Extended Abstract (68K)1.6
Collaborative approaches to the development of climate-based decision support systems: What role for social sciences?
Todd A. Crane, Univ. of Georgia, Athens, GA; and C. Roncoli, N. E. Breuer, J. O. Paz, C. W. Fraisse, K. T. Ingram, D. F. Zierden, G. Hoogenboom, and J. O'Brien
This paper explores some of the benefits and challenges of collaboration between biophysical and social scientists in the development of climate-based decision support tools for farmers in the American southeast. By conducting both types of research concurrent with product development and dissemination forged a project model that includes end-user participation and an iterative approach to product development. This collaborative, iterative and participatory approach to research contributes to the efficacy of the project and the decision-support tools we have created for rural resource managers.
One of the challenges in maximizing the societal benefits of weather and climate information products is tailoring them products to the public in terms of content, distribution, format and timing. This is particularly true when the content represents the cutting edge of scientific mid-range climate forecasting and the target audience is comprised of farmers across spread across an entire region of the country. In the American Southeast, the El Niņo-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a key determinant of inter-annual climate variability. The economic hazards associated with climatic variation can be mitigated through the incorporation of predictive information systems into crop management decisions. However, these predictive information systems must successfully interface with farmers' existing systems of knowledge and practice to be relevant and effective.
The Southeast Climate Consortium is collaborative, interdisciplinary research group that includes six land-grant universities in Florida, Georgia and Alabama. It is a Regional Integrated Science and Assessments program (RISA) funded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the US Department of Agriculture. The SECC's overarching goal is to develop decision-support tools that are based on seasonal (90-120 day) climate forecasting. These tools, distributed primarily through our website Agclimate.org, are intended for agricultural and natural resource managers in the southeastern U.S. The premise of the SECC is that agricultural risk related to climate variability can be offset through various risk-management practices if farmers and agricultural extension agents have access to reliable seasonal forecasts and associated decision-support tools.
In order to achieve our goal, the SECC has integrated multiple lines of basic research, dissemination of climate-based decision support tools, and product assessment into a project model that maintains continuous feedback loops between end-users, agricultural extension agents and researchers. In fact, some tools have in essence been co-developed by farmers, scientists, and extension agents. By concurrently undertaking research on seasonal climate forecasting, crop tools and farmers' decision-making processes, the SECC has developed a successful project model for addressing end-users needs and benefiting from their input.
Extension specialists and anthropologists jointly conducted numerous workshops in which agricultural extension agents were familiarized with SECC's climate-based decision support tool, AgClimate.org. Participants were then asked to evaluate the efficacy, utility and user-friendliness of the tools in short surveys. Similar website evaluation workshops were conducted with agriculture students, many of whom come from farming families, in land-grant universities. Feedback from these workshops was then passed along to researchers involved in the development of the decision-support tools. This feedback cycle has significantly contributed to the extension agents' use of the tools as well as researchers' improvement of the tools.
Social science research with farmers and extension agents has been integral to the realization of societal benefits of climate forecasts in a variety of ways. Early in the SECC's development, rapid rural appraisals were conducted in 44 counties in order to ascertain the kinds of climate and crop information would be most useful. In-depth ethnographic interviews were conducted with 47 farmers to refine our understanding of the decision-making environment into which climate-based decision support tools are to be introduced. This research identified agricultural management decisions with the potential to be influenced by climate forecasts as well as the many factors other than climate that shape agricultural management, including commodity prices, agricultural policies, and agroecological considerations. SECC social scientists have also conducted research on farmers' use of weather information in order to understand their interactions with information inputs. By understanding the timing of decisions and the ways that farmers use information, we have been able to refine the ways that our information tools are delivered, making them more relevant and easily accessible to farmers.
By including social scientists who work directly with end-users in the research program, the Southeast Climate Consortium has promoted the societal benefits of climate science. The methodologies that social science brings to the project have facilitated stakeholders' participation in the development of decision-support tools, making them more relevant to our end-users . Not only does this lead to relatively quick improvement of the tools themselves, but farmers' and extension agents' participation in tool development increases the likelihood that they will continue to access, use and maximize the benefits of the tools that we deliver. The integration of research by social and biophysical scientists has been an important and synergistic aspect of the SECC's efforts to maximize the societal benefits of climate research.
The process of integrating social science insights and stakeholders' concerns does not, however, unfold automatically and unproblematically from their involvement in a program. The process is one of negotiation and adjustments of different ways of thinking and speaking about climate. There are differences in linguistic terminologies, semantic content, relevance of parameters, standards of rigor, and criteria for establishing credibility and accuracy of information. Integrating these different perspectives requires time and effort, willingness to compromise, and commitment to common goals.
Session 1, Societal Dimensions of Hazards I
Monday, 21 January 2008, 4:00 PM-5:30 PM, 228-229
Previous paper
Recorded presentation