Suchergebnisse

The main objective of the APPLICATE project is to develop enhanced predictive capacity for weather and climate in the Arctic and beyond, and to determine the influence of Arctic climate change on the Northern Hemisphere. To produce usable and trustworthy predictive information for decision-making, APPLICATE actively engages with stakeholders, including representatives of various economic sectors and local communities. This deliverable describes the different stakeholder interaction activities that have been undertaken in the last 18 months (from May 2018 to October 2019), including the meetings with the APPLICATE User Group, the interactions with stakeholders when attending relevant events, the development of case studies and the participation in the blog Polar Prediction Matters (PPM). The User Group is composed of representatives from all the APPLICATE targeted stakeholder groups1, including Arctic business and governmental stakeholders, local and indigenous communities, NGOs, meteorological and climatological services, the scientific community and business stakeholders from mid-latitudes. The fourth meeting of the APPLICATE User Group was held online in July 2018. The meeting was aimed to discuss the topics that the APPLICATE consortium could tackle and provide expertise and added value for, taking into account all the topics that were identified in the previous User Group meetings. This meeting was preceded by a preparatory meeting between WP7 partners and other scientific partners from the other technical WPs (WP1, WP2, WP3 and WP5). Other chances to interact with stakeholders were provided through attendance to relevant events about the Arctic. WP7 partners attended and participated in various activities in the framework of the China-Nordic Arctic Research Seminars in Tromsø (Norway) in May 2018 the Polar2018 conference in Davos (Switzerland) in June 2018, the Arctic Circle Assembly in Reykjavik (Iceland) in October 2018 and October 2019, the ACI 13th Arctic Shipping Conference in Hamburg (Germany) in ...

The main objective of the APPLICATE project is to develop enhanced predictive capacity for weather and climate in the Arctic and beyond, and to determine the influence of Arctic climate change on the Northern Hemisphere. To produce usable and trustworthy predictive information for decision making, APPLICATE will actively engage with users, including policy makers, businesses and society within and outside the EU. Only by effectively exchanging information with stakeholders and co-developing knowledge, can we assure the stakeholder- relevance of the project results, which can then enhance their capacity to adapt to long-term climate change. The proactive dialogue with users will be performed using modern and interactive user engagement mechanisms that will be developed and maintained throughout the project. This plan presents the user engagement approach that will be applied. It provides a detailed description of the three main user categories defined by the project: key, primary and secondary users. It builds around three main mechanisms of user engagement to be applied in the project: i) User Group involvement ii) Participation in meetings and organization of workshops and iii) User blog, surveys and interviews. In addition, different communication channels that are also being developed as a part of the project will enhance information exchange and knowledge transfer, reaching a broad and diverse group of users.

The visual communication of climate information is one of the cornerstones of climate services. It often requires the translation of multidimensional data to visual channels by combining colors, distances, angles, and glyph sizes. However, visualizations including too many layers of complexity can hinder decision-making processes by limiting the cognitive capacity of users, therefore affecting their attention, recognition, and working memory. Methodologies grounded on the fields of user-centered design, user interaction, and cognitive psychology, which are based on the needs of the users, have a lot to contribute to the climate data visualization field. Here, we apply these methodologies to the redesign of an existing climate service tool tailored to the wind energy sector. We quantify the effect of the redesign on the users' experience performing typical daily tasks, using both quantitative and qualitative indicators that include response time, success ratios, eye-tracking measures, user perceived effort, and comments, among others. Changes in the visual encoding of uncertainty and the use of interactive elements in the redesigned tool reduced the users' response time by half, significantly improved success ratios, and eased decision-making by filtering nonrelevant information. Our results show that the application of user-centered design, interaction, and cognitive aspects to the design of climate information visualizations reduces the cognitive load of users during tasks performance, thus improving user experience. These aspects are key to successfully communicating climate information in a clearer and more accessible way, making it more understandable for both technical and nontechnical audiences. ; The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreements 776787 (S2S4E), 776613 (EUCP), and (ClimatEurope). This work was also supported by the MEDSCOPE project. MEDSCOPE is part of ERA4CS, an ERA-NET initiated by ...

The main objective of the APPLICATE project is to develop enhanced predictive capacity for weather and climate in the Arctic and beyond, and to determine the influence of Arctic climate change on the Northern Hemisphere. To produce usable and trustworthy predictive information for decision making, APPLICATE will actively engage with users, including policy makers, businesses and society within and outside the EU. Only by effectively exchanging information with stakeholders and co-developing knowledge, can we assure the stakeholder-relevance of the project results, which can then enhance their capacity to adapt to long-term climate change. The proactive dialogue with users will be performed using modern and interactive user engagement mechanisms that will be developed and maintained throughout the project. This updated plan describes already applied engagement approaches and activities, as well as those planned for the rest of the project. It provides a detailed description of the three main user categories defined by the project – key, primary and secondary. It builds around three main mechanisms of user engagement to be applied in the project: i) User Group involvement ii) Participation in meetings and organization of workshops, iii) Case studies development iv) User blog and interviews. In order to maximize the projects impact in a meaningful, direct and measurable way, specific users have been and will be targeted and involved through the projects User-Group. Further identification of project relevant users, to be consulted and impacted through case-studies and organised events, will be on going. Project impact on identified specific users will be measured through the stakeholder engagement and collected stakeholder feedback. In addition, different communication channels that are also being developed and maintained as a part of the project, including the project website, social media channels and project dissemination material, will enhance information exchange and knowledge transfer, presenting the first ...

