Editing IPCC:AR6/WGI/Chapter-10 (section)

==== 10.5.2.2 Developing Climate Information Conditioned by Values of Different Actors and Communities ====

<div id="h3-48-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

Developing climate information relevant to user needs can be influenced by the explicit and implicit values of all parties: those constructing the information, those communicating the information, those receiving the information, and, critically, those who construct the problem statement being addressed. A discussion of how values in the scientific community shape climate research appears in [[IPCC:Wg1:Chapter:Chapter-1#1.2.3.2|Section 1.2.3.2]] . The influence of values need not be a source of bias or distortion; it is sometimes appropriate and beneficial: critical scrutiny from a diverse range of value-governing perspectives may uncover and challenge biases and omissions in the information that might otherwise go unrecognized ( [[#Longino--2004|Longino, 2004]] ). Dialogue among all parties in a culturally, socially, and economically heterogeneous society is therefore important for recognizing and reconciling value differences to best yield information that is salient, relevant and avoids ambiguity, most notably when informing the complexity of risks and resilience for human systems and ecosystems in developing nations (e.g., [[#Baztan--2017|Baztan et al., 2017]] ).

Thus, a challenge with constructing climate information for users, especially about impactful change, is that producing the information may need to involve people with a variety of backgrounds, who have different sets of experiences, capabilities, and values. The information thus would need to accommodate and be relevant to a range of different ways of viewing the problem ( [[#Sarewitz--2004|Sarewitz, 2004]] ; [[#Rosenzweig--2013|Rosenzweig and Neofotis, 2013]] ; [[#Gorddard--2016|Gorddard et al., 2016]] ). Failure to recognize the variety of people using the climate information can make it ineffective, even if the source data on which it is based is of the highest quality, and may create a danger of maladaptation.

A substantial body of evidence shows that the receptivity of individuals to climate information is strongly conditioned by motivated reasoning ( [[#Hart--2012|Hart and Nisbet, 2012]] ; [[#Kahan--2012|Kahan, 2012]] , 2013), wherein a person’s reception of climate information is influenced by the values of the community with which the person identifies. Adherence to a community’s values forms part of an individual’s social identity ( [[#Hart--2012|Hart and Nisbet, 2012]] ). Individuals thus frame their analysis and understanding of climate information in the context of cultural values espoused by their community ( [[#Hart--2012|Hart and Nisbet, 2012]] ; [[#Kahan--2012|Kahan, 2012]] , 2013; [[#Campbell--2014|Campbell and Kay, 2014]] ; [[#Bessette--2017|Bessette et al., 2017]] ; [[#Tschakert--2017|Tschakert et al., 2017]] ; [[#Vezér--2018|Vezér et al., 2018]] ). Successful framing of climate information products thus seeks to identify common ground with users, taking account of their values and interests.

Given the relevance of both context and values, the effectiveness of climate information can increase if developed in partnership with the target communities (Figure 10.17; [[#Tschakert--2016|Tschakert et al., 2016]] ). Such an approach can inspire trust among all parties and at the same time promote a co-production process ( [[#Cash--2003|Cash et al., 2003]] ). Recipients of information have the greatest trust when the communicator is perceived as understanding their context and sharing their values and identity ( [[#Corner--2014|Corner et al., 2014]] ). As a consequence, developing mental models informed by user values can help with understanding complex climate models and their outcomes ( [[#Bessette--2017|Bessette et al., 2017]] ).

<div id="_idContainer050" class="Basic-Text-Frame"></div>

[[File:7e2a8db5005a7b53ce95baff79bb7660 IPCC_AR6_WGI_Figure_10_17.png]]

'''Figure 1''' '''0.17 |''' '''Effective regional climate information requires shared development of actionable information that engages all parties involved and the values that guide their engagement.''' Participants in the development of climate information come from varying perspectives, based in part on their professions and communities. Each of the three broad categories shown in the Venn diagram (Users, Producers, Scientists) is not a homogenous group, and often has a diversity of perspectives, values and interests among its members. The subheadings in each category are illustrative and not all-inclusive. The arrows connecting those categories represent the distillation process of providing context and sharing climate relevant information. The arrows that point toward the centre represent the distillation of climate information that involves all three categories.

The importance of a co-production process does not preclude the climate-research community from taking steps to develop and convey relevant information on its own. Indeed, communicating expert consensus about contested scientific issues is beneficial ( [[#Goldberg--2019|Goldberg et al., 2019]] ). Climate services ( [[#10.5.4|Section 10.5.4]] ), in particular, can become an effective means for using sources from the climate community and crafting these to be consistent with the needs, interests and values of stakeholder communities. However, simply presenting more information without recognizing user values and the contextual elements listed in [[#10.5.2.1|Section 10.5.2.1]] may be ineffective ( [[#Kahan--2013|Kahan, 2013]] ). An aversion to climate information discordant with one’s pre-existing beliefs can actually become stronger for people who are more scientifically literate: they feel more confident sifting through all sources of information to find support for their positions ( [[#Kahan--2012|Kahan, 2012]] ). A challenge is that if climate information is not framed carefully, recognizing context and user values, it may make the sceptical person less receptive to further information about climate change ( [[#Corner--2012|Corner et al., 2012]] ; [[#Hart--2012|Hart and Nisbet, 2012]] ; [[#Shalev--2015|Shalev, 2015]] ). A further complication is that audiences may view climate change as a problem distant in time and space ( [[#Spence--2012|Spence et al., 2012]] ), too threatening to acknowledge ( [[#Brügger--2015|Brügger et al., 2015]] ; [[#McDonald--2015|McDonald et al., 2015]] ), or too economically challenging to accept ( [[#Bessette--2017|Bessette et al., 2017]] ). Identifying positive outcomes that align with user values, instead of adaptation and mitigation efforts, appears to promote the interest in and the success of climate information ( [[#Bain--2012|Bain et al., 2012]] ).

<div id="10.5.2.3" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="the-roles-of-spatial-and-temporal-resolution-in-relation-to-decision-scale"></span>