At every COP, the United Nations climate summit, and the recently concluded COP28 is no exception, the atmosphere is charged with anticipation. Amidst the hope that scientific evidence will catalyse a quantum leap in response to the urgency, the reality of a conference where diplomacy toils day and night to forge a consensus among 198 Parties prevails.
This time, the conclusion of COP28 was met with applause, embraces, and smiles. Of course, a few days earlier, an unfortunate statement by Al Jaber had cast a shadow: “There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.” [1] This assertion was rightly and sharply criticised, and it didn’t augur well for a positive outcome in the context of a global conference tasked with aligning positions and interests that often stand worlds apart. However, something positive did emerge.
“Transitioning away from fossil fuels in energy systems, in a just, orderly, and equitable manner, accelerating action in this critical decade, to achieve net zero by 2050 in keeping with the science,” is the phrase, in the Global Stocktake report [2], which garnered applause, and that represents a groundbreaking development. It’s a non-trivial achievement for the COP28 presidency under Sultan Al Jaber, who, let’s not forget, also heads the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC).

The statement publicly declares, in a document endorsed by all Parties, a fundamental principle: the climate crisis is caused by fossil fuels. The elephant in the room is now plain for all to see, to borrow a metaphor from the media. This is no small assertion, though belated and somewhat tepid; it marks a specific point from which turning back is unlikely. “Unlikely” doesn’t mean impossible, as we’re well aware of the fragility and delicacy of such agreements.
“Transitioning Away” is a compromise compared to the “phase-out” loudly demanded by 130 countries, including the European Union. Like all compromises, it is ostensibly a linguistic balancing act, and probably the best agreement achievable given the strong pressures from oil and gas lobbies present at the Conference of the Parties.
But this phrase conveys more.
It suggests that this transition from fossil fuels to other energy systems must be equitable, orderly, and just, as emphasised by Ferdinando Cotugno, a journalist from “Il Domani.” Equitable so that the transition should be fair avoiding disparities, in terms of climate justice, orderly as the transition should be planned and managed effectively, and just because it must not leave anyone behind. The phrase also indicates two temporal horizons: “accelerating action in this critical decade […] in keeping with the science,” meaning that action must be accelerated in the next ten years, a critical window to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, as indicated by science.
Thus, the unacceptable anti-scientific statement by Al Jaber a few days earlier can be shelved and downgraded to a misunderstanding or a (in)voluntary prologue to success by contrast. Some may think it was a refined (or cunning) strategy to weight more something very weak: denying scientific facts meant making any result in agreement with science an impossible feat. As a result, the outcome of COP28 becomes a coup de théâtre, applauded as an epic triumph in the best dramatic tradition. However, we will never know if this hypothesis is true or captious, so let’s continue with the facts.

Some commentators emphasise how “transitioning away” is feeble compared to “phase-out” (gradually eliminate), but certainly better than the previously circulated “phase-down” (gradually reduce). Are these just words? “Words are a thin film on deep water,” as Wittgenstein said, and beneath, in the deep water, we delve to find their meaning. While the language may be constrained, it is these exact words that construct the meaning of climate change within the frame of COP28 and, consequently, for the representatives of the countries on planet Earth.
So, despite the language of multilateralism, it is clear that fossil fuels are responsible for climate change, and the time to act has come. And this is where things get complicated.
Because if the Global Stocktake (GST) sets the principle, the energy transition will depend on national plans that, to accelerate toward net-zero and low-emission technologies, may resort to, “[…] inter alia, renewables, nuclear, abatement and removal technologies such as carbon capture and utilization and storage, particularly in hard-to-abate sectors, and low-carbon hydrogen production.”
The transition could thus resort to nuclear (on which there would be much to analyse, understand, and discuss), transitional fuels (including gas), and storage systems. The latter are particularly favoured by oil-dependent countries, but they are an expensive and not particularly effective technology. “The technologies that would (perhaps) allow us to achieve this goal are under development, but they bring challenges, risks, and costs that place these solutions at the centre of a very intense debate,” as stated in an article by the IPCC focal point for Italy [3]. Or, as we read in this article from The Guardian, “Another weasel word is ‘transitional fuels’ – it is code for fossil gas. Recognizes that transitional fuels can play a role in facilitating the energy transition while ensuring energy security. This is the biggest win for the fossil fuel industry – it almost amounts to a poison pill in the agreement.”
And so the elephant again peeks out the window in disguise.
Although, for the sake of precision, it must be said that the COP28 document does not equate nuclear and renewables. The former is a legitimate option for net zero, while there is a commitment to globally triple renewables within six years, doubling energy efficiency.

