Max Boykoff, Invited Speaker at International Festival of Environmental Communication

ficma

November 11, 2015

Max Boykoff will be giving a talk “Climate Change and the Media” at the International Festival of Environmental Communication in Barcelona, Spain.

Maxwell T. Boykoff is a Researcher and Professor at the Center for Science & Technology Policy Research at University of Colorado Boulder (USA) and one of the senior experts in the field of influence that stakeholders had and have in media and public discourse on climate change, and in particular on the denial of climate change. Professor Boykoff with the film Directors present at Festival Internacional de Cine del Medio Ambiente and have screened their movies will share with us during this roundtable on “Climate Change & Media” their vision of the role that climate change & environmental documentaries have played and play on public perception.

Posted in Announcements | Leave a comment

Senator George J. Mitchell Lecture on Sustainability

video

Keynote Speaker: Roger Pielke Jr., University of Colorado
When Science Meets Politics: Symphony or Slugfest?

With remarks by Senator George J. Mitchell

[video] 1:31:11

There are a range of controversies in the news these days where the role of expertise in decision making has proved challenging, from Deflategate in NFL football to the relationship of academics and industry in public debates over GMOs. Perhaps foremost among these, nations will gather in Paris in December to continue international negotiations on climate change, a generational challenge where progress has proven difficult.

In this lecture, Pielke will take a critical look at the contested terrain where science and politics meet. He has long studied this terrain and occasionally found himself embroiled in it. Pielke will argue that science and expertise are essential to good decision making. In particular, he will argue that better decision making requires more honest brokers in political debates and less partisanship played out through science. There are strong incentives against such honest brokering – for politicians and experts alike. However, better decision making requires that we better connect science and politics. Pielke will offer a hopeful message about how this might be done.

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. is Director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Colorado. His research focuses on science, innovation and politics. In 2012, he was awarded an honorary doctorate from Linköping University in Sweden and was also awarded the Public Service Award of the Geological Society of America. He is author, co-author or co-editor of seven books, including “The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics” and “The Climate Fix: What Scientists and Politicians Won’t Tell you About Global Warming”. Watch the video.

Posted in Announcements, Events | Leave a comment

Media Coverage of ‪Climate Change‬ Building Momentum

graph17

COP21 on the horizon: US media coverage of climate change is up 22% in May-Oct ’15 vs May-Oct ’14

The Media and Climate Change Observatory (MECCO) monitors fifty sources across twenty-five countries in seven different regions around the world. MECCO assembles the data by accessing archives through the Lexis Nexis, Proquest and Factiva databases via the University of Colorado libraries. These fifty sources are selected through a decision processes involving weighting of three main factors:

  • geographical diversity (favoring a greater geographical range)
  • circulation (favoring higher circulating publications
  • reliable access to archives over time (favoring those accessible consistently for longer periods of time)

World, Australia, Canada, India, New Zealand, Spain, United Kingdom, & United States (Updated through October 2015)

Figure Citations
Daly, M., Gifford, L., Luedecke, G., McAllister, L.,  Nacu-Schmidt, A., Andrews, K., and Boykoff, M. (2015). World Newspaper Coverage of Climate Change or Global Warming, 2004-2014. Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Web. [Date of access.] http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/media_coverage.

Posted in Announcements | Leave a comment

Exploring Multiple Ontologies of Drought in Agro-Pastoral Regions of Northern Tanzania: A Topological Approach

tanzania3

Royal Geographical Society, Area
2015

by Mara J Goldman, Meaghan Daly, and Eric J. Lovell

Abstract: There has been increased focus within the human dimensions of climate change on understanding the complex and multiple ways of ‘knowing’ climate. While these discussions are important in recognising different ways of knowing the climate and climate change processes already underway, we argue that this epistemological approach is limited and challenging. It begins with an assumption that there is one world (climate) out there that can just be known differently, and that knowledge can be isolated from ways of being and acting in the world. This often results in a distilling of complex knowledge practices into information for the purposes of integration. Drawing from a material-semiotic approach from Science and Technology Studies (STS), we propose a shift of focus to ontology, with an emphasis on the enactment of knowledge and reality (climate) simultaneously. We present ethnographic data from two drought events (2008/2009 and 2010/2011) among Maasai pastoralists in Northern Tanzania in East Africa to illustrate the value of such an approach, using multiple topologies (regional, network, fluid) for thinking through and following multiple enactments of drought in practice. Read more …

