* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Communicating Uncertainty PPT Slides
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Global warming controversy wikipedia , lookup
ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Michael E. Mann wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Heaven and Earth (book) wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
North Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Global Climate Change and Uncertainty David B. MacNeill Fisheries Specialist NY Sea Grant Extension SUNY Oswego [email protected] Global Climate Change and Uncertainty Apocalypse Climate models Decision-making This Presentation: • Broad-brush overview of climate change uncertainties, communication etc. from literature sources, extension experience with scientific uncertainty. • Not an indictment of science or an admonishment of scientists, policy makers, government or the lay community!! Understanding the concepts of risk and uncertainty with a deck of cards?? The uncertainty: What poker hand will I draw next? The Dead Man’s Hand: unlucky for Wild Bill Hickok? The risk: What is the probability of drawing it? (<1%) But, the card deck changes unexpectedly…… Death cards Other cards The Risk ? Some Climate Change Perspectives • A complex, multidisciplinary issue of long- • term global consequence, that demands: – Best available information – New assessment, predictive, decision-making tools – A carefully planned extension/outreach strategy – Better PR for science An opportunity to: – Inform communities: climate science, risks, abatement and science 101 – Assist coastal communities: decision-making Global Climate Model Climate Change Complexity: • Many different disciplines. • Highly uncertain events; outcomes poorly defined. • Interactive anthropogenic and natural events. • Future outcomes sensitive to small changes in current conditions. • Incomplete understanding of climate system. • Imprecise models: feedbacks, interactions, parameter values. • Huge jigsaw puzzle having 10s of thousands of pieces. • Compilation: decades of intensive, international research. Uncertainty leads to those nagging questions Is climate change real?, are humans responsible? • What are the impacts?, What should we do? • Why: – – – – is science uncertain? do scientists disagree? change their minds? don’t scientists always have the answer? do results contradict? Uncertainty paradigms •Uncertainty is unwelcome, and needs to be avoided. Science must eliminate uncertainty through more and better research. •Uncertainty is undesirable, but unavoidable. Science must estimate and quantify uncertainty as well as possible. •Uncertainty creates opportunities. Science must contribute to more inclusive, understandable discussions. •Uncertainty is an integral part of decision-making. Science must have more societal influence. Communicating Science and Uncertainties Why even bother ??? • PR: The process of science. • Restore credibility of science: increased • • • • • transparency. Provide accessible information/knowledge to decision-makers. Decision-making: accurate and collaborative. Increase public support/involvement: decisionmaking Enhance societal abilities: adaptation & mitigation GCC interactions: science and human ecology Three Arguments for Climate Change • Climate is changing: analyses of many indicators • Human activities have contributed to increases in • • green house gas emissions Scientific deliberations and large-scale computer models suggest potential for climate change from anthropogenic influences High degree of confidence: weight of evidence from expert opinion Is climate really changing? Climate proxies Convincing evidence BUT.. Contentious Points Natural vs. anthropogenic Sea level Seeing is Believing? Muir Glacier Alaska, August 2004. photo by B.F. Molnia Muir Glacier Alaska, August 1940. photo by W.O. Field An exaggerated view….. “You just don’t understand.” “It’s too complicated”. “We know what is best.” “It’s not our job to explain it to you”. “We’re scientists, not interpreters”. Scientist “Science is sloppy - a collection of useless facts”. “You’re arrogant, out-of touch and have impractical ideas”. “You’ve been wrong before.” “Prove it.” Non-scientist Uncertainty Some major challenges • Continuing uncertainties on climate system sensitivity to various • • • • • • feedbacks (e.g., clouds, water vapor, snow). Several natural modes of climate variability have been identified and described, but their predictability is uncertain. Need to improve understanding of whether and how human impacts may alter natural climate variability. Do not yet have confident assessments of the likelihood of abrupt climate changes. Insufficient understanding of effects of climate variability and change on extreme events. Limited capabilities at regional scales. Need better means for identifying, developing, and providing climate information required for policy and resource management decisions. Mac’s Uncertainty Concept Model Stochastic (Surprises) Climate System Epistemic (Unknowns) Scientists Science communication (translation) Knowledge Knowledge Non-Scientists Human reflexive (volition) Decisions Mac’s