ten years after user centricity in a messy situation n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Ten Years After: User-centricity in a messy situation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Ten Years After: User-centricity in a messy situation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 42
boaz

Ten Years After: User-centricity in a messy situation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

0 Views
Download Presentation
Ten Years After: User-centricity in a messy situation
An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Ten Years After: User-centricity in a messy situation John Wiener Presentation to Climate Prediction Applications Science WorkshopMarch 2008, Chapel Hill <John.Wiener@Colorado.edu> Note: see “notes” for additional material, and appendices (hand-out, etc.). The posted version will be “director’s cut”; presentation will be shorter. In fact, presentation will be jumpy and too fast, but the ideas are here… Note: the opinions expressed in this presentation are not those of any known institution, and if captured exposed, or killed, the secretary will disavow all knowledge of me, mistakes, and all charges.

  2. We interrupt this program… • Presentation has been suspended, due to late-breaking notion… • WHY comes before how.

  3. Corn seedling dying from lack of irrigation - Denver Post, 18 May 06, Brian Rutherford

  4. The old psychiatrist joke.. • The users we want to reach are NOT homogenous, and SOME OF THEM REALLY THINK DIFFERENTLY • or, under-appreciated fundamental epistemological divergences regarding the utility and applicability of non-traditional and non-experiential information may hinder successful communication…

  5. You have the answer, but do they have THAT question? • How to get to THEIR sense of WHY and meet that… • YOU spent your adult life learning to think the way you do. You’re not alone, but you’re not in the majority. • Going to “them” and with them may be necessary. • And now, back to the program…

  6. Ten Years After What? • “An exploratory assessment of the potential for improved water management through increased use of climate information in three western states and selected tribes” • 3 different state teams, political science and history in Utah and Tribes, water resource economists in New Mexico, water resource economist and other in Colorado • Diversity in places, peoples, problems – so, diversity in inquiries and reporting • This talk is on Colorado, since presenter involved with that one and subsequent studies

  7. Features of Project • Interview with questions, and climate information sample • Re-interview with some new questions and new climate information sample • Decision calendar drafted, and then checked with advisory group and many interviewees • Became long-standing relationship with advisors, some interviewees • Details posted, retrospective in progress

  8. Since the project… • Following the problem: big barrier to use of climate information is inability to transfer water • grant-funded and unfunded studies: climate-informed water bank project, research support for water transfers (“what could go wrong?”) and next, modeling support for water transfers • Observation of Statewide Water Supply Initiative Phase 1, with extensive comments; Participation in 3 of 4 Technical Roundtables SWSI Phase 2, Observation of Arkansas Basin Roundtable in new permanent process, Participation in Water Transfers Guidelines Committee; far too many monthly meetings and trips and re-schedule and quick-response memos and updates of big collections of memos… and endless politics… • Comments, oral and written and meetings with a lot of water officials • A lot of presentations on water banking, water transfers, impacts of water transfers and adverse impact reduction, etc etc etc… • Annual meeting cycles – USDA CSREES, Central Plains Irrigation Assn, Ditch and Reservoir Company Alliance, Colorado Water Congress, Arkansas River Basin Water Forum, Tamarisk Coalition, and some academic/scientific meetings… • A few unusual events – American Society of Civil Engineers Environment and Water Resources Institute, Society for Conservation Biology, US Committee on Irrigation and Drainage (3 times), and coming up, topical session at Riparian areas conference of American Water Resources Association, with short article in Water Resources Impact, with USFS and USGS ecologists and a geography scholar of hybrid ecologies, and David Yates, model developer and applier. • New survey: 2/3 of sample of South Platte farmers like idea of leasing… (James Pritchett) • Wasted youth, declining health, poverty, and a lot of friends out of town.

  9. Lowlights • Should have just moved to service area of CLIMAS or SECC – or Nebraska… • Failed to pursue the climate applications hard enough, while tangled up in institutional change – Now, just have to scrounge from great stuff already done! • Failed to affect leadership of agriculture enough, while working on water leaders • Stuck with threshold institutional problems and policy bottlenecks…

  10. Housing Density Change In Colorado Housing Density Change 1960 - 2050 (C.U. Center for American West, Tom Dickinson) 2020 2000 David M. Theobald. “Targeting Conservation Action through Assessment of Protection and Exurban Threat.” Conservation Biology, 17(6):1624-1637. Dec. 2003

  11. East Slope River Basins in Colorado South Platte Basin

  12. South Platte North Platte Yampa/White/Green 10,300 AF Gap 107,800 AF Colorado 107,600 AF Identified Projects 404,300 AF Gunnison Dolores/ San Juan/ San Miguel Rio Grande Arkansas 2030 M&I “NEW” Water Demands and “Gaps”(Statewide Water Supply Initiative (SWSI) slide except for comments) This may be VERY optimistic! Beware! Self- reported “identified projects” !!

  13. 12 to 23% -- or maybe MUCH more? BIG questions about this: water to acres varies, and the basis of the demand estimate is uncertain… And,no climate effects! SWSI slide

  14. Meanwhile, back on the ranch or farm… Recent results of the current trends What is happening to the farm-dependent areas of Colorado? Some are being converted to recreational -- tourism – second home… Some are not… Eastern Arkansas Valley – 26% of primary income from agriculture – Very high!

  15. Arkansas River Basin in Colorado Map by Tom Dickinson, SSDAC, IBS, University of Colorado Canon City

  16. Biological and Environmental Issues: The Green is “under a ditch”… but we have little science on “out there”… Water Law: maintain pattern of flows…in the river… Data source: Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper, 2005. Map by Thomas W. Dickinson, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado at Boulder

  17. Holbrook Canal Headgate Works -- May 2002 Irrigation works are substantial investments with significant effects on the environment and positive as well as negative effects on the ecology

  18. User-centricity? • Elaborated in basics of outreach, including NRC 1999 Stern and Easterling, Making Climate Forecasts Matter, later studies • Elaborated in NOAA Office of Global Programs projects, Human Dimensions of Global Change, etc • Elaborated by wide range of researchers and co-developers of information products – RCCs, RISAs, NWS FSOs… etc… • Why mention? To set up a heresy…

  19. Messy Situation? “Policy bottlenecks” • Federal government level responses to climate change – • You’re it, mostly… officially… (lost the mirror slide) • Compare: USDA Long Range Projections, February 2008

  20. One bit of the Federal Level • USDA Agricultural Projections to 2017 • http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/Baseline/present2008.htm • Projections themselves can be downloaded as Microsoft Word ™ file from the briefing room website • Issued end of February 2008…

  21. “climate” occurs twice, neither use related to climate change; “climatic” occurs once, in “agroclimatic”; “environmental” occurs twice in “environmental concerns” and twice in “environmental regulations”; “warming” does not occur.

  22. One bit of the Federal Level • USDA Agricultural Projections to 2017 • http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/Baseline/present2008.htm • Agricultural Water Security Listening Session, Final Report, 2006 (2004 meeting) • http://www.csrees.usda.gov/water • Global Climate Change Briefing Room • http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/GlobalClimate/ • Schaible, G.D., Ed., 2004, Agricultural Risks in a Water-Short World: Producer Adaptation and Policy Directions. A Workshop Summary. USDA ERS, 2004. <www.farmfoundation.org/documents/Z4C1-WaterWorkshopSummary-Final-V1c_11-8-04.pdf> – Puzzling… • Darwin, R., 2001, Issues in Food Security: Climate Change and Food Security, USDA ERS Agriculture Information Bulletin Number 765-8 • Schimmelpfennig, D., J. Lewandrowski, J. Reilly, M. Tsigas, and M. Parry, 1996, Agricultural Adaptation to Climate Change: Issues of Longrun Sustainability. USDA ERS, AER-740. • WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? THESE FOLKS ARE GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO!

