7

Examples of Research Agenda Components

Attendees participated in breakout groups to discuss elements related to a research agenda on systemic risk assessment. Participants rotated through four themed groups, with each informed by previous group discussions. The four themes were (1) inter/transdisciplinarity, (2) modeling and methodologies, (3) data and information integration, and (4) communication and decision making. The groups were separated by virtual and in-person participation.

INTERDISCIPLINARITY

Participants discussed various examples of critical research questions that would likely benefit from interdisciplinary approaches. These included studying the health effects of extreme heat, gaining a better understanding of energy systems transitions, examining climate-induced migration, assessing the impacts of increasing global conflict, and exploring mechanisms of local, regional, and global adaptation and the potential for maladaptation.

Another group of participants discussed some of the challenges that can impede effective collaboration across disciplines and sectors on crosscutting issues. Some highlighted the role of academic silos as a significant barrier. Similarly, several participants discussed the difficulties of training the next generation in interdisciplinary work while considering disciplinary needs and the job market. One participant noted the importance of fostering openness to work across disciplines early in one’s career and empowering graduate students and postdoctoral scholars to work creatively and learn from other disciplines (e.g., data and methods). Another barrier mentioned

by a few participants was the benefit of ensuring all voices are heard and included early in the process. One group discussed how well-endowed institutions may overshadow smaller ones. Last, a few participants cited the rigidity in funding as a barrier, with one noting that proposals submitted to interdisciplinary calls are often reviewed by disciplinary experts.

Participants also discussed opportunities to overcome some of the barriers. Many ideas were raised, including encouraging leading journals within disciplines to publish more interdisciplinary researchers, offering incentives in funding mechanisms, and learning from other successful interdisciplinary programs (e.g., the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Joint Program, the Program on Coupled Human and Earth Systems, and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis). One participant from a small island nation suggested examining small systems to learn how they understand complexities across all sectors.

Last, participants discussed potential incentives or funding mechanisms to promote and sustain interdisciplinary research. One suggested building bridges across different programs and funding agencies (e.g., National Science Foundation). Several emphasized the importance of funding and providing training for researchers to collaborate with community partners and practitioners. Some suggested planning grants to diversify participants and bringing in more researchers who may challenge conventional paradigms. Another highlighted the importance of strong leadership that can encourage interdisciplinary research.

MODELING

Participants discussed the importance of clearly defining the purpose and goals of modeling exercises, with input from relevant experts, as an initial step before selecting specific models. In discussing barriers and challenges, several participants noted that incorporating expertise beyond climate scientists and economists could help overcome limitations. These experts could include computer scientists, data analysts, and experts in community participation. Additionally, some participants highlighted the importance of rigorously incorporating qualitative information, not just quantitative data. Incentives within academic disciplines that prevent collaboration and open sharing of models were noted as another challenge.

Another group explored potential solutions and conceptual frameworks. Some participants highlighted narrative storylines as a powerful tool for envisioning risk scenarios before formal modeling. The availability of granular spatial data on both climate and economic factors was noted as important for models to provide useful insights. Additionally, a complex systems approach was suggested to build resilience rather than solely predicting isolated impacts.

Regarding stakeholder engagement, participants stressed the centrality of ethical considerations and human well-being, suggesting a shift away from the monetization of impacts. They also encouraged an open-source approach to modeling to ensure accessibility and avoid the limitations of proprietary models.

Overall, the discussions covered examples of key considerations around defining goals, incorporating diverse expertise, using qualitative information, breaking down disciplinary barriers, adopting a systems approach, and prioritizing accessibility and ethics when developing models to assess systemic climate risk.

DATA AND INFORMATION

The discussions delved into the interconnected nature of data, collaboration, and funding to better model and assess systemic risks. By addressing data challenges, fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, and securing adequate resources, researchers can better understand, communicate, and mitigate the complex risks posed by systemic threats. Many challenges and considerations were discussed, including the complexities of tracking changing response functions and impact distributions, particularly in the context of transition risks. One participant highlighted the importance of adaptable methodologies and models capable of capturing dynamic shifts in risk profiles. Others stressed the importance of clarifying goals and questions for effective collaboration, recognizing that different research objectives may require distinct expertise and approaches.

Several participants emphasized an interest in improved data quality and accessibility, including not only identifying the specific types of data to be used but also ensuring that they are readily available for analysis. Some noted challenges related to access to government and proprietary data, documentation, and usability of existing datasets. Several also highlighted an opportunity for enhanced data collection in marginalized communities and developing countries where data gaps are often more pronounced. Additionally, some recognized the importance of standardizing and validating private-sector data to address selection bias and improve its utility for research and decision making.

Participants also discussed the limitations and opportunities for transdisciplinary collaboration, with many highlighting the importance of broadening engagement beyond climate. They discussed the benefit of networking opportunities and platforms for interdisciplinary exchange for fostering collaboration and knowledge sharing. By bringing together diverse expertise, a few participants noted, researchers can gain deeper insights into the multifaceted nature of systemic risks and develop more robust mitigation and adaptation strategies.

Last, another group discussed the importance of adequate funding for advancing research to comprehensively model and assess systemic risks. This includes funding for data collection efforts, particularly in underserved communities, and resources for maintaining data systems and supporting transdisciplinary collaboration. Others noted that funding is important to improve communication efforts to ensure that research findings are effectively disseminated to policy makers, stakeholders, and the public.

COMMUNICATION AND DECISION MAKING

Participants considered the complexities of communication and collaboration between researchers studying systemic risk assessment and policy makers tasked with implementing relevant policies. The groups discussed several challenges with effective communication. One of the primary challenges was the sheer volume and diversity of information, making it difficult to distill key insights and coherently present them. Participants noted the importance of striking a balance in communicating both the immediate and long-term risks associated with systemic issues and the challenge of building trust in the information, especially given the inherent uncertainties. Another challenge was the academic disincentives around publishing. For example, one participant remarked that it is difficult for climate economists or climate scientists to publish in one of the top five economic journals, resulting in potentially limited publications and therefore difficulty in securing funding.

Participants discussed strategies for effective communication, including the benefit of avoiding technical jargon and presenting information in ways that are accessible and easily understandable to policy makers and other stakeholders. Additionally, they emphasized the importance of timely information dissemination, drawing parallels to the concept of nutritional labeling as a model for clear and concise communication. Some highlighted that communication efforts could focus on not only highlighting risks but also presenting the potential benefits of proposed actions, thus providing a more comprehensive view for decision makers.

In terms of bridging the gap between researchers and policy makers, discussions centered around the common disparities in language, priorities, and cultures. It was noted that researchers may face challenges in having their work recognized and valued within the policy sphere, and policy makers may struggle to fully grasp the complexities of research. To overcome these barriers, some participants suggested involving translational agents, such as think tanks and nongovernmental organizations, to facilitate communication and collaboration. They suggested leveraging existing frameworks, such as national climate assessments, and exploring innovative approaches, such as scenario exercises, to foster greater understanding and cooperation.

Overall, the discussions underscored the critical importance of effective communication, collaboration, and stakeholder engagement in understanding systemic risks and translating research findings into actionable policy initiatives. Several participants emphasized the importance of overcoming communication barriers and fostering better collaboration for informed, impactful decisions to mitigate systemic risks and promote resilience in the face of uncertainty.

This page intentionally left blank.