climate change training needs assessmentgmgarfin/finalreport_ccna_16aug2011.pdfclimate change...
TRANSCRIPT
ClimateChangeTrainingNeedsAssessmentIntermountainRegion–NationalParkService8/16/2011 University of Arizona Gregg Garfin Holly Hartmann Mabel Crescioni Benitez National Park Service Theresa Ely John Keck Jim Kendrick Kristin Legg Janet Wise
2
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................................5
PROJECTTIMELINE...............................................................................................................................6
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.........................................................................................................................7
SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION AND METHODS....................................................................11
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 11
Methods ........................................................................................................................................................... 11
Recent Relevant Surveys ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Online Survey .......................................................................................................................................................... 11
Interviews ................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Curricula Outlines and Decision Trees .................................................................................................................... 12
Website Evaluations ................................................................................................................................................ 12
SECTION2‐ONLINESURVEY...........................................................................................................13
Online Survey Design ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Demographics ................................................................................................................................................... 13
Managerial representation in the survey sample. ................................................................................................ 13
Representation of job categories in the survey sample. ...................................................................................... 13
Figure 2.1. Answers to the question “How long have you worked for the National Park Service? ........................ 14
Figure 2.2. Answers to the question “How long have you been in your current position?” ................................... 15
Figure 2.3. Answers to the question “How would you rate your ability to comprehend scientific literature? ...... 16
Table 2.1. Representativeness of survey sample, compared to composition of NPS IMR workforce (actual). ...... 17
Table 2.2. Comparison of employee categories and science information media sources ...................................... 19
Figure 2.4. Answers to the question “How would you rate your knowledge of climate change” .......................... 21
Figure 2.5. Employee ratings of the quality of climate change information currently provided by the NPS .......... 22
Table 2.3. Self‐rating of climate change knowledge, by job category. .................................................................... 24
Table 2.4. Number and percent of respondents identifying climate change definitions. ....................................... 25
Table 2.5. Number and percent of respondents identifying adaptation and mitigation examples ........................ 26
Figure 2.6. Answers to “Climate variability is:” ....................................................................................................... 27
Figure 2.7. Answers to the question “What is El Niño?” ......................................................................................... 28
Figure 2.8. Answers to the question “If the climate of the NPS Intermountain Region is changing due to human
causes, then:” .......................................................................................................................................................... 30
Table 2.6. Rating of the quality of climate change information provided by the NPS ............................................ 32
SECTION3–INTERVIEWS................................................................................................................34
Demographics (Questions 1‐6) .......................................................................................................................... 34
3
Your Experience (Questions 7‐8) ........................................................................................................................ 35
Table. 3.1 – Experiences with Climate Change training programs. ......................................................................... 36
Table 3.2. – Suggested goals of a National Park Service climate change training program. ................................... 39
Future Climate Change Training Programs (Questions 9‐18) ............................................................................... 40
Table 3.3. Climate change training: mandatory, voluntary, or only mandatory if needed for carrying out job
duties (i.e., “if applicable”)? .................................................................................................................................... 45
Table 3.4. How should the NPS IMR fund a climate change training program? ..................................................... 46
Table 3.5. Probable participation in a climate change training program. ............................................................... 52
SECTION4–CURRICULAOUTLINESANDDECISIONTREEDEVELOPMENT....................54
Methods ........................................................................................................................................................... 54
Table 4.1. Climate change training categories ........................................................................................................ 55
Table 4.2. Climate change training job categories, rationales and abbreviated curricula ...................................... 56
Table 4.3. Core topics and motivating questions for Intermountain Region climate change training. ................... 57
Table 4.4. Climate literacy curricula outlines .......................................................................................................... 58
Table 4.5. Communication curriculum outlines ...................................................................................................... 59
Table 4.6. Responses to climate change curricula outlines ..................................................................................... 60
