Scientists say new approach to climate preparedness essential to help people adjust to coming changes

Changes are already happening to Earth's climate due to the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation and large-scale agriculture. As changes get more pronounced, people everywhere will have to adjust. In this week's issue of the journal Science, an international group of researchers urge the development of science needed to manage climate risks and capitalize on unexpected opportunities.

"Adapting to an evolving climate is going to be required in every sector of society, in every region of the globe. We need to get going, to provide integrated science if we are going to meet the challenge," said senior scientist Richard Moss of the Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. "In this article, we describe the foundations for this research and suggest measures to establish it."

Climate preparedness research needs to integrate social and , engineering, and other disciplines. It prepares for impacts by determining who and what are most vulnerable to changes and considering ways to adapt.

"Science for adaptation starts with understanding decision-making processes and information needs, determining where the vulnerabilities are, and then moves to climate modeling. A final step tracks whether adaptation is effective," said Moss, who is based at the Joint Global Change Research Institute, a collaboration between PNNL in Richland, Wash. and the University of Maryland.

The article grew out of a workshop held in August 2012 at the Aspen Global Change Institute in Aspen, Colo., on how to improve support for decision-making in the face of a changing climate. The authors arrived at this approach to guide preparedness research based on the need to reduce the risks that presents.

"The need to adapt and adjust is going to be global," said Moss. "We need a flexible, integrated approach that merges theoretical and problem-oriented sciences around four general challenges."

The four challenges are:

  • Understanding what information is needed to make decisions about adapting to climate change
  • Identifying vulnerabilities in society, the economy and the environment
  • Improving forecasts and in ways that can address specific problems
  • Providing technology, management, and policy options for adapting

As an example of how practical and basic research can work together, Moss described work in the U.S. involving water utilities, university scientists, and private firms to pilot use of climate models and water utility modeling to design resilient water systems.

"This research is motivated by a practical challenge, ensuring reliable water supplies. Among the scientific advances that will be required is better integration of weather and climate models to improve decadal climate information to help people plan," Moss said.

Bringing together diverse disciplines at the Aspen workshop allowed the international team to explore all facets of adaptation, including less examined ones such as how scientific information is (and isn't) used in making decisions.

"Traditionally we think that what society needs is better predictions. But at this workshop, all of us – climate and social scientists alike – recognized the need to consider how decisions get implemented and that is only one of many factors that will determine how people will adapt," he said.

The focus on problem-solving could open up new sources of funding as well, sources such as non-governmental organizations, industry—any group with specific problems that adaptation science could solve.

"We will make a virtue of necessity," said Moss.

Explore further

Models for a more effective response to climate change

More information: R.H. Moss, G.A. Meehl, M.C. Lemos, J.B. Smith, J.R. Arnold, J.C. Arnott, D. Behar, G.P. Brasseur, S.B. Broomell, A.J. Busalacchi, S. Dessai, K.L. Ebi, J.A. Edmonds, J. Furlow, L. Goddard, H.C. Hartmann, J.W. Hurrell, J.W. Katzenberger, D.M. Liverman, P.W. Mote, S.C. Moser, A. Kumar, R.S. Pulwarty, E.A. Seyller, B.L. Turner II, W.M. Washington, T.J. Wilbanks. Hell and High Water: Practice-Relevant Adaptation Science, Science November 8, 2013, DOI: 10.1126/science.1239569
Journal information: Science

Citation: Scientists say new approach to climate preparedness essential to help people adjust to coming changes (2013, November 7) retrieved 17 August 2019 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments

Nov 07, 2013
Raw rent seeking from the Science journal abstract: "U.S. President Obama underscored the need for this research when he made climate preparedness a pillar of his climate policy."

This year the journal Science also published a headline grabbing confirmation of the revolutionary history reforming temperature hockey stick in which a simple Peer Review 101 plotting of the included spreadsheet format proxy data falsified instead of supported what a co-author led NY Times reporter Revkin to describe as a "super hockey stick" and which Mike "Hide The Proxy Data Decline" Mann repeatedly celebrated on Facebook:

(A) http://s17.postim...mage.jpg
(B) http://s15.postim...2013.jpg

Marcott 2013...look it up, to discover the bizarre doublespeak nature of climate "science."

Nov 07, 2013
The highly political nature of climatology was revealed this week as the environmental lobby threw millions of dollars of campaign money into defeating the politician who was trying to access Michael Mann's e-mails from when his hockey stick was reinvigorating environmentalism and one formerly obscure branch of science:

Environmental groups now receive tax money support via billions of dollars pumped into
green energy boondoggles like Solandra that hire lobbyists and donate to Greenpeace & Co., with no great conspiracy needed, just a series of hundred million dollar incentives.

Nov 07, 2013
It's the shooting fish in a barrel season of the Climate cult debate.

Homosexuality as a mental disease, revisited.
Bizarre and envious antisemitism, revisited.
Soviet Union activist "science," again.
Pigeons in electrically shocking Skinner boxes as models of therapy, again.

Business as usual, merely.

It all goes back to Mike "CLIMATE WARS" Mann, now allied to Australian fool/tool Steven "Lewpaper" Dowsky.

Are you bitter enders working for me after all?!

Seriously...are you just trying to *bore* me to death?

It's working!

A single skeptical voice among many drags Lew Lew into the dumpster:

Nov 07, 2013
djr is an ultra-fine follower of the iconic philosopher Doctor Charley Manson:

djr also calls for mere school children to be mother fucking blown to smithereens if they don't cowtow to his doomsday prophets:

djr also want his son to become the anti-technology Unabomer, unapologetically:

The UFOs are on his sandwich board are glowing for all to see, damn it!!!

Nov 07, 2013
DAMN IT!!!!!!!!!!!

Nov 07, 2013


These guys are fucking C-R-A-Z-Y.

The very icons of American scientific exploration, they are Big Oil Money stooges.

No, wait...they are KRACKED wide open kkkrrraaaazzzzyy.


What is the other option?

Might they be responsibly seasoned stewards of real Science in the face of the bored panic of a decadent age?


Or listen.

Nov 07, 2013
Goracle thinks proof comes from Internet comments, much like Mann's co-author, sampling errors be damned.

Is it crazy, is it oil money, of is it pseudoscience?!

The data is a demon! Bad, bad data!!!

Hey, let's STOP those evil PSEUDO-scientists by erasing recent tide gauge data and tack on satellite altimetry, and allow the systematic mismatch between them to *imply* a sudden burst in the real rate of sea level rise, even though tide gauge data utterly falsifies this claim:

Skeptics except for a raw count of perhaps five tag-a-long crackpots, offer no maverick theories, just Occam's razor and the Null Hypothesis, just the very basis of science.

Nobody told you? Mann's history revisionism represented a *radical* new break from past understanding that Greenland was

Liberal icon Alexander Cockburn explains the reticence of young scientists to speak out:

Nov 07, 2013
That's all you chattering class doomsayers have left circa 2013: psychologizing dehumanization of data hounds.

Hey, djr, please confirm that Burt Rutan, inventive rocket scientist winner of the XPRIZE is "bat shit crazy" for saying:

"In general, if you as an engineer with normal ethics, study the subject you will conclude that the theory that man's addition of CO2 to the atmosphere (a trace amount to an already trace gas content) cannot cause the observed warming unless you assume a large positive feedback from water vapor. You will also find that the real feedback is negative, not positive!"

Perhaps djr is busy at the moment:

Nov 08, 2013
Holy looks like Nik is off his meds again! Laughable luny toon!

Nov 08, 2013
Nik: the graph you link (and shows sat data ) does not have the last 2 years which have seen sea-level rise back above the trend line of 3.2 mm/yr (Jan '93 – Aug '13).


This is the historic rise (BASED ON TIDE GAUGES) ……

"When averaged over all the world's oceans, absolute sea level increased at an average rate of 0.06 inches per year from 1870 to 2008. From 1993 to 2008, however, average sea level rose at a rate of 0.11 to 0.13 inches per year—roughly twice as fast as the long-term trend."

Tip: never let the truth get in the way of a good delusion.

Nov 08, 2013
I hope runrig is reading. What a look into the world of the bat shit crazy. No point in trying to have a reasoned conversation there. Thanks Nik....

I don't think people are saying all on the "non-consensus" side are "..... crazy". There are after all some scientists in the field who subscribe to that view. It's just not justifiable to inflate the importance of that into either "it's all a scam" or the 97% are incompetent. Has it not dawned on you that all human nature is here. And that there is no accounting for it? People can be contrary by nature - you don't have to bring motives into it or even scientific facts I'm afraid.

All we can be sure on in life is that a majority view is more likely to be correct than the minority, especially when pitting the expert against the layman.

Just because some luminary advocates something does not make his opinion of greater weight.

Nov 08, 2013
Here is the Alchemist with another observation that hasn't made the science community yet...
(Can you count how many have?)

The rise of the oceans, inches right? What a joke, right?

Now let's look at a tsunami. Displacement of water in the ocean. Let's say for the sake of argument an inch of water is added to the ocean. Then an Earthquake happens, AT SEA.

Gravity doesn't care one wit about how much water it displaces; call it an infinite energy reserve. Do we need to calculate how much energy is added to a tsunami due to a tiny amount water. That power is more than a man can resist over the size of a small (8x10) carpet over a trivial fall.

We wonder why these events have been getting more tragic? Global "Warming" or as I like to correctly say, Global Melting.

It is having impacts now people. Not 50 years in the future. Though I can't see it being pleasant then either.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more