Uncertainty Concept Model Stochastic (Surprises) Climate System Epistemic (Unknowns) Scientists Science communication (translation) Knowledge Knowledge Non-Scientists Human reflexive (volition) Decisions Mac’s Uncertainty Concept Model Surprises Climate System Unknowns Scientists Science communication (translation) Knowledge Non-Scientists Decisions Knowledge Human reflexive (volition) Different Roles of Science in GCC Policy Pure scientist interpretation Politicians Science arbiter Scientific Knowledge Policy makers Decision making Policy Honest broker Issue opinions advocate Advocacy Roger Pielke Jr. How does science work, anyway? Susan Haack Addressing uncertainties • • • • Identify Characterize: source, magnitude Solicit expert judgments: level of “confidence” Sensitivity analysis: range of probable model outcomes assessed with model using a range of values various inputs, upper and lower bound • Quantify: probabilistic analysis (Frequentist and Bayesian), probabilistic distributions, deterministic analysis and hybrids • Clarify, document range and distributions • Articulate and communicate: probabilistic and scenarios Some predicted impacts of climate change? In-direct Direct Droughts, crop loss, famine Invasive species, new or re- Warmer, dryer summers Warmer, wetter winters Increased spring flooding Changes in sea/lake levels, water currents, thermal structure Increased storm frequency, severity emerging pathogens, parasites More hyperthermia deaths Coastal infrastructure/tourism Habitat damage/loss Loss of biodiversity, extinctions? Technological advances Longer growing seasons New agriculture/tourism opportunities. More snow? Reduced heating costs Fewer hypothermia deaths GCC heretics, infidels, skeptics, nay-sayers, cynics, deniers?? What are they really saying? • • • • • • • • • Nature: too complex. Conflicting data. Models: poor predictors. Exaggerated impacts. Doom/gloom vs. facts. Earth’s resiliency. Strategies: cost/benefits? Consensus: evidence supports GCC Less consensus: drivers, impacts, strategies, policies What is the matter with science? The debate continues…… • Dyson (1993) – Consensus: peer pressure (entrepreneurial science) vs. debate – Public fear drives funding priorities = politicization of science – Science's failure to address global welfare vs. unrealistic expectations • Rubin (2001) – – – – – Science is not the sole repository of the truth Little self-limitation on deliverable truths Get the facts straight vs. overselling science Scientific authority fosters hidden agendas that short-circuit debate Participatory decision making impeded by science education shortfalls • Commoner (1971) – Illusion of scientific objectivity • Grant et al. (2004) – Popper’s vs. psychological v – Benedikter (2004) basic ideologies and mechanisms not fully visible (psychologically) • Malnes (2006) – Mixed messages: duplicity vs. extraneous diversions Classical, Modern & Post-Normal Science Classical: •Observations •Sense experiments •Subjective judgments •Past experience Modern / Normal: •Exclusive, remote •Non-interdisciplinary •Experiments/models •Data analysis/interpretation •Hypothesis testing the Truth! •predictions •probabilities •possible explanations •disconnected policy •adversarial •communication gaps Absolute Reductionist, “puzzle-solving” “Post-Normal” •Inclusive •Natural & social sciences •Complexity/risk/urgency •Systems approach •Cost/benefits •Public debate •shared decision making •problems solving •confidence/trust building •Anti-science perception Precautionary, risk management Classical, Modern & Post-Normal Science Classical: •Observations •Sense experiments •Subjective judgments •Past experience Modern / Normal: •Exclusive, remote •Non-interdisciplinary •Experiments/models •Data analysis/interpretation •Hypothesis testing the Truth! •predictions •probabilities •possible explanations •disconnected policy •adversarial •communication gaps Absolute Reductionist, “puzzle-solving” “Post-Normal” •Inclusive •Natural & social sciences •Complexity/risk/urgency •Systems approach •Cost/benefits •Public debate •shared decision making •problems solving •confidence/trust building •Anti-science perception Precautionary, risk management Perceptions of Science God-like? Elitist? Crusading knight? Mad/evil? Two Opposing Metaphors for Science: God-like or Golem? • “Ultimate source of knowledge/wisdom. • Operates in unencumbered, controlled environment. • Strives for perfection. • Accountable, held to high standard. Truth • A creature of our own design, neither good or • • • • bad. Powerful, protective, follows orders. Clumsy and dangerous, must be controlled. Fallible = low expectations. Can’t be blamed for mistakes if it is trying. “Other” Uncertainties Climate Science Uncertainties The Snowball Effect Cascading Uncertainties in Climate Science Adapted from Schneider 1983 Emission scenarios Carbon cycle response Global climate sensitivity Regional climate change scenarios Range of possible impacts Scientists face important challenges in communicating science to non-scientists • The nature of ‘normal’ scientific investigation and debate – logic vs. cognitive processes – adversarial, not focused on consensus development – debate primarily within disciplines • Isolationism – “too busy” to talk to non-scientists! – rift between physical and social scientists • Inadequate training in communication skills – dealing with media – addressing misinformation – understanding policy development process Can complex science be understood by the public? • Yes, many successful examples ! • Knowledge from Scientific process • “Step-back”, discuss and debunk science myths – Myth 1: science as a collection of established facts – Myth 2: conflicting science presented in a balanced way – Myth 3: science jargon as chief obstacle Interpretations of Global Climate Science Uncertainties • Scientists: intrinsic part of science too many variables to eliminate can be reduced with more scientific information general support of a “precautionary” approach”. • Policymakers: science is sloppy “burden of proof” lack of/incomplete knowledge = bad science must have all the facts: decision making/policy implementation little/no support of precautionary steps The Climate Uncertainty “Toolbox” Communicating Uncertainties of Climate Change • • • • • • • • Increase science literacy Outreach materials: Hypothetical scientific investigations. Develop vivid narratives of potential harm Address/communicate uncertainties to stakeholder communities. Understand decision making mechanics, assess values and attitudes Develop an integrative (social-natural science), participatory decisionmaking process Psychometric paradigm: people (focus on a range of qualitatively distinctive factors that are irreducible by numbers) show a richer rationality than experts (focus on quantity), risk perception in social sciences, used to explain divergence between risk related judgments People influenced by whether risk is catastrophic , future generations, involuntary incurred, , uncontrollable, delayed vs immediate, and particularly dreaded. Cass Sustein 2007: Columbia Law Review 107: 503-557 What are the likely climate changes over the next century, or so?? • Most global warming projections are for a 4-10 F increase by 2100 • Virtually certain: ~ 95 to 100% – Warmer days and nights, fewer cold periods over most land areas • Very likely: ~ 67-95% – Warm spells/heat waves, frequency increasing over most land areas – Heavy and more frequent precipitation events • Likely: ~ 33-67% – Area affected by drought increases – Intense tropical cyclone activity increases – Increased incidence of extreme high sea level (exclude tsunamis) Communicating Uncertainty: Examples from Weather Forecasts • Numerical probabilities: – A 30 % chance of rain. • Qualitative or categorical forecasts: – Today’s weather will be “fine”. Handmer et al. 2007 Communicating Uncertainty: Examples from Weather Forecasts • Numerical probabilities: – high likelihood, tangible events – can be misinterpreted: where? when? how long? – example: 30% chance of rain • a 30% chance of rain in the forecast area. • a 30% chance of rain at a specific location in forecast area. • only 30% of the forecast area will be affected, if it does rain. • it will rain 30% of the day. • it will rain 3 out of 10 days when rain is forecasted – not useful when: i.e. 0.0001% chance of as a severe event • Abstract, “invisible”, even catastrophic events • Public more concerned with issues of control, trust and equity • Handmer et al. 2007 Decision-making Under Uncertainty Decisions: • based on likelihood of uncertain events – Uncertainties expressed • numerical form (odds) • subjective probabilistic statements • heuristics – Representativeness – degree of relationship, causality – Availability – ease of instances/consequences imagined – Adjustment/Anchoring –initial value adjusted to yield final answer (problem formulation or partial computation) Tversky, A. and D. Kahneeman. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185: 1124-1131 Decision-making Under Uncertainty • Task of choice – Framing • Relate decision making to similar problems • Used to determine outcome loss or gains – Evaluation • Act to reduce loss probability, maximize gains • Adopt risk averse stance • 3 subconscious processes (heuristics): – Representativeness – degree of relationship, causality – Availability – ease of instances/consequences imagined – Adjustment/Anchoring –initial value adjusted to yield final answer (problem formulation or partial computation) Patt, A. and S. Dessai. (2005). Communicating Uncertainty: lessons learned and suggestions for climate change assessment. C. R. Geoscience 337: 425-441 Tversky, A. and D. Kahneeman. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185: 1124-1131 Decision-making Under Uncertainty • Stochastic uncertainties (unpredictability/surprises) – – – – Framing: (usually) in frequentist terms Uncertainty: probability expressed relative frequencies Heuristic: Availability = analogy Evaluation: Less risk averse, under-estimate risk, less prone to illogical choice • Epistemic uncertainties (structural/ignorance) – Framing (often) in Bayesian terms – Uncertainties: ambiguous probability estimates, numerical ranges confidence, expert opinion – Heuristic: Representativeness = common, familiarity – Evaluation: More risk averse, over-estimate risk, more prone to logic errors Patt, A. and S. Dessai. (2005). Communicating Uncertainty: lessons learned and suggestions for climate change assessment. C. R. Geoscience 337: 425-441 Tversky, A. and D. Kahneeman. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. 1131 Science 185: 1124- Decision-making Under Uncertainty Decisions: • based on likelihood of uncertain events – Uncertainties expressed • numerical form (odds) • subjective probabilistic statements • heuristics – Representativeness – degree of relationship, causality – Availability – ease of instances/consequences imagined – Adjustment/Anchoring –initial value adjusted to yield final answer (problem formulation or partial computation) Tversky, A. and D. Kahneeman. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185: 1124-1131 * * 9 graphical representations of the same snow fall predictions Communicating Uncertainty: Examples from Weather Forecasts • Qualitative or categorical forecasts: – “Fine” – Also misinterpreted: does it mean • • • • • • • No rain? Sunny/sunshine? Not too hot/moderate temperature? Clear day/ not cloudy or overcast? Lovely weather/a nice day? No wind/light winds? Some cloud/may be overcast? Handmer et al. 2007 Communicating Uncertainty: When Uncertainties are Insurmountable • Scenarios – Coherent, plausible, alternative representations of future climate – Projections/modeled responses (not forecasts) from climate “drivers”. – Descriptions: current states, drivers, step-wise changes, future images. – Assessments future climate conditions (very high uncertainties). – Assist in designing adaptation/mitigation strategies – Provide better understanding of interactions/dynamics Outreach: Uncertainties of Climate Change • • • • • • • Increase science literacy vivid narratives of potential harm/benefits Communicate uncertainties to stakeholder communities. Assess values and attitudes Develop an integrative (social-natural science) decision-making process Psychometric paradigm: people (focus on a range of qualitatively distinctive factors that are irreducible by numbers) show a richer rationality than experts (focus on quantity), risk perception in social sciences, used to explain divergence between risk related judgments People influenced by whether risk is catastrophic , future generations, involuntary incurred, , uncontrollable, delayed vs immediate, and particularly dreaded. An Interesting Expert Opinion: An Essay: Divergent American Reactions to Terrorism and Climate Change Cass Sustein 2007: Columbia Law Review 107: 503-557 Similarities: potentially catastrophic outcomes, difficulty assigning probabilities to risks Divergence: simple facts and political responses to each risk: • • • • • • • • Terrorism: low probability, palpable, catastrophic risks are immediate, short term Concern to US, Britain an allies. Perceived high risk recurrence neglect probability visual anger, fear, Huge costs justified to protect national security benefits unimportant 2005-2006: $255 $318 billion committed to war on terror vs $312 billion for entire Kyoto protocol. Public opinion – – 2004 48% Britons: top global priority 2006 80% Americans top global priority • • • • • • • • Climate change: high probability, impalpable, catastrophic Long-term risk, affect future generations. Concern to other nations only serious mitigative/adaptive action unlikley climate change causes obscure (uncertainties) people lack experience make risks apparent, real or impending, cost benefits, Public opinion – – 2000 CC: ranked environment as 16th most important issue and 12th out of 13 top environmental problems 2004: 63% Britons: top global environmental issue. An Interesting Expert Opinion: An Essay: Divergent American Reactions to Terrorism and Climate Change Cass Sustein 2007: Columbia Law Review 107: 503-557 “We have to deal with this new type of threat [terrorism] in a new way we haven’t yet defined.. With a low-probability, high impact event like this.. if there is a 1% chance that Pakistani nuclear scientists are helping Al Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response” -- Dick Cheney, Former Vice-President “Climate change is the most severe problem we are facing today - more serious than the threat from terrorism” – Sir David King Director, Smith School of Environment, Oxford; Research Director, Dept. of Physical Chemistry, Cambridge; Former Chief Scientific Advisor to Blair Administration. Epilogue “Any philosophy that in its quest for certainty ignores the reality of the uncertain in the ongoing processes of nature, denies the conditions out of which it arises.” John Dewey, The Quest for Certainty, 1929 And now, the punch line(s)…… • Climate change uncertainties: tremendous outreach challenges • Uncertainties are cumulative: science to policy • Climate change predictions: probabilistic context where possible. • Scenarios: address insurmountable uncertainties. • Integrative natural and social science approach to decisionmaking. • Outreach: science mechanics, sources of uncertainty, restore faith in science, assess/understand heuristics, facilitate improved decision-making, craft a responsible, informative and useful message.