For GST is an honourable agreement.

Let’s not underestimate the outcome achieved in this COP28. Certainly, the ongoing demands of science would require a greater effort, a profound transformation, not a mere improvement, however fundamental. But from now on, climate change deniers will be forced to change their tune, perhaps donning the garb of nuclear advocates and proponents of carbon capture and storage systems. Thus, a rare phenomenon might occur: in media narratives, provided we escape the trap of polarisation, discussions about solutions could take centre stage.

For GST is an honourable agreement.
However, funds are essential for the development of clean energy (mitigation), the preparation of vulnerable communities for increasing climate impacts (adaptation), and recovery from disasters (loss and damage). Yet, while the GST, according to some commentators, acknowledges the need to invest trillions of dollars, it falls short of specifying amounts and timelines. The GST seems lacking in the aspects of a global plan for adaptation, as the United Nations would put it, crucial for the most vulnerable countries. Without adequate adaptation funding, the risk is that a part of the climate discourse loses its meaning.

For GST is an honourable agreement. Let’s focus on the positive aspects and build on them. But the big unknown is in how the local actions, that is, the National Plans, will be implemented, namely the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which must transform principles into reality with the determination of competent and motivated politicians, to avoid crossing the point of no return. A risk that some countries are well aware of, a concern eloquently expressed by John Silk, the head of the Marshall Islands delegation: “I came here to build a canoe together. We have built a canoe with a weak and leaky hull, full of holes. Yet we have to put it in the water because we have no other option.” [http://rb.gy/nvnywa]

He is one of the voices of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) that experience firsthand the vulnerability to the effects of climate change such as sea-level rise, coastal erosion, and saltwater intrusion. These are the countries already witnessing the other face of climate change, not the one of scenarios but the one that requires actions for adaptation while working on mitigation.

If the AOSIS seems too distant for us Europeans, perhaps the story of La Faute-sur-Mer will prompt us to reflect on our “backyard.” In February 2010, in this quiet seaside town on the French Atlantic coast, an entire neighbourhood was submerged by waters during a devastating storm (Tempête Xynthia). [read the story here] The water had never reached three meters before. Buildings, people, and vehicles were swept away. Twenty-nine victims, all drowned. Sea-level rise caused by climate change not only made that storm more dangerous but also more deadly. Yes, climate change, is right here in the heart of Europe. (Read the full story here.) Because now, we Europeans are also vulnerable, candidates to become climate migrants. “It’s a reality in Europe, not something that will happen hundreds of years from now,” says Dina Ionesco, head of the Migration and Climate Change Department at the International Organization for Migration (IOM). [4]

As Italian geologist and science communicator Mario Tozzi puts it, the agenda is not set by politics or economics, the agenda is set by climate change. And it’s not a catchy phrase. Recently, a study published in the journal “Science” reconstructed the concentration of CO2 over the past 66 million years, providing clearer evidence of the Earth system’s sensitivity to this gas in the past and of CO2’s role in global warming. [5] The study also found that the current concentration of CO2 is the highest in the past 14 million years. This trajectory of climate change, barring significant shifts, suggests an impending 3-degree global temperature increase by the end of the century. This would have catastrophic repercussions, as one might easily envisage. So let’s not linger in conference halls, but take a stand and try to wake up from our slumber of reason. Monitoring and pressure are the weapons we have to ensure that every country implements national plans, but that they are above all inflexible on mitigation and factual on adaptation. Then, is the GST an honourable agreement?

