Science and Knowledge Production for Climate Change Adaptation: Challenges and Opportunities

  • Silvia Serrao-NeumannEmail author
  • Anne Coudrain
Part of the Springer Climate book series (SPCL)


After more than two decades of consistent messages emanating from the scientific community that the climate is changing, there is now recognized urgency for both climate change mitigation and adaptation. Addressing climate change is not a straightforward task with the International Panel on Climate Change calling for substantial and widespread transformational change (IPCC in Working Group II Contribution to the IPCC 5th Assessment Report—Changes to the Underlying Scientific/Technical Assessment, 2014). To enable such transformational change, there needs to be significant advances in scientific, political, and social practice (Gillard et al. in Wiley Interdisc Rev Climate Change, 7:251–265, 2016). At the center of advancements lies the role of interdisciplinary research, including interactions between scientists and citizens or representatives of entities at risk (cities, ocean, biodiversity, climate).



The preparation of this book was inspired by two sessions on Information for Decision-making (4418a—how to engage in future thinking or plan for the long term, and 4418b—improve availability, access and use of information) held at the Our Common Future under Climate Change Conference, Paris, July 2015 ( We thank all the authors for their contributions and willingness to provide valuable insights into advancing climate change adaptation and mitigation.


  1. Bengston DN, Kubik GH, Bishop PC (2012) Strengthening environmental foresight: potential contributions of futures research. Ecol Soc 17(2):10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bishop P, Hines A, Collins T (2007) The current state of scenario development: an overview of techniques. Foresight 9:5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dilling L, Lemos MC (2011) Creating usable science: opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Glob Environ Change 21:680–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gidley JM (2013) Global knowledge futures: articulating the emergence of a new meta-level field. Integral Rev 9:145–172Google Scholar
  5. Gillard R, Gouldson A, Paavola J, Van Alstine J (2016) Transformational responses to climate change: beyond a systems perspective of social change in mitigation and adaptation. Wiley Interdisc Rev Climate Change 7:251–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Haasnoot M, Kwakkel JH, Walker WE, ter Maat J (2013) Dynamic adaptive policy pathways: a method for crafting robust decisions for a deeply uncertain world. Glob Environ Change 23:485–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hagemeier-Klose M, Beichler SA, Davidse BJ, Deppisch S (2014) The dynamic knowledge loop: inter- and transdisciplinary cooperation and adaptation of climate change knowledge. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 5:21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hellsten I, Leydesdorff L (2016) The construction of interdisciplinarity: the development of the knowledge base and programmatic focus of the Journal Climatic Change, 1977–2013. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol 67:2181–2193Google Scholar
  9. Holm P, Goodsite ME, Cloetingh S, Agnoletti M, Moldan B, Lang DJ, Leemans R, Moeller JO, Buendía MP, Pohl W, Scholz RW, Sors A, Vanheusden B, Yusoff K, Zondervan R (2013) Collaboration between the natural, social and human sciences in Global Change Research. Environ Sci Policy 28:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability—summary for policymakers. In: Working group II contribution to the IPCC 5th assessment report—changes to the underlying scientific/technical assessment. IPCCGoogle Scholar
  11. Jantsch E (1972) Toward interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in education and innovation. In: Apostel L, Berger G, Michaud G, (eds) Interdisciplinarity: problems of teaching and research in universities. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and Center for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI)Google Scholar
  12. Kagle M, Baptiste A (2017) A framework for collaborative climate change research. J Environ Stud Sci 7:301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kirchhoff CJ, Carmen Lemos M, Dessai S (2013) Actionable knowledge for environmental decision making: broadening the usability of climate science. Annu Rev Environ Resour 38:393–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Klenk N, Meehan K (2015) Climate change and transdisciplinary science: problematizing the integration imperative. Environ Sci Policy 54:160–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lemos MC, Kirchhoff CJ, Ramprasad V (2012) Narrowing the climate information usability gap. Nat Climate Change 2:789–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Loorbach D, Rotmans J (2006) Managing transitions for sustainable development. In: Olshoorn X, Wieczorek A (eds) Understanding industrial transformation, views from different disciplines. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  17. Mastrandrea M, Heller N, Root T, Schneider S (2010) Bridging the gap: linking climate-impacts research with adaptation planning and management. Clim Change 100(1):87–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Milman A, Marston JM, Godsey SE, Bolson J, Jones HP, Weiler CS (2017) Scholarly motivations to conduct interdisciplinary climate change research. J Environ Stud Sci 7:239–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moser SC (2010) Now more than ever: the need for more societally relevant research on vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Appl Geogr 30:464–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Obermeister N (2017) From dichotomy to duality: addressing interdisciplinary epistemological barriers to inclusive knowledge governance in global environmental assessments. Environ Sci Policy 68:80–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Quay R (2010) Anticipatory governance. J Am Plan Assoc 76:496–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Robertson E, O’Grady Á, Barton J, Galloway S, Emmanuel-Yusuf D, Leach M, Hammond G, Thomson M, Foxon T (2017) Reconciling qualitative storylines and quantitative descriptions: an iterative approach. Technol Forecast Soc Change 118:293–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rothman D, Romero-Lankao P, Schweizer V, Bee B (2014) Challenges to adaptation: a fundamental concept for the shared socio-economic pathways and beyond. Clim Change 122:495–507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Spencer T, Lane SN (2017) Reflections on the IPCC and global change science: time for a more (physical) geographical tradition. Can Geogr/ Le Géographe canadien 61:124–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stock P, Burton RJF (2011) Defining terms for integrated (multi-inter-trans-disciplinary) sustainability research. Sustainability 3:1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. van der Helm R (2009) The vision phenomenon: towards a theoretical underpinning of visions of the future and the process of envisioning. Futures 41:96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. van der Leeuw S, Costanza R, Aulenbach S, Brewer S, Burek M, Cornell S, Crumley C, Dearing JA, Downy C, Graumlich LJ, Heckbert S, Hegmon M, Hibbard K, Jackson ST, Kubiszewski I, Sinclair P, Sôrlin S, Steffen W (2011) Toward an integrated history to guide the future. Ecol Soc 16(4):2Google Scholar
  28. Vasileiadou E, Heimeriks G, Petersen AC (2011) Exploring the impact of the IPCC Assessment Reports on science. Environ Sci Policy 14:1052–1061CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Arts and Social SciencesThe University of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand
  2. 2.Cities Research InstituteGriffith UniversityBrisbane, QLDAustralia
  3. 3.Unité de recherche ESPACE-DEVIRD, Universités UM UR UG UA, Maison TeledetectMontpellier 5France

Personalised recommendations