Design and evaluation of a local analytic-deliberative process for climate adaptation planning

References

• Abelson, J., et al., 2003. Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science & Medicine, 57 (2), 239–251. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00343-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adger, W.N., 2006. Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16 (3), 268–281. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter, J., 2006. A case study of intra-community conflict as facility impact. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 49 (3), 337–360. doi: 10.1080/09640560600598361
   Google Scholar
• Berkes, F. and Folke, C., 2002. Back to the future: ecosystem dynamics and local knowledge. In: L.H. Gunderson and C.S. Holling, eds. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press, 121–146.
   Google Scholar
• Blandford, K., et al., 2009. Climate change: perceptions, knowledge, and needs of local decision-makers in coastal North Carolina. Chapel Hill: Nicholas Center for the Environment, Duke University.
   Google Scholar
• Burton, I., Kates, R.W., and White, G.F., 1993. The environment as hazard. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carpini, M., Cook, F., and Jacobs, L., 2004. Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: a review of the empirical literature. Annual Reviews in Political Science, 7, 315–344. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.7.121003.091630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, G., et al., 1998. Assessing the vulnerability of coastal communities to extreme storms: the case of Revere, MA, USA. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 3 (1), 59–82. doi: 10.1023/A:1009609710795
   Google Scholar
• Climate Central, 2013. Surging Seas [online]. Climate Central. Available from: http://sealevel.climatecentral.org/ [Accessed 15 April 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Chilvers, J., 2008. Deliberating competence theoretical and practitioner perspectives on effective participatory appraisal practice. Science, Technology & Human Values, 33 (2), 155–185. doi: 10.1177/0162243907307594
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corburn, J., 2005. Street science: community knowledge and environmental health justice. Boston: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels, S.E. and Walker, G., 2001. Working through environmental conflict: the collaborative learning approach. New York: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Delborne, J., et al., 2011. Virtual deliberation? Prospects and challenges for integrating the Internet in consensus conferences. Public Understanding of Science, 20 (3), 367–384. doi: 10.1177/0963662509347138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietz, T., 2013. Bringing values and deliberation to science communication. Proceedings of the National Academies, 110 (Supplement 3), 14081–14087.
   Google Scholar
• Dietz, T. and Stern, P.C., 1998. Science, values, and biodiversity. Bioscience, 48, 441–444. doi: 10.2307/1313241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietz, T., Fitzgerald, A., and Shwom, R., 2005. Environmental values. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 30, 335–372. doi: 10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dow, K., 1992. Exploring differences in our common future(s): the meaning of vulnerability to global environmental change. Geoforum, 23 (3), 417–436. doi: 10.1016/0016-7185(92)90052-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dow, K. and Carbone, G., 2007. Climate science and decision making. Geography Compass, 1 (3), 302–324. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-8198.2007.00036.x
   Google Scholar
• Downing, T., 2012. Views on the frontiers in climate change adaptation economics. WIREs Climate Change, 3 (2), 161–170. doi: 10.1002/wcc.157
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J.S., 2000. Deliberative democracy and beyond: liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eakin, H. and Luers, A.L., 2006. Assessing the vulnerability of social-environmental systems. Annual Review of Resources, 31 (1), 365–394. doi: 10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144352
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EPA, 2013. Climate resilience, awareness, and evaluation tool (CREAT) [online]. Environmental Protection Agency. Available from: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/climate/creat.cfm [Accessed 15 April 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, D., et al., 2008. Making decision-support information useful, useable, and responsive to decision-maker needs. In: N. Beller-Simms et al., eds. Decision support experiments and evaluations using seasonal-to-interannual forecasts and observational data: a focus on water resources. Asheville, NC: US Climate Change Science and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research, National Climatic Data Center, 101–140.
   Google Scholar
• Ferber, P., Foltz, F., and Pugliese, R., 2006. Community networks and public participation: a forum for civic engagement or a platform for ranting irate malcontents? Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26 (5), 388–397. doi: 10.1177/0270467606292505
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F., 2000. Citizens, experts, and the environment: the politics of local knowledge. Boston: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. and Luskin, R., 2005. Experimenting with a democratic ideal: deliberative polling and public opinion. Acta Politica, 40 (3), 284–298. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folke, C., 2006. Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global and Planetary Change, 16 (3), 253–267. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folke, C., et al., 2010. Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecology and Society [online], 15 (4), 20–28. Available from: www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss4/art20/ [Accessed 16 May 2014].
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forester, J. 1999. Beyond dialogue to transformative learning: how deliberative rituals encourage public judgment in community planning processes. In: J. Forester, ed. The deliberative practitioner: encouraging participatory planning practices. Boston: Beacon, 81–103.
