National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×

Chapter 2
INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS

This chapter and the next two pull together material from the project’s first and last (capstone) workshops that identified likely interactions among climate, engineered systems, and societies and the range of available responses. Project co-principal investigator Juan Lucena of the division of Liberal Arts and International Studies at the Colorado School of Mines (CSM), moderated the opening session, in which speakers described science perspectives, business and engineering perspectives, and public perspectives. Project team members Joseph Herkert at the Arizona State University School of Applied Arts and Sciences and Jason Delborne, CSM Liberal Arts and International Studies, provided overarching observations about the presentations, focusing on their implications for building a network and improving educational efforts and outcomes.5

Science Perspectives

James McCarthy, professor of biological oceanography at Harvard University, reviewed the evolution of climate science from 1980 to 2010, demonstrating that although the evidence for global warming has been increasing for many years (Figure 2-1), it has not translated into effective action. In the 1980s several workshops sponsored by the National Research Council (NRC) indicated growing concern; from those discussions came the creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was established in June 1992, at the UN Conference and Development in Rio de Janeiro, where President George H.W. Bush signed the treaty on behalf of the United States; in October 1992 the US Senate ratified it. By 1994 enough nations had ratified it for the treaty to come into force.

image

Figure 2-1

The UN Framework Convention calls for the signatory nations to work together to reduce CO2 emissions, but the emissions rate began to soar. Between 1995 and 2000, the evidence of unusual weather patterns and extreme events was consistent with theory on what to expect in a warmer world. But factors that promote increases in emissions—particularly from developing countries, which produce items consumed

_______________

5The agenda with links to slides from the speakers’ presentations at the first workshop is available at http://www.nae.edu/Projects/CEES/57196/35146/60202/47874.aspx. The appendixes to this report provide the three workshop agendas and list the project investigators and staff.

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×

by developed nations—continue to overcome concerns about the problems associated with those emissions because developed countries benefit greatly from this production.

McCarthy reported that much of what concerns people is the extremes: unusually cold periods become very rare, hot periods become hotter, and there are new record highs. When extreme highs become common, the coping range of humans (and other animals) is exceeded. McCarthy cited the heat waves of Paris in August 2003 and Russia in summer 2010, which caused some 15,000 and 55,000 deaths, respectively.

Complex parts of the climate are difficult to explain and are often seen as contradictions. People may point to the extreme cold in winter 2012 as a counterexample to global warming, but it is not in fact unrelated to the warming in the Arctic. New winter records for low ice cover in the Arctic create more open water and change the polar circulation so that cold air spills out of the Arctic and into some parts of southern Canada and the northern United States.

Social uncertainty—about what we humans will do, the choices we will make, and how they will affect whether we will have a low-, medium-, or high-emission future—further complicates the problem. President George W. Bush indicated in 2000 that he would sign the Kyoto protocol, but then changed his mind. None of the bills introduced in the US House and Senate has been enacted and the prospects are bleak. Pew public opinion polls show that the issue is a partisan one, and that people with a higher level of education are more likely to believe that human activity has caused global warming.

McCarthy concluded that there is absolutely no reason to believe that more definitive data and numbers or better explanations will lead people to agree on the severity of the problem or how to address it. But engineers can help point the way forward, by improving engineered systems that address climate as well.

Business and Engineering Perspectives

Jay Golden, director of the Center for Sustainability and Commerce at Duke University, posited that thinking about engineering and climate change requires consideration of manufactured goods and the expansion of the middle class: increases in population, urbanization, and the middle class go hand in hand with increased demands for services and engineered, manufactured products. He challenged a commonly accepted perspective that limits thinking about climate change to its impact on the built environment and said it is essential to recognize the influence of institutional drivers, private as well as public, on growing consumption.

Looking at the built environment together with the goods used in it (both products and services), transportation, and individual and organizational behaviors focuses attention on economic gains and savings from energy efficiency. This composite perspective also reveals the impact of climate change on the availability of resources, such as the bio-based products that will be needed to feed a much larger middle class living in cities; Golden calls this perspective sociometabolic consumption.6 Engineers will have to work with industry, government, and nonprofit organizations to address these problems, he said.

