Scientific knowledge and scientific uncertainty in bushfire and flood risk mitigation: literature review

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Scientific Diversity, Scientific Uncertainty and Risk Mitigation Policy and Planning (RMPP) project aims to investigate the diversity and uncertainty of bushfire and flood science, and its contribution to risk mitigation policy and planning. The project investigates how policy makers, practitioners, courts, inquiries and the community differentiate, understand and use scientific knowledge in relation to bushfire and flood risk. It uses qualitative social science methods and case studies to analyse how diverse types of knowledge are ordered and judged as salient, credible and authoritative, and the pragmatic meaning this holds for emergency management across the PPRR spectrum. This research report is the second literature review of the RMPP project and was written before any of the case studies had been completed. It synthesises approximately 250 academic sources on bushfire and flood risk science, including research on hazard modelling, prescribed burning, hydrological engineering, development planning, meteorology, climatology and evacuation planning. The report also incorporates theoretical insights from the fields of risk studies and science and technology studies (STS), as well as indicative research regarding the public understandings of science, risk communication and deliberative planning. This report outlines the key scientific practices (methods and knowledge) and scientific uncertainties in bushfire and flood risk mitigation in Australia. Scientific uncertainties are those ‘known unknowns’ and ‘unknown unknowns’ that emerge from the development and utilisation of scientific knowledge. Risk mitigation involves those processes through which agencies attempt to limit the vulnerability of assets and values to a given hazard. The focus of this report is the uncertainties encountered and managed by risk mitigation professionals in regards to these two hazards, though literature regarding natural sciences and the scientific method more generally are also included where appropriate. It is important to note that while this report excludes professional experience and local knowledge from its consideration of uncertainties and knowledge, these are also very important aspects of risk mitigation which will be addressed in the RMPP project’s case studies. Key findings of this report include: Risk and scientific knowledge are both constructed categories, indicating that attempts to understand any individual instance of risk or scientific knowledge should be understood in light of the social, political, economic, and ecological context in which they emerge. Uncertainty is a necessary element of scientific methods, and as such risk mitigation practitioners and researchers alike should seek to ‘embrace uncertainty’ (Moore et al., 2005) as part of navigating bushfire and flood risk mitigation

Bridging the gap between policy and science in assessing the health status of marine ecosystems

Human activities, both established and emerging, increasingly affect the provision of marine ecosystem services that deliver societal and economic benefits. Monitoring the status of marine ecosystems and determining how human activities change their capacity to sustain benefits for society requires an evidence-based Integrated Ecosystem Assessment approach that incorporates knowledge of ecosystem functioning and services). Although, there are diverse methods to assess the status of individual ecosystem components, none assesses the health of marine ecosystems holistically, integrating information from multiple ecosystem components. Similarly, while acknowledging the availability of several methods to measure single pressures and assess their impacts, evaluation of cumulative effects of multiple pressures remains scarce. Therefore, an integrative assessment requires us to first understand the response of marine ecosystems to human activities and their pressures and then develop innovative, cost-effective monitoring tools that enable collection of data to assess the health status of large marine areas. Conceptually, combining this knowledge of effective monitoring methods with cost-benefit analyses will help identify appropriate management measures to improve environmental status economically and efficiently. The European project DEVOTES (DEVelopment Of innovative Tools for understanding marine biodiversity and assessing good Environmental Status) specifically addressed t hese topics in order to support policy makers and managers in implementing the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Here, we synthesize our main innovative findings, placing these within the context of recent wider research, and identifying gaps and the major future challenges

A FRAMEWORK FOR THE ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

Economists, especially agricultural economists, have undertaken extensive analysis of the gains of technological-based scientific research. This is in stark contrast to the efforts undertaken to understand the economic effects of environmental scientific research. Economic evaluation of environmental science is important because knowledge-based government agencies are regularly required to justify their research expenditure and set clear priorities for their research programmes. This paper addresses the gap in the literature by offering a general framework for evaluating environmental scientific research. The paper is structured around two themes central to appraisals of environmental research: (a) the non-market nature of environmental outcomes; and (b) the pathways to achieve these outcomes. Some of the more important and unique issues addressed include the links between the natural systems being researched, the benefits in terms of resulting goods and services, and their subsequent values, as well as the factors influencing the overall contribution research makes to environmental decision-making.Environmental Economics and Policy, Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies,

CURRENT ISSUES AFFECTING TRADE AND TRADE POLICY: AN ANNOTATED LITERATURE REVIEW

This review provides a base of literature describing current issues and research on the impacts of lobalization and the industrialization of agriculture and recent approaches to analyze and model agricultural trade and trade policies. Three key factors of the survey are differentiated goods, global economic integration and international supply chain linkages. The review covers 182 publications, which are presented alphabetically by author with a brief annotation describing how it relates to the above criteria. The articles are also indexed by keyword. A brief summary highlights the documented literature and includes a series of issues for future discussion and research.International Relations/Trade,

Management and drivers of change of pollinating insects and pollination services. National Pollinator Strategy: for bees and other pollinators in England, Evidence statements and Summary of Evidence

These Evidence Statements provide up-to-date information on what is known (and not known) about the status, values, drivers of change, and responses to management of UK insect pollinators (as was September 2018). This document has been produced to inform the development of England pollinator policy, and provide insight into the evidence that underpins policy decision-making. This document sits alongside a more detailed Summary of Evidence (Annex I) document written by pollinator experts. For information on the development of the statements, and confidence ratings assigned to them, please see section ?Generation of the statements? below. Citations for these statements are contained in the Summary of Evidence document

Addressing Uncertainty in TMDLS: Short Course at Arkansas Water Resources Center 2001 Annual Conference

Management of a critical natural resource like water requires information on the status of that resource. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported in the 1998 National Water Quality Inventory that more than 291,000 miles of assessed rivers and streams and 5 million acres of lakes do not meet State water quality standards. This inventory represents a compilation of State assessments of 840,000 miles of rivers and 17.4 million acres of lakes; a 22 percent increase in river miles and 4 percent increase in lake acres over their 1996 reports. Siltation, bacteria, nutrients and metals were the leading pollutants of impaired waters, according to EPA. The sources of these pollutants were presumed to be runoff from agricultural lands and urban areas. EPA suggests that the majority of Americans-over 218 million-live within ten miles of a polluted waterbody. This seems to contradict the recent proclamations of the success of the Clean Water Act, the Nation\u27s water pollution control law. EPA also claims that, while water quality is still threatened in the US, the amount of water safe for fishing and swimming has doubled since 1972, and that the number of people served by sewage treatment plants has more than doubled