[1] https://euromed-economists.org/cop28-president-claims-no-science-behind-fossil-fuel-phase-out/#:~:text=In%20response%2C%20Al%20Jaber%20retorted,to%20achieve%201.5%CB%9AC.%E2%80%9D

[2] https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cma2023_L17_adv.pdf

[3] https://ipccitalia.cmcc.it/carbon-capture-and-storage-ccs/

[4] https://it.euronews.com/2020/02/27/migranti-climatici-sono-gia-tra-noi-e-sono-europei

[5] The study was coordinated by the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, and the Italian National Research Council’s Institute of Polar Sciences (ISP) also participated. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adi5177

The post The COP28 Agreement: Desperately Seeking Hope appeared first on climateservices.it CNR-IBE.

The impact of both natural and human interventions on hydrological systems, including inter-basin water transfers, droughts, and agricultural water usage, is crucial. However, these interventions profoundly affect ecosystems and impact human populations’ water needs and demands.
Socio-hydrology is an interdisciplinary field at the nexus of social and hydrological sciences, that is gaining momentum as researchers strive to understand the intricate relationship between human societies and water resources. Socio-hydrological modelling is changing the approach to water systems, offering valuable insights for system understanding, and policy formulation. By adopting socio-hydrological studies – historical, comparative, and process-oriented – researchers gain a comprehensive understanding of how these systems have evolved over time, enabling comparisons across locations and investigations into the interconnections among different parameters. Such insights are instrumental in creating a holistic view of these complex systems.

Evolution of the term

An interesting article on bibliometrics analysis related to socio-hydrology [Herrera-Franco et al. 2021] (1), highlighted the evolution of the definitions of the term socio-hydrology from 1979 to 2020. In 2012, publications addressing this matter gained significant momentum, demonstrating a heightened focus and increased scholarly attention on the subject. Among all, we mention Silvaplan et al. journal article (2) published in 2012, where the researchers use the term “socio-hydrology” to redefine the understanding of water resource challenges. One of the key points is the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration between hydrologists and social scientists to address these challenges in a practical and impactful manner, benefiting both water resource managers and decision-makers. Since 2015, the term “socio-hydrogeology” has become a prevalent feature in scientific publications that explore the multifaceted nature of water resources, with a particular emphasis on the human dimension.

Socio-Hydrology is interdisciplinary

With its interdisciplinary approach, socio-hydrology could offer fresh insights into the complex dynamics shaping water systems and calls for innovative solutions to pressing water management challenges.
Unlike traditional hydrology, which focuses primarily on the physical aspects of water, socio-hydrology recognises the pivotal role of social, economic, and cultural factors in shaping water-related phenomena. By integrating social variables such as human behaviour, decision-making processes, and societal dynamics, into hydrological models, socio-hydrology aims to capture the feedback loops and interactions between human and natural systems.
Recent studies in socio-hydrology have showcased its potential to shed light on previously overlooked aspects of water management. Researchers have examined how social factors influence water use patterns, water allocation decisions, and the resilience of communities despite water-related hazards. The field has revealed the critical influence of societal norms, cultural beliefs, and governance structures on water management practices, underscoring the need for interdisciplinary approaches.

Next step: the trans-disciplinary approach

While socio-hydrology has made significant strides, there is still much to explore. Integrating cultural and anthropological approaches within socio-hydrological frameworks remains an exciting frontier. By incorporating cultural perspectives, researchers can gain deeper insights into how societal values, knowledge systems, and historical contexts shape water-related behaviours and policies [Vanelli et al. 2022] (3). Further progress is needed in integrating multiple disciplines and stakeholders in the study of coupled human-water systems, as the characteristics of human variables make them particularly challenging to handle in models. Socio-hydrology should integrate knowledge from social and natural sciences equally, while actively involving stakeholders to generate new insights. This means that Socio-Hydrology should take a step further in collaboration between disciplines to gain a comprehensive understanding. It should foster trans-disciplinary collaboration by involving stakeholders and aiming for actionable solutions to this complex problem. Emphasising the connection between research and the practical realities faced by stakeholders, it is crucial to amplify the impact of socio-hydrological studies and foster trust among stakeholders. Addressing these research gaps will strengthen socio-hydrology and enhance its relevance to scientists, practitioners, and decision-makers in supporting disaster risk reduction efforts.