  23. Messy Situation? “Policy bottlenecks” • Federal government level responses to climate change – • You’re it, mostly… officially… (lost the mirror slide) • Other agencies vary widely, and may not be homogeneous • State level – big variation – • California, has a water plan, has climate plans • Colorado: has no water plan (2003 substitute idea: policy discussion, SWSI, and later IBCC). New Governor has climate response ideas. • Local Governments – big variation – • cities with their own foreign policy • most with serious fiscal constraints, short time horizons • Individuals/businesses – big variation • technical capacity and access to professional capacity, or not • credibility problem in face of fierce attacks on science, or this science… • “Middle management” – another group…

  24. Next steps? • More use of information pathways already in use (e.g. SUCCESS of SECC et al. using Extension, CIG and WWA et al. using big water management and providers) • More use of middle management levels – e.g. Yates, Purkey et al. service with AWWARF to water providers at different scales • Heresy: Tactical retreat from “user-centricity”? Between zero and tailored… “Assume righteousness, aim at the middle”

  25. Working Around Bottlenecks • “Engaging Inquiries” – questions with some give-back, commitment, and persistence in participation; using new tools takes time. (Great, but labor intensive…) • Guides to what you have – they don’t have time to learn your work; you took years to learn it. We have to make the effort. Other agency employees should be able to find what is available and know about its uses. Layers! • Not everyone should be asked to “translate”, but every product for out-of-agency-use needs a guide; may be a special position. • Case study collection – If they can do it, why can’t we do it? Whose policy is it to hurt my ability to compete? -- New task to undertake • I want that Holly Hartmann – Hero slide!

  26. What Sources of Weather and Climate Information Were Used, 1999-2001 • NO dominant government source except for Snotel and USGS Stream Gauges • not NWS direct sources • not NOAA weather radio • NO dominant commercial source • one most popular in E. Colorado, because of satellite service • Highly influenced by the personal experience of the user

  27. Partial Update • US Drought Monitor – Hurrah! • NWS direct access – sometimes mentioned now • Commercial – no known change, but some consolidation in private services may affect future. • MOST IMPORTANT? Drought response stimulated state water planning -- sent middle-management to info. sources and increased use of information as substitute for [the P thing, that dare not speak its name…*] • Question: Huge number of new sources now -- Too hard to distinguish? -- Job for the guide?

  28. What information when? • The “decision calendar” – still underused? • Easy verification by users/interviewees and others (advisors…) • Another use: for coordination of multiple requests, and multiple interests • And, useful for re-visits and re-thinking – “Engaging Inquiries” –build relationships with potential users – strategic way to reach out • Merle Haggard factor: if we make it through December… tax allocations will be done… Get that forecast out in time to use it !

  29. What information was wanted? “Shopping Lists” Nearer-term interests in weather and climate information: • (1) Flash flood threats and basic monitoring gaps • (2) Soil moisture and evaporative losses information • (3) "Calibration" of forecasts for urban areas to apply better to rural areas, identification of common storm and general weather patterns • (4) Forms of information – more visuals, mapped, and "now versus last year versus normal" • (5) Local packages of information were often requested • (6) Improved and additional snow and SNOTEL information • (7) Frost dates – forecast of different from normal • (8) Fire and burning weather – for wildfire threat and field or prescribed burning • (9) Range grass growing conditions – soil moisture and windiness too • (10) Range cattle watering conditions and small reservoir ET losses • (11) Cloud seeding forecasts (snowmaking and hail stone size reduction) Longer-term interests, perhaps relevant to research orientation, as well as presentation: • (A) Irrigation season forecasting, for water banking and market operations • (B) Localization of forecasts; geographic specificity • (C) Requests and concerns for long-term climatology support for decision-making and risk understanding • (D) The concept and application of "probable maximum precipitation" in dam safety • (E) Reliability standards and measures of confidence for forecast information • (F) River forecast center incorporation of forecast information • (G) Forthcoming growing season degree-days.