Posted in New Publications | Leave a comment

The Colorado Basin River Forecast Center and the Decision Making Process

colorado_river

Western Water Assessment White Paper
2015

by Roberta Klein and Lisa Dilling

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Weather Service (NOAA/NWS) operates a network of thirteen River Forecast Centers (RFCs) across the country with the intended purpose of providing water management entities, emergency managers, and others with forecasts of streamflow and volumetric water supply at timescales ranging from hourly to seasonal. These predictions, along with others from entities such as the US Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in western snow-dominated areas, are designed to provide actionable information that will improve the outcome of a host of decisions relating to issues such as reservoir management, drought restrictions, and flood preparations. NOAA/NWS has made significant investments in developing improved forecasting methods and forecast verification.

Despite these continued technical advances, recent research demonstrates that potential users of forecasts do not always rely on available forecast information in decision making (Werner et al. 2013).  Barriers to forecast use have been characterized broadly as technical, financial, legal, cognitive and institutional (Pulwarty and Redmond 1997), and can include political pressure, legal and policy constraints, issues with infrastructure and natural and managed water supply, as well as a lack of scientific background or awareness of forecast availability (Werner et al. 2013).

In an attempt to further understand this disconnect, we developed a study, with input from the Colorado Basin River Forecast Center (CBRFC), to investigate characteristics of the users or potential users of CBRFC forecasts (hereafter referred to as “stakeholders”) and their decision making contexts.  Previous work has suggested that decision context is an important determinant of how usable information is to decision makers, in addition to the characteristics of information itself such as skill, timing, and accessibility (Dilling and Lemos 2011). Furthermore, water managers who have experienced past weather and climate events such as drought, flood, extreme temperature or precipitation events, etc., are more likely to feel at risk to such events in the future and therefore use forecasts (O’Connor et al. 2005).  Accordingly, this study focused specifically on the decision context of CBRFC stakeholders in order to learn:

  • Who are CBRFC’s main stakeholders, and what roles do they play in water management?
  • What weather and climate events have these stakeholders experienced in the past, what do they see as their most important risks now and in the future, and what kind of strategies have they used in the past and plan to use in the future to reduce the impacts of these events?
  • What kinds of decisions do they make, what information do they use to make decisions, where do they obtain that information, and what role does that information play in their decision making processes?

In addition, we leveraged this effort to analyze the utility of a use-inspired scientific project developed by our colleagues at the Western Water Assessment Regional Integrated Sciences and Assessments Program (WWA). That effort was aimed at quantifying the contribution of watershed changes—specifically, tree death due to bark beetle infestation along with desert dust deposition on snowpack (“dust on snow”). We investigated whether stakeholders are concerned about these changes and whether improved forecast skill based on the outcome of this project could help to improve stakeholder decision making. Thus we posed an additional set of research questions:

  • Are stakeholders aware of and concerned about the impact of dust on snow and bark beetle infestations on streamflow and streamflow forecasts?  Would they like information about these impacts?  If so, what form should that information take to be usable to them?  If forecast skill could be improved by incorporating watershed change information, would that improve stakeholder decision making? Read more …
Posted in New Publications | Leave a comment

CU Boulder Red Cross/Red Crescent Climate Centre Internship Program

rccc2016

Improving Environmental Communication and  Adaptation Decision-making in the Humanitarian Sector

submit your application to redcross@colorado.edu
Application Deadline:  Monday, February 1, 2016
More Information

CU-Boulder has partnered with the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre (RCRCCC) to place graduate students in locations in eastern and southern Africa each summer. This collaborative program targets improvements in environmental communication and adaptation decision-making as well as disaster prevention and preparedness in the humanitarian sector. It connects humanitarian practitioners from the Red Cross/Red Crescent Climate Centre – an affiliate of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies – with graduate student researchers at the University of Colorado who are interested in science-policy issues. Through this program we strive to accomplish three key objectives:

  1. to improve the capacity of humanitarian practitioners within International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies network at the interface of science, policy and practice
  2. to help meet needs and gaps as well as work as a research clearing house in environmental communication and adaptation decision-making in response to climate variability and change, as identified through Red Cross/Red Crescent Climate Centre priorities and projects
  3. to benefit graduate students by complementing the classes and research that they undertake in their graduate program with real-world experience in climate applications and development work

This internship program will place 1-2 PhD and/or Master’s degree students in an IFRC regional field office, a National Society branch office, or with a partner organization for a period of approximately 3 months.