In conclusion

Socio-hydrology holds the potential for informing water resource management strategies and facilitating more sustainable water governance. It offers decision-makers a broader understanding of the social complexities surrounding water systems, enabling them to design contextually appropriate interventions and policies. In this framework, sustainable water management should focus on understanding the mechanics of the entire system rather than adopting a narrow problem-solving approach.
As socio-hydrology continues to evolve, collaborations between hydrologists, sociologists, anthropologists, engineers, and other disciplines are vital to advancing the field. By fostering interdisciplinary dialogue and integrating diverse perspectives, researchers can unlock novel approaches to address water challenges and pave the way for more resilient and equitable water management.
Socio-hydrology is an example of interdisciplinary collaboration to achieve sustainable water management and propel the research towards a deeper understanding of the complex interplay between water and society.

(1) Herrera-Franco, G.; Montalván-Burbano, N.; Carrión-Mero, P.; Bravo-Montero, L. Worldwide Research on Socio-Hydrology: A Bibliometric Analysis. Water 2021, 13, 1283. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13091283
(2) Murugesu Sivapalan, Hubert H. G. Savenije, and Günter Blöschl, “Socio‐hydrology: A new science of people and water,” Hydrological Processes 26 (2012): 1270–6, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8426.
(3) Vanelli, F. M., Kobiyama, M., and de Brito, M. M.: To which extent are socio-hydrology studies truly integrative? The case of natural hazards and disaster research, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 26, 2301–2317, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-26-2301-2022, 2022.

The post Water and Society: the Emerging Field of Socio-Hydrology appeared first on climateservices.it CNR-IBE.

Climate scientists can provide valuable insights and information on the causes and impacts of atmospheric events. By appearing on TV news programs, scientists can help to educate the public on the latest scientific research, provide context for current events, and help to dispel misconceptions and misinformation about weather and climate change. 

What challenges may climate scientists face when appearing on TV news programs?  Why is it significant having climate scientists on TV news programs? How does a scientist get prepared for a media interview?

We asked these questions to Massimiliano Pasqui.

The post Scientists “on air” appeared first on climateservices.it CNR-IBE.

The Added Value of Local Knowledge

Local knowledge refers to the understanding and information held by individuals and communities that are specific to a particular location or region. This knowledge, in flood-prone areas, can include information about historical flooding patterns, local infrastructure and infrastructure vulnerability, and cultural and social factors that may affect how people respond to flooding.

One example of the use of local knowledge in flood risk management is the use of traditional ecological knowledge by indigenous communities. This type of knowledge refers to the knowledge and practices passed down through generations that are specific to a particular culture or region. Indigenous communities often have a deep understanding of the local environment, including patterns of flooding and the impacts of flooding on their communities. Incorporating traditional ecological knowledge into the design of climate services for flood risk can help to ensure that these services are sensitive to the unique needs and context of indigenous communities.

Another example is the use of community-based monitoring to gather local knowledge about flood risk, engaging community members in the collection and analysis of data related to flooding. This can include information about flood frequency, magnitude, and impacts, as well as information about local infrastructure and vulnerability. By involving community members in the data collection process, community-based monitoring can help to ensure that the information used to design climate services for flood risk is accurate and relevant to the specific community.

The Importance of Community Participation

Participation is a crucial approach to developing climate services that are effective and relevant to local communities. By involving community members in the design, implementation, and evaluation of climate services, it is possible to ensure that these services are tailored to the specific needs and context of the community. This can lead to more effective warning systems, and more appropriate response and recovery plans. Additionally, community participation can help to increase the acceptance and understanding of climate services, leading to greater adoption and use of these services by the community. Furthermore, it can also help to identify the social and cultural factors that may affect how people respond to climate change, and to design services that are sensitive to these factors.