Knowledge of the climate is essential to manage climate-related risks. Underpinning this knowledge is a huge range of climate research and climate service activities. There has been a marked expansion of such activities and while the numerous and diverse funding streams, activities and organizations involved means that climate service development is relatively well resourced in places, there is a risk that the landscape becomes fragmented, duplicative, confusing, and inefficient. To mitigate this, the European Commission established the Climateurope project to bring coordination to Europe's climate-related knowledge base. Climateurope created a managed network to share knowledge, improve synergies and reduce fragmentation among the stakeholders. As the network evolved, we proactively strove for equality, diversity and inclusion, for example for gender, under-represented regions, and under-represented stakeholder groups. Climateurope explored and adopted innovative approaches to engaging the network members, including face-to-face networking events (Festivals), virtual networking events (Webstivals and webinars), use of arts, social media, expert groups, publications, and an active website. The mix and integration of the traditional communications, such as website, publications and expert groups, with more innovative and varied approaches, such as the Festivals, Webstivals, social media and arts, proved popular and successful in making the network active and attractive. We describe how the network and collaboration was established and managed, and we offer some recommendations for others based on our experiences, including consideration of equality, diversity and inclusion, consider strategies for growing, managing and sustaining the network, and consider a mix of virtual and physical networking events. ; This work was funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union: Climateurope - Linking science and society, Project ref. 689029. The views expressed are purely those of the authors who were all involved in the project and may not under any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Thank you to Rob Groenland and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on the paper ; Peer Reviewed ; "Article signat per 18 autors/es: Chris Hewitt, Janette Bessembinder, Mauro Buonocore, Tyrone Dunbar, Natalie Garrett, Lola Kotova, Stacey New, Paula Newton, Rebecca Parfitt, Carlo Buontempo, Francisco Doblas-Reyes, Francesca Guglielmo, Daniela Jacob, Erik Kjellström, Aleksandra Krzic, Helena Martins, Alessia Pietrosanti, Marta Terrado" ; Postprint (published version)

The research into the human health impacts from air pollution has advanced substantially over the last decade; in Europe ∼500 000 premature deaths are attributed annually to air pollution exposure [1], with adverse health effects beginning at much lower concentrations than previously understood [2]. The latest epidemiological evidence is now reflected in the new 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) Air Quality Guidelines (AQGs$^{\textrm{v2021}}$) [3], which represent a major revision over the previous ones set in 2005 (AQGs$^{\textrm{v2005}}$) [4]. Ten new AQGs have been set for the major health-damaging air pollutants, across different averaging times (annual$^{\textrm{(AN)}}$, peak season$^{\textrm{(PS)}}$, 24 h$^{\textrm{(24H)}}$, daily maximum 8 h average$^{\textrm{(8H)}})$, namely: particulate matter (PM$_{2.5}^{\textrm{AN, 24H}}$ and PM$_{10}^{\textrm{AN, 24H}})$, ozone (O$_3^{\textrm{PS, 8H}})$, nitrogen dioxide (NO$_2^{\textrm{AN, 24H}})$, sulphur dioxide (SO$_2^{\textrm{24H}})$ and carbon monoxide (CO$^{\textrm{24H}})$. The AQGs$^{\textrm{v2021}}$ are significantly more stringent, except for a relaxation in SO$_2^{\textrm{24H}}$, and O$_3^{\textrm{8H} }$ staying the same (supplementary table 1 (available online at stacks.iop.org/ERL/17/021002/mmedia)). This article quantifies the increase in non-compliance across all European measurement stations with AQGs$^{\textrm{v2021}}$ compared with AQGs$^{\textrm{v2005}}$, during business-as-usual (BAU) conditions (section 2); evaluates the impact that emission reductions during COVID-19 lockdowns had on non-compliance (section 3); and finally discusses the implications of our findings for any new European Union (EU) standards (section 4). ; This research has received funding from the Agencia Estatal de Investigacion (AEI) (MITIGATE, PID2020-116324RA-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033), European Research Council (#773051, FRAGMENT), and the AXA Research Fund. We also acknowledge Red Temática ACTRIS España (CGL2017-90884-REDT), H2020 ACTRIS IMP (#871115), and PRACE and RES for awarding access to Marenostrum4 Supercomputer based at the Barcelona Supercomputing Center. ; Peer reviewed

