stakeholders after some development at a later time.
That is, exploiting the advancement of science together with an
embedding of societal questions will in some cases result in direct utility
for public understanding of complex phenomena of environmental
dynamics and socio-economic dynamics.
In other cases, no such utility is generated. The value of the scientific
achievement is independent of its societal utility.
When speaking of added utility, we do not imply that science would
solve societal conflicts, such as how to use certain regions, or how to
decide about conflicting usages of coastal seas, such as off-shore wind
energy, fishing and protection of migrating birds.
However, by clarifying certain "if -then" questions and dealing with
options of decision making, science can contribute valuably to quality of
life, both in terms of understanding and management.
In this presentation cases of scientific efforts are sketched which
aim believably at such utility-gains
-
Deutung / making sense
Monitoring
Detection and attribution
Scenarios and forecasts
Categories of utility of scientific insights
Deutung
Understanding of complex phenomena, such as consequences of
eutrophication or the manifestation of natural system variations vis-aavis anthropogenic climate change.
For making these scientific understandings acceptable by the public, it is
needed to understand public questioning, and public mental models of
the dynamics and statistics of the coastal sea environment.
Example
How does the intraseasonal variability of
high tides in Cuxhaven
depend on the seasonal
mean circulation?
von Storch, H. and H. Reichardt 1997: A scenario of storm
surge statistics for the German Bight at the expected time
of doubled atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. - J.
Climate 10, 2653-2662
Categories of utility of scientific insights
Monitoring
Routine monitoring, analysis and short-term forecast of current
environmental state, such as coastal wave conditions, and the emergence
of certain short-term events, such as storm surges or algae blooms.
Example
Analyse von Sturm “Christian” am
28. Oktober 2013
Seewetteramt des DWD, Lefebrve
und Rosenhagen
COSYNA product #1: Analysis of surface currents in the German Bight employing radar
measurements and data assimilation in dynamical model
Hours after Dec 5, 2009, 00 UTC:
Predicted
current
HF radar
observations
Kalman filter analysis
Complete, optimized
current fields
Only model
Data
assimilated
Categories of utility of scientific insights
Detection and attribution
For all kind of societal modifications, be it aquaculture or bridge-building, of
the coastal environment, knowledge is needed about the statistics of
variability, including rare events and the hazards associated with such rare
events, and the sensitivity of these statistics to global and local change.
In particular man-made climate change is a factor which may influence the
assessment of future risks of offshore and shoreline activities. The
identification of systematic change (detection) and plausible mixes of
causes (attribution) are key concepts to make concepts of change
accessible for public and stakeholders
Example: detection
Counting of globally warmest years
in the record of thermometer-based
estimates of global mean surface air
temperature:
In 2013, it was found that among the
last 23 years (since 1990) there were
the 20 warmest years of all years since
1880 (133 years).
For both a short-memory world (𝛼 =
0.85) and for a long-memory world (d =
0.45) the probability for such an event
would be less than 10-4.
Thus, we detect a change stronger than
what would be expected to happen if
only internal variations would be active;
thus, external causes are needed for
explaining this clustering
12
Example: attribution
Attribution argument
provided by IPCC AR5,
SPM of WG I, 2013
Example
“All extremes are getting worse, in particular storms are
getting more destructive.”
Categories of utility of scientific insights
Scenarios and forecasts
A societal value is generated when planning which reflect (changing)
societal preferences is combined with knowledge about geophysical (or
ecological) conditions
Such preferences may relate to the exploitation of marine winds for offshore energy generation.
Such geophysical (or ecological) conditions may be the statistics of
ocean waves, or the needs of a healthy population of harbor porpoises.
In this case, an understanding among scientists is required about the
managerial information needs.
Range of projected change of: precipitation amount – at the end of the century
Maximum wind
Making sense of “scenarios”
• Scenarios are not
predictions (most
probable
developments) but
descriptions of
possible futures.
• The utility of
scenarios is to
examine possibilities
and options – as a
support for decision
processes.
• Another utility is the
provision of steering
public perspectives
(doomsday
prophecies)
Situation
1.
2.
3.
4.
Apart from scientific knowledge alternative knowledge claims exists
among stakeholders and public; scientific practice is influenced by
such cultural constructions.
Scientific knowledge is widely scattered, partly consensual, partly
contested.
Scientific agreement and disagreement is not documented on
regional scales.
The format of regional research results is often incomprehensible for
the public, and not decision-relevant.
Public reception of research findings causes a metamorphosis of
scientific knowledge.
The issue is “postnormal”, i.e, stakes are high, decisions are urgent,
the fact basis is uncertain and societal values are important. Then
economic and political interests try to instrumentalize science.
Major Challenge:
Establish a sustainable dialogue between stakeholders and science in
order to generate decision relevant scientific knowledge and information.
Two-pronged approach
Theoretical: Understanding dynamics of knowledge about coastal,
marine and climate dynamics.
Practical: Embedding scientific knowledge in the context of sociocultural dynamics.
Conditions for implementing science-stakeholder
interaction
(von Storch and Meinke, Nature geoscience, 2008)
1.
Analysis of topology of knowledge about dynamics, risks and
perspectives, and the role of environmental values.
(e.g.,. von Storch, 2009:. Environmental. Science and Policy)
2.
Assessments of scientific knowledge about climate and
environmental change in regions.
(e.g.,. Reckermann, et al., 2008 EOS Trans. Amer. Geophys. U.)
3.
Building and studying dialogue between stakeholders and science
in order to produce decision-relevant information products.
(e.g., von Storch et al., 2011, Journal for Environmental Law and Policy)
Examples
Analyses of topology of alternative knowledge claims
- Surveying in Hamburg, along the North Sea coast and the Elbe about
public and administrative understanding of risk
(cf. Ratter,et al., 2012: Environmental Science & Policy)
- Surveying
climate scientist about state of science and policy
implementation
(cf. Bray, et al., 2011, Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering)
- Analysis of scientific and cultural construction of climate change
(von Storch, 2009, Leviathan, Berliner Zeitschrift für Sozialwissenschaften)
- Postnormality
and climate science; international workshop at U Hamburg in
2011
(cf. Krauss, et al., 2012: nature and culture)
A „linear
model“framework of
how to think
about response
strategies
(Hasselmann, 1990)
Bray, 2010
Increasing level of consensus among scientists that climate
change is underway (manifestation) and that it is likely a
result of anthropogenic influences (attribution)
Die Wissenschaft wird sich immer einiger, während die Reaktion in der
Öffentlichkeit beschränkt bleibt – offenbar eine Entkopplung von Wissenschaft
und von manchen gewünschter Mobilisierung der Öffentlichkeit.
Is scientific knowledge driving the policy process?
How strongly do you employ the
following sources of information, for
deciding about issues related to
climate adaptation?
Regional administrators in German
Baltic Sea coastal regions.
Bray, 2011, pers. comm.
Two different construction of „climate change“
– scientific and cultural – which is more powerful?
Cultural: „Klimakatastrophe“
Temperature
Scientific: man-made change is real,
can be mitigated to some extent but
not completely avoided
Lund and Stockholm
Storms
Die Allgegenwärtigkeit der politischen
Konsequenzen: Postnormalität
Eine Forschungsrichtung befindet sich in einer „postnormalen“ Phase
(laut Ravetz und Funtovicz) beschrieben, wenn
-
Ihre Aussagen inhärent unsicher ist;
und eingesetzt werden für gesellschaftliche Entscheidungen, die
-
dringend sind;
mit gesellschaftlichen Werten und
mit großem Mitteleinsatz verbunden sind.
Dann besteht die Tendenz, dass Wissenschaft für bestimmte Ziele und
Maßnahmen instrumentalisiert wird, und dass die Nützlichkeit der
wissenschaftlichen Aussagen vorn größerer Bedeutung ist als die
zugrunde liegenden Methodik.
Lobbyisten treten verkleidet als wissenschaftliche Akteure auf.
Die Topologie der politischen (und medialen)
Nützlichkeit
Wissenschaftliches Ethos (Merton)-geleitetes Wissensproduktion
und Management
Politikvorschreibend
Die Topologie der wissenschaftlichen
Nützlichkeit
“Mitte”
Honest
Brokers
Alarmisten
Skep
-tiker
Nachhaltiger Einsatz der Ressource
Wissenschaft: Bereitstellung von
Wissen, um Entscheidungen über
Möglichkeiten und Konsequenzen von
Optionen zu informieren (z.B. IPCC
WG I)
Qualitätssicherung durch Limitierung
des Einflusses auf Politik und von
Politik.
Verbrauch der Ressource
„Wissenschaft“: Instrumentalisierung
von Wissenschaft zugunsten
vorgefasster politischer Lösungen.
Bevormundung des politischen
Willensbildungsprozesses.
