Linking science with action affords a prime opportunity to leverage greater societal impact from research and increase the use of evidence in decision-making. Success in these areas depends critically upon processes of producing and mobilizing knowledge, as well as supporting and making decisions. For decades, scholars have idealized and described these social processes in different ways, resulting in numerous assumptions that now variously guide engagements at the interface of science and society. We systematically catalog these assumptions based on prior research on the science-policy interface, and further distill them into a set of 26 claims. We then elicit expert perspectives (n = 16) about these claims to assess the extent to which they are accurate or merit further examination. Out of this process, we construct a research agenda to motivate future scientific research on actionable knowledge, prioritizing areas that experts identified as critical gaps in understanding of the science-society interface. The resulting agenda focuses on how to define success, support intermediaries, build trust, and evaluate the importance of consensus and its alternatives – all in the diverse contexts of science-society-decision-making interactions. We further raise questions about the centrality of knowledge in these interactions, discussing how a governance lens might be generative of efforts to support more equitable processes and outcomes. We offer these suggestions with hopes of furthering the science of actionable knowledge as a transdisciplinary area of inquiry.

Abstract Prior research suggests that climate stories are rarely reported by local news outlets in the United States. As part of the Climate Matters in the Newsroom project—a program for climate-reporting resources designed to help journalists report local climate stories—we conducted a series of local climate-reporting workshops for journalists to support such reporting. Here, we present the impacts of eight workshops conducted in 2018 and 2019—including participant assessments of the workshop, longitudinal changes in their climate-reporting self-efficacy, and the number and proportion of print and digital climate stories reported. We learned that participants found value in the workshops and experienced significant increases in their climate-reporting self-efficacy in response to the workshops, which were largely sustained over the next 6 months. We found only limited evidence that participants reported more frequently on climate change after the workshops—possibly, in part, due to the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the news industry. These findings suggest that local climate-reporting workshops can be a useful but not necessarily sufficient strategy for supporting local climate change reporting. Further research is needed to illuminate how to support local climate reporting most effectively. Significance Statement As part of an NSF-funded project to support local climate change news reporting, we conducted a series of eight journalist workshops. Here we evaluate their impacts. Participants gave the workshops strong positive ratings and experienced significant increases in climate-reporting self-efficacy. There was only limited evidence, however, that the workshops led to more frequent reporting on climate change—a conclusion muddied by the impacts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the news industry. These findings suggest that local climate-reporting workshops may be a useful strategy but that additional research is needed to strengthen the approach.

Scientific meetings organized by professional organizations have been keystone activities of scientific culture and career advancement. They provide opportunities to share research results, promote discussion on current and emerging research and education needs, apprentice early career participants into the community, and foster professional partnerships. However, scientific meetings are not equally inviting or accessible for all scientists, particularly those from historically marginalized communities. Organizers of scientific meetings have historically not ensured diverse representation of speakers and those in leadership roles, or have not provided needed networking opportunities and professional learning to foster scientists from historically marginalized communities, who often do not have the visibility or networking opportunities needed for persistence and success in a scientific career. As a result, scientific meetings can be an isolating and stressful experience. People from historically excluded identities can encounter structural barriers, such as lack of childcare or safe bathroom spaces, and can experience harassment and bullying. Within professional societies, policies and procedures as well as unwritten norms, can perpetuate bias and exclusion. For instance, certain attire, hair styles, and speaking tone may be targeted as counter to historical norms of professionalism, which were established before BIPOC and women entered the STEM fields in larger numbers. But these challenges also present opportunities to change. Scientific meetings can instead serve as influential intervention points to advance an inclusive environment and climate for geoscientists from across institutions, career stages, and backgrounds. We present a few actionable strategies that professional societies and convening organizations can take before, during, and after scientific meetings to make them more equitable, accessible, and anti-racist. We offer guidance for scientific meeting policies, procedures, awards systems, and leadership opportunities to build structure for inclusion. We also share recommendations for how professional societies can support members to advocate for more equitable and anti-racist culture within scientific meetings and at their home institutions.

Abstract. In 2009, the International Soil Moisture Network (ISMN) was initiated as a community effort, funded by the European Space Agency, to serve as a centralised data hosting facility for globally available in situ soil moisture measurements (Dorigo et al., 2011b, a). The ISMN brings together in situ soil moisture measurements collected and freely shared by a multitude of organisations, harmonises them in terms of units and sampling rates, applies advanced quality control, and stores them in a database. Users can freely retrieve the data from this database through an online web portal (https://ismn.earth/en/, last access: 28 October 2021). Meanwhile, the ISMN has evolved into the primary in situ soil moisture reference database worldwide, as evidenced by more than 3000 active users and over 1000 scientific publications referencing the data sets provided by the network. As of July 2021, the ISMN now contains the data of 71 networks and 2842 stations located all over the globe, with a time period spanning from 1952 to the present. The number of networks and stations covered by the ISMN is still growing, and approximately 70 % of the data sets contained in the database continue to be updated on a regular or irregular basis. The main scope of this paper is to inform readers about the evolution of the ISMN over the past decade, including a description of network and data set updates and quality control procedures. A comprehensive review of the existing literature making use of ISMN data is also provided in order to identify current limitations in functionality and data usage and to shape priorities for the next decade of operations of this unique community-based data repository.

During a pandemic, news media play a crucial role in communicating public health and policy information. Traditional newspaper coverage is important amidst increasing disinformation, yet uncertainties make covering health risks and efforts to limit transmission difficult. This study assesses print and online newspaper coverage of the coronavirus disease COVID-19 for March 2020, when the global pandemic was declared, through August 2020 in three countries: Canada (with the lowest per-capita case and death rates during the study timeframe), the United Kingdom (with a pronounced early spike), and the United States (with persistently high rates). Tools previously validated for pandemic-related news records allow measurement of multiple indicators of scientific quality (i.e., reporting that reflects the state of scientific knowledge) and of sensationalism (i.e., strategies rendering news as more extraordinary than it really is). COVID-19 reporting had moderate scientific quality and low sensationalism across 1331 sampled articles in twelve newspapers spanning the political spectrums of the three countries. Newspapers oriented towards the populist-right had the lowest scientific quality in reporting, combined with very low sensationalism in some cases. Against a backdrop of world-leading disease rates, U.S. newspapers on the political left had more exposing coverage, e.g., focused on policy failures or misinformation, and more warning coverage, e.g., focused on the risks of the disease, compared to U.S. newspapers on the political right. Despite the generally assumed benefits of low sensationalism, pandemic-related coverage with low scientific quality that also failed to alert readers to public-health risks, misinformation, or policy failures may have exacerbated the public-health effects of the disease. Such complexities will likely remain central for both pandemic news media reporting and public-health strategies reliant upon it.

Several bills moving through Congress are likely to provide significant funding for expanding research and results in climate change solutions (CCS). This is also a priority of the Biden-Harris Adm...

AbstractLocal community interest in better understanding regional climate change impacts has motivated the establishment of a long‐term soil moisture and weather observation network in the Roaring Fork catchment of the Colorado River Headwaters. This catchment‐wide suite of 10 stations, installed between 2012 and 2020, collects frequent, fixed‐interval data on soil moisture, soil temperature, rain, air temperature, relative humidity, and (at some stations) snow across an elevational gradient from 1800 to 3680 m. In this paper we provide a description of the data this network provides, how data are accessed, and how this community‐supported effort has resulted in data that support mountain hydrology research with applications for resource management and climate change adaptation decision making. All data from this network are publicly available.