_______________

6See http://www.uni-klu.ac.at/socec/inhalt/1928.htm. Some systems engineering programs focused on energy take as premises that socio-economic systems depend on a continuous throughput of materials and energy for their reproduction and maintenance like those of the metabolisms of biological organisms. An objective of these programs, such as the one identified in this footnote, can be to describe and analyse socio-metabolic patterns at different scales and identify points of intervention for guiding consumption in a more sustainable direction.

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×

The next two generations will see the equivalent of about 1,000 megacities (i.e., with more than 10 million inhabitants), and the associated alterations occurring in the canopy (or the atmosphere in, above, and around them) from the physical engineered infrastructure and designs of urban dwellings in these cities will send a strong climate signal.

Dense urban environments also create issues of social justice, such as heat exhaustion and morbidity from heat-related illnesses, inequities in access to energy-efficient devices, and increases in crime and human health morbidity and mortality. How should these factors be incorporated in the education of future engineers?

Golden indicated that recent study of climate change finds that manufactured goods during their full life cycle contributed 50 percent of the problem. So focusing on built environments leaves out much of relevance in engineering fields such as mechanical, electrical, transportation, mining, and industrial. Results from these fields often add to sociometabolic consumption, and can exacerbate contributions from engineering to climate change. Changing this role requires understanding how the needs of clients influence the focus and outputs of engineering schools and knowing what is asked and expected of engineers when they leave school.

The product life cycle is a related engineering perspective that needs broadening, particularly to include attention to human behavior. Knowledge of the impacts of manufactured goods requires consideration of consumer use. If Apple computers are designed to be highly energy efficient but consumers leave them on all night, there may be no energy savings. Understanding the complexities of sociometabolic consumption calls for broader, more inclusive perspectives from engineers.

For a simple example of how consumer use affects climate change, Golden used the illustration of doing laundry. Simple design decisions have lowered the energy use associated with washing clothes: cold water washing and horizontal loading equipment can make significant inroads on the need for coal-fired power plants. Many people still believe that the biggest impact is from heating water, but mechanical drying has far greater impacts, particularly in the United States, where very little laundry is hung to dry.

Other important drivers are regulations and business-to-business initiatives; the latter are the largest global driver, through the Sustainability Consortium. Golden cited Walmart, which told its vendors that it will make purchases based on the full life cycle of the product, from manufacture to consumer use and postconsumer disposition. Companies such as Procter & Gamble and Unilever, with 30 percent of revenues tied to Walmart, and business associations with multinational members pay attention to such announcements. Thus retailers, manufacturers, and suppliers will have to be transparent as their products, including life cycle impacts, are audited.

Golden concluded by identifying other positive initiatives. One is open collaboration, such as Nike’s work with others to make a new technology freely available; while another individual or company can’t profit from that use, it can improve it and make a profit on the improvement. He noted the models at his university of a certificate program in engineered systems and sustainability, and sustainable energy fellowships linking theoretical with hands-on experience and examination of the political, economic, and social realities underlying sociotechnical change.

Public Perspectives

Ann Bostrom, dean of research and professor at the University of Washington School of Public Affairs, addressed three issues associated with public trust and engagement: (1) engineering risk assessments and engineering expertise; (2) lay risk perceptions and how they contrast with those of engineers; and (3) steps to better decisions, which involve engaging stakeholders.

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×

Stereotypes about engineers being highly numerate and technically minded are borne out by some research showing that they do, in fact, prefer accuracy and lots of technical detail, she said. Lay people, on the other hand, have problems understanding probabilities and tend to make affective evaluations rather than numerical comparisons, using feeling, a rapid and automatic response, to assess the positive or negative quality of a stimulus. Everybody does this, but those who are numerate might check the details or do the calculations and then respond differently.

Decades of research on trust have led to several major models in the field. One takes a twofold approach to study how people decide whether to cooperate. First is social trust, where people look at morality or values information, including social and cultural similarities; if this information matches their values, the match engenders social trust in an interpersonal situation. Second, people evaluate information based on performance—their observations of what’s happened, competence, and so on (Figure 2-2).

image

Figure 2-2

Whatever the technical information, however, people, even experts, will in most contexts turn to the affective information to decide on trustworthiness, and will be insensitive to the probabilities. So in efforts to address climate change, if people need to engage or cooperate, affect will trump numbers. Similarly, unlike technical risk assessments, lay risk assessments tend not to consider statistics and to compress probabilities, seeing lower probabilities as higher and higher as lower. They pay attention to different information, attending to and remembering problems based on their cognitive limitations and what’s salient at the moment. Views depend on perceived threat and the perceived efficacy of actions to diminish it, attention, and other factors.

Furthermore, research on public opinions indicates a marked difference between measures along a scale of egalitarian to hierarchical and individualistic to communitarian. Asked about risk from global warming, people with individualistic and hierarchical values think it’s substantially lower than do those with high egalitarian and communitarian scores. Some people contend, said Bostrom, that these differences underlie political differences in responses to climate change.

Experts must be aware of public processes and values if they want to assist in solving problems associated with climate and engineered systems. Bostrom and other researchers have developed mental models of how people think about hazardous processes and the systems such processes interact with, and how they understand causal processes. People tend to think of causal processes using metaphor and analogy, so they are heavily influenced by how the problem is framed and the analogies used. These results have been

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×

replicated nationally, with findings of both misconceptions and complex understanding about climate change mechanisms and solutions.

Despite these differences in understanding and perspective, there is considerable evidence that lay participation can produce better decision making. For example, members of local publics may have relevant expertise. There are several approaches to participative decision making but in all cases the first thing to remember is that affect trumps performance information. Further, it should be admitted that much important information about hazard-associated deaths, expenses, displacement, distribution of risk and benefits, is disputed; that there are methodological and ethical challenges to figuring out what people value and what should dominate in decision-making efforts; and that these are further complicated by uncertainty. Facilitated discussions of engineers with other parties can help address these issues.

Bostrom presented a “choice architecture” (or “nudges”) for useful guidance in decision making:

  • Incentives for people to feel they are getting something for their choice
  • Understanding how people see things
  • Defaults: make sure the “do nothing” route is one of the best
  • Give feedback: investigate rejected options and experiment with them
  • Expect error: humans make mistakes, and well-designed systems allow for this
  • Structure complex choices: if it’s difficult, break it down into easier chunks

In the question and answer period, Bostrom expanded the concept of moral information as social information about, basically, whether a person is “good” or “bad.” Emphasizing shared values can help persuade people at least to consider what you’re saying. She thought the use of cases was a good strategy for climate change education for engineers, but that findings on the effects of values on perceptions and choices of experts and nonexperts alike should inform the general understanding of engineers and nonengineers as well as engineering thought about designing, implementing, and assessing systems. Another important focus should be on the effectiveness of facilitated dialogue and decision engagement strategies.

Remarks on the Presentations

Delborne highlighted some session ideas that he believed provided useful information for the project. McCarthy’s presentation demonstrated that increased knowledge and certainty needn’t translate into action. How uncertainty is applied can have significant ramifications, as in the use of a smaller number for sea level rise. How engineers deal with uncertainty needs to be examined. Also relevant is the mismatch between scientific confidence in climate change and that in the media and public discourse, as is the question of which groups of citizens engineers and policymakers listen to.

Golden’s talk was thought-provoking, Delborne said, about how the problem of climate change is defined. Focusing on cities as a built environment that experiences climate change in a more extreme way can motivate engineers; the challenge is to expand the network of those involved beyond civil and environmental engineers to perhaps mechanical engineers and others. What interventions would work to educate these other groups of engineers? Does bringing a broader variety of engineers into the network help or does it create different challenges?

Bostrom’s remarks raised the question for Delborne of what cooperation the project aims to achieve. There’s a big difference between getting public cooperation to follow expert advice, cooperation between experts and the public to make decisions together, and cooperation based on a more systematic and deliberative democratic process. It is also necessary to recognize the tension between lay and expert perspectives: people in general offer confused interpretations of technical information, whereas engineers

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×

have confidence that people know a lot and that participatory decision making is good, he said. Will people who cannot communicate well be discounted? There is value in the participatory process and in dialogue among experts, engineers, scientists, and the public, but those interactions can also give way to negative judgments from the public about engineers and from engineers about the public. Delborne concluded that it may be necessary to create a network that spans expert and lay communities, to pay attention to how they perceive each other and what kind of trust they build and how.

Herkert reiterated the point that engineers are not monolithic in their thinking or positions; like any group, they have a lot of commonalities and differences. He considered the three issues that are the focus of this project—ideas about enhancing the network, educational reforms, and the sociotechnical systems that comprise the interactions among climate, engineered systems, and society. First, he identified two takeaway messages for enhancing the network. One is to make sure it includes people with expertise who are also expert communicators; the other is to expand the notion of engineered systems, as suggested by Golden, to include manufacturing and manufactured products to include all engineers, regardless of academic discipline.

For educational reform, Herkert noted that Golden’s talk indicates the need for more of a systems approach in engineering; some fields are embracing this approach quite readily while others are slower. Bostrom’s presentation raised issues to be considered in communication between engineers and nonengineers. The results from research on risk perception, he said, may be hard for engineers to understand, but such understanding is critically important to the necessary dialogue between the two communities.

Last, the notion of sociotechnical systems is difficult to convey to engineers, and the project will have to address that difficulty. Herkert cited the Golden talk as a good example of how to convey the notion to engineers.

Further Perspectives on Interactions: The National Climate Assessment, Regional Impacts of Climate Change, and Infrastructure

Four talks at the capstone workshop focused on the findings of the National Climate Assessment, the implications of regional climate change given high climate variability, and strengths and weaknesses in interconnected infrastructures.7

Kathy Jacobs, assistant director for climate adaptation and assessment, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, opened with a presentation titled “Engineering, Adaptation, and the National Climate Assessment.” She discussed the challenges of climate change for engineered systems, the recent draft National Climate Assessment (ncadac.globalchange.gov), the role of ecosystem services and ecosystem-based approaches in engineering, the role of engineering in adaptation and resilience, and the importance of sustained assessment.

She made the following broad suggestions for (re)framing the role of engineering:

  • Make sure you are solving the right problem.
  • Engage a broad range of stakeholders and decision makers in collaborative, participatory processes to focus on solutions.
  • Leverage existing systems, institutions, partnerships, and networks to build on existing capacity.

_______________

7Video and slides from the workshop are available at www.regonline.com/builder/site/tab2.aspx?Event.

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
  • Understand regional culture and its influence in decision making. Identify and engage trusted intermediaries who can assist with coordination.
  • Advance coordination and evaluation processes based on shared learning and joint problem solving.

Moving from the national to the regional level, Daniel R. Cayan, researcher, Climate Atmospheric Science and Physical Oceanography (CASPO), Scripps Institution of Oceanography, spoke on “Regional Climate Change on Top of Already High Climate Variability.” Using California as an example, he showed the implications of climate change for increases in days of extreme heat, numbers of forest fires, coastal flooding, and other untoward weather events. He concluded that

  • Warming is already under way and projected to get worse.
  • Along with warmer mean temperatures, extremes will intensify—heat waves will become hotter, longer, and occupy a broader season.
  • Recent IPCC model projections for precipitation are scattered, but several simulations show moderate drying in the Southwest and increases in precipitation across the northern tier of the United States.
  • Wildfire could become a greater threat.
  • Climate warming projections, combined with recent global sea level rise (SLR) estimates, suggest increases along the West Coast sea levels of 0.5m to more than 1.5m by 2100.
  • Tides, weather, and short period climate (such as increasing runoff from “warm storms” and decreased snowpack) will exacerbate SLR impacts.
  • To plan and prepare for impacts, knowledge of regional and local details of climate, natural, and human systems matter greatly. Vulnerability assessments and downscaling are crucial.

The next two speakers focused on infrastructure. Thomas Wilbanks, corporate research fellow, Climate Change Science Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, talked about “Climate Change and the Resilience of Interconnected Infrastructures,” and Gerald Galloway, Glen L. Martin Institute Professor of Engineering, University of Maryland, gave the lunchtime address on “Climate Change, Engineering, Disasters, and Risk: It’s Time to Do Something!”

Wilbanks pointed out that many consequences of climate change involve interactions among various kinds of built infrastructures and environments. Urban areas often hold special interest for cross-sectoral attention because their infrastructures are integrated (and because that is where most people live and vote, and where the financial and media centers are, for example). Critical cross-sectoral interactions are also issues at the regional (e.g., electricity infrastructures and communication infrastructures; transportation and waste disposal infrastructures) and national (national security) levels.

Risks of disruptive impact can be substantially reduced, he explained, by developing and implementing appropriate adaptation strategies based on information such as standards, codes, certification programs, and other practices that set rules for infrastructure; partnerships between the public and private sector; special attention to infrastructure that is near the end of its lifetime or performing poorly; and leadership and effective governance. Other elements of adaptation strategies often include the bundling of climate change responses with other development and sustainability issues, attention to financing, and efforts to spur innovation. Signs of progress include a number of bottom-up initiatives by US cities and attention to adaptation research needs for infrastructures.

Galloway identified the big picture in which scientists and engineers must operate today. The traditional approach assumed little change in climate and human behavior, operated within a narrow future, and stayed inside disciplinary stovepipes. Today’s approaches require struggling with hundreds of possible

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×

climate and anthropogenic-driven scenarios, shared responsibilities, and adaptive, complementary efforts. He used a series of examples, as recent as Superstorm Sandy, to make this point.

Determination of risks and what to do about them requires many different people and entities, including scientists and engineers and their organizations, to assume responsibility. Risk is complex, it changes over time, people don’t know they are at risk, and those responsible for communicating about it are not doing so effectively, he said. Structural and nonstructural interventions, including policy changes, need consideration. He contrasted the lack of direct US policy about risk with that of the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The UK in 2005 issued guidance stating that the government will act proportionately and consistently in dealing with risks to the public, basing all decisions about risks on what best serves the public interest, with actions to be taken proportionate to the level of protection needed and targeted to the risk.8 The Royal Netherlands Embassy in Washington DC issued a statement on September 16, 2008 indicating that the government had established an independent committee to issue advice as to how to improve the flood protection levels of all diked areas by a factor of 10 before 2050.

In Summary

Sessions in the first and capstone workshops of this Climate Change Educational Partnership Phase I project focused on examining the interactions between the phenomena from which the project took its name - “Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society.” The presentations and discussions summarized here illuminated the nature and complexity of climate, engineered systems, and society as a sociotechnical system and discussed their implications for enhancing the network and educational reforms. The next chapter summarizes material from workshop sessions on interventions intended to address these complex phenomena.

_______________

82005. HM Treasury. Managing Risks to the Public: Appraisal Guidance.

Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 12
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"2 INTERACTIONS: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS." National Academy of Engineering. 2014. The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18957.
×
Page 15
Next: 3 INTERVENTIONS: EXAMINING THE RANGE OF SOCIOTECHNICAL RESPONSES »
The Climate Change Educational Partnership: Climate Change, Engineered Systems, and Society: A Report of Three Workshops Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $39.00 Buy Ebook | $31.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Societies develop engineered systems to address or mediate climate-related problems, such as drought, sea-level rise or wildfire control; the mediation involves public trust, public engagement, and governance. In these efforts, societies also decide - intentionally or implicitly - questions of justice and sustainability, such as what areas will receive mediation measures, what types of measures will be used, and what levels and kinds of local impacts are tolerated.

In September 2010, the Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society at the National Academy of Engineering began working with four other partners on a Climate Change Educational Partnership Phase I planning grant from the National Science Foundation. The project focused on defining and characterizing the societal and pedagogical challenges posed by the interactions of climate change, engineered systems and society, and identifying the educational efforts that a network could use to enable engineers, teachers, students, policymakers, and the public to meet the challenges. The project also aimed to build awareness of the complexities among a diverse set of communities affected by climate change and engineered systems and to engage the communities in addressing these challenges.

The Climate Change Educational Partnership is the summary of three workshops convened over the course of the grant on the interactions of climate change with engineered systems in society and the educational efforts needed to address them. The first workshop provided the partners with an introduction to the varied social and technical dimensions found in the relationships among climate, engineered systems, and society. The second workshop built on the common language developed in the first. It allowed the partners to expand involvement in the project to include representatives from community and tribal colleges, professional societies and business. It examined the opportunities and challenges for formal and informal education, particularly in engineering classrooms and science museums, to prepare students and citizens to address these issues. The third workshop allowed the partners to broaden further the discussion and the audience. It solicited participation from government officials, Native American tribal representatives, professional society leaders, as well as educators, artists, scientists, and engineers who are developing programs that can manage change and educate students and citizens in ways that foster their leadership skills. The Climate Change Educational Partnership will be a useful resource to engineers, educators, corporate leaders, local and regional officials, members of professional societies, and others in their efforts to understand and address the challenges of climate change and its societal impacts.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!