Students will design their own program of work in conjunction with CU-Boulder Director Max Boykoff and RCRCCC supervisors. The RCRCCC supervisors will liaise with specific IFRC field offices to identify potential projects and placements.  Projects can encompass, but are not limited to, topics such as the use of scientific information in decision making, communication of probability and uncertainty, perceptions of risk, and characterizing vulnerability and adaptive capacity.  Placements in the field will address specific needs identified by IFRC field staff related to challenges of science communication and adaptation decision-making. Participants will participate in an informal reading group designed to familiarize them with the Red Cross/Red Crescent organization and other topics of relevance to adequately prepare for field placements. The reading group will meet 2-3 times during the Spring 2016 semester.

Participants will also be required to write six blog posts from the field during this placement, give some presentations (e.g. in ENVS, in the CSTPR brownbag series) upon return, and complete a report at the conclusion of their internship detailing their experience and research outcomes.

$5,000 funding in total will be provided to offset expenses (in-country housing, food, airfare and in-country transportation). Expenses can vary widely depending on the location and nature of the placement. Interns will work with CU-affiliated travel agents to arrange round-trip airfare to their field site. Due to this $5,000 limit, applicants are encouraged to seek additional funds from alternate sources, as expenses can exceed this budgeted amount.

This CU-Boulder program has now placed these five students in in locations of eastern and southern Africa:

  • Drew Zackary (Anthropology PhD), Apac and Otuke, Uganda
  • Leslie Dodson (ATLAS PhD), Lusaka, Zambia and Capetown, South Africa
  • Amy Quandt (ENVS PhD), Isiolo, Kenya
  • Arielle Tozier de la Poterie (ENVS PhD), Soroti, Uganda
  • Kanmani Venkateswaran (ENVS, MS), Lusaka, Zambia

Projects have involved topics such as analysis of uses of regional climate forecasts to trigger anticipatory humanitarian action, and examinations of ways to improve the linking of science-based forecasts with humanitarian decisions. More information on the specifics of all these placements and activities can be found here.

Posted in Announcements | Leave a comment

Climate Change Adding Billions to U.S. Hurricane Costs

katrina

by Doyle Rice

USA Today
October 19, 2015

The cost of U.S. hurricane damage has increased dramatically from 1900 to 2005 as a result of man-made climate change, an economic study released Monday concludes.

“The rise in losses is consistent with an influence of global warming on the number and intensity of hurricanes, an influence which may have accounted for 2% to 12% of the U.S. hurricane losses in 2005,” according to the study, which was published in the peer-reviewed British journal Nature Geoscience.

In 2005 alone, climate change was likely responsible for close to $14 billion of additional damage, including devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina.

The study claims that the extra costs in recent decades do not just stem from more homes, businesses and infrastructure that have been built near the coastlines. “Increases in wealth and population alone cannot account for the observed trend in hurricane losses,” according to the study, whose lead author is Francisco Estrada, an economist at Mexico’s National Autonomous University.

Estrada and two colleagues from Europe said that this unexplained increase in economic losses over time is consistent with a climate change signal.

One scientist who has written extensively about U.S. costs from weather damage said the study is flawed.

University of Colorado’s Roger Pielke,  who was not involved in the study, said it should have included hurricane damage data from just the past 10 years (2006-2015), which have been quiet for hurricane activity. He said it’s “misleading” to end an analysis with the “exceptional” hurricane year of 2005.

“The period 2006-2015 has been well below average in terms of damage and U.S. hurricanes,” Pielke said in an email to USA TODAY. “It is shocking that they did not include this further data.”

