by Jason Vogel, Elizabeth McNie, David Behar
Climate Services, 2016
Our recent paper, “Co-producing actionable science for water utilities” (Vogel et al., 2016), examined how four water utilities in New York City, Portland, Seattle, and Tampa Bay, all members of the Water Utility Climate Alliance, used a ‘chain of models’ approach that emphasized collaboration between scientists and decision makers to produce useful, climate-relevant information over the first three years of their Piloting Utility Modeling Applications project. These collaborations helped utilities fit climate information into their specific management context. We found that in order to produce useful information, these partnerships focused on making the research context-sensitive and relevant, developing knowledge networks, and taking an entrepreneurial approach to assessment.
Each water utility engaged in a ‘chain-of-models’ exercise to better understand how climate changes might affect their water systems. The chain-of-models refers to the sequence of climate, hydrologic, and water operations models used to apply climate change information to water utility decision making. By running climate projections thorough this chain-of-models, the impacts of projected climate changes can be understood and water utilities can consider taking adaptation action to prepare for or alleviate those potential impacts.
Our first finding, consistent with the literature on co-production, determined that context matters in a number of ways. First, the research questions were generated not by researchers working independently from water managers, but rather, with them, ensuring that the research questions took each utility’s immediate needs into consideration, resulting in research that was highly relevant. Second, possible extreme events that the utilities could experience were contextualized for their specific region and addressed specific questions posed by the utilities, so that the resulting science could fit easily into existing decision frameworks. Third, the researchers worked with each utility to customize the hydrometeorology to ensure that the models used could fit with existing technical capacities of each each utility.
Our second finding, also consistent with the literature on co-production, illustrated the importance of knowledge networks and active partnerships with scientists. Interactions between utility and scientific partners were often carefully designed to occur early and often, and to include substantive and meaningful discussion of project progress toward identified goals. Most of these knowledge networks persist beyond the period reported in our paper and form the foundation for on-going work at each of the four utilities.
Our third finding identified a new factor in co-production, what we call an entrepreneurial approach to the research agenda. In our case studies we saw the utilities themselves drive methodological innovation in climate model downscaling and hydrologic modeling to resolve their particular problems and allow climate projections to be useful in their utility context. One utility developed a variation on the “delta method” downscaling methodology to better understand how extreme events might affect their water system. A second utility developed a new statistical downscaling technique which did a better job than off-the-shelf statistical downscaling tools of replicating the spatial and temporal distribution of rainfall for their region, the key driver of local water supply. Another utility worked with their science partners to bias-correct a widely accepted hydrologic dataset in order to better capture orographic effects important in its local watershed and to better reflect the instrumental record.
For readers who would like to learn more about this interesting project focused on an applied research agenda, we recommend reading our peer reviewed article in Climate Services (Vogel, et al. 2016) and the project final report (Vogel, et al. 2015).
Vogel, J., E. McNie, and D. Behar. 2016. Co-producing actionable science for water utilities. Climate Services. doi: 10.1016/j.cliser.2016.06.003.
Vogel, J.M., J.B. Smith, M. O’Grady, P. Fleming, K. Heyn, A. Adams, D. Pierson, K. Brooks, and D. Behar, 2015. Actionable science in practice: Co-producing climate change information for water utility vulnerability assessments. Prepared for the Water Utility Climate Alliance. May.
RSS
Co-Producing Actionable Science for Water Utilities
by Jason Vogel, Elizabeth McNie, David Behar
Climate Services, 2016
Our recent paper, “Co-producing actionable science for water utilities” (Vogel et al., 2016), examined how four water utilities in New York City, Portland, Seattle, and Tampa Bay, all members of the Water Utility Climate Alliance, used a ‘chain of models’ approach that emphasized collaboration between scientists and decision makers to produce useful, climate-relevant information over the first three years of their Piloting Utility Modeling Applications project. These collaborations helped utilities fit climate information into their specific management context. We found that in order to produce useful information, these partnerships focused on making the research context-sensitive and relevant, developing knowledge networks, and taking an entrepreneurial approach to assessment.
Each water utility engaged in a ‘chain-of-models’ exercise to better understand how climate changes might affect their water systems. The chain-of-models refers to the sequence of climate, hydrologic, and water operations models used to apply climate change information to water utility decision making. By running climate projections thorough this chain-of-models, the impacts of projected climate changes can be understood and water utilities can consider taking adaptation action to prepare for or alleviate those potential impacts.
Our first finding, consistent with the literature on co-production, determined that context matters in a number of ways. First, the research questions were generated not by researchers working independently from water managers, but rather, with them, ensuring that the research questions took each utility’s immediate needs into consideration, resulting in research that was highly relevant. Second, possible extreme events that the utilities could experience were contextualized for their specific region and addressed specific questions posed by the utilities, so that the resulting science could fit easily into existing decision frameworks. Third, the researchers worked with each utility to customize the hydrometeorology to ensure that the models used could fit with existing technical capacities of each each utility.
Our second finding, also consistent with the literature on co-production, illustrated the importance of knowledge networks and active partnerships with scientists. Interactions between utility and scientific partners were often carefully designed to occur early and often, and to include substantive and meaningful discussion of project progress toward identified goals. Most of these knowledge networks persist beyond the period reported in our paper and form the foundation for on-going work at each of the four utilities.
Our third finding identified a new factor in co-production, what we call an entrepreneurial approach to the research agenda. In our case studies we saw the utilities themselves drive methodological innovation in climate model downscaling and hydrologic modeling to resolve their particular problems and allow climate projections to be useful in their utility context. One utility developed a variation on the “delta method” downscaling methodology to better understand how extreme events might affect their water system. A second utility developed a new statistical downscaling technique which did a better job than off-the-shelf statistical downscaling tools of replicating the spatial and temporal distribution of rainfall for their region, the key driver of local water supply. Another utility worked with their science partners to bias-correct a widely accepted hydrologic dataset in order to better capture orographic effects important in its local watershed and to better reflect the instrumental record.
For readers who would like to learn more about this interesting project focused on an applied research agenda, we recommend reading our peer reviewed article in Climate Services (Vogel, et al. 2016) and the project final report (Vogel, et al. 2015).
Vogel, J., E. McNie, and D. Behar. 2016. Co-producing actionable science for water utilities. Climate Services. doi: 10.1016/j.cliser.2016.06.003.
Vogel, J.M., J.B. Smith, M. O’Grady, P. Fleming, K. Heyn, A. Adams, D. Pierson, K. Brooks, and D. Behar, 2015. Actionable science in practice: Co-producing climate change information for water utility vulnerability assessments. Prepared for the Water Utility Climate Alliance. May.