Table 4.7. Decisions curricula outlines .................................................................................................................... 62
Table 4.8. National Parks and Climate Change curricula outlines ........................................................................... 63
Figure 4.1. Climate change training decision tree for the operations and administration job category. ............... 65
Figure 4.2. Climate change training decision tree for the interpretation and education job category .................. 66
Figure 4.3. Climate change training decision tree for the research scientist job category. .................................... 67
Figure 4.4. Climate change training decision tree, for the planning and engineering job category. ...................... 68
Figure 4.5. Climate change training decision tree, for the management job category ........................................... 69
SECTION5–WEBSITEEVALUATIONS..........................................................................................70 Website assessment ................................................................................................................................................ 70
Table 5.1. Criteria for evaluating climate change training resources. ..................................................................... 73
Table 5.2. Spreadsheet tools identification. ............................................................................................................ 74
SECTION6–CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................................75 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................. 75
Project Contributors ................................................................................................................................................ 76
Acknowledgments ................................................................................................................................................... 76
References ............................................................................................................................................................... 76
APPENDIXA‐INTERVIEWSWITHNPSCOLLEAGUESFORSURVEYGUIDANCE.............77
Interview with Intermountain Region Inventory and Monitoring Coordinator .............................................. 77
Interview with Intermountain Region Fire Ecologist ....................................................................................... 79
4
APPENDIXB–ON‐LINESURVEYPROTOCOL..............................................................................81
APPENDIXC–INTERVIEWPROTOCOL........................................................................................90
5
Abstract The National Park Service Intermountain Region partnered with the University of Arizona, to assess climate change training needs for over 5,000 Intermountain Region employees. The assessment team evaluated baseline climate literacy and employee training preferences, and outlined plans for climate change training. In the literacy assessment, the team identified adequate understanding of key climate phenomena, such as El Niño, but a lack of discernment between climate variability and trends, and little knowledge of climate projections for the Intermountain Region. Analysis of surveys and interviews showed that Intermountain Region employees are concerned with the following training program implementation issues: information communication technology, funding, clear guidance on actions and policy changes, and communication with climate change skeptics. Intermountain Region employees recommended that training connect global changes to regional impacts and local solutions, and demonstrate relevance to job duties. They preferred interactive, group, and hands-on learning experiences, but agreed to use electronic media, if costs constrain program development. They identified information overload as a problem. To meet diverse needs, within fiscal constraints, we recommend a modular program, leveraging existing well-vetted information resources. From a website evaluation exercise, we found adequate online training for climate change literacy, but a lack of training on topics such as mitigation of and adaptation to climate change.
6
ProjectTimeline
Task
2010
JAN
2010
FEB
2010
MAR
2010
APR
2010
MAY
2010
JUN
2010
JUL
2010
AUG
2010
SEP
2010
OCT
2010
NOV
2010
DEC
2011
JAN
2011
FEB
2011
MAR
2011
APR
2011
MAY
2011
JUN
2011
JUL
2011
AUG
Hire student assistant
Design survey and sampling technique
Implement online survey
NPS previous initiatives interviews
Analyze online survey
Design interview protocol
Key informant interviews
Analyze key informant interviews
Previous initiative sub‐analysis
Decision tree process and review
Web training and resource review
Draft final report and internal review
Park Science Publication
Final report
7
ExecutiveSummaryThis project was characterized by five distinct phases. These include the Online Survey, Interviews, Curricula Outlines and Decision Tree Development, Website Evaluations, and Conclusions.
Online Survey The project team developed the survey which addressed employee demographics, a climate literacy assessment, access to electronic information and Internet connections related to online training applications and learning style preferences. The survey was sent to all 5000+ Intermountain Region (IMR) employees in April 2010 requesting a response within two weeks. More than 600 employees responded providing a sampling size of greater than 12%. The sample consisted of 61% in non-supervisory/non-management positions. Regarding tenure, more than 80% of respondents have worked for the NPS for more than two years, and almost half have worked for NPS for over 10 years. Some job categories, such as Administrative Assistants, Laborers, Motor Vehicle/Automotive, Park Guides, and Park Ranger/Law Enforcement were under-represented in the sample. In the areas of Climate Literacy, information access, and learning style preferences we found:
o The majority of respondents (83%) rated themselves as having fair or good knowledge of climate change. The highest percentages of poor or very poor self-ratings, came from Administrative Assistance/Support, Budget and Accounting, Contracting/Purchasing, Facilities Management, Human Resources, Park Manager/Superintendent, and Park Ranger/Law Enforcement.
o Most respondents correctly identified climate change impacts observed in the IMR, but could not
correctly identify projected changes for the IMR. o While over 90% of respondents correctly identified definitions of key terms, such as the
greenhouse effect and mitigation of and adaptation to climate change, far fewer (38-82%) correