Climate Change Survey Measures: Exploring Perceived Bias and Question Interpretation

Climate change has become an important yet politically divisive topic in recent years. Further complicating the issue are assertions that climate change– related public opinion surveys used by social scientists are biased or otherwise problematic. We conducted a pilot study to explore questions concerning bias and interpretation of climate change surveys. Our study sample was composed of adult residents of Nebraska (n = 115). We augmented our survey findings with cognitive interviews of a subsample of respondents (n = 20). We assessed study participants’ attitudes about climate change, and perceptions of bias and interpretation of survey questions drawn from previously used survey instruments and national polls. Among our study sample, we found little support for perceived bias within the survey items employed. However, interview findings indicated that particular survey language may have elicited unexpected associations among respondents. We discussed implications for further research

Decadal Climate Information Needs of Stakeholders for Decision Support in Water and Agriculture Production Sectors: A Case Study in the Missouri River Basin

Many decadal climate prediction efforts have been initiated under phase 5 of the World Climate Research Programme Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. There is considerable ongoing discussion about model deficiencies, initialization techniques, and data requirements, but not much attention is being given to decadal climate information (DCI) needs of stakeholders for decision support. Here, the authors report the results of exploratory activities undertaken to assess DCI needs in water resources and agriculture sectors, using the Missouri River basin as a case study. This assessment was achieved through discussions with 120 stakeholders. Stakeholders’ awareness of decadal dry and wet spells and their societal impacts in the basin are described, and stakeholders’ DCI needs and potential barriers to their use of DCI are enumerated. The authors find that impacts, including economic impacts, of decadal climate variability (DCV) on water and agricultural production in the basin are distinctly identifiable and characterizable. Stakeholders have clear notions about their needs for DCI and have offered specific suggestions as to how these might be met. However, while stakeholders are eager to have climate information, including decadal climate outlooks (DCOs), there are many barriers to the use of such information. The first and foremost barrier is that the credibility ofDCOs is yet to be established. Second, the nature of institutional rules and regulations, laws, and legal precedents that pose obstacles to the use of DCOs must be better understood and means to modify these, where possible, must be sought. For the benefit of climate scientists, these and other stakeholder needs are also articulated in this paper

Decadal Climate Information Needs of Stakeholders for Decision Support in Water and Agriculture Production Sectors: A Case Study in the Missouri River Basin

Many decadal climate prediction efforts have been initiated under phase 5 of the World Climate Research Programme Coupled Model Intercomparison Project. There is considerable ongoing discussion about model deficiencies, initialization techniques, and data requirements, but not much attention is being given to decadal climate information (DCI) needs of stakeholders for decision support. Here, the authors report the results of exploratory activities undertaken to assess DCI needs in water resources and agriculture sectors, using the Missouri River basin as a case study. This assessment was achieved through discussions with 120 stakeholders. Stakeholders’ awareness of decadal dry and wet spells and their societal impacts in the basin are described, and stakeholders’ DCI needs and potential barriers to their use of DCI are enumerated. The authors find that impacts, including economic impacts, of decadal climate variability (DCV) on water and agricultural production in the basin are distinctly identifiable and characterizable. Stakeholders have clear notions about their needs for DCI and have offered specific suggestions as to how these might be met. However, while stakeholders are eager to have climate information, including decadal climate outlooks (DCOs), there are many barriers to the use of such information. The first and foremost barrier is that the credibility ofDCOs is yet to be established. Second, the nature of institutional rules and regulations, laws, and legal precedents that pose obstacles to the use of DCOs must be better understood and means to modify these, where possible, must be sought. For the benefit of climate scientists, these and other stakeholder needs are also articulated in this paper

Conducting a drought-specific THIRA (Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment): A powerful tool for integrating all-hazard mitigation and drought planning efforts to increase drought mitigation quality

