The provision and utility of earth science to decision-makers: synthesis and key findings

Quigley, Mark C. and Bennetts, Luke G. and Kuhnert, Petra M. and Durance, Patricia and Lindsay, Mark D. and Pembleton, Keith G. and Roberts, Melanie E. and White, Christopher J. (2019) The provision and utility of earth science to decision-makers: synthesis and key findings. Environment Systems and Decisions, 39 (3). pp. 349-367. ISSN 2194-5403

Abstract

This paper synthesizes important elements from case studies presented in its companion paper (Quigley et al. in Environ Syst Decis, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-019-09728-0) to define mutual and distinct characteristics, and to develop a more holistic understanding of how earth science was used to support diverse examples of decision-making. We identify a suite of 28 different science actions used within the case studies that are classified as pertaining to (i) evidence acquisition and analysis, (ii) provision of science to target audience, or (iii) enhancing future science provision and utility. Sample action pathways provide empirically evidenced, albeit simplified, examples of how scientists may contribute to the progression of science through complex decision-making frameworks. Decision trees with multiple scientific and non-scientific inputs are presented based on empirical evidence and theory to provide scientists and decision-makers with simplified examples of complex multi-step decision-making processes under conditions of risk and uncertainty. Evidence for nonlinear engagement between decision-makers and science providers is presented, including non-traditional approaches such as provision of unsolicited science through the media and stakeholders. Examples of scientifically informed, precautionary decision-making with adaptive capacity, even where economically favourable decision alternatives exist, are provided. We undertake a self-elicitation exercise of case studies to derive values and uncertainties for % scientific agreement amongst utilized inputs and % uptake of potentially relevant and available science. We observe a tendency towards increased scientific uptake with increasing scientific agreement, but this is not ubiquitous; politically affected decisions and/or complex multi-decision scenarios under time pressure complicate this relationship. An increasing need for decision-making expediency that is not met by increased availability of relevant science evidence may rely on expert judgement, based on incomplete knowledge that is manifested as large uncertainties in defining a singular value for scientific agreement and uptake. We encourage scientists to further document their experiences using the science-action classification scheme provided herein to stimulate further comparative analyses of this nature.


Statistics for USQ ePrint 36971
Statistics for this ePrint Item
Item Type: Article (Commonwealth Reporting Category C)
Refereed: Yes
Item Status: Live Archive
Additional Information: Published version cannot be displayed due to copyright restrictions.
Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: Historic - Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences - School of Agricultural, Computational and Environmental Sciences (1 July 2013 - 5 Sept 2019)
Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: Historic - Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences - School of Agricultural, Computational and Environmental Sciences (1 July 2013 - 5 Sept 2019)
Date Deposited: 16 Sep 2019 05:21
Last Modified: 25 Sep 2019 05:07
Uncontrolled Keywords: earth science, policy, decision-making, natural disasters
Fields of Research : 04 Earth Sciences > 0499 Other Earth Sciences > 049999 Earth Sciences not elsewhere classified
Socio-Economic Objective: D Environment > 96 Environment > 9607 Environmental Policy, Legislation and Standards > 960799 Environmental Policy, Legislation and Standards not elsewhere classified
Identification Number or DOI: 10.1007/s10669-019-09737-z
URI: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/id/eprint/36971

Actions (login required)

View Item Archive Repository Staff Only