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, T.G., Wood, N., and Yarnal, B., 2010. Stakeholder perspectives on land-use strategies for adapting to climate-change-enhanced coastal hazards: Sarasota, Florida. Applied Geography, 30 (4), 506–517. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frewer, L.J., et al., 2002. Public preferences for informed choice under conditions of risk uncertainty. Public Understanding of Science, 11 (4), 363–372. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/11/4/304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frohmberg, E., et al., 2000. The assessment of radiation exposures in Native American communities from nuclear weapons testing in Nevada. Risk Analysis, 20 (1), 101–111. doi: 10.1111/0272-4332.00010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Füssel, H. 2007. Vulnerability: a generally applicable conceptual framework for climate change research. Global Environmental Change, 17 (2), 155–167. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gokhale, A.A., 1995. Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7 (1), 22–30.
   Google Scholar
• Grimes, M., 2006. Organizing consent: The role of procedural fairness in political trust and compliance. European Journal of Political Research, 45 (2), 285–315. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00299.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewes, A. and Lyons, D.I., 2008. The humanistic side of eco-industrial parks: champions and the role of trust. Regional Studies, 42 (10), 1329–1342. doi: 10.1080/00343400701654079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hufschmidt, G., 2011. A comparative analysis of several vulnerability concepts. Natural Hazards, 58 (2), 621–643. doi: 10.1007/s11069-011-9823-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IPCC, 2012. Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation. A special report of working groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
   Google Scholar
• IPCC, 2014. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Working Group II [online]. Geneva: IPCC. Available from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg2/ [Accessed 16 May 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Kasperson, R.E., et al., 1988. The social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis, 8 (2), 177–187. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasperson, J.X., et al., 2005. Vulnerability to global environmental change. In: J.X. Kasperson and R.E. Kasperson, eds. The social contours of risk. Volume II. London: Earthscan, 245–285.
   Google Scholar
• Kates, R.W., Hohenemser, C., and Kasperson, J.X., eds., 1985. Perilous progress: managing the hazards of technology. Boulder: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kirshen, P., Ruth, M., and Anderson, W., 2008. Interdependencies of urban climate change impacts and adaptation strategies: a case study of Metropolitan Boston USA. Climatic Change, 86 (1–2), 105–122.
   Google Scholar
• Mastrandrea, M.D., et al., 2010. Bridging the gap: linking climate-impacts research with adaptation planning and management. Climatic Change, 100 (1), 87–101. doi: 10.1007/s10584-010-9827-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDevitt, M. and Kiousis, S., 2006. Deliberative learning: an evaluative approach to interactive civic education. Communication Education, 55 (3), 247–264.
   Google Scholar
• McLain, R. and Lee, R., 1996. Adaptive management: promises and pitfalls. Journal of Environmental Management, 20 (4), 437–448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merrill, S., et al., 2010. Valuing mitigation strategies: a GIS-based approach for climate adaptation analysis. ARC User, Fall 2010, 28–29.
   Google Scholar
• Mills, D., Wobus, C., and Ebi, K., 2011. Vulnerability white paper: in support of the National Climate Assessment's Vulnerability Assessment Workshop. ClimAdapt, LCC: Stratus Consulting.
   Google Scholar
• Moser, S.C. and Dilling, L., 2007. Creating a climate for change: communicating climate change and facilitating social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Climate Assessment. 2011. Uses of Vulnerability Assessments for the National Climate Assessment. In: NCA Report Series. Washington, DC: National Climate Assessment, U.S. Global Change Research Program.
   Google Scholar
• NOAA, 2013. Sea level rise and coastal flooding impacts viewer. NOAA Coastal Services Center.
