This session will bring together a range of presenters who have conducted social scientific research as part of the many years of VORTEX-SE research cycles in order to summarize their findings and begin to answer a number of questions, including: What are the critical social factors that make the U.S. southeast different from other parts of the country regarding severe weather? How have findings from this social scientific research been brought into conversation with operational or research-oriented meteorology? What can be learned from this research in the southeast that can be applied across the entire U.S. or even globally? What recommendations come out of this work to support NOAA’s mission to protect life and property? What are the next steps and next big questions/challenges we should be pursuing?

Mr. David Kenny has a legacy career across the tech sector with experience at many storied corporations including IBM, The Weather Company, Best Buy, Yahoo, Digitas, Akamai and Publicis. He has three decades of consumer and media focused experience in big data, analytics, AI/ML, and cloud technologies. He is passionate about organizational excellence, good leadership, diversity and inclusion, emerging technology, and of course, the AMS community.

Come hear Mr. Kenny share his thoughts on what the world can learn from the AMS and what the AMS might learn from the rest of the world in an inspiring and thought-provoking conversation.

• Higgins, Paul A. T. (phiggins@ametsoc.org)
  • AMS, Washington, DC USA
• Mohleji, Shali (mohlejis@gmail.com)
  • None, Washington, DC USA
  • IBM, Washington, DC USA
• Henry, Michael (mhenry@aip.org)
  • American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD USA

• Droegemeier, Kelvin 
  • White House Office of Science & Technology Policy,  ,   USA
• Jacobs, Neil 
  • Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Environmental Observation and Prediction, Washington DC, DC USA

Abstracts

• 371196 Introductory Remarks
  
  
• 371058 Policy Leadership in Weather, Water, and Climate. Part II
  
  
  • Droegemeier, Kelvin (kkd@ou.edu)
    • American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD USA
  • Jacobs, Neil A. (njacobs@airdat.com)
    • NOAA,  ,    
• 371197 Panel Discussion
  
  

Many efforts are underway to improve such transitions. For example, the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act requires NOAA “to ensure continuous development and transition of the latest scientific and technological advances.” While using the phrase “transition” provides a research end goal to incorporate valuable research findings into applications, applying research is multidimensional, and as such requires thoughtful care on where and how research findings transition. Although the Weather Act emphasizes technology, there are also people, policies, and mission that guide the application process surrounding these technologies. Each of these areas require different points of contact and organizational knowledge of the NWS, and ultimately a unique transition process.

Equivalently, social and behavioral science research findings also come in many forms. Results may take the form of tangible to less tangible results, such as developing a new end user software tool to providing knowledge on risk communication message improvements.  Both the concrete tools and knowledge are critically important to integrating SBS research into NWS operations and seeing the full value of SBS research on empowering public response.

This panel session will reflect on current SBS R2O challenges, take us back to the future by discussing recommendations and best practices for transitioning SBS research as reported at the SBS R2O Workshop held in September 2019, as well as discuss a community vision for transitioning SBS research for the next 100 years.

 Although there are several examples of sustained, meaningful engagement between the meteorological and humanitarian communities, there is both a need and an opportunity to build deeper relationships, defining key principals that support increased collaboration. Some of the key issues include:

1.  How to balance the constraints between research and operations; In applied sciences there is a tension between the need to publish rigorous analysis to uphold the scientific method, while in the humanitarian community there is often the need to use science that is ‘sufficient’ or ‘good enough’.
2.  The disparity between academic project timescales and the long-term engagement / short-fuse action often required by the humanitarian sector.
3.  The complexities and lack of incentives for creating tailored versions of existing research output, or for moving from research to applications.
4.  The disconnect between the content of peer reviewed academic literature and the tailored output needed by the humanitarian sector to make actionable decisions.
5.  The lack of incentive for those in the humanitarian sector to write up their own research outcomes, along with the logistical and cost barriers to accessing the peer reviewed journal process. 

There are many exciting innovations on the horizon to overcome these challenges. These include co-sponsored researchers, dedicated “translator” centres integrated within the structures of humanitarian organizations, or academic funding programmes dedicated to humanitarian linked research. This session uses the "hard talk format" to allow space to candidly discuss these topics, exploring the state of affairs and reflecting on novel approaches to bridge the gap.

