recognised by UN Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) as crucial (IPCC 2007a), and it will receive even more attention in
the forthcoming Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) (Yohe and Oppenheimer 2011). A goal of
the AR5 is to apply “a common framework with associated calibrated uncertainty language
that can be used to characterise findings of the assessment process” (Mastrandrea et al.
2011
/media/loftslag/2012-Refsgaard_etal-uncertainty_climate-change-adaptation-MITI343.pdf
In this project, the calculation of return levels was done using the R programming language (R
Core Team, 2014) with a package called extRemes (Gilleland and Katz, 2016). The package
provides many functions and visual tools for EVA. The main functions used in this project
covered the fitting of GEV and GP distributions using MLE or L-moments methods, in addition
to a declustering function
/media/vedurstofan-utgafa-2020/VI_2020_008.pdf
) organisations.
Secondly, interviews were conducted with adaptation policy-relevant actors at each level,
targeting those actors who are involved in policy development or administration, resulting in a
total of 94 interviews across the four European countries. Each interview was conducted in
the language of the interviewee, transcribed and translated (Table 1).
Table 1: Case study selection
/media/loftslag/Keskitalo_et_al-MLG_and_adaptation_FINAL.pdf
of other agents, is for social construction-
ism deeply problematic (Gergen, 1994).
In response to this we begin our analysis at the level of
the human relationship as it generates both language and
understanding. Social understanding is generated from
participation within the common system. Viewed from
Gergens position we believe that the qualitative interview is
a good method by which meaning stands
/media/loftslag/Henriksen_Barlebo-2008-AWM_BBN-Journ_Env_Management.pdf
for people to conceptualise
and to relate to their daily activities, arguably because it cannot be easily translated
into the language of popular culture (Ungar, 2000; see also mental models of cli-
mate change by Bostrom et al., 1994; Kempton, 1997; discussed later). Secondly,
the various datasets available detailing public opinions and attitudes on climate
PUBLIC VIEWS ON CLIMATE CHANGE: EUROPEAN
/media/loftslag/Lorenzoni_Pidgeon_2006.pdf
indicators and analyses used in the natural sciences is generally different from that
used in assessing technology development or the social sciences. WG I focuses on the former, WG III on the latter, and WG II covers aspects
of both.
Three different approaches are used to describe uncertainties each with a distinct form of language. Choices among and within these three
approaches depend on both
/media/loftslag/IPPC-2007-ar4_syr.pdf