IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v171y2022i1d10.1007_s10584-021-03248-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co-developing the IPCC frequently asked questions as an effective science communication tool

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah L. Connors

    (Université Paris Saclay)

  • Maike Nicolai

    (Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research
    GEOMAR Helmholtz-Centre for Ocean Research)

  • Sophie Berger

    (Université Paris Saclay)

  • Rosalind Pidcock

    (Université Paris Saclay
    Climate Outreach
    Independent Consultant)

  • Melissa Walsh

    (IPCC Secretariat)

  • Nigel Hawtin

    (Nigel Hawtin Information Design)

Abstract

In its Sixth Assessment Report Cycle (AR6), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) aims to strengthen the communication of its products. As the only mandatory part of IPCC reports specifically targeting a lay audience, the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) provide an opportunity for broader communication of key IPCC topics. AR6 has released three Special Reports that include FAQs, varying in number and structure, as well as the approach taken to develop them. Using these Special Report FAQs, in this essay, we take stock of current efforts to co-develop IPCC FAQs and provide recommendations to strengthen the impact of these highly useful yet currently under-utilised resources. Building on evidence from a user survey, text analysis and social media statistics, we find that bringing together IPCC authors and communication specialists to jointly develop the text and graphics increases the accessibility and usefulness of the FAQs. Efforts made for informative visuals additionally increase their impact on social media. To maximise the potential and impact of the IPCC FAQs, we recommend involving communication experts from the beginning of the drafting process to share responsibility, which requires sufficient resources to be allocated to the FAQs. We also suggest developing common FAQ guidelines across Working Groups so future assessment reports can ensure all FAQs are an effective and useful tool for IPCC communication. We also hope that other scientific institutions and projects that wish to summarise scientific content for diverse audiences can benefit from our lessons learned.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah L. Connors & Maike Nicolai & Sophie Berger & Rosalind Pidcock & Melissa Walsh & Nigel Hawtin, 2022. "Co-developing the IPCC frequently asked questions as an effective science communication tool," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:171:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-021-03248-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-021-03248-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-021-03248-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-021-03248-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jordan Harold & Irene Lorenzoni & Thomas F. Shipley & Kenny R. Coventry, 2016. "Cognitive and psychological science insights to improve climate change data visualization," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(12), pages 1080-1089, December.
    2. Ralf Barkemeyer & Suraje Dessai & Beatriz Monge-Sanz & Barbara Gabriella Renzi & Giulio Napolitano, 2016. "Linguistic analysis of IPCC summaries for policymakers and associated coverage," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(3), pages 311-316, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arjan Wardekker & Susanne Lorenz, 2019. "The visual framing of climate change impacts and adaptation in the IPCC assessment reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 273-292, September.
    2. Jordan Harold & Irene Lorenzoni & Thomas F. Shipley & Kenny R. Coventry, 2020. "Communication of IPCC visuals: IPCC authors’ views and assessments of visual complexity," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 255-270, January.
    3. Jonathan Lynn & Nina Peeva, 2021. "Communications in the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report cycle," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-10, November.
    4. Melissa A. Kenney & Anthony C. Janetos, 2020. "National indicators of climate changes, impacts, and vulnerability," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(4), pages 1695-1704, December.
    5. Mary Sanford & James Painter & Taha Yasseri & Jamie Lorimer, 2021. "Controversy around climate change reports: a case study of Twitter responses to the 2019 IPCC report on land," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-25, August.
    6. Michael D. Gerst & Melissa A. Kenney & Irina Feygina, 2021. "Improving the usability of climate indicator visualizations through diagnostic design principles," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-22, June.
    7. Claudia Matus & Pascale Bussenius & Pablo Herraz & Valentina Riberi & Manuel Prieto, 2021. "Nature Is for Trees, Culture Is for Humans: A Critical Reading of the IPCC Report," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-9, October.
    8. Astrid Kause & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Fai Fung & Andrea Taylor & Jason Lowe, 2020. "Visualizations of Projected Rainfall Change in the United Kingdom: An Interview Study about User Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, April.
    9. Joseph Daron & Susanne Lorenz & Andrea Taylor & Suraje Dessai, 2021. "Communicating future climate projections of precipitation change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-20, May.
    10. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Meredith T. Niles & Jeroen A. Veraart & Saskia E. Werners & Fiona C. Korporaal & Bob C. Mulder, 2020. "Communicating Climate Change Risk: A Content Analysis of IPCC’s Summary for Policymakers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, June.
    11. Marta Terrado & Luz Calvo & Isadora Christel, 2022. "Towards more effective visualisations in climate services: good practices and recommendations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-26, May.
    12. Melissa A. Kenney & Anthony C. Janetos & Michael D. Gerst, 2020. "A framework for national climate indicators," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(4), pages 1705-1718, December.
    13. Brück, Maria & Abson, David J. & Fischer, Joern & Schultner, Jannik, 2022. "Broadening the scope of ecosystem services research: Disaggregation as a powerful concept for sustainable natural resource management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    14. Guofeng Wang & Rui Shi & Wei Cheng & Lihua Gao & Xiankai Huang, 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis for Carbon Neutrality with Hotspots, Frontiers, and Emerging Trends between 1991 and 2022," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-23, January.
    15. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew Dugan, 2022. "On the differential correlates of climate change concerns and severe weather concerns: evidence from the World Risk Poll," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-24, April.
    16. Angela Morelli & Tom Gabriel Johansen & Rosalind Pidcock & Jordan Harold & Anna Pirani & Melissa Gomis & Irene Lorenzoni & Eamon Haughey & Kenny Coventry, 2021. "Co-designing engaging and accessible data visualisations: a case study of the IPCC reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-11, October.
    17. Emma Frances Bloomfield & Chris Manktelow, 2021. "Climate communication and storytelling," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-7, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:171:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-021-03248-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.