Climate tools without climate consensus: weather and climate decision support tools create openings for agricultural adaptation
Natalia Pinzón, I. Velicogna, Leslie M. Roche, Mark H. Cooper, Samuel Ikendi, Lauren E. Parker, Vikram Koundinya, Namah Chiamo Taku-Forchu, A Geruo, Tapan B. Pathak
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
カリフォルニア州の農家・牧場主383名と農業アドバイザー121名への調査から、気候変動への懸念度と気候意思決定支援ツールの利用に統計的有意な関係がないことを示した。生産者は情報が十分と考える一方、アドバイザーは不足と考える認識の断絶も明らかにした。支援ツールを「境界オブジェクト」と捉え、気候変動の原因への合意なしに多様な世界観を超えた適応行動を促しうると論じる。
English
Surveying 383 California farmers/ranchers and 121 advisors, the study finds no significant link between climate concern and use of climate decision-support tools. Producers believe they have enough information while advisors overwhelmingly disagree, revealing an epistemological divide. The authors frame these tools as boundary objects that enable coordinated adaptation action without consensus on climate change causes.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本の農業分野における気候適応・スマート農業政策や、適応策の実装ギャップを考える上で示唆がある。ただし開示・SSBJ文脈との直接接続は弱い。
In the global GX context
Relevant to global adaptation finance and climate-risk disclosure debates (TCFD/ISSB adaptation sections) by showing that tool adoption does not require belief consensus—useful for designing decision-useful disclosure and advisory infrastructure.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:気候情報ツールの受容と信念の非結合性を示す実証として、適応ガバナンス研究に有用。
🏢実務担当者:気候リスク情報の提供側は、信念ではなく意思決定文脈に埋め込む設計が有効と示唆される。
🏛政策担当者:適応政策において、気候懸念の啓発より実務ツールの普及を優先する根拠になりうる。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract Despite the investment in climate and weather decision support tools and services, their adoption is reported to be lower than expected. Even with advances in modeling and forecasting, these tools are underutilized in agricultural decision-making. Historically, it has been widely assumed that concern with rapidly occurring climate change was a precursor to climate adaptation within the agricultural sector. Emerging research, including this study, challenges the coupling between climate change belief and adaptive action. Drawing on survey data from more than 383 California farmers and ranchers and 121 agricultural advisors, we find no statistically significant relationship between our Climate Concern Index—a measure that integrates belief with related dimensions of evidence, attribution, motivation and interest in learning—and the use of climate decision support tools by farmers and ranchers. We also identify a sharp epistemological divide: while most producers reported having sufficient information to manage climate risks, advisors overwhelmingly believed that producers lacked it, reflecting differing standards for what counts as ‘enough’ knowledge. We argue that climate decision support tools act as boundary objects: common instruments that support coordination among users with varied perspectives, without needing agreement on the causes of climate change. In doing so, we posit that they may also shape mental models of climate variability and change over time, embedding long-term trends within familiar decision contexts. As boundary objects, climate decision support tools hold promise not only in bridging divides and reshaping how climate change is understood, but in creating common ground for action across diverse worldviews in a contested political climate.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-026-04253-xfirst seen 2026-10-31 04:49:19
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。