1 / 30

Dr. Eve Gruntfest and Monica Zappa Integrated Hazard Information Services (IHIS) Workshop

Changing the Research to Operations Framework to Include All Partners: First Steps Toward the New Paradigm. Dr. Eve Gruntfest and Monica Zappa Integrated Hazard Information Services (IHIS) Workshop October 27, 2009 Social Science Woven into Meteorology (SSWIM) University of Oklahoma.

herve
Download Presentation

Dr. Eve Gruntfest and Monica Zappa Integrated Hazard Information Services (IHIS) Workshop

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Changing the Research to Operations Framework to Include All Partners: First Steps Toward the New Paradigm Dr. Eve Gruntfest and Monica Zappa Integrated Hazard Information Services (IHIS) Workshop October 27, 2009 Social Science Woven into Meteorology (SSWIM) University of Oklahoma

  2. Today’s presentation • Evidence that the process of weaving in social science and changing the stovepiped paradigm is underway • Social Science Woven into Meteorology (SSWIM) • WAS * IS (Weather and Society * Integrated Studies) • Our contributions to this workshop • Methods and results from interviews - tornado and hurricane examples • Inclusive model with all players as equal partners • Ways to move forward together this week and after the workshop

  3. Social Science Woven Into Meteorology (SSWIM) The National Weather Center – Norman, OK Funded by University of Oklahoma and NOAA www.sswim.org

  4. SSWIM’s objectives are innovative research and capacity building • … by increasing the appreciation of the value of qualitative as well as quantitative approaches including archival, ethnographic, and participatory methods • … through partnerships with public, private, and academic sectors, including students, practitioners, and policymakers across the spectrum of stakeholders

  5. water

  6. TheWAS*IS movement • Began as 1 workshop … now 7 • Original 2-part Boulder WAS*IS (Nov 2005, Mar 2006) • Condensed 3-day Norman WAS*IS (April 2006) • Summer WAS*IS (July 2006) • Australia WAS*IS (end of January 2007) • Summer WAS * IS (July 2007) • Summer WAS * IS (July 2008) • Summer WAS*IS (August 2009) • Integrated Warning Team Meetings inspired by WAS * IS • Springfield, MO December 2008 • Kansas City, MO January 2009 ANDY BAILEY is HERE • Omaha, NE September 2009 As of October, 2009 - 198 WAS*ISers and hundreds of “friends of WAS * IS”

  7. Groundwork prior to this workshop Workshops • Advanced WAS * IS workshop in Norman with Hazardous Weather Testbed September 2008 • NEX GEN warning meeting December 2008 Call to Action policy changes and discussions • Tornadoes and vehicles • Report from Ike Integrated Warning Team meetings (after Kansas City meeting) • All TV stations have consistent warning map colors • Live Skype video from NWS office on air during severe weather • List-serve email list for all IWT members in KC metro • Increased NWS chat adoption and use • Developing set of uniform siren guidelines for KC metro

  8. Challenge To develop ways to incorporate preferences of forecasters and decision-makers in new hazard warning tools Our experiment to bring forecaster and decision-maker stories and experiences to enrich the context in which new tools are invented Take advantage of existing capacity in Boulder and Norman – how can we work together effectively

  9. Today’s end-to-end decision-making relationships Media Developers Weather Forecasters 6 Publics Emergency Managers & 1st Responders Researchers

  10. Our methods • Conduct interviews across the spectrum of folks participating in the workshop • Construct graphics highlighting spatial and temporal needs of forecasters and decision-makers • Weave needs of decision-makers into the workshop agenda and next generation warning products • Complex process – • We’ve only scratched the surface • Need for patience– many languages – listening a MUST • Commitment to new ways of doing business • Developing interactive end-to-end practices that change the paradigm to include all partners all the time

  11. Study Participants

  12. Finding - Interviewedforecaster and developer have different concerns • One forecaster • Too many types of warnings to keep track of • Difficulty with beginning and ending times (especially in situations with many warnings at once) • One developer • Many warnings do not follow the storm and parts of counties get clipped out • Boundary issues: forecast office warning jurisdictions • Often not enough lead-time when new warnings are not issued until the storm leaves the old polygon

  13. One weather forecaster Super Tuesday events February 2, 2008 t0 t1 =1h Time W1 W2 W10 W4 W11 W8 W18 W5 W12 W6 W3 W14 W13 W15 W16 W24 W9 W1 W17 W20 W3 W11 W5 W9 W6 W14 W15 W13 W18 W19 W21 W22 W23 W19 W17 W7 W7 20 Warnings • Many overlapping warnings – ending/beginning • Number of warnings was extremely difficult for the forecasters to monitor At one point 20 warnings (tornado and severe thunderstorm) issued for our forecast area. Forecasters had to keep track of all the warnings, when they start and stop • Warnings were continuously expiring and being reissued • Many places were in and out of warnings several times

