Abstract
Assessments that are designed to be credible and useful in the eyes of potential users must rigorously evaluate the state of knowledge but also address the practical considerations—politics, economics, institutions, and procedures—that affect real-world decision processes. The Third US National Climate Assessment (NCA3) authors integrated a vast array of sources of scientific information to understand what natural, physical and social systems are most at risk from climate change. They were challenged to explore some of the potentially substantial sources of risk that occur at the intersections of social, economic, biological, and physical systems. In addition, they worked to build bridges to other ways of knowing and other sources of knowledge, including intuitive, traditional, cultural, and spiritual knowledge. For the NCA3, inclusion of a broad array of people with on-the-ground experience in various communities, sectors and regions helped in identifying issues of practical importance. The NCA3 was more than a climate assessment; it was also an experiment in testing theories of coproduction of knowledge. A deliberate focus on the assessment process as well as the products yielded important outcomes. For example, encouraging partnerships and engagement with existing networks increased learning and made the idea of a sustained assessment more realistic. The commitment to building an assessment focused on mutual learning, transparency, and engagement contributed to the credibility and legitimacy of the product, and the saliency of its contents.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The Council on Environmental Quality provides oversight on regulatory and policy matters related to natural resources and the environment. It is parallel to the Office of Science and Technology Policy within the White House. The Department of Homeland Security—which includes the Federal Emergency Management Agency—did not exist at the time of the formation of the USGCRP in 1990, but is now very engaged in climate-related matters and chose to join the NCADAC as a non-USGCRP agency.
Each chapter was led by two coordinating lead authors and typically had 6 additional authors, resulting in a total of approximately 240 primary plus ~60 contributing authors of the whole report.
References
Bidwell D, Dietz T, Scavia D (2013) Fostering knowledge networks for climate adaptation. Nat Clim Chang 3:610–611
Buizer JL, Fleming P, Hays SL, Dow K, Field CB, Gustafson D, Luers A, Moss RH (2013) Report on preparing the nation for change: Building a sustained National Climate Assessment process, National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee. http://downloads.globalchange.gov/nca/NCADAC/NCADAC_Sustained_Assessment_Special_Report_Sept2013.pdf
Carr A, Wilkinson R (2005) Beyond participation: boundary organizations as a new space for farmers and scientists to interact. Soc Nat Resour 18(3):255–265
Cloyd E, Moser S, Maibach E, Maldonado J, Chen T (submitted for this issue) Engagement in the Third US National Climate Assessent: Commitment, Capacity, and Communication for Impact. Climatic Change
Dilling L, Lemos MC (2011) Creating usable science: opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Global Environ Chang 21(2):680–689. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.11.006
Dyer JH, Hatch NW (2006) Relation-specific capabilities and barriers to knowledge transfers: creating advantage through network relationships. Strateg Manag J 27(8):701–719
Eden S (2011) Lessons on the generation of usable science from an assessment of decision support practices. Environ Sci Policy 14:11–19. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.09.011
Ekwurzel B, Frumhoff PC, McCarthy JJ (2011) Climate uncertainties and their discontents: increasing the impact of assessments on public understanding of climate risks and choices. Clim Chang 108:791–802
Guston DH (2001) Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: an introduction. Sci Technol Hum Values 26(4):399–408
Hoppe R (2010) Lost in translation? Boundary work in making climate change governable. In: Driessen P, Leroy P, van Vierseen W (eds) From climate change to social change: perspectives on science-policy interfaces. International Books, Utrecht, pp 109–130
Jacobs K, Lebel L, Buizer J, Addams L, Matson P et al (2010) Linking knowledge with action in the pursuit of sustainable water-resources management. Proc Natl Acad Sci. doi:10.1073/pnas.0813125107
Kenney M, Janetos A (submitted for this issue) Building an Integrated National Climate Indicator System. Climatic Change
Kirchhoff C (2013) Understanding and enhancing climate information use in water management. Clim Chang 119(2):495–509
Kunkel K, Moss R, Parris A (submitted for this issue) Innovations in Science and Scenarios for Assessment. Climatic Change
Lemos MC, Morehouse BJ (2005) The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments. Global Environ Chang 15:57–68. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.09.004
Lemos MC, Kirchhoff CJ, Ramprasad V (2012) Narrowing the climate information usability gap. Nat Clim Chang 2:789–794. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1614
Lemos MC, Kirchhoff CJ, Kalafatis SE, Scavia D, Rood RB (2014) Moving climate information off the shelf: boundary chains and the role of RISAs as adaptive organizations. Weather Clim Soc 6(2):273–285
Mauser W, Klepper G, Rice M, Schmalzbauer BS, Hackmann H, Leemans R, Moore H (2013) Transdisciplinary global change research: the co-creation of knowledge for sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 5(3–4):420–431
McNie EC (2008) Co-producing useful climate science for policy: Lessons from the RISA Program. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder
Melillo, JM, Richmond TC, Yohe GW, eds. (2014) Climate change impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, 841 pp. (NCA 3 report)
Morgan MG, Dowlatabadi H, Henrion M, Keith D, Lempert R, McBride S, Small M, Wilbanks T (2009) Best practice approaches for characterizing, communicating, and incorporating scientific uncertainty in decisionmaking. CCSP 5.2, A report by the Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington
Moser SC, Davidson MA (submitted for this issue) Coastal Assessment: The Making of an Integrated Assessment. Climatic Change
Moss R, Scarlett PL, Kenney MA, Kunreuther H, Lempert R, Manning J, Williams BK, Boyd JW, Cloyd ET, Kaatz L, Patton L (2014): Ch. 26: Decision support: Connecting science, risk perception, and decisions. Climate change impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, Melillo JM, Richmond TC, Yohe GW, eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 620–647. doi:10.7930/J0H12ZXG
National Climate Assessment. NCA report series, vols. 1–9. All volumes published online by the United States Global Change Research Program, accessible at http://www.globalchange.gov/engage/process-products/NCA3/workshops
National Research Council (2007) Evaluating progress of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program: methods and preliminary results. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
U.S. Global Change Research Program (2011) National Climate Assessment Interim Strategy—Summary (Final) Accessed at http://www.globalchange.gov/sites/globalchange/files/NCADAC-May2011-Interim-Strategy.pdf
U.S. Global Change Research Program (2012) Guidance on information quality assurance to chapter authors of the National Climate Assessment questions tools. Accessed at http://www.globalchange.gov/sites/globalchange/files/Question-Tools-2-21-12.pdf
Waple AM, Champion S, Kunkel K, Tilmes C (submitted for this issue) Innovations in Information Management and Access for Assessments. Climatic Change
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors are members of the development team for the Third National Climate Assessment, specifically, the Director (Jacobs) and a member of the Executive Secretariat (Buizer), and thus are not unbiased observers.
This article is part of a special issue on “The National Climate Assessment: Innovations in Science and Engagement” edited by Katharine Jacobs, Susanne Moser, and James Buizer.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jacobs, K.L., Buizer, J.L. Building community, credibility and knowledge: the third US National Climate Assessment. Climatic Change 135, 9–22 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1445-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1445-8