He also said that U.S. hurricanes have not become more common or more intense, based on long-term data from 1900 to the present. Read more …

 

Posted in In the News | Leave a comment

Gov. Brown’s Link Between Climate Change and Wildfires is Unsupported, Fire Experts Say

brown

by Paige St. John

Los Angeles Times
October 18, 2015

The ash of the Rocky fire was still hot when Gov. Jerry Brown strode to a bank of television cameras beside a blackened ridge and, flanked by firefighters, delivered a battle cry against climate change.

The wilderness fire was “a real wake-up call” to reduce the carbon pollution “that is in many respects driving all of this,” he said.

“The fires are changing…. The way this fire performed, it’s not the way it usually has been. Going in lots of directions, moving fast, even without hot winds.”

“It’s a new normal,” he said in August. “California is burning.”

Brown had political reasons for his declaration.

He had just challenged Republican presidential candidates to state their agendas on global warming. He was embroiled in a fight with the oil industry over legislation to slash gasoline use in California. And he is seeking to make a mark on international negotiations on climate change that culminate in Paris in December.

But scientists who study climate change and fire behavior say their work does not show a link between this year’s wildfires and global warming, or support Brown’s assertion that fires are now unpredictable and unprecedented. There is not enough evidence, they say.
University of Colorado climate change specialist Roger Pielke said Brown is engaging in “noble-cause corruption.”

Pielke said it is easier to make a political case for change using immediate and local threats, rather than those on a global scale, especially given the subtleties of climate change research, which features probabilities subject to wide margins of error and contradiction by other findings.

“That is the nature of politics,” Pielke said, “but sometimes the science really has to matter.”

Other experts say there is, in fact, a more immediate threat: a landscape altered by a century of fire suppression, timber cutting and development. Read more …

Posted in In the News | Leave a comment

Environmental Rulemaking Across States: Process, Procedural Access, and Regulatory Influence

fracking

by Deserai A. Crow, Elizabeth A. Albright, and Elizabeth Koebele

Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy
doi: 10.1177/0263774X15606922
September 30, 2015

Abstract: Rulemaking is central to policymaking in the United States. Additionally, regulatory authority is devolved to the states in many instances. However, our knowledge of state-level rulemaking is not as advanced as that related to federal rulemaking. To advance the scholarship on state rulemaking, this study compares environmental rulemaking across three environmental issues (renewable portfolio standards, concentrated animal feeding operation regulations, and hydraulic fracturing disclosure rules) in five states (California, Colorado, Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania) to understand procedural and stakeholder participation commonalities among the cases. Using data from public rulemaking documents, stakeholder comment during rulemaking, and in-depth interviews with agency staff and stakeholders, the findings suggest that there are common patterns of pre-process informal stakeholder consultation, public comment and outreach mechanisms, and corollary issues related to stakeholder access across these cases. These findings advance our knowledge of state-level rulemaking as it relates to public input and procedural equity for stakeholders. Read more …

Posted in New Publications | Leave a comment

Assessing Outputs, Outcomes, and Barriers in Collaborative Water Governance: A Case Study

water

by Elizabeth A. Koebele

Universities Council on Water Resources
Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education
Issue 155, Pages 63-72
July 2015

Abstract: As freshwater supplies become increasingly threatened by overuse, pollution, and changes in climate, governing bodies have begun to recognize the urgent need for flexible, sustainable solutions to water use and management. Collaborative governance of water resources has arisen as a widespread strategy to develop such solutions in a way that integrates diverse stakeholder needs and works to create consensus-driven management actions. Directly linking the outputs of collaborative processes to improved water sustainability is difficult even on a local scale. However, examining diverse collaborative governance processes, particularly the outputs and outcomes produced and barriers faced, is necessary as these processes continue to flourish at a multitude of scales and settings. In 2005, the state of Colorado initiated a collaborative governance process to assess its existing water resources and future water needs; the information gathered through this endeavor is now being used to inform the creation of Colorado’s first statewide water plan. Using data from 28 in-depth interviews with key participants in this process, this paper highlights not only what outputs and outcomes may be produced through a high-stakes collaborative process, but also what barriers exist to producing desired outputs (and therefore, consequent outcomes). Gaining a better understanding of outputs, outcomes, and barriers within a statewide collaborative water governance process can provide insight into improving future decision-making processes and evaluations of those processes in a variety of natural resource arenas. Read more …

Posted in New Publications | Leave a comment