Anne-Maree Dowd

Climate change is the least of my worries:Stress limitations on adaptive capacity

The wine industry in southern Australia faces potential threats from climate change. This article examines how grape growers in this region perceive and prioritize climate change adaptation as an issue for their industry. Analysis of a survey of 50 growers reveals themes contributing to stress and worry overshadow planning for climate change. Growers are constrained by current economic, social and environmental stresses, not climate change. We relate these findings and the literature on stress to the adaptive capacity and general wellbeing of individual farmers. Projected future climate change means stress in the farming community is likely to worsen and practitioners working with farmers need to recognize the complex causes of stress, in addition to the practical need to facilitate climate change adaptation. A useful approach is to understand both the types and causes of stress, and the way individuals cope.

CCS in the media: an analysis of international coverage

Internationally, the level of public awareness of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) technology remains low. The mainstream media have a salient influence in shaping the debate on CCSs implementation and its risks. This paper presents the results of analysis of print media coverage of CCS worldwide between August 2009 and June 2010. A total of 1138 articles from the Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum were reviewed and analysed. The majority of these articles were balanced or neutral in tone and lacking in technical detail. Fifteen key themes were identified. Two of these emerged the most frequently across all sources: CCS pilot and demonstration projects, and funding issues. This suggests a pattern of media curiosity over how financial support for CCS is provided and what results are occurring at pilot and demonstration efforts. Cross-regional key risks included: Time, cost, and implementation issues; technical validity; and storage capacity issues.

ISRIA statement: ten-point guidelines for an effective process of research impact assessment

As governments, funding agencies and research organisations worldwide seek to maximise both the financial and non-financial returns on investment in research, the way the research process is organised and funded is becoming increasingly under scrutiny. There are growing demands and aspirations to measure research impact (beyond academic publications), to understand how science works, and to optimise its societal and economic impact. In response, a multidisciplinary practice called research impact assessment is rapidly developing. Given that the practice is still in its formative stage, systematised recommendations or accepted standards for practitioners (such as funders and those responsible for managing research projects) across countries or disciplines to guide research impact assessment are not yet available.In this statement, we propose initial guidelines for a rigorous and effective process of research impact assessment applicable to all research disciplines and oriented towards practice. This statement systematises expert knowledge and practitioner experience from designing and delivering the International School on Research Impact Assessment (ISRIA). It brings together insights from over 450 experts and practitioners from 34 countries, who participated in the school during its 5-year run (from 2013 to 2017) and shares a set of core values from the school’s learning programme. These insights are distilled into ten-point guidelines, which relate to (1) context, (2) purpose, (3) stakeholders’ needs, (4) stakeholder engagement, (5) conceptual frameworks, (6) methods and data sources, (7) indicators and metrics, (8) ethics and conflicts of interest, (9) communication, and (10) community of practice.The guidelines can help practitioners improve and standardise the process of research impact assessment, but they are by no means exhaustive and require evaluation and continuous improvement. The prima facie effectiveness of the guidelines is based on the systematised expert and practitioner knowledge of the school’s faculty and participants derived from their practical experience and research evidence. The current knowledge base has gaps in terms of the geographical and scientific discipline as well as stakeholder coverage and representation. The guidelines can be further strengthened through evaluation and continuous improvement by the global research impact assessment community.

Urban sustainability – a segmentation study of Greater Brisbane, Australia

Setting universal goals for sustainability is problematic and may hinder the adoption of sustainable pathways as different sectors of society often have differing opinions on not just what sustainability means for them, but also what is of priority to them. This paper tests a set of psychographic, behavioural, lifestyle and social identities to segment the public on sustainability. We evaluate general knowledge, apply social-choice tools to identify public priorities, and then apply segmentation to reveal broad strata of community profiles around these choices. We discuss our findings in the context of moving beyond knowledge on sustainability and general public choices, to more nuanced messaging and engagement that respects differences in sustainability orientations. We suggest that by focusing on what matters most for different segments of society, there is potential to design effective processes to engage with people and acquire better ownership of sustainability.