Usable, but unused: A critical story of co-producing the UK's Climate Change Risk Assessments. Issue 139 (January 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Porter, James J.; Clark, Caitlin
• Is Part Of: Environmental science & policy. Issue 139(2023)
• Page Start: 83
• Page End: 91
• Publication Date: 2023-01
• Subjects: Use -- Usable -- Climate -- Information -- Adaptation -- Co-production; Environmental policy -- Periodicals; Environmental sciences -- Periodicals; Environnement -- Politique gouvernementale -- Périodiques; Sciences de l'environnement -- Périodiques; Environmental policy; Environmental sciences; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 363.70561
• DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2022.10.018
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1462-9011

Abstract

Abstract: Non-use of climate information is often attributed to scientists failing to understand what decision-makers need. In response, co-production offers one promising method to improve the usability, and therein, use of climate information. Yet it remains unclear to what extent usability and use are linked, or if other factors influence the non-use of climate information. This paper critically examines two efforts to co-produce climate information for UK adaptation decision-making: the first and second cycles of the climate change risk assessment to gather evidence and then inform the national adaptation programme. To do this, a mixed methods approach was used: (i) textual analysis of official Government documents, and (ii) in-depth interviews with key actors. Our research found that the institutional-political context in which climate information is produced and used, played a significant role in defining who the user should be, how the data analysis was performed, and the extent to which that information was used. Just because something is co-produced does not mean it will be usable, nor does something that's usable automatically mean it will be used. Unless new research seeks to better understand how the modes of production (linear vs. co-production) influence the use of climate information, who uses it, and how it's used, questions will remain over whether the right barriers to climate inaction have been tackled. Highlights: Co-production promises to improve the usability and use of climate information. We conducted an interview and document analysis of the UK's climate change risk assessments. Use and usability of climate information differ. More research is needed on the difference co-production makes to use and usability of climate information.