USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Science Action”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2026

Debunking the myth of the quintessential resource manager: Precision in actionable science

“Actionable science” is a widely held standard for identifying the merits of natural resources research. Yet, science is often framed as actionable to a vaguely identified quintessential “manager” without defining either the intended manager or use. Generic descriptions lack precision for identifying end users or their needs, limiting methodological rigor in research design and leading to contextual misalignments of outputs with the need they intended to serve. Further, imprecise terminology limits the ability to evaluate impact, replicate efforts, or foster adoption and implementation of findings. This perspective article presents the heuristic of “who, what, when, where, why, how” to help researchers be more precise when describing their actionable science. Through intentional reflection, researchers can move beyond generic framings of “managers” representing monolithic organizations. “Managers” become individuals, with unique responsibilities, functions, worldviews, and levels of authority, all influencing their use of and need for scientific information and data.

Conservation Science and Practice↗
USGS2022

Considering science needs to deliver actionable science

Conservation practitioners, natural resource managers, and environmental stewards often seek out scientific contributions to inform decision-making. This body of science only becomes actionable when motivated by decision makers considering alternative courses of action. Many in the science community equate addressing stakeholder science needs with delivering actionable science. However, not all efforts to address science needs deliver actionable science, suggesting that the synonymous use of these two constructs (delivering actionable science and addressing science needs) is not trivial. This can be the case when such needs are conveyed by people who neglect decision makers responsible for articulating a priority management concern and for specifying how the anticipated scientific information will aid the decision-making process. We argue that the actors responsible for articulating these science needs and the process used to identify them are decisive factors in the ability to deliver actionable science, stressing the importance of examining the provenance and the determination of science needs. Guided by a desire to enhance communication and cross-literacy between scientists and decision makers, we identified categories of actors who may inappropriately declare science needs (e.g., applied scientists with and without regulatory affiliation, external influencers, reluctant decision makers, agents in place of decision makers, and boundary organization representatives). We also emphasize the importance of, and general approach to, undertaking needs assessments or gap analyses as a means to identify priority science needs. We conclude that basic stipulations to legitimize actionable science, such as the declaration of decisions of interest that motivate science needs and using a robust process to identify priority information gaps, are not always satisfied and require verification. To alleviate these shortcomings, we formulated practical suggestions for consideration by applied scientists, decision makers, research funding entities, and boundary organizations to help foster conditions that lead to science output being truly actionable.

Conservation Biology↗
USGS2023

Critical stakeholder engagement: The road to actionable science Is paved with scientists’ good intentions

To help stakeholders such as planners, resource managers, policymakers, and decision makers address environmental challenges in the Anthropocene, scientists are increasingly creating actionable science—science that is useful, usable, and used. Critical physical geography encourages the engagement of stakeholders in the creation of scientific knowledge to conduct actionable science and produce outputs that are directly relevant to stakeholder plans, decisions, or actions. Many scientists, however, lack formal training in how to partner with stakeholders using effective and ethical practices. In this article, we use the core principles for ethical research of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice from the Belmont Report (1979) as a suggested framework to examine the perspectives of stakeholders engaged in climate adaptation science projects. We argue that this framework aligns with the principles of critical physical geography and provides guidance for scientists to make their research more actionable while placing necessary emphasis on ethical considerations. We also challenge scientists to consider the broader ethical implications of engaging with these partners.

Annals of the American Association of Geographers↗
USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment: Invasives topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed six needs (hereinafter “Needs”) identified under the Invasives topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs related to the control of invasive plant species in sagebrush rangelands, with a special emphasis on invasive annual grasses. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (“Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed, or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 198 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Invasives topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: studies of natural and anthropogenic factors influencing the distribution and spread; methods of preventing, eradicating and controlling invasive plant species; development of mapping techniques that provide regularly updated annual grass and fine fuel projections; and assessment of the efficacy of potential cheatgrass biocontrol agents. Needs that were addressed poorly included (1) investigations of livestock grazing as a tool for managing invasive plants and (2) investigations of cheatgrass die-offs and identification and subsequent study of potential biocontrol agents associated with those die-offs. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗
USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment: Restoration topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are substantial management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions, and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed 10 needs (hereinafter “Needs”) identified under the Restoration topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs for improving restoration success in degraded sagebrush rangelands. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (“Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 371 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Restoration topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: the development of methods to improve seeding success of native plants after fire; evaluation of short- and long-term plant responses relative to biotic and abiotic factors following restoration treatments; assessments of long-term effects on ecosystem processes following conifer removal treatments and development of decision support tools to aid in conifer management; determination of the costs of restoration treatments relative to the benefits to sage-grouse occupancy, survival, and populations; and assessments of the factors which contribute to soil degradation and development of soil enhancement methods that enhance seed germination and seedling survival while resisting nonnative plants. Needs that were not addressed well included: the development of methods for the rapid recovery of sagebrush and native herbaceous plants following wildfire and determination of whether treatments benefit sage-grouse and mitigate impacts from fires; determination of thresholds for successful restoration across a range of environmental conditions and development of decision support tools to assist with restoration effectiveness monitoring; and development and evaluation of the utility of seed transfer zones. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗
USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment—Fire topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed eight needs (hereinafter known as “Needs”) identified under the Fire topic in the Plan, defined as any non-structure fire that occurs in vegetation or natural fuels, including wildfires and prescribed fires. The topic outlined research Needs broadly focused on understanding the mechanisms and management of threats posed to the maintenance of large, contiguous sagebrush rangelands by fire. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (‘Next Steps’) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (in other words., addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 156 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Fire topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: studies of relationships between fire and the sagebrush ecosystem (Need 1) investigations of the responses of sage-grouse to burned area characteristics (Need 2); spatial modeling of fire risk (Need 3); studies of the effects of fuels management treatments (Need 4); sagebrush reduction treatments on multiple characteristics of the sagebrush ecosystem (Need 6); and assessments of the role of fire in maintaining healthy sagebrush communities (Need 7). Needs addressed poorly included: assessments of the effects of fuel breaks on sage-grouse (Need 5); and investigations of characteristics associated with the effectiveness of fuel breaks (Need 8). The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗
USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment — Sagebrush and sage-grouse topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western United States. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (Needs) for informing the actions proposed under the 5 topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse, Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed nine needs (hereinafter, “Needs”) identified under the Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs broadly focused on understanding sagebrush rangelands and population dynamics important for the conservation and management of sage-grouse and other sagebrush-reliant wildlife species. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (‘Next Steps’) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (in other words, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 333 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: development of biome-wide mapping techniques that provide regularly updated grassland and shrubland vegetation layers (Need 4); generation of spatially explicit greater sage-grouse habitat suitability and population models (Need 5); identification of greater sage-grouse seasonal habitats (Need 6); identification of thresholds for the extent of threats, especially conifer expansion, above which greater sage-grouse and other sagebrush-obligate species cannot persist (Need 8); and studies of sagebrush community dynamics as those relate to management and restoration of sagebrush rangelands (Need 9). Needs addressed poorly included: investigations of factors conducive and restrictive to greater sage-grouse movement patterns and population connectivity (Need 1); investigations of livestock and other large ungulate (for example, feral horse) grazing effects on greater sage-grouse populations and habitats (Need 2); identification of thresholds of disturbance (especially renewable energy developments) below which greater sage-grouse and other sagebrush reliant species are not impacted (Need 3); and studies of habitat relationships for sagebrush-reliant species other than greater sage-grouse, songbirds, and small mammals (Need 7). The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan along with other science strategies.

western United States↗
USGS2023

Integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan completion assessment— Climate and weather topic, 2015–20

Loss and degradation of sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) rangelands due to an accelerated invasive annual grass-wildfire cycle and other stressors are significant management, conservation, and economic issues in the western U.S. These sagebrush rangelands comprise a unique biome spanning 11 states, support over 350 wildlife species, and provide important ecosystem services that include stabilizing the economies of western communities. Impacts to sagebrush ecosystem processes over large areas due to the annual grass-wildfire cycle necessitated the development of a coordinated, science-based strategy for improving efforts to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of sagebrush rangelands, which was framed in 2015 under the Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (IRFMS). Central to this effort was the development of an Actionable Science Plan (Plan) that identified 37 priority science needs (hereinafter, “Needs”) for informing the actions proposed under the five topics (Fire, Invasives, Restoration, Sagebrush and Sage-Grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ), Climate and Weather) that were part of the collective focus of the IRFMS. Notable keys to this effort were identification of the Needs co-produced by managers and researchers, and a focus on resulting science being “actionable.” Substantial investments aimed at fulfilling the Needs identified in the Plan have been made since its release in 2016. While the state of the science has advanced considerably, the extent to which knowledge gaps remain relative to identified Needs is relatively unknown. Moreover, new Needs have likely emerged since the original strategy as results from actionable science reveal new questions and possible (yet untested) solutions. A quantifiable assessment of the progress made on the original science Needs can identify unresolved gaps and new information that can help inform prioritization of future research efforts. This report details a systematic literature review that evaluated how well peer-reviewed journal articles and formal technical reports published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, addressed four Needs identified under the Climate and Weather topic in the Plan. The topic outlined research Needs broadly focused on understanding the potential effects of climate change on vegetative resilience to inform restoration of sagebrush rangelands. We established the level of progress towards addressing each Need following a standardized set of criteria, and developed summaries detailing how research objectives nested within Needs identified in the Plan (hereinafter, “Next Steps”) were either addressed well, partially addressed or remain outstanding (that is, addressed poorly) in the literature through 2020. Our searches resulted in the inclusion of 92 science products that at least partially addressed a Need identified in the Climate and Weather topic. The Needs that were well and partially addressed included: studies of the complex set of climatic relationships that influence sagebrush rangeland restoration and seeding success; the identification of seed collection areas across the range of environmental variability inhabited by target restoration species; and develop predictive models to assess targeted restoration species’ responses to mid-century climatic conditions. The Need addressed poorly was the identification of native plant species, genotypes and ecotypes, and seed mixes that may be resilient to a changing climate. The information provided in this assessment will assist updating the Plan, and can inform updates of other relevant science planning documents as needed.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2018

Practical tips to establish an actionable science portfolio for climate adaptation

The delivery of climate adaptation science products and services to inform resource management decisions—otherwise known as actionable climate adaptation science—is the primary driver and intended outcome of the science portfolios administered within the Department of the Interior's Climate Adaptation Science Center (CASC) network in the USA. This commitment hinges on the essential requirement that natural and cultural resource managers (science users) and scientists (science producers) work in unison with one another. This partnership may be illustrated by the conventional demand and supply relationship, where resource managers create the demand term by explicitly describing a priori top decisions or priority actions concerning the natural or cultural resources they administer, and scientists supply relevant research products and services. But an ideal interaction of users and producers is not trivial and presents challenges in the process of establishing an actionable science portfolio. A few practical suggestions are presented here to set up a productive dialogue between resource managers and scientists, and broker that conversation as they work side-by-side toward agreed-upon common objectives. These useful tips stem from working towards the goal of establishing actionable science portfolios within the CASC network and may prove valuable to similar entities committed to delivering climate adaptation science to address resource management concerns.

Science and Public Policy↗
USGS2019

Identifying characteristics of actionable science for drought planning and adaptation: Final report to the North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center

Changing climate conditions can make water management planning and drought preparedness decisions more complicated than ever before. Resource managers can no longer rely solely on historical data and trends to base their actions, and are in need of science that is relevant to their specific needs and can directly inform important planning decisions. Questions remain, however, regarding the most effective and efficient methods for extending scientific knowledge and products into management and decision-making. This study analyzed two unique cases of water management to better understand how science can be translated into resource management actions and decision-making. In particular, this project sought to understand 1) the characteristics that make science actionable and useful for water resource management and drought preparedness, and 2) the ideal types of scientific knowledge or science products that facilitate the use of science in management and decision-making. The first case study focused on beaver mimicry, an emerging nature-based solution that increases the presence of wood and woody debris in rivers and streams to mimic the actions of beavers. This technique has been rapidly adopted by natural resource managers as a way to restore riparian areas, increase groundwater infiltration, and slow surface water flow so that more water is available later in the year during hotter and dryer months. The second case study focused on an established research program, Colorado Dust on Snow, that provides water managers with scientific information explaining how the movement of dust particles from the Colorado Plateau influences hydrology and the timing and intensity of snow melt and water runoff into critical water sources. This program has support from and is being used by several water conservation districts in the state. Understanding how scientific knowledge translates into action and decision-making in these cases is expected to strengthen our knowledge of actionable science in the context of drought and its impacts on ecosystems. The project team gathered qualitative data through stakeholder interviews and will conduct an extensive literature review. Findings from these efforts will also be incorporated into a broader Intermountain West synthesis effort to determine and assess commonalities and differences among socio-ecological aspects of drought adaptation and planning.

Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota,↗
USGS2022

Institutional barriers to actionable science: Perspectives from decision support tool creators

Scholars have identified a ‘usability gap’ between science and its ability to inform real-world decisions as well as a range of factors that facilitate or impede attempts to span the usability gap with information products. However, most attention has focused on barriers related to information users; much less research focuses on the unique institutional and organizational barriers experienced by creators of decision support tools. To address this gap, we used semi-structured interviews to investigate the perspectives and experiences of practitioners holding scientific or technology roles, including their goals for their tools, their perceptions of success in meeting those goals, and the barriers and opportunities they encountered. We find that there is often a mismatch between what tool creators know is necessary to achieve success for their tools and what is actually possible given various constraints. Our results suggest that knowledge may be a less important barrier to conducting actionable science through creating decision support tools than the institutional context in which tool creators work.

Environmental Science and Policy↗
USGS2026

2026–2031 U.S. Geological Survey strategy for a hazard ready Nation—Actionable science for risk reduction

Executive Summary The USGS Strategy for a Hazard Ready Nation provides an approach that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researchers and staff can use to deliver actionable, user-focused science that supports risk-informed decision making aimed at reducing risk and losses across the Nation. The Strategy builds upon successful efforts within the USGS and seeks to promote and prioritize similar work in the future under an organized framework. Rooted in four priorities—(1) center end-user needs, (2) enhance research relevance, (3) support product and service development and implementation, and (4) improve communication—the USGS Strategy for a Hazard Ready Nation is designed to focus and guide, not prescribe, activities. Strategic actions are proposed to achieve these four priorities in a timely fashion. The USGS plans to continually build upon the Strategy for a Hazard Ready Nation to deliver actionable information for risk-informed decision making.

Circular↗
USGS2016

The integrated rangeland fire management strategy actionable science plan

The Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy (hereafter Strategy, DOI 2015) outlined the need for coordinated, science-based adaptive management to achieve long-term protection, conservation, and restoration of the sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) ecosystem. A key component of this management approach is the identification of knowledge gaps that limit implementation of effective strategies to meet current management challenges. The tasks and actions identified in the Strategy address several broad topics related to management of the sagebrush ecosystem. This science plan is organized around these topics and specifically focuses on fire, invasive plant species and their effects on altering fire regimes, restoration, sagebrush and greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), and climate and weather.

Report↗
USGS2021

Engaging with stakeholders to produce actionable science: A framework and guidance

Natural and cultural resource managers are increasingly working with the scientific community to create information on how best to adapt to the current and projected impacts of climate change. Engaging with these managers is a strategy that researchers can use to ensure that scientific outputs and findings are actionable (or useful and usable). In this article, the authors adapt Davidson’s wheel of participation to characterize and describe common stakeholder engagement strategies across the spectrum of Inform, Consult, Participate, and Empower. This adapted framework provides researchers with a standardized vocabulary for describing their engagement approach, guidance on how to select an approach, methods for implementing engagement, and potential barriers to overcome. While there is often no one “best” approach to engaging with stakeholders, researchers can use the objectives of their project and the decision context in which their stakeholders operate to guide their selection. Researchers can also revisit this framework over time as their project objectives shift and their stakeholder relationships evolve.

Weather Climate and Society↗
USGS2020

Science in action or science inaction? Evaluating the implementation of "best available science" in hydropower relicensing

Over the next two decades, half of all hydropower projects in the USA will require relicensing by the Federal Regulatory Commission (FERC). Relicensing proceedings invoke a range of informational sources and agency regulators are tasked with using the “best available science” (BAS) to make informed decisions about hydropower operations and management. Although embraced as the standard, BAS is not well-defined. The Kennebec and Penobscot River watersheds in Maine provide an ideal opportunity for studying BAS in the relicensing process. Using citation analysis and an online survey, we identified informational sources used in relicensing decisions for dams in this system and assessed agency perceptions of BAS. Analysis of relicensing documents (n=62) demonstrates that FERC and licensee documents are highly similar in citation composition. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) documents typically cite more sources and are three times more likely to cite peer-reviewed sources than FERC and licensee documents. Survey data reveals that federal and state agency respondents (n=49) rate peer-reviewed literature highly as BAS, followed by university, agency, and expert sources while industry and community sources rate poorly. Federal respondents report using peer-reviewed/academic sources more frequently and expert sources less frequently than state respondents. Overall, the agreement between individuals with respect to the valuation of sources is low. The reported differences in information use may be linked to disparities in the access to certain sources of information, particularly peer-reviewed literature. Enhanced understanding of information use may aid in identifying pathways for better informed relicensing decisions.

Maine↗
USGS2023

The usability gap in water resources open data and actionable science initiatives

The open data movement represents a major advancement for informed water management. Data that are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable—or FAIR —are now prerequisite to responsible data stewardship. In contrast to FAIR, accessibility and usability case studies and guidelines designed around human access and understanding are lacking in the literature, especially for water resources. Such decision support guidelines are critical because (i) inherent visual design trade-offs are not best made using intuition or feedback (perceived preference), and (ii) choosing designs requires a nuanced understanding of why and how the design works (revealed effectiveness). Thus, the goal of this commentary is to highlight knowledge gaps and discuss a general usability testing method which can be applied to any water resources decision support product. The user-testing approach includes (i) interviews about visualization goals, audiences, and the uses and decisions made with the data products, (ii) diagnosis of usability challenges, and (iii) redesign of decision support products given best practices and control versus treatment with intended end-user audiences. We illustrate the method using high-profile U.S. Geological Survey water science products. In sum, optimizing and testing for usability and understandability are as central to stakeholder use as FAIR standards are, and warrant being part of the development of data products and geovisualizations.

Journal of the American Water Resources Associatio↗
USGS2017

A path to actionable climate science: Perspectives from the field

The U.S. Department of the Interior Climate Science Centers (CSCs) work with natural and cultural resource managers and scientists to gather information and build tools needed to help fish, wildlife, and ecosystems adapt to the impacts of climate change. The CSCs prioritize the delivery of actionable science products (e.g., synthesized scientific information, maps, decision support tools, etc.) that are focused on key management priorities and co-produced by teams of scientists and managers. In the specific case of the Northwest CSC, we have been successful at promoting and supporting the co-production of actionable climate science at the individual project level, but it has been more difficult to replicate this success at the regional program level. Here we identify the most significant challenges in satisfying this mandate and propose the creation of a Science Advisory Panel to provide improved interface between resource managers and scientists engaged with the Northwest CSC.

Environmental Management↗
USGS2023

A research agenda for the science of actionable knowledge: Drawing from a review of the most misguided to the most enlightened claims in the science-policy interface literature

Linking science with action affords a prime opportunity to leverage greater societal impact from research and increase the use of evidence in decision-making. Success in these areas depends critically upon processes of producing and mobilizing knowledge, as well as supporting and making decisions. For decades, scholars have idealized and described these social processes in different ways, resulting in numerous assumptions that now variously guide engagements at the interface of science and society. We systematically catalog these assumptions based on prior research on the science-policy interface, and further distill them into a set of 26 claims. We then elicit expert perspectives (n = 16) about these claims to assess the extent to which they are accurate or merit further examination. Out of this process, we construct a research agenda to motivate future scientific research on actionable knowledge, prioritizing areas that experts identified as critical gaps in understanding of the science-society interface. The resulting agenda focuses on how to define success, support intermediaries, build trust, and evaluate the importance of consensus and its alternatives – all in the diverse contexts of science-society-decision-making interactions. We further raise questions about the centrality of knowledge in these interactions, discussing how a governance lens might be generative of efforts to support more equitable processes and outcomes. We offer these suggestions with hopes of furthering the science of actionable knowledge as a transdisciplinary area of inquiry.

Environmental Science & Policy↗