The sustainable science-based management of natural resources requires knowledge exchange between scientists and environmental decision-makers; however, evidence suggests that information flow is inhibited by a range of barriers. To date, our understanding of the range and importance of factors limiting knowledge exchange between scientists and decision-makers is based primarily on the perceptions of decision-makers, while the perceptions of scientists have been largely overlooked. This study addresses this knowledge gap by quantitatively assessing the perceptions of scientists, represented by a sample of 78 Australian marine scientists, regarding (i) the role and importance of engaging with environmental decision-makers on a personal level, (ii) the role and importance of engaging with environmental decision-makers at the institutional level, (iii) current barriers to engaging with environmental decision-makers and (iv) options for overcoming barriers to engaging with environmental decision-makers. Survey results suggest that Australian marine scientists feel that they have an obligation to engage decision-makers in their science, and that engaging with and communicating to environmental decision-makers is important on a personal level. This study also identifies a range of barriers that impede engagement activities, including inadequate measures of science impact that do not account for engagement activities, a lack of organisational support for engagement activities, insufficient time to conduct engagement activities in addition to other responsibilities and a lack of funding to support engagement activities. To overcome these barriers, participants identified the need for institutional innovation by research institutions, research funders and decision-making agencies alike to promote a culture whereby knowledge exchange activities are legitimised as core business for research scientists, and recognised and rewarded appropriately. Although difficulties exist in implementing such institutional innovations, doing so will improve two-way knowledge exchange among scientists and decision-makers and improve the likely success of environmental management. 相似文献
Energy and climate policies may have significant economy-wide impacts, which are regularly assessed based on quantitative energy-environment-economy models. These tend to vary in their conclusions on the scale and direction of the likely macroeconomic impacts of a low-carbon transition. This paper traces the characteristic discrepancies in models’ outcomes to their origins in different macro-economic theories, most importantly their treatment of technological innovation and finance. We comprehensively analyse the relevant branches of macro-innovation theory and group them into two classes: ‘Equilibrium’ and ‘Non-equilibrium’. While both approaches are rigorous and self-consistent, they frequently yield opposite conclusions for the economic impacts of low-carbon policies. We show that model outcomes are mainly determined by their representations of monetary and finance dimensions, and their interactions with investment, innovation and technological change. Improving these in all modelling approaches is crucial for strengthening the evidence base for policy making and gaining a more consistent picture of the macroeconomic impacts of achieving emissions reductions objectives. The paper contributes towards the ongoing effort of enhancing the transparency and understanding of sophisticated model mechanisms applied to energy and climate policy analysis. It helps tackle the overall ‘black box’ critique, much-cited in policy circles and elsewhere.
Key policy insights
Quantitative models commissioned by policy-makers to assess the macroeconomic impacts of climate policy generate contradictory outcomes and interpretations.
The source of the differences in model outcomes originates primarily from assumptions on the workings of the financial sector and the nature of money, and of how these interact with processes of low-carbon energy innovation and technological change.
Representations of innovation and technological change are incomplete in energy-economy-environment models, leading to limitations in the assessment of the impacts of climate-related policies.
All modelling studies should state clearly their underpinning theoretical school and their treatment of finance and innovation.
A strong recommendation is given for modellers of energy-economy systems to improve their representations of money and finance.
The existence of outliers can seriously influence the analysis of variational data assimilation. Quality control allows us to effectively eliminate or absorb these outliers to produce better analysis fields. In particular, variational quality control(VarQC) can process gray zone outliers and is thus broadly used in variational data assimilation systems. In this study,governing equations are derived for two VarQC algorithms that utilize different contaminated Gaussian distributions(CGDs): Gaussian plus flat distribution and Huber norm distribution. As such, these VarQC algorithms can handle outliers that have non-Gaussian innovations. Then, these VarQC algorithms are implemented in the Global/Regional Assimilation and PrEdiction System(GRAPES) model-level three-dimensional variational data assimilation(m3 DVAR) system. Tests using artificial observations indicate that the VarQC method using the Huber distribution has stronger robustness for including outliers to improve posterior analysis than the VarQC method using the Gaussian plus flat distribution. Furthermore,real observation experiments show that the distribution of observation analysis weights conform well with theory,indicating that the application of VarQC is effective in the GRAPES m3 DVAR system. Subsequent case study and longperiod data assimilation experiments show that the spatial distribution and amplitude of the observation analysis weights are related to the analysis increments of the mass field(geopotential height and temperature). Compared to the control experiment, VarQC experiments have noticeably better posterior mass fields. Finally, the VarQC method using the Huber distribution is superior to the VarQC method using the Gaussian plus flat distribution, especially at the middle and lower levels. 相似文献