Search results

This review addresses a critical research gap concerning why climate information (CI) is used (or not) and contributes to narrowing the knowledge-action gap to improve climate adaptation. The article reviews research on factors that are endemic to the context of CI use and that can influence whether use happens. It synthesizes factors that promote or impede use at three levels of social aggregation: the micro, meso, and macro levels. The organizing principle of the micro, meso, and macro levels enables a consideration of the nested social layers that comprise the context of CI use. The micro level consists of factors at the smallest level of social aggregation, individuals who use (or do not use) CI. The meso level consists of larger social aggregates, organizations, with leadership, decision-making processes, and technical and human capacity that influence CI use. Finally, the macro level is comprised of the political environment in which individuals and organizations operate, and which may be more or less supportive of CI use. Though the review is focused on the context of water management, the implications are much broader. A conceptual model is introduced to help explain how context shapes CI use. While the interactions between producers and users and the ways in which users see CI influence whether CI use happens, use only happens if elements in the micro, meso, and macro level contexts align to support use. That is, even when the best conditions for interactions between producers and users exist, these interactions alone may be insufficient in a context that stymies CI use, for political reasons or due to organizational dynamics. By attending to context, this new conceptual model shows where and how to strategically invest in supporting CI use.

Abstract
While research focusing on how boundary organizations influence the use of climate information has expanded substantially in the past few decades, there has been relatively less attention to how these organizations innovate and adapt to different environments and users. This paper investigates how one boundary organization, the Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments Center (GLISA), has adapted by creating "boundary chains" to diversify its client base while minimizing transaction costs, increasing scientific knowledge usability, and better meeting client climate information needs. In this approach, boundary organizations connect like links in a chain and together these links span the range between the production of knowledge and its use. Three main chain configurations are identified. In the key chain approach, GLISA has partnered with other organizations in a number of separate projects simultaneously, diversifying its client base without sacrificing customization. In the linked chain approach, GLISA is one of several linked boundary organizations that successively deepen the level of customization to meet particular users' needs. Finally, by partnering with multiple organizations and stakeholder groups in both configurations, GLISA may be laying the groundwork for enhancing their partners' own capacity to make climate-related decisions through a networked chain approach that facilitates cooperation among organizations and groups. Each of these approaches represents an adaptive strategy that both enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of participating boundary organizations' work and improves the provision of climate information that meets users' needs.

AbstractScholarship on climate information use has focused significantly on engagement with practitioners as a means to enhance knowledge use. In principle, working with practitioners to incorporate their knowledge and priorities into the research process should improve information uptake by enhancing accessibility and improving users' perceptions of how well information meets their decision needs, including knowledge credibility, understandability, and fit. Such interactive approaches, however, can entail high costs for participants, especially in terms of financial, human, and time resources. Given the likely need to scale up engagement as demand for climate information increases, it is important to examine whether and to what extent personal interaction is always a necessary condition for increasing information use. In this article, we report the results from two experimental studies using students as subjects to assess how three types of interaction (in-person meeting, live webinar, and self-guided instruction) affect different aspects of climate information usability. Our findings show that while in-person interaction is effective in enhancing understanding of climate knowledge, in-person interaction may not always be necessary, depending on the kinds of information involved and outcomes desired.