Assessing stakeholder climate data needs for farm-level decision-making in the U.S. Corn Belt
-
Published:2023-03-07
Issue:1
Volume:6
Page:27-38
-
ISSN:2569-7110
-
Container-title:Geoscience Communication
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Geosci. Commun.
Author:
Clark Suzanna, Wolfinger J. Felix, Kenney Melissa A.ORCID, Gerst Michael D., Roop Heidi A.
Abstract
Abstract. Across the Midwest region of the United States, agriculturalists
make decisions on a variety of timescales, ranging from daily to weekly,
monthly, and seasonally. Ever-improving forecasts and decision support tools could assist the decision-making process, particularly in the context of a changing and increasingly variable climate. To be usable, however, the
information produced by these forecasts and tools should be salient,
credible, legitimate, and iterative – qualities which are achieved through
deliberate co-production with stakeholders. This study uses a document
analysis approach to explore the climate information needs and priorities of stakeholders in the U.S. Corn Belt. Through the analysis of 50 documents, we find that stakeholders are primarily concerned with practical and tactical decision-making, including from whom they obtain their information, the application of information to agricultural, water, and risk management, and desired economic outcomes. The information that stakeholders desire is less focused on social issues, environmental issues, or long-term climate resilience. These results can inform the development of future decision support tools, identify known gaps in climate information services to reduce stakeholder fatigue, and serve as an example to scientists trying to understand stakeholder needs in other regions and specialties.
Funder
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Publisher
Copernicus GmbH
Subject
Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous),Communication
Reference56 articles.
1. Andrys, J., Lyons, T. J., and Kala, J.: Multidecadal evaluation of WRF
downscaling capabilities over Western Australia in simulating rainfall and
temperature extremes, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 54, 370–394,
https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-D-14-0212.1, 2015. 2. Angel, J. R., Widhalm, M., Todey, D., Massey, R., and Biehl, L.: The U2U
Corn Growing Degree Day tool: tracking corn growth across the U.S. Corn
Belt, Clim. Risk Manag., 15, 73–81,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2016.10.002, 2017. 3. Angel, J. R., Swanson, C., Boustead, B. M., Conlon, K., Hall, K. R., Jorns,
J. L., Kunkel, K. E., Lemos, M. C., Lofgren, B. M., Ontl, T., Posey, J.,
Stone, K., Takle, E., and Todey, D.: Midwest, in: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II, edited by: Reidmiller, D. R., Avery, C. W., Easterling, D. R., Kunkel, K. E., Lewis, K. L. M., Maycock, T. K., and Stewart, B. C., U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 872–940, https://doi.org/10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH21, 2018. 4. Arslan, A., Mccarthy, N., Lipper, L., Asfaw, S., Cattaneo, A., and Kokwe,
M.: Climate smart agriculture? Assessing the adaptation implications in
Zambia, J. Agr. Econ., 66, 753–780,
https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12107, 2015. 5. Baker, Z., Ekstrom, J. A., Meagher, K. D., Preston, B. L., and Bedsworth,
L.: The social structure of climate change research and practitioner
engagement: evidence from California, Global Environ. Chang., 63, 102074,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102074, 2020.
|
|