Abstract. There remains a gap between the production of scientifically robust forecasts and the translation of these forecasts into useful information such as daily “bulletins” for decision-makers in early warning systems. There is significant published literature on best practice in communicating risk information but very little to guide and provide advice on the process of how these bulletins have been, or should be, developed. This paper reviews two case studies where bulletins were developed for national and district-level government agencies and humanitarian responders: daily reports in response to cyclones Idai and Kenneth in Mozambique and prototype landslide forecast bulletins in the Nilgiris and Darjeeling districts of India. Primary data were collected from producers and intermediaries of the bulletins via interview, and secondary data were analysed on iterative changes in the bulletin development, minutes from internal discussions, and feedback from users to extract learning on both the content and process of developing the bulletins. There were significant similarities in the type of content included in the bulletins, such as the layout, choice of words, and use of visualisation that was consistent with published best practices. Both case studies experienced challenges dealing with uncertainty, complexity, and whether to include advice. There were also similarities in the processes and approaches taken to develop the bulletins. Both case studies took an iterative approach, developed feedback mechanisms, benefitted from experienced multidisciplinary teams, and emphasised the need for strong inter-relationships and the importance and value of preparedness and protocols. A major challenge was the difficulty in balancing science capabilities, including issues related to data scarcity, with user needs, which did not become significantly easier to deal with given more time availability. In particular, there were tensions between developing new forecast products that were urgently needed by users against the limited time for testing and refinement of those forecasts and the risk of misinforming decisions due to uncertainty in the information based on limited data. The findings indicate that whilst more research is needed into existing or best practice processes to develop content for forecast bulletins, there is an existing body of experiential and intuitive knowledge and learning that already exists but that is not yet captured in an appropriate format that could be of significant interest and value to those developing forecast information. This paper goes some way to capturing some of the learning from translating scientific forecasts into useful information, in particular on both the content and the process of developing forecast bulletins for decision-making.

<p>There remains a gap between the production of scientifically robust forecasts, and the translation of these forecasts into useful information such as daily “bulletins” for institutional decision-makers in early warning systems. There is significant published literature on best practice to communicate risk information, but very little to guide and provide advice on the process of how these bulletins have been, or should be, developed.</p><p>This presentation will discuss learning and share best practices of developing such early warning bulletins for institutional decision-makers, providing specific case study examples and drawing on wider experience from Practical Action and the Science for Humanitarian Emergencies And Resilience (SHEAR) programme.</p><p>The session will share lessons from two example case studies where bulletins were developed for national and district-level government agencies and humanitarian responders as part of the SHEAR programme: daily reports in response to Cyclones Idai and Kenneth in Mozambique, and prototype landslide forecast bulletins in Nilgiris and Darjeeling Districts of India.</p><p>There were significant similarities in the type of content included in the bulletins, such as the layout, choice of words, and use of visualisation that was consistent with published best practices. Both case studies experienced challenges dealing with uncertainty, complexity, and whether to include advice. There were also similarities in the processes and approaches taken to develop the bulletins. Both case studies took an iterative approach, developed feedback mechanisms, benefitted from experienced multi-disciplinary teams, emphasised the need for strong inter-relationships, and the importance and value of preparedness and protocols.</p><p>A major challenge was the difficulty of balancing science capabilities with user needs, which did not become significantly easier to deal with given more time availability. The findings indicate that whilst more research is needed into existing or best practice processes to develop content for forecast bulletins, there is an existing body of experiential and intuitive knowledge and learning that already exists but is not yet captured in an appropriate format that could be of significant interest and value to those developing and responsible for providing forecast information.</p><p>This presentation will share key learning from translating scientific forecasts into useful information, in particular on both the content and the process of developing forecast bulletins for decision-making.</p>

<p>Resilience to natural hazards varies widely within and between populations. People living in the same area affected by the same hazard event will experience it differently depending on their specific vulnerabilities and capacities. The social inequalities which drive differential resilience vary based on the norms of a given context, but result in resources being harder for some people to reach and use than others.</p><p>These inequalities are often invisible in traditional data, and therefore the needs of the most vulnerable are not addressed in disaster risk reduction and management policy and practice. The impacts of disasters therefore reinforce and worsen existing inequalities as already vulnerable people are left further and further behind.</p><p>This presentation will focus on new learning about the relationship between gender and social vulnerabilities and resilience to natural hazard-related disasters in a range of contexts with three key aims:</p><ul><li>To share key learning about differential disaster resilience and requirements of early warning and disaster risk management implementation</li> <li>To explore key tools which have been piloted, tested, and developed to improve knowledge and understanding of resilience</li> <li>To discuss effective and practical ways to apply these tools going forward in research, policy, and practice.</li> </ul><p>The presentation will draw on experiences and findings from projects conducted in the Philippines, Bangladesh, Malawi, Nepal, and Dominica to research gender and social inclusion in relation to early warning systems, disaster preparedness and response, and disaster risk financing.</p><p>The session will examine the drivers of social inequalities and their impacts relating to risk knowledge, monitoring and warning, communication and dissemination, and response capability, sharing examples of the different needs, considerations, and priorities relating to early warning and disaster risk management within communities.</p><p>We’ll then explore approaches to data layering and our Missing Voices methodology as key tools to identify and understand factors, including intersectional factors, influencing social and economic resilience to natural hazards.</p>

Abstract. There remains a gap between the production of scientifically robust forecasts, and the translation of these forecasts into useful information such as daily "bulletins" for decision-makers in early warning systems. There is significant published literature on best practice to communicate risk information, but very little to guide and provide advice on the process of how these bulletins have been, or should be, developed. This paper reviews two case studies where bulletins were developed for national and district-level government agencies and humanitarian responders: daily reports in response to Cyclones Idai and Kenneth in Mozambique, and prototype landslide forecast bulletins in Nilgiris and Darjeeling Districts of India. Primary data was collected from producers and intermediaries of the bulletins via interview, and secondary data analysed on: iterative changes in the bulletin development; minutes from internal discussions; and feedback from users to extract learning on both the content and process of developing the bulletins. There were significant similarities in the type of content included in the bulletins, such as the layout, choice of words, and use of visualisation that was consistent with published best practices. Both case studies experienced challenges dealing with uncertainty, complexity, and whether to include advice. There were also similarities in the processes and approaches taken to develop the bulletins. Both case studies took an iterative approach, developed feedback mechanisms, benefitted from experienced multi-disciplinary teams, emphasised the need for strong inter-relationships, and the importance and value of preparedness and protocols. A major challenge was the difficulty of balancing science capabilities with user needs, which did not become significantly easier to deal with given more time availability. The findings indicate that whilst more research is needed into existing or best practice processes to develop content for forecast bulletins, there is an existing body of experiential and intuitive knowledge and learning that already exists but is not yet captured in an appropriate format that could be of significant interest and value to those developing forecast information. This paper goes some way to capturing some of the learning from translating scientific forecasts into useful information, in particular on both the content and the process of developing forecast bulletins for decision-making.