In the United States, drought is the second costliest natural disaster, which leads to the need for increased drought mitigation efforts over time. However, drought planning has lagged behind other hazard mitigation efforts, which is likely due to the lack of a national drought planning policy. Although the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requires all jurisdictions have a hazard mitigation plan (HMP) to receive pre-disaster mitigation funds, drought has only recently been a requirement in HMPs. In 2012, Nebraska witnessed its worse drought in recent history, which exposed the gaps in drought planning effectiveness at all jurisdictional levels. To address potential drought planning gaps, we developed, conducted, and evaluated a Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA), a FEMA risk assessment process, which solely focused on drought. This drought-specific THIRA consisted of a one-day workshop in which stakeholders and agency experts from the Platte River Basin in Nebraska worked collaboratively to determine the necessary resources for successfully managing a worst-case drought scenario in the region. We analyzed the findings of this workshop and compared them against the current drought planning activities in the Platte River Basin and found that the current drought planning activities would not be effective against a worst-case drought, in terms of reducing drought vulnerability and increasing preparedness and response efforts. Our use of a drought-specific THIRA and drought plan evaluation provides both a quality process to increase drought mitigation efforts and a process to strengthen the integration between stand-alone drought plans and hazard mitigation plans

BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE NETWORK OF DROUGHT COMMUNITIES

The first step in managing large-scale (national) collaborations and networks is to consider and address how a group and a potential partnership may match up (Luther, 2005). To explore this concept and many other collaborative concepts, the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) hosted a workshop, “Building a Sustainable Network of Drought Communities,” which was facilitated by the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC) in Chicago, IL, June 8-9, 2011. The workshop explored current examples of good communication and lessons learned within the realm of drought planning in order to address a future NIDIS Engaging Preparedness Communities (EPC) working group that is solution-focused and collaborative. With the diversity and experience of the participants at this meeting, a wealth of good practices or lessons learned in drought planning, preparedness, and general stakeholder engagement set the pathway for building a sustainable community of drought practitioners. In his opening remarks, NIDIS Director Roger Pulwarty noted that adaptive institutions can show robustness in the following ways: Levels of alertness—monitoring the external world for early warning signs that key assumptions are likely to verify/fail and a commitment to rigorous monitoring of performance; Agility—the ability to react to early warning signs of problems or opportunities; flow of knowledge across components, and to adjust strategies and tactics rapidly to meet changes in the environment; and Alignment—the ability to align the whole organization (and partners) to its mission-policies and practices that give rise to failures/successes. Through an interactive workshop format that used Appreciative Inquiry (framing breakout sessions on success), the group was able to effectively discuss topics such as: • Integrating Planning Efforts • Planning Under Uncertainty • Evaluating, Assessing, and Updating Drought Plans • Leveraging Resources for Risk Management • Implementing Plans and Planning Information • Synthesizing Success Stories and Lessons Learned • Creating a Sustainable Network of Drought Professionals The most common themes resulting from the workshop included: • Importance of networking and collaboration—this is a necessity. Figuring out how to make it seamless is the main goal that the NIDIS EPC Community should foster. Good communication is the key among the drought practitioners and their stakeholders. • Celebrate success—in this future drought network, successes related to drought efforts should be highlighted within the community and to the public. This will help drive future positive interactions and collaborations. It also gives the community a sense of pride. • “Stakeholder Buy-In”—why should stakeholders stay engaged in an ongoing drought community? Especially when there is no drought? Again, good communication and collaborations with other multi-hazard, sustainability, and natural resources planning efforts will help keep drought a priority. • Economic, environmental, and social aspects of planning for drought—these should always be considered. This was a recurrent theme in the workshop. • Planners should not “reinvent the wheel”—planners involved in climate adaptation work can and should reference the best drought planning resources and case studies to help them incorporate drought in their overall planning efforts. • “Have a plan for the plan”—how and who will make it happen? What kind of leadership is needed within the NIDIS EPC community to track its progress and success? • Sharing of resources—as budgets become slimmer, a central location of available resources and the sharing of resources in the area of drought preparedness and mitigation is necessary. Communication regarding these potential resources should also be integrated into this NIDIS EPC community. Since the occurrence of the workshop, several EPC-related activities have taken place, including a webinar in December 2011. This workshop report and additional EPC updates will be placed on the U.S. Drought portal (www.drought.gov). Currently, the American Planning Association (APA), NIDIS and the NDMC are collaborating to produce a Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Report to connect drought mitigation resources with the planning practices of local, regional, tribal and state governments. This builds on the work of the APA’s Hazard Planning Center, which produced a similar PAS Report (sponsored by FEMA) on how to integrate multi-hazard planning into planning practices. In May 2012: The APA’s drought planning project webpage went live and can be found at: http://www.planning.org/research/drought/index.ht

Climate Change Survey Measures: Exploring Perceived Bias and Question Interpretation

Climate change has become an important yet politically divisive topic in recent years. Further complicating the issue are assertions that climate change– related public opinion surveys used by social scientists are biased or otherwise problematic. We conducted a pilot study to explore questions concerning bias and interpretation of climate change surveys. Our study sample was composed of adult residents of Nebraska (n = 115). We augmented our survey findings with cognitive interviews of a subsample of respondents (n = 20). We assessed study participants’ attitudes about climate change, and perceptions of bias and interpretation of survey questions drawn from previously used survey instruments and national polls. Among our study sample, we found little support for perceived bias within the survey items employed. However, interview findings indicated that particular survey language may have elicited unexpected associations among respondents. We discussed implications for further research

Conducting a drought-specific THIRA (Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment): A powerful tool for integrating all-hazard mitigation and drought planning efforts to increase drought mitigation quality

In the United States, drought is the second costliest natural disaster, which leads to the need for increased drought mitigation efforts over time. However, drought planning has lagged behind other hazard mitigation efforts, which is likely due to the lack of a national drought planning policy. Although the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requires all jurisdictions have a hazard mitigation plan (HMP) to receive pre-disaster mitigation funds, drought has only recently been a requirement in HMPs. In 2012, Nebraska witnessed its worse drought in recent history, which exposed the gaps in drought planning effectiveness at all jurisdictional levels. To address potential drought planning gaps, we developed, conducted, and evaluated a Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA), a FEMA risk assessment process, which solely focused on drought. This drought-specific THIRA consisted of a one-day workshop in which stakeholders and agency experts from the Platte River Basin in Nebraska worked collaboratively to determine the necessary resources for successfully managing a worst-case drought scenario in the region. We analyzed the findings of this workshop and compared them against the current drought planning activities in the Platte River Basin and found that the current drought planning activities would not be effective against a worst-case drought, in terms of reducing drought vulnerability and increasing preparedness and response efforts. Our use of a drought-specific THIRA and drought plan evaluation provides both a quality process to increase drought mitigation efforts and a process to strengthen the integration between stand-alone drought plans and hazard mitigation plans

Tracking Drought Perspectives: A Rural Case Study of Transformations Following an Invisible Hazard

Rural towns are especially susceptible to the effects of drought because their economies are dependent on natural resources.However, they are also resilient in many ways to natural hazards because they are rich in civic engagement and social capital. Because of the diverse nature of drought’s impacts, understanding its complex dynamics and its effects requires a multidisciplinary approach. To study these dynamics, this research combines appreciative inquiry, the Community Capitals Framework, and a range of climatological monitoring data to assess the 2012–14 Great Plains drought’s effect on McCook, Nebraska. Community coping measures, such as water-use reduction and public health programs, were designed to address the immediate effects of heat and scant rainfall during the initial summer and the subsequent years. Residents generally reported the community was better prepared than in previous droughts, including the persistent multiyear early-2000s drought. However, the results highlight wide variation in community perspectives about the drought’s severity and impacts, as well as divergent experiences and coping responses. Despite these factors, we find evidence of the transformative potential of moving from drought coping to drought mitigation. We attribute the city’s resilience to the ability to draw upon prior experience with droughts, having a formal municipal plan, and strong human and social capital to coordinate individual knowledge and expertise across agencies. We suggest that droughts have served a catalytic function, prompting the community to transform land-use practices, water conservation planning, and built infrastructure in lasting ways