Examples
Assessment of scientific knowledge about
climate, climate change and climate impact
• in the Baltic Sea region, in the context of international
BALTEX programme (secretariat at HZG), now
renamed to BALTIC Earth; adopted by the
international Commission of the Baltic Sea, HELCOM
The BACC author team, 2008: Assessment of Climate Change in
the Baltic Sea Basin., Springer Verlag
• for Metropolitan Region of Hamburg, in the context of
the excellence initiative program of climate science
CliSAP, Hamburg, adopted by the senate of Hamburg
von Storch, H., M. Claussen and KlimaCampus Autoren Team,
2010: Klimaberibbcht für die Metropolregion Hamburg, Springer
Verlag
Principles
→ The assessment is a synthesis of material drawn
comprehensively from the available scientifically legitimate
literature (e.g. peer reviewed literature, conference
proceedings, reports of scientific institutes).
→ Influence or funding from groups with a political, economical
or ideological agenda is not allowed;
however, questions from such groups are welcome.
→ If a consensus view cannot be found in the above defined
literature, this is clearly stated and the differing views are
documented. The assessment thus encompasses the
knowledge about what scientists agree on but also identify
cases of disagreement or knowledge gaps.
→ The assessment is evaluated by independent scientific
reviewers.
Printed at
Examples
Dialogue between stakeholders and science
• Conceptual development of regional climate servicing
(e.g., von Storch et al., 2011, Journal for Environmental Law and Policy)
• International workshop on regional climate servicing, in Victoria, Canada,
2011
(e.g.,. Reckermann, et al., 2008 EOS Trans. Amer. Geophys. U.)
• Experimental practice of regional climate offices in HZG and AWI,
initiated in 2006 (HZG) on coastal climate and 2009 (AWI) on polar
issues. (Many details, needs extra prsentation)
• Assessment of state of climate servicing
Jones et. al., 2014: Foundations for Decision Making, Chapter 2 of IPCC AR5, WG II. Lead
author von Storch, contribution author: Krauss, HZG
North German Climate Office@HZG
An institution set up to enable communication between
science and stakeholders
• that is: making sure that science understands the
questions and concerns of a variety of stakeholders
• that is: making sure that the stakeholders understand the
scientific assessments and their limits.
Typical stakeholders:
Coastal defense, agriculture, off-shore activities (energy),
tourism, water management, fisheries, urban planning
North German Climate Atlas – some user statistics
•
Online since July, 14., 2009
•
~ 6500 visitors per year (11/2011 –
11/2013)
•
Average visiting time: 4 minutes
•
7 pages per visitor on average
•
Most visits during working hours
•
Visitors mostly from Germany
•
But also visitors from USA, Denmark,
Switzerland, Austria, Netherlands and
others
User feedback
Main user groups:
• Practitioners with no background in climate science.
• Practitioners with some background based on previous consultancy
(UBA)
• Scientists
Most frequent misunderstanding:
• Climate scenario and weather forecast were understood as the same
• Ensemble mean of uncertainty range was interpreted as most
probable scenario
38
The CoastDat data set:
• Long (60 years) and high-resolution reconstructions
of recent offshore and
GKSS in Geesthacht
coastal conditions mainly in terms of wind, storms, waves, surges and
currents and other variables in N Europe
• Scenarios (100 years) of possible consistent futures of coastal and
offshore conditions
• extensions – ecological variables, Baltic Sea, E Asia, Laptev Sea
Clients:
• Governmental: various coastal agencies dealing with coastal defense and
coastal traffic
• Companies: assessments of risks (ship and offshore building and
operations)
and opportunities (wind energy)
• General public / media: explanations of causes of change; perspectives
and options of changeb
www.coastdat.de
Vier Regionale Klimabüros in der Helmholtz Gemeinschaft
Netzwerk für regionalen Klimaservice
HZG
Border-activities elsewhere
•
•
•
•
•
CSC
DKK Initiative /Arbeitsgruppe 3
CliSAP Bereich C (Hamburg)
PACES II, Topic 4
ESKP
• Model: National Research Council, USA
Summary
• Some science generates utility for society, in the form of concepts, data
and perspectives.
• Other science provides no specific utility.
• Scientific excellence and societal utility are hardly correlated.
• The issue is often knowledge, sometimes information.
• Recognition of alternative knowledge claims, in particular when a post
normal situation prevails.
• Supply: Transformation from scientific validity to societal utility is nontrivial and needs understanding of societal environment.
• Recognition of societal questions as legitimate scientific challenges.
• Border organizations needed.