Browsing by Author "Harrison SE"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Differences in perceived sources of uncertainty in natural hazards science advice: lessons for cross-disciplinary communication
    (Frontiers Media S.A., 2024-04-04) Doyle EEH; Thompson J; Hill SR; Williams M; Paton D; Harrison SE; Bostrom A; Becker JS; Tagliacozzo S
    Introduction: We conducted mental model interviews in Aotearoa NZ to understand perspectives of uncertainty associated with natural hazards science. Such science contains many layers of interacting uncertainties, and varied understandings about what these are and where they come from creates communication challenges, impacting the trust in, and use of, science. To improve effective communication, it is thus crucial to understand the many diverse perspectives of scientific uncertainty. Methods: Participants included hazard scientists (n = 11, e.g., geophysical, social, and other sciences), professionals with some scientific training (n = 10, e.g., planners, policy analysts, emergency managers), and lay public participants with no advanced training in science (n = 10, e.g., journalism, history, administration, art, or other domains). We present a comparative analysis of the mental model maps produced by participants, considering individuals’ levels of training and expertise in, and experience of, science. Results: A qualitative comparison identified increasing map organization with science literacy, suggesting greater science training in, experience with, or expertise in, science results in a more organized and structured mental model of uncertainty. There were also language differences, with lay public participants focused more on perceptions of control and safety, while scientists focused on formal models of risk and likelihood. Discussion: These findings are presented to enhance hazard, risk, and science communication. It is important to also identify ways to understand the tacit knowledge individuals already hold which may influence their interpretation of a message. The interview methodology we present here could also be adapted to understand different perspectives in participatory and co-development research.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Eliciting mental models of science and risk for disaster communication: A scoping review of methodologies
    (Elsevier Ltd, 2022-07-01) Doyle EEH; Harrison SE; Hill SR; Williams M; Paton D; Bostrom A
    We present a scoping review of methods used to elicit individuals' mental models of science or risk. Developing a shared understanding of the science related to risk is crucial for diverse individuals to collaboratively manage disaster consequences. Mental models, or people's psychological representation of how the ‘world works’, present a valuable tool to achieve this. Potential applications range from developing effective risk communication for use in short-warning situations to community co-development of future communication protocols for the co-management of risk. A diverse range of tools, in diverse fields, have thus been developed to elicit these mental models. Forty-four articles were selected via inclusion criteria from 561 found through a systematic search. We identified a wide range of direct and indirect elicitation techniques (concept, cognitive, flow, information world, knowledge, mind, and fuzzy cognitive maps, and decision influence diagrams) and interview-based techniques. Many used multiple elicitation techniques such as free-drawing, interviews, free-listing, sorting tasks, attitudinal surveys, photograph elicitation, metaphor analysis, and mapping software. We identify several challenges when designing elicitation methods, including researcher influence, the importance of external visualization, a lack of evaluation, the role of ‘experts’, and ethical considerations due to the influence of the process itself. We present a preliminary typology for elicitation and analysis and suggest future research should explore methods to assess the evolution of mental models to understand how conceptualisations change through time, experience, or public education programs. These lessons have the potential to benefit both science and disaster risk communication activities, given best practice calls for mutually constructed understanding.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Nurturing partnerships to support data access for impact forecasts and warnings: Theoretical integration and synthesis
    (Elsevier B.V., 2024-04-15) Harrison SE; Potter SH; Prasanna R; Doyle EEH; Johnston D
    This paper presents a synthesis and theoretical integration of findings from a research project that explored the data needs and sources for implementing impact forecasts and warnings for hydrometeorological hazards. Impact forecasts and warnings (IFW) have received global attention in recent years as they offer a novel way of improving the communication of hazards and risks. The fundamental idea behind IFWs is to enable warning services to meaningfully communicate the anticipated outcomes, consequences, or impacts of the hazard interacting with society or the environment by incorporating knowledge about the underlying and dynamic exposure and vulnerability of people and assets. One key question for IFW implementation is about data needs and sources to inform IFWs.Using the Grounded Theory Methodology, we address the question “How can partnerships and collaboration better facilitate the collection, creation, and access to hazard, impact, vulnerability, and exposure data for IFWs?” Our findings point to partnerships and collaboration as a necessary strategy for implementing IFWs. Implementation requires accessing various types and sources of hazard, impact, vulnerability, and exposure data to assess and communicate the potential impacts of hydrometeorological hazards. Partnerships and collaboration facilitate the sharing of and access to required data and knowledge. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations to increase interagency communication and partnerships for IFWs and disaster risk reduction, such as making cohabitation arrangements between agencies, running joint training scenarios, and encouraging meteorological services and emergency responders to co-define tailored warning thresholds.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ‘Sharing is caring’: A socio-technical analysis of the sharing and governing of hydrometeorological hazard, impact, vulnerability, and exposure data in Aotearoa New Zealand
    (Elsevier Ltd, 2022-01) Harrison SE; Potter SH; Prasanna R; Doyle EEH; Johnston D
    There has been a growing recognition of the need to collect disaster and risk data over the last two decades. Accordingly, better collection and management of disaster data was identified as a priority of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. The introduction and implementation of Impact Forecasts and Warnings (IFWs) have further highlighted this need to collect and access hazard, impact, vulnerability, and exposure (HIVE) data. However, challenges have been met with reporting and using disaster data, which have resulted in an identified need to establish principles for data collection, recording, reporting, exchange/sharing, and comparability. This introduces the concept of data governance and management for disaster data, particularly with regards to data custodianship, stewardship, and sharing. Using Grounded Theory, a series of interviews were conducted with users and creators of HIVE data to develop further understanding around managing and accessing it for severe weather hazards in New Zealand. A socio-technical lens guided the analysis to identify the organisational and technical intervening conditions and action/interaction strategies for accessing and sharing HIVE data in NZ. Findings indicated that there is a need to establish data governance principles for HIVE data in New Zealand. An additional need was identified for nurturing partnerships to continue building trust between stakeholders for sharing data. Furthermore, integration challenges continue to interfere with the use of various sources of HIVE data for effective risk and impact assessments for IFWs and beyond. Systematic and standardised data collection approaches using GIS-based tools can support integration.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ‘Where oh where is the data?‘: Identifying data sources for hydrometeorological impact forecasts and warnings in Aotearoa New Zealand
    (Elsevier B.V, 2021-12) Harrison SE; Potter SH; Prasanna R; Doyle EEH; Johnston D
    Early Warning Systems are a key component to building preparedness and response capacities to hydrometeorological hazards that continue to affect people worldwide. Notable historic events have revealed gaps in current hazard-based warning systems. Impact Forecasts and Warnings (IFWs) have been proposed to fill these communication gaps by re-centring the warning thresholds and language around the consequences, or impacts, of the hazard(s), rather than just the physical characteristics. However, research has shown that implementing IFWs requires not just hazard data, but also data on impacts, vulnerability, and exposure to understand the risk of impacts. Using Grounded Theory Methodology, we conducted a series of interviews with users and creators of hazard, impact, vulnerability, and exposure (HIVE) data to identify data sources and understand how these data are collected and created to support the implementation of IFWs. We focus the study on the New Zealand context to support the country's efforts towards implementing IFWs. Our findings indicate that many sources for HIVE data exist that are collected for other uses (such as for disaster/emergency response efforts, and for research) and have relevant applications for IFWs. Our findings further suggest that priorities, motivation, and interest within organisations influence how well data is collected. Moreover, agencies tend to prefer official data, but official data has limitations that unofficial data may address, such as timeliness. To that end, a tension exists between the timeliness and trustworthiness of data needed for emergency response and warnings.