Cognition, caution, and credibility: the risks of climate forecast application

Abstract

Weather and climate forecasters are now in the business of communicating seasonal climate forecasts to decision-makers. While it seems clear that these forecasts carry a great many potential benefits, it also appears possible that conveying too much information about the forecasts could have the potential to harm people. Based on theories from behavioral economics, we argue that many people are likely to overestimate the potential dangers of forecasts, and to err on the side of communicating too little information. We support this argument with evidence gathered over the last three years in Zimbabwe, in a project designed to help subsistence farmers understand and use seasonal rainfall forecasts.

Seasonal Climate Prediction and Adaptation Using Indigenous Knowledge Systems in Agriculture Systems in Southern Africa: A Review

“…Inaccurate forecasts have been implicated in negative yield impacts and the opportunity costs for uncertain forecast is substantial and compromises profitability (Kolawole et al, 2014;Roudier et al, 2014). Farmers in Zimbabwe, and in eastern Africa, have demonstrated that, with some help, they are able to understand and incorporate probabilistic forecast information into their decision making processes Luseno et al, 2003;Lybbert et al, 2007;Patt, 2001;Suarez & Patt, 2004). Therefore, much more work needs to be done in engaging farmers directly on interpreting seasonal climate forecasts correctly.…”

“…A tripartite arrangement between users, scientists (cross disciplinary) and policy makers is important to create partnerships that maximize use of available climate information through the near-universal use of indigenous climate indicators, and building culturally relevant analogies of decisions under uncertainty into the climate communication process (Kolawole et al, 2014;Ogallo, 2010;Phillips & Orlove, 2004;Sivakumar, 2006;Suarez & Patt, 2004). This can be done through contact workshops, public lectures and through the mass media (Kolawole et al, 2014).…”

Communicating uncertainty to policy makers

“…Often, scientists conduct their analysis at a coarse spatial scale, and participation is the means to obtain the local knowledge necessary to downscale their models. Third, through the participatory process of questions and answers, scientists can learn which parts of their message are difficult to understand, and 240 focus their communication on those points, correcting initial misperceptions and misunderstandings (Suarez and Patt, 2004). Fourth, participation is a way of developing an implicit connection between scientists and decision-makers that is necessary to improve trust in the information .…”

“…This is because while there may not be progress in eliminating the uncertainty, there may be major changes in the estimates of it in the near term, because one or more of the sources of uncertainty are resolved. An example of this was described by Suarez and Patt (2004). They were communicating probabilistic climate forecasts to forecasts, in a year where there was a great deal of uncertainty about the future development of El Niño, the most important predictor of seasonal climate.…”

A coupled human–natural system to assess the operational value of weather and climate services for agriculture

“…In addition, many studies have shown how stakeholders' adoption of weather forecasting is influenced by their social context (e.g. Hansen, 2002;Suarez and Patt, 2004;Crane et al, 2010). Such evidence motivates exploring how users' behavioural factors influence the uptake and the use of W&C services, and suggests the need to quantify the operational value of W&C services and the improvement in the system performance obtained by informing stakeholders' decisions with W&C services (e.g.…”