↓ Skip to main content

How normative interpretations of climate risk assessment affect local decision-making: an exploratory study at the city scale in Cork, Ireland

Overview of attention for article published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical & Engineering Sciences, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
How normative interpretations of climate risk assessment affect local decision-making: an exploratory study at the city scale in Cork, Ireland
Published in
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical & Engineering Sciences, April 2018
DOI 10.1098/rsta.2017.0300
Pubmed ID
Authors

T. K. J. McDermott, S. Surminski

Abstract

Urban areas already suffer substantial losses in both economic and human terms from climate-related disasters. These losses are anticipated to grow substantially, in part as a result of the impacts of climate change. In this paper, we investigate the process of translating climate risk data into action for the city level. We apply a commonly used decision-framework as our backdrop and explore where in this process climate risk assessment and normative political judgements intersect. We use the case of flood risk management in Cork city in Ireland to investigate what is needed for translating risk assessment into action at the local city level. Evidence presented is based on focus group discussions at two stakeholder workshops, and a series of individual meetings and phone-discussions with stakeholders involved in local decision-making related to flood risk management and adaptation to climate change, in Ireland. Respondents were chosen on the basis of their expertise or involvement in the decision-making processes locally and nationally. Representatives of groups affected by flood risk and flood risk management and climate adaptation efforts were also included. The Cork example highlights that, despite ever more accurate data and an increasing range of theoretical approaches available to local decision-makers, it is the normative interpretation of this information that determines what action is taken. The use of risk assessments for decision-making is a process that requires normative decisions, such as setting 'acceptable risk levels' and identifying 'adequate' protection levels, which will not succeed without broader buy-in and stakeholder participation. Identifying and embracing those normative views up-front could strengthen the urban adaptation process-this may, in fact, turn out to be the biggest advantage of climate risk assessment: it offers an opportunity to create a shared understanding of the problem and enables an informed evaluation and discussion of remedial action.This article is part of the theme issue 'Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy'.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 23%
Researcher 6 20%
Other 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 11 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 10%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Engineering 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2020.
All research outputs
#843,625
of 15,339,481 outputs
Outputs from Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical & Engineering Sciences
#200
of 2,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,417
of 277,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical & Engineering Sciences
#15
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,339,481 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,182 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.