   Google Scholar
• NRC, 1996. Understanding risk: informing decisions in a democratic society. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• NRC, 2008. Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• NRC, 2010a. America's climate choices: adapting to the impacts of climate change. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• NRC, 2010b. America's climate choices: informing an effective response to climate change. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• NRC, 2011. Learning science through computer games and simulations. Washtington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pahl-Wostl, C., 2009. A conceptual framework for analyzing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes. Global Environmental Change, 19 (3), 354–365. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parry, M.L., et al., eds., 2007. Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pelling, M., 1993. Natural disaster and development in a globalizing world. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Petts, J., 2007. Learning about learning: lessons from public engagement and deliberation on urban river restoration. The Geographical Journal, 173 (4), 300–311. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-4959.2007.00254.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pidgeon, N. and Fischhoff, B. 2011. The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nature Climate Change, 1 (1), 35–41. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1080
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabinovich, A., Morton, T.A., and Birney, M.E., 2011. Communicating climate science: the role of perceived communicator's motives. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32 (1), 11–18. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, M., 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biological Conservation, 141 (10), 2417–2431. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renn, O., 1999. A model for an analytic−deliberative process in risk management. Environmental Science and Technology, 33 (18), 3049–3055. doi: 10.1021/es981283m
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renn, O., 2006. Participatory processes for designing environmental policies. Land Use Policy, 23 (1), 34–43. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renn, O., 2008. Risk governance. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Schon, D. and Rein, D. 1994. Frame reflection: toward the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Senge, P., 1990. The fifth discipline: art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Sheppard, S.R.J., 2012. Visualizing climate change: a guide to visual communication of climate change and developing local solutions. Washington, DC: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Slovic, P., 1987. Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280–285. doi: 10.1126/science.3563507
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smit, B. and Wandel, J., 2006. Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16 (3), 282–292. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spies, S., et al., 1998. Support for waste facility siting: differences between community leaders and residents. Rural Sociology, 63 (1), 65–93. doi: 10.1111/j.1549-0831.1998.tb00665.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swiss, R.E., 2010. US Gulf Coast could face average annual losses of up to USD 23 billion by 2030 and cumulative economic damages of USD 350 billion from climate risks, says Swiss Re research [online]. Available from: http://www.swissre.com/media/news_releases/US_Gulf_Coast_could_face_average_annual_losses_of_up_to_USD_23_billion_by_2030_and_cumulative_economic_damages_of_USD_350_billion_from_climate_risks_says_Swiss_Re_research.html [February 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Tate, E., 2012. Social vulnerability indices: a comparative assessment using uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Natural Hazards, 63 (2), 325–347. doi: 10.1007/s11069-012-0152-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate, E., 2013. Uncertainty analysis for a social vulnerability index. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103 (3), 526–543. doi: 10.1080/00045608.2012.700616
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomalla, F., et al., 2006. Reducing hazard vulnerability: towards a common approach between disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. Disasters, 30 (1), 39–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9523.2006.00305.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TNC, 2012. Climate Wizard [online]. The Nature Conservancy. Available from: www.climatewizard.org [Accessed 15 April 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Tribbia, J. and Moser, S. 2008. More than information: what coastal managers need to plan for climate change. Environmental Science and Policy, 11 (4), 315–328. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2008.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tufts University, 2012. Virtual understanding environment [online]. Available from: http://vue.tufts.edu/ [Accessed 22 September 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Tuler, S., 2000. Forms of talk in policy dialogue: distinguishing between adversarial and collaborative discourse. Journal of Risk Research, 3 (1), 1–17. doi: 10.1080/136698700376671
   Google Scholar
• Tuler, S. 2002. Radiation risk perception and communication: a case study of the fernald environmental management project. SERI report 02–005. Greenfield, MA: Social and Environmental Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Tuler, S. and Webler, T. 1999. Designing an analytic deliberative process for environmental health policy making in the US nuclear weapons complex. Risk: Health, Safety, and Environment, 10 (1), 65–87.
   Google Scholar
• Turner, B.L.I., et al., 2003. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 100 (14), 8074–8079. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1231335100
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Umoquit, M.J., et al., 2011. A multidisciplinary systematic review of the use of diagrams as a means of collecting data from research subjects: application, benefits and recommendations. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11 (1), 1–11. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• VCAPS. 2014a. VCAPS process. Available from: http://www.vcapsforplanning.org/process.html [Accessed 16 May 2014].
   Google Scholar
• VCAPS. 2014b. VCAPS home page. Available from: www.vcapsforplanning.org [Accessed 16 May 2014].
   Google Scholar
• Watkiss, P. and Hunt, A., 2012. Scoping study: reviewing the coverage of economic impacts in the CCRA. Paul Watkiss Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Webler, T. and Renn, O., 1995. A brief primer on public participation: philosophy and practice. In: O. Renn, T. Webler and P. Wiedemann, eds. Fairness and competence in citizen participation: evaluating models for environmental discourse. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press, 17–33.
   Google Scholar
• Webler, T. and Tuler, S., 1999. Integrating technical analysis with deliberation in regional watershed management planning: applying the National Research Council approach. Policy Studies Journal, 27 (3), 530–543. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.1999.tb01984.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webler, T., et al., 1995. Eliciting and classifying concerns: a methodological critique. Risk Analysis, 15 (3), 421–436. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1995.tb00334.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webler, T., Tuler, S., & Dietz, T., 2011. Modelers’ and outreach professionals’ views on the roles of models in watershed management. Environmental Policy & Governance, 21 (6), 472–486. doi: 10.1002/eet.587
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss, R., 1995. Learning from strangers: the art and method of qualitative interview studies. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J.V., 1998. Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Willows, R.I. and Connell, R.K., 2003. Climate adaptation: risk, uncertainty and decision-making. UKCIP Technical Report. Oxford: UKCIP.
   Google Scholar
• Wisner, B., et al., eds., 2004. At risk. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, B., 1991. Knowledges in context. Science, Technology & Human Values, 16 (1), 111–121. doi: 10.1177/016224399101600108
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yohe, G. and Leichenko, R., 2010. Chapter 2: Adopting a risk-based management approach. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1196, 29–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05310.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar