The sources of uncertainty associated with climate change are very diverse; uncertainty in climate models, impact projections, economic costs and, above all, social behavior. These sources can interact with each other and generate synergistic effects that enhance or minimize them, impacting the predictions made of the evolution of climate change. Therefore, the policy surrounding climate change must be prepared to design risk reduction strategies in permanent conditions of uncertainty, seeking to learn how to manage uncertainty and avoid using it as an excuse for inaction. But, as will be explained below, this is not an easy task, given that not only climatic factors, but also social and economic factors create an extremely complex system around climate change, where uncertainty plays a prominent role.
Uncertainty is first associated with climate models and projections. One of the main challenges of climate change studies is to improve the understanding of climate models and the uncertainty inherent in climate projections. Better understanding of these two factors is necessary to reduce the ambiguity and confusion surrounding projections of future climate that have made effective communication of climate change impacts difficult.
Uncertainty associated with mitigating climate change is also listed. Various sources of uncertainty can be found associated with actions to mitigate climate change, such as those that impact on greenhouse gas emission inventories, or those associated with the use of renewable energies. Ignoring the uncertainties associated with each of the mitigation actions generates uncertain emission reduction calculations, and therefore the impact of the mitigation policies may not be as expected.
Uncertainties related to emissions are intimately linked to social behavior, uncertainty therefore arises from insecurity about how people will react or what they are going to do, which relies on their perception of risk.
Risk is a perception about the possibility of an event happening in the future. It is a form of perception and understanding, this makes it possible for people to differ in the way they see and interpret things. Thus, scientific predictions and models are translated into risk objects such as an evaluation and a perception of an uncertain and intangible reference on which society must decide. The different perceptions mean that it is not possible to assess the risk in a unitary, absolute and irreducible way, resulting in a structural conflict in the centrality of decision-making.
In order to know how the population interprets climatic events and their effects, studies are carried out on social representations, and on the perception of risk according to particular cultural, psychological and contextual dimensions. Studies have come to demonstrate the incompatibility between information and its correct interpretation or acceptance by the population. The importance of these studies is not minimal; since, these should guide the collection of data on local information needs, based on their own assimilation and response to events.
One of the main challenges in managing the risk associated with the impacts of climate change is learning to manage the different sources of uncertainty. Decision-making, both in matters of mitigation and adaptation, must be sensitive to the uncertainty associated with climate change, therefore it is necessary to take care of the quality of both: the decision-making process and the participation of science in this process. For this it is necessary to manage uncertainty, one possible way could be assigning differentiated values to the information that contains a lesser or greater degree of uncertainty and specifying, for each recommendation, the uncertainty on which it is based. This would make it possible to take better decisions, make the process more transparent and improve the understanding and acceptance of the recommendations by the different actors.
In general, public policy for risk management under a climate change scenario must contemplate actions to reduce vulnerability and increase resilience based on public policies of an economic and political nature, contextualized according to the needs and perceptions of each community, given that the effectiveness of actions, will be closely related to the characteristics of each community in particular, such as their sources of information, their own or others’ past experiences, their level of resilience and cultural factors (beliefs, ideologies, customs), all of this must always be done taking into account the central role of uncertainty, managing it in a standardized, transparent and communicable way.
References
- Sluijs, van Der, et. al. (2005). Combining quantitative and qualitative measures of uncertainty in model-based environmental assessment: the NUSAP system. Risk analysis.
- Aykut Stefan, et. al. (2021). The social plausibility assessment framework. Hamburg Climate Futures Outlook.
- Urbina, J. (2006). Dimensiones psicológicas del cambio ambiental global. On: Más allá del cambio climático. Las dimensiones psicosociales del cambio ambiental global. Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT)
Hi Danira, great post and very interesting topic! I’m especially interested in the idea of differing perceptions of risk amongst differing groups, and how cultural, psychological, and contextual factors play an important role in risk perception. I think we don’t talk about risk perception enough, but it is extremely pertinent nowadays given the discussion around things like climate impacts, risks, loss and damage, etc.
I think as a natural scientist one tends to think of risk as a probabilistic and ‘objective’ concept, but in reality there is a huge difference between that understanding of risk and the individual or societal perception of risk which depends on many factors. Since much of the research and discussion on this topic happens in the Global North while the worst impacts of climate change are felt by the marginalized in the Global South, framings of risk used in international studies and reports like the IPCC may be somewhat incompatible with perceptions and beliefs in areas across the world. At the very least, more research into perceptions of climate risk in vulnerable areas is needed, as well as into risk communication strategies.