  30. Highlight?: information wanted • Soil moisture and evaporative losses – (okay, duh…) but increasingly valuable for range management as well as farming • Wide range of applications because so central in so many processes • Management of a large amount of land, public and private, forests, habitat, etc • Climate change may be more stressful • So… wasn’t a breakthrough idea, but was VERY important to the users

  31. Dim-light? information wanted • Visuals, mapped information – GREAT progress on this! – florescence of GIS, etc • Now/coming up vs normal vs last year?– They said best for the agricultural sector interviewees to compare forecasts to known points of reference… (not same as analogue years – may relate to different information storage and different sets of variables (markets…etc)? I agreed. • Problem: the trouble with normal (sorry, Bruce) • Adaptation - to what?Better adaptive capacity

  32. Highlight: information wanted • “CALIBRATION” – help with two goals: • How to relate my place to forecast for another place? If snowing there at noon, when will it get here? Weather patterns? • How to relate my place to observations and modeling for points of reference? • E.g. Colorado Agricultural Meteorology Net – designed for farming; how use for range? • Basic in some decision support systems; not down-scaling (cheaper? quicker?); prescribe useful adjustments to correlations

  33. Sneaking up one of the goals • Want: Irrigation season forecasting for water management (water banking, etc.) and soil moisture… • In place: soil moisture monitoring already urged • Next step: irrigation scheduling DSS in place – could also be used for scenario testing • Next step: deficit irrigation/limited irrigation – less for vegetative growth stages, plenty for reproductive stage • Next step: Water Optimizer (NE) – DSS for deficit irrigation (or limited irrigation) – e.g. use – allocate between crops and fallow for maximum return on known water; now Colorado Crop Water Allocator also. • And now? Daily sequences for a forecast with P of occurrence please! Meet need? • Add that to hydrology forecast – Success?

  34. Re: last year’s talk…Crop Switching is Possible

  35. Moving Toward Climate-ResponsiveWater Management appended to CPASW 2008 set John Wiener Research Associate, University of Colorado, and Visitor, National Center for Atmospheric Research Brief Co-presentation with David Yates Colorado Water Congress January 25, 2008 Copies of summaries are provided <John.Wiener@Colorado.Edu>

  36. (Center of the American West, on the internet with two other cases) Colorado Front Range

  37. I-25 BoydLake One square mile Slide by Tom Dickinson, IBS and Geography, Source: National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP),USDA-FSA Aerial Photography Field Office

  38. What would be “climate responsive water management”? • Has to be within water law • Has to include climate variation and change as one of many conditions • OUGHT to help achieve at least goals in water management • OUGHT to help achieve goals affected by water management • WON’T succeed without engagement and acceptance by those involved • After SWSI, focus on agriculture-urban transfers -- “the new last water hole” (apologies to Dr Tyler!)

  39. Goals in water management • Optimal use -- max economic benefit -- • return on use of water -- need capacity to do better -- big progress by others in climate applications in agriculture • flexibility to respond to changes in social and physical environment -- need will and authority to do better • complication: long-term valuation problems -- soil... • Optimal use -- certainty to support investments and planning • certainty of supply or adequate substitute • for water providers -- no real substitute • for agriculture -- may be partial substitute • complication: variability of supply and demand • need storage and flexibility in re-allocation

  40. Goals affected by water management • Optimal use -- max social benefit -- • complication: valuation of “third-party” interests • complication: participation of third-parties helped or hurt by changes • complication: public interest identification and public participation • complication: recreational and amenity interests; SWSI non-consumptive needs assessment partly answers • Optimal Use -- maintain environment • water quality; SWSI non-consumptive needs assessment partly answers • habitat - problem: “hybrid ecology” • avoid cumulative impact thresholds

  41. The green area includes land unintentionally wetted by irrigation -- it may now be important habitat that we should pay to secure Data source: Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper, 2005. Map by Thomas W. Dickinson, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado at Boulder

  42. Conditions for success • Meet transferor goals, transferee goals • Develop answers with participants • Even the legislature can’t innovate without adequate engagement; expand participation (in all ways - $ too) • Introduce innovations in the accepted ways • water providers’ technical evaluation and leading utility demonstrations • agricultural innovations work through extension and demonstration • Get the new ways figured out before all the water needed is transferred in the old ways! • Progress so far… please see summaries (in the handouts for CPASW 2008)