BUILDING A SUSTAINABLE NETWORK OF DROUGHT COMMUNITIES

The first step in managing large-scale (national) collaborations and networks is to consider and address how a group and a potential partnership may match up (Luther, 2005). To explore this concept and many other collaborative concepts, the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) hosted a workshop, “Building a Sustainable Network of Drought Communities,” which was facilitated by the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC) in Chicago, IL, June 8-9, 2011. The workshop explored current examples of good communication and lessons learned within the realm of drought planning in order to address a future NIDIS Engaging Preparedness Communities (EPC) working group that is solution-focused and collaborative. With the diversity and experience of the participants at this meeting, a wealth of good practices or lessons learned in drought planning, preparedness, and general stakeholder engagement set the pathway for building a sustainable community of drought practitioners. In his opening remarks, NIDIS Director Roger Pulwarty noted that adaptive institutions can show robustness in the following ways: Levels of alertness—monitoring the external world for early warning signs that key assumptions are likely to verify/fail and a commitment to rigorous monitoring of performance; Agility—the ability to react to early warning signs of problems or opportunities; flow of knowledge across components, and to adjust strategies and tactics rapidly to meet changes in the environment; and Alignment—the ability to align the whole organization (and partners) to its mission-policies and practices that give rise to failures/successes. Through an interactive workshop format that used Appreciative Inquiry (framing breakout sessions on success), the group was able to effectively discuss topics such as: • Integrating Planning Efforts • Planning Under Uncertainty • Evaluating, Assessing, and Updating Drought Plans • Leveraging Resources for Risk Management • Implementing Plans and Planning Information • Synthesizing Success Stories and Lessons Learned • Creating a Sustainable Network of Drought Professionals The most common themes resulting from the workshop included: • Importance of networking and collaboration—this is a necessity. Figuring out how to make it seamless is the main goal that the NIDIS EPC Community should foster. Good communication is the key among the drought practitioners and their stakeholders. • Celebrate success—in this future drought network, successes related to drought efforts should be highlighted within the community and to the public. This will help drive future positive interactions and collaborations. It also gives the community a sense of pride. • “Stakeholder Buy-In”—why should stakeholders stay engaged in an ongoing drought community? Especially when there is no drought? Again, good communication and collaborations with other multi-hazard, sustainability, and natural resources planning efforts will help keep drought a priority. • Economic, environmental, and social aspects of planning for drought—these should always be considered. This was a recurrent theme in the workshop. • Planners should not “reinvent the wheel”—planners involved in climate adaptation work can and should reference the best drought planning resources and case studies to help them incorporate drought in their overall planning efforts. • “Have a plan for the plan”—how and who will make it happen? What kind of leadership is needed within the NIDIS EPC community to track its progress and success? • Sharing of resources—as budgets become slimmer, a central location of available resources and the sharing of resources in the area of drought preparedness and mitigation is necessary. Communication regarding these potential resources should also be integrated into this NIDIS EPC community. Since the occurrence of the workshop, several EPC-related activities have taken place, including a webinar in December 2011. This workshop report and additional EPC updates will be placed on the U.S. Drought portal (www.drought.gov). Currently, the American Planning Association (APA), NIDIS and the NDMC are collaborating to produce a Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Report to connect drought mitigation resources with the planning practices of local, regional, tribal and state governments. This builds on the work of the APA’s Hazard Planning Center, which produced a similar PAS Report (sponsored by FEMA) on how to integrate multi-hazard planning into planning practices. In May 2012: The APA’s drought planning project webpage went live and can be found at: http://www.planning.org/research/drought/index.ht