  14. Warnings must follow the storm– too much confusion (hypothetical case) Current time 11: 30 pm 12 : 00 am Storm Motion 11:02-11:20 12 : 30 am 11:02-11:35 10:55-11:15 11:50-12:20 11:55-12:25 11:05-11:35 11:36-12:23 11:00:11:21 12:26-12:40 11:12-11:43 11:49-12:28 11:46-12:18 12:28-12:48 12:29-12:48 11:51-12:26 11:45-12:21 11:40-12:27 12:27-12:51 12:28-12:50 11:45-12:20 12:29-12:48

  15. One programmer's perspective • Program settings exclude counties if only a small part of the warning is included • Most severe weather was missed in this event • Gaps between polygons can exclude severe portions of the storm • A problem for people that receive warnings from a GPS mobile device

  16. Geographic space scales: Regional, State, Local Future research is needed to fill in this timeline with a more representative sample of the decisions to be made and by whom Awareness raised among emergency managers, and other officials Nashville sirens sounded 1000 km Hospitals, Schools, Events? 100 Km 13 fatalities 44 injuries Near Lafayette, TN N-S Space Scale E-W 10 Km Area (Km2) Time Scale lead 4 3 2 6 5 1 0 km Feb 1 Feb 2 Feb 3 real Jan 31 Feb 4 Feb 5 10 Km 26 tornado warnings issued 8 severe storm warnings 100 Km 1st warning issued 9pm 2nd watch issued (3pm) 1000 km First outlook issued 1st watch issued (2pm)

  17. 100,000 km2 10,000 km2 1,000 km2 1,000,000 km2 One county emergency manager’s hurricane warning time/space considerations Decisions about whether or not to evacuate special needs populations NWS Forecasts are integrated in storm surge models Area of concern Decisions about whether or not to evacuate everyone at risk Conference calls EMs & NWS –storm potential Evacuations – none, some/all of county Evacuation decision begin: When? Who? To where? Order busses? 2 Days 3 Days 5 Days Event 1 Day 4 Days

  18. Examples of societal impacts - Public perspectives Consider people and infrastructure • If a area is not in a warning does that mean there is not a threat? • When (days, hours, rush hour, holiday, first snow of season) • What facilities (roads, hospitals, schools, factories) • What kinds of (probability, threat levels) information may be useful to different publics BEFORE the time of a warning? • No such thing as ideal lead time – Tell what you know • People planning a trip or large outdoor event • Mobile home dwellers without nearby shelter or without transportation • Hiker

  19. Relationships addressed in Integrated Hazard Information Services (IHIS) Workshop Developers Media Weather Forecasters 6 Publics Publics Emergency Managers & 1st Responders Researchers Various publics are not represented at workshop

  20. Putting it all together: Future relationships for developing effective warnings Developers Media Weather Forecasters 6 Publics Publics Emergency Managers & 1st Responders Researchers Interactive relationships with all the hazardous weather decision makers Changing the paradigm of hazardous weather warnings

  21. Change “public education” paradigm – recognize two -way relationships – The “right” message is one piece of the puzzle to change behaviors Flash flood example • Drivers know there are warnings and where the hazardous low water crossings are but THEY NEED TO GO to work • Potential to lose their job is perceived as a greater risk than driving across flooded road • Better information is NOT going to change behavior - only if boss closes work • Publics use weather warnings as part of complex decision-making with many other considerations – THEIR BEHAVIORS must be understood to improve warning responses • Evaluate public education efforts - Before, during, after

  22. Changing Research-to-Operations paradigm – Show commitment to sustained efforts Sponsor more efforts to bring players together (software developers and researchers with each other – Boulder and Norman) • Testbeds • Workshops Recognize consistent themes NO one size fits all NO perfect lead-time Time and space needs are case and person specific Bring in social science to help with tool development, surveys of publics, forecasters, and other decision-makers and program evaluations

  23. Ways to move forward Involve social scientists • Identify best ways to change the paradigm to be more inclusive (Bring in more associations, agencies, companies, universities, local governments) • Be equal players with software developers, modelers, and physical scientists • Perform program effectiveness evaluation research • Participate in more local Integrated Warning Team workshops (Develop local collaborations between emergency managers, media, NWS)

  24. Changing the Research-to-Operations paradigm occurs when stovepipes are not the model Local communities Emergency managers Private forecasters Environmental groups National Weather Service hydrologists Universities Urban drainage districts Anthropologists, Geographers Broadcast meteorologists Utilities Research centers Software developers National Weather Service meteorologists

  25. What did the most influential players in weather warning work look like prior to the Integrated Hazard Information Services (IHIS) Workshop?

  26. Effective new hazardous weather warnings require more than new technologies, models and tools – new ways of thinking about hazards and warnings are required

  27. The people of the Global Systems Division, the Hazardous Weather Testbed- All of us are changing the uni-dimensional culture

  28. Thanks to Dr. Tracy Hansen for her vision and hard work to bring us all together today and… from now on in sustainable waysAll of US committed to better hazard warnings across agencies, geographic boundaries, and disciplines Dr. Steve Koch for continuing to inspire and fund this developing partnership

  29. Extreme speed of watershed responses Extremely short lead-time for warnings Isabelle Ruin WAS * ISer NCAR post doc – New time/space analysis – hydrometeorology

More Related