Analysis of Global Change Assessments Lessons Learned (2007) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Diversity of Assessments and Their Potential Contributions
2 Diversity of Assessments and Their Potential Contributions
Pages 27-38
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 27... ...
These problems stem from the diversity of contexts in which assessments are conducted; the diversity of assessment strategies, which results from the variety of goals and potential contributions; and the fact that assessments are evaluated by multiple actors with distinct perspectives and interests. Consequently, when evaluating the effectiveness of a particular assessment the following
|
From page 28... ...
. While this list is not exhaustive, it captures the most important categories of contributions that are evident in the record of global change assessments of the past 30 years.
|
From page 29... ...
For example, the process assessment of stratospheric ozone assessment conducted under the Montreal Protocol provided evidence that the new policies were effective in reducing negative impacts on the ozone layer. SCIENTIFIC AND POLICY CONTEXTS FOR ASSESSMENTS The context for any global change assessment has two primary components: (1)
|
From page 30... ...
Once relevant decisions have been identified and have entered the policy agenda, the focus on a global change issue depends on whose agenda it is and how much attention the issue is being given. Often the attention is 1Rather than established orders, policies are changing phenomena.
|
From page 31... ...
For example, there are many variants in the institutional setting of assessments, some of which can be identified according to their degree of official connection to international policy-making bodies: • Assessments conducted under the auspices of an official policymaking body (e.g., World Meteorological Organization stratospheric ozone assessments) ; • Assessments sponsored by international or intergovernmental bodies that do not have direct decision-making authority and those sponsored by multiple national bodies (e.g., IPCC assessments)
|
From page 32... ...
Integrated assessments attempt to incorporate all three. Process Assessments: Understanding What Global Changes Are Occurring and What Is Causing Them The goal of process assessments is to summarize and synthesize scientific knowledge of global change processes, rather than their impacts or responses to global change.
|
From page 33... ...
Climate Change Science Program Synthesis and AssessmentFigure 2.1on Temperature Trends in the Lower Product 1.1 Atmosphere; IPCC WG I, II, and III = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Groups I, II, and Circles redrawn to same size III; MA = Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; NACCI = U.S. National Assessment of Climate Change Impacts; Ozone EEAP = Environmental Effects Assessment Panel of the stratospheric ozone assessments; Ozone SAP = Scientific Assessment Panel of the stratospheric ozone assessments; Ozone TEAP = Technology and Economical Affects Panel of the stratospheric ozone assessments.
|
From page 34... ...
mate change assessments and of stratospheric ozone assessments indicates, impact assessments often occur once a global change phenomenon has been validated by a process assessment and they often draw on the outputs of the process assessment. The most prominent examples are the IPCC WG II and Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA)
|
From page 35... ...
While a process assessment can identify and characterize an anthropogenic global change, without sound analysis of impacts, decision makers cannot make an informed decision about the importance of responding. Impact assessments answer the "so what?
|
From page 36... ...
A logical sequence would suggest that a process assessment should be completed before impact and response assessments so that the latter can benefit from the most updated understanding of the processes. In turn, the impact and especially the response assessments can inform assumptions about human activities that should be deployed in subsequent process assessments.
|
From page 37... ...
For example, broadening stakeholder participation in an assessment can increase legitimacy but poses risks to credibility to the extent that these participants are perceived as lacking expert standing, thereby, diminishing the assessment's reliance on scientific expertise. In Chapter 3, the committee discusses in greater detail how these mostly internal design choices can be approached to optimally balance all three attributes in achieving an effective assessment.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.