British Ecological SocietyAccording to the European Union Water Framework Directive, river basin management plans must include a programme of measures, with a series of management actions aiming to achieve good ecosystem status of all water bodies within the basin. The design and later prioritization of these management actions is, in theory, done through cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), which compares management action costs with expected improvements in ecosystem status. However, such an approach does not consider the effects of management actions on human well-being resulting from changes in the provision of ecosystem services. We propose to complement the current CEA approach with a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) integrating the effects of management actions on the provision of ecosystem services, therefore moving from a single-objective to a multiobjective approach. We propose a flexible methodological framework based on a combination of CEA and CBA that can be easily adapted to different case studies. To test the applicability of our approach, we applied it to an impaired basin, the Llobregat River basin (north-eastern Iberian Peninsula). The analysis considers management actions selected from the programme of measures under implementation: establishment of environmental river flows, improvement of river connectivity, treatment of urban wastewater and reduction in saline pollution; and the effects on a series of ecosystem services: water provisioning, waste treatment and habitat for species. Results revealed that management actions designed to improve ecosystem status do not necessarily improve human well-being through changes in the provision of ecosystem services. The implementation of the CEA and CBA allowed the identification of management actions providing the best trade-offs between improvements of ecosystem status and human well-being. For example, the establishment of environmental river flows in the upper Llobregat River was the management action that maximized the balance between gains in ecosystem status and human well-being. Synthesis and applications. Overall, the combination of cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis supports a more informed and transparent decision-making in the implementation of river basin management plans, better assisting stakeholders to prioritize those management actions providing the optimal win–win results ; This research was supported by the EC 7th Framework Programme (GLOBAQUA; 603629-ENV-2013-6.2.1) and the Juan de la Cierva subprogramme from the MINECO

British Ecological SocietyAccording to the European Union Water Framework Directive, river basin management plans must include a programme of measures, with a series of management actions aiming to achieve good ecosystem status of all water bodies within the basin. The design and later prioritization of these management actions is, in theory, done through cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), which compares management action costs with expected improvements in ecosystem status. However, such an approach does not consider the effects of management actions on human well-being resulting from changes in the provision of ecosystem services. We propose to complement the current CEA approach with a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) integrating the effects of management actions on the provision of ecosystem services, therefore moving from a single-objective to a multiobjective approach. We propose a flexible methodological framework based on a combination of CEA and CBA that can be easily adapted to different case studies. To test the applicability of our approach, we applied it to an impaired basin, the Llobregat River basin (north-eastern Iberian Peninsula). The analysis considers management actions selected from the programme of measures under implementation: establishment of environmental river flows, improvement of river connectivity, treatment of urban wastewater and reduction in saline pollution; and the effects on a series of ecosystem services: water provisioning, waste treatment and habitat for species. Results revealed that management actions designed to improve ecosystem status do not necessarily improve human well-being through changes in the provision of ecosystem services. The implementation of the CEA and CBA allowed the identification of management actions providing the best trade-offs between improvements of ecosystem status and human well-being. For example, the establishment of environmental river flows in the upper Llobregat River was the management action that maximized the balance between gains in ecosystem status and human well-being. Synthesis and applications. Overall, the combination of cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis supports a more informed and transparent decision-making in the implementation of river basin management plans, better assisting stakeholders to prioritize those management actions providing the optimal win–win results ; This research was supported by the EC 7th Framework Programme (GLOBAQUA; 603629-ENV-2013-6.2.1) and the Juan de la Cierva subprogramme from the MINECO

British Ecological SocietyAccording to the European Union Water Framework Directive, river basin management plans must include a programme of measures, with a series of management actions aiming to achieve good ecosystem status of all water bodies within the basin. The design and later prioritization of these management actions is, in theory, done through cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), which compares management action costs with expected improvements in ecosystem status. However, such an approach does not consider the effects of management actions on human well-being resulting from changes in the provision of ecosystem services. We propose to complement the current CEA approach with a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) integrating the effects of management actions on the provision of ecosystem services, therefore moving from a single-objective to a multiobjective approach. We propose a flexible methodological framework based on a combination of CEA and CBA that can be easily adapted to different case studies. To test the applicability of our approach, we applied it to an impaired basin, the Llobregat River basin (north-eastern Iberian Peninsula). The analysis considers management actions selected from the programme of measures under implementation: establishment of environmental river flows, improvement of river connectivity, treatment of urban wastewater and reduction in saline pollution; and the effects on a series of ecosystem services: water provisioning, waste treatment and habitat for species. Results revealed that management actions designed to improve ecosystem status do not necessarily improve human well-being through changes in the provision of ecosystem services. The implementation of the CEA and CBA allowed the identification of management actions providing the best trade-offs between improvements of ecosystem status and human well-being. For example, the establishment of environmental river flows in the upper Llobregat River was the management action that maximized the balance between gains in ...