Proposed by: Jeffrey K. Lazo and William Hooke (hooke@ametsoc.org)

This panel will discuss the benefits of integrating physical and social science for a multidisciplinary approach, the challenges and needs to implement a more robust inclusive approach (e.g., training, research design), and outcomes for linking the knowledge ascertained from multidisciplinary service assessments to policy and society. Though this panel will focus on NWS service assessments, it also serves as a forum for the broader challenge of integrating social and physical science in order to further understand how the weather community can inform and benefit society. Panelists include the following:

Cindy Woods, NOAA/National Weather Service, Chief, Operations Division

Vankita Brown, NOAA/National Weather Service, Research Social Scientist, Operations Division

Ayeisha Brinson, NOAA/Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Economist, Office of Performance, Risk and Social Science

Chris Ellis, NOAA/National Ocean Service, Social Scientist, Office for Coastal Management

Jeff Gorman, NOAA/National Weather Service, Meteorologist In Charge, Cheyenne Weather Forecast Office

Logan Johnson, NOAA/National Weather Service, Meteorologist In Charge, Seattle Weather Forecast Office

Suzanne Van Cooten, NOAA/National Weather Service, Hydrologist In Charge, Lower Mississippi River Forecast Center

Leticia Williams, Post-Doctoral Fellow, NOAA Center for Atmospheric Science and Meteorology

Engineering standards often depend on estimates of probabilities to provide specified levels of safety. There is no accepted method to estimate the probability of future extremes in the face of climate change. In addition, there are multiple sources of uncertainty in the projection of future climate extremes, some of which may not be quantifiable. Nonstationarity, and in particular multi-year and decadal variability further compound the challenge. This session highlights presentations from both climate scientists and engineers to provide different perspectives and promote dialog between these diverse communities on the topic of climate change and infrastructure, and is a joint activity of the AMS Water Resources Committee and the ASCE Committee on Adaptation to a Changing Climate. This session is part 1 of 2.

Engineering standards often depend on estimates of probabilities to provide specified levels of safety. There is no accepted method to estimate the probability of future extremes in the face of climate change. In addition, there are multiple sources of uncertainty in the projection of future climate extremes, some of which may not be quantifiable. Nonstationarity, and in particular multi-year and decadal variability further compound the challenge. This session highlights presentations from both climate scientists and engineers to provide different perspectives and promote dialog between these diverse communities on the topic of climate change and infrastructure, and is a joint activity of the AMS Water Resources Committee and the ASCE Committee on Adaptation to a Changing Climate. This session is part 2 of 2.

Additionally, many complex science programs include societal relevance, with interdisciplinary work that requires technical scientists to understand how to effectively partner with non-technical experts from across the private and public sectors. For example, many government researchers are learning to effectively work with non-governmental programs and individuals, collaborating with them as co-researchers, not just individual technical collaborators; this represents a significant challenge to how complex scientific projects have often been run. Many of these programs benefit from a management structure that oversees the whole project, especially where there are a significant number of collaborators and funding streams.

This session will highlight complex science management programs and projects, with a goal of understanding more deeply the process and best practices of successful science program management. Talks will highlight interdisciplinary projects or programs that analyze the effects of global change on the natural environment, in areas such as agriculture, energy production and use, land and water resources, transportation, human health and welfare, human social systems, and/or biological diversity, among other topics.

Exponentially improved computing capabilities in the 21st Century have allowed the development of high resolution atmospheric forecast models whose multi-day accuracy is better than ever before. In addition, probabilistic forecasting of potentially hazardous weather elements is creating a baseline of threat communication, the first critical element of risk assessment.  Similar computational improvements have allowed more accurate assessments of physical impact and vulnerability communication through measurement of natural and man-made infrastructure, from micro-scale geographic differences to infrastructural differences and changes to each. 

Social science research applied to the potential impact on weather on the physical world to human behavior.  Human behavior based on a diverse set of factors (demographics, culture, education, income, etc) informs the behavioral side of vulnerability. 

The combination of knowledge, computing power, and an increased need for true risk assessment in a world with more extreme meteorological events and larger populations in harm's way has opened the door for researchers and developers to produce an increasing number of research studies and computer applications that can help all decision-makers to assess risk, from the granular (personal) level to the holistic (jurisdictional) level.  Such studies and applications must be better connected to unify the process of risk communication in order to meet a shared goal of protecting life and property from potential weather disasters.  

This session can become a springboard to begin and move forward a unified process, one that serves the entire Weather Enterprise in the shared goal of public safety and ultimately a reduction in weather-related disasters.