The Anadia Project Approach

Anadia Project is a training and research project in Niger aiming at contributing to the development of sustainable agriculture, through the adaptation of production systems to climate change, to make them less vulnerable to extreme events, supporting food security. The project strengthened the capacities of different actors at the national and local levels. To achieve the project goal, the research team adopted a multidisciplinary approach and involved participatory activities and the use of local knowledge.

For example, a group of local observers was set up to monitor water bodies, using colour-coded scales installed in the main riverine villages to materialise the hydraulic levels that the river flows can expect, encouraging local monitoring of the flood, providing observations to the platform, and informing downstream villages.

However, the participation extended beyond local observation.

How were the communities involved?

The integration of public participation and local knowledge played a crucial role throughout the entire process of Flood Risk Assessment (FRA).

In the step of hazard characterization, local knowledge was instrumental in determining the critical threshold for daily precipitation levels that lead to pluvial flooding damage. Additionally, the areas that are prone to flooding based on the hydraulic model were verified through the use of a georeferenced and photographed inventory of all assets affected during the 2019 season, which was prepared by a local team in each town. The local knowledge also helped in determining the replacement value of flood-prone assets. Furthermore, during the two public meetings held in each town, the participation of the community enriched the criteria for selecting measures, identified the benefits of treating the risk, and ultimately decided whether to accept or treat the risk.

A focus group with different categories of participants had the goal to define risk reduction measures in each town. Mayors and municipal technicians, community women, and community men and scientists worked together to identify various measures to reduce flood risk. Moreover, the community emphasized that any chosen measures should be:

• widely accepted and understood by the community,
• feasible with local labour and resources,
• implemented through mutual aid,
• require minimal maintenance,
• have a positive impact on the environment
• increase agro-forestry production.

In conclusion

This project is an example of how local and scientific knowledge can be effectively integrated into an under-investigated field. Further studies should also consider policy implications. It is crucial to encourage public participation at all stages of a Flood Risk Assessment, but it is also important to define a legal framework, framed on the specific territorial area, to better manage the whole process.

Read More on the participatory approach adopted in the Anadia Project:

• Maurizio Tiepolo, Sarah Braccio, Edoardo Fiorillo, Andrea Galligari, Gaptia Lawan Katiellou, Giovanni Massazza, Vieri Tarchiani, Participatory risk assessment of pluvial floods in four towns of Niger, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Volume 84, 2023, 103454, ISSN 2212-4209, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103454.
  Internal Link

The post Participation and Local Knowledge for Flood Risk Management in Niger appeared first on climateservices.it CNR-IBE.

An article published in January 2022 by Raju, Boyd, and Otto, begins with an enlightening incipit: “Disasters occur when hazards meet vulnerability”.  

According to United Nations (UN) terminology, Risk is the combination of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Hence the purpose of risk research and analysis is to reduce the impacts of events and save our lives and societies, modifying one of the three components of risk: hazard, exposure and vulnerability. It is acknowledged that an earthquake in the desert is risk zero. But as a matter of fact, risks mainly occur in a social context and are necessarily connected to people’s activities. 

Hence saying disasters occur when hazards meet vulnerability underlines that it is fundamental to develop knowledge and assess risk throughout the disaster life cycle not only as a physical event but also considering its economic and social dimension.

It is nothing new that also risk management studies emphasise the importance of greater integration of disciplines. But it is not a matter of course that researchers from different disciplines compare notes to find ways to cooperate and collaborate operationally. This was the idea that animated the meeting held on 12 December on Flood Risk Assessment and forecasting, organised by CNR-Ibe, where the speakers illustrated and exchanged their approaches, with a special focus on social impact assessment. We hope this seminar represents the first step towards further exchanges and operational ways to integrate the different perspectives that share a common goal: reduce the impact of risks.

The Videos

Keynote Speakers

6 Videos

Vieri Tarchiani - Introduction

11:12

Maurizio Tiepolo

29:46

Antonio Aledo

31:26

Guadalupe Ortiz

26:06

Lauro Rossi

37:05

Discussion

51:07

The Presentations

Maurizio Tiepolo

Antonio Aledo

Guadalupe Ortiz

Lauro Rossi

Maurizio Tiepolo

Antonio Aledo

Guadalupe Ortiz

Lauro Rossi

The Speakers

Antonio Aledo

Full Professor at the University of Alicante (UA). PhD in Sociology and MSc in Anthropology (Louisiana State University) with more than 70 articles and book chapters published. He teaches Environmental Sociology and Sociology of Risk at the UA. His line of research focuses on the development of Social Impact Assessment (SIA) methodologies and social vulnerability analysis applied to megaprojects and natural disasters. He investigated the social impacts of megaprojects such as the expansion of the Panama Canal, a set of dams in the upper Paraná River basin (Brazil) and the Baker River (Chilean Patagonia) or mining projects in the Brazilian Amazon. In the field of natural disasters, he is applying SIA to flood and earthquake hazards. He is the director of the Socioeconomic Observatory of Floods and Droughts at the Institute of Water and Environmental Sciences (UA) and collaborator of the Scientific Division of Environmental Management, Science and Technology, University of Sao Paulo.

Guadalupe Ortiz

PhD in Sociology at University of Alicante (UA) and a MSc in Environmental Management at University of Valencia. She is an Associate Professor in the Department of Sociology I (University of Alicante), deputy director of the Institute of Water and Environmental Sciences, director of the directs Population, Environment and Development research group and deputy director of the Socioeconomic Observatory of Floods and Droughts. She has chaired the Research Committee 21 of Sociology and Environment of the Spanish Federation of Sociology. She is specialised in Environmental Sociology. Her main line of work focuses on the development of methodological tools for the diagnosis and management of socio-environmental problems,
with a recent interest in the impacts of natural disasters, as well as the application of participatory and transdisciplinary approaches to environmental management.

Maurizio Tiepolo

Associate Professor of Urban and Regional Planning at DIST (Dipartimento Interateneo di Scienze, Progetto e Politiche del Territorio) - Politecnico di Torino. He has been studying measures to address flood, drought and warm spell risk in the rural and urban tropics since 2011. He has coordinated several local risk reduction plans. Areas of academic interest are Climate Change Adaptation, Climate Planning, Disaster Risk Reduction, Land policies, Land surface temperature, Land Tenure, Land use/land cover change, Local Development, Regional Planning, Sustainable Development, Urban Planning. He has been scientific responsible of several international projects in Sub-Saharan Africa. His research is interdisciplinary: Agronomy, Geomatics, Hydraulics, Hydrology, and Climatology. The involvement of networks of researchers aims to enrich methods and comparisons. Innovative methods and research findings are then shared through vocational training in Italy and the Global South.

Lauro Rossi

Environmental Engineer with more than 20 years of relevant experience in Disaster Risk Reduction at national and international level, with special focus on flood risk assessment and Early Warning System (EWS). As EWS Program Director, he coordinates CIMA Innovation, Development and Implementation of Early Warning Systems in different contexts and for different hazards (floods, droughts, wildfires). He has a long record of successful implementations of research and operational projects, as well as complex international DRR projects mainly in Africa, Latin America and Caribbean. Consolidated experience in building consensus, partnership and negotiation with governments, UN system and international investment banks for the implementation of projects at regional and country scale. Active participation as invited speaker in international conferences and author of papers in international refereed journals, scientific reports and book chapters.

The post Flood Risk Assessment and Forecasting: the inter-disciplinary dialogue appeared first on climateservices.it CNR-IBE.

“The climate crisis? The Guardian has been investigating it for more than 100 years” by Mark Rice-Oxley and Richard Nelsson, is an interesting article published in The Guardian on 02 October 2022. It highlights how the Guardian and Observer journalists have been writing and publishing articles on climate events and warnings for a hundred years.

Just an example: “The Gulf Stream has changed its course… This change, we are told, has been in operation for two years, and as a consequence, New England has almost forgotten the rigours of winter.” It was reported on 25 January 1890.

Since 1997 after the Kyoto agreement, “The Guardian” has increased its attention to the climate issue. By 2009 the British newspaper hired “climate” reporters and declare the climate issue an editorial priority. In 2019 The Guardian’s Environmental Pledge: “We believe, it’s time to act”, and “We want to play a leading role in reporting on the environmental catastrophe.”, reads Guardian’s pledge, defining a precise and committed editorial line.

There is no doubt that this example is a best practice that other newspapers should follow and further develop. However, it could be the case that other newspapers have a history of climate journalism, albeit less known and perhaps not adequately structured and embedded in a specific editorial policy.

Is neutrality of communication an issue?

The stance taken on the climate and environmental crisis not only by “The Guardian”, but also by the magazine New Scientist and the BBC, opened a debate on the role of journalism in supporting and popularising the climate culture.
More precisely, questions emerged on the neutrality of journalism, or whether communication in any form is neutral.

However, does it make sense to speak of neutrality in journalism and communication? How to do it in practice? Publishing articles that openly take a stand on climate change alongside others that deny it or are sceptical about the responsibility of human activities in climate change? Neutrality could be an issue if there were scientifically based doubts about climate change. It would mean questioning the unequivocal results of decades of climate science. Also, Governments agree that climate science is settled. [B. C. Glavovic et al., 2021]

Is it time to take a stand?

Taking a stand in the face of the climate and environmental crisis means there are no doubts about the state of risk of our planet, and about the fact that the human footprint is increasing its pressure on ecosystems and natural resources. We are experiencing climate emergencies that require urgent actions.

Taking a stand also involves defining a correct vocabulary. Climate change is a well-worn term that could remind the idea the climate has always changed [Morton, 2018], without taking into account the anthropogenic (man-made) nature of climate change. That is why The Guardian’s mission statement emphasises the need for a new vocabulary for the environmental crisis. Because talking about climate change is not the same as talking about climate crisis or global warming.

Then the questions are: Can we still avoid taking a stand? Can we talk about neutrality instead of helping to save the planet? Some scientists choose activism, abandoning the posture of “pure scientists”, disconnected from society and the world of values, interests and politics [Brüggemann et al., 2020]. And journalism? The Guardian’s experience demonstrates that abandoning neutrality and taking a stand can make a difference in supporting the creation of a solid climate culture. The hope is that such an experience will be seminal for other news and media companies.

The post Climate Crisis: not a breaking news for UK journalism appeared first on climateservices.it CNR-IBE.

Data visualization is the graphic representation of data. Data visualization is more than the graphic representation of data. As Edward Tufte, pioneer of data visualization would say: “Those who discover an explanation are often those who construct its representation.”

We can say, without fear of contradiction, that Data Visualization (or Data viz) is a new discipline and field of study that uses charts, maps, diagrams, infographics, icons, and illustrations to create beautiful solutions to make it easier to identify patterns and trends of data sets.
It is art and science, it is creativity and accuracy.

This cutting-edge discipline, constantly evolving and expanding. A great solution to solve information problems in climate science. It is both a technique and a formidable communication language to develop user-centred climate services, web applications and websites with high usability, accessibility and user experience.

We met Moritz Stefaner, a data visualization designer also on science-based and climate services projects, to discover in his own words what is data visualization. This interview is part of the open training course “Climate and risk communication” of the Training Initiative ToPaCS.

The featured image of this post is taken from the Perpetual Plastic Website.  A project by Liina Klauss, Skye Morét and Moritz Stefaner. First prize at the National Geographic Ocean Plastic Innovation Challenge. instagram.com/perpetualplastic/

The post Data Viz and the narrative of data appeared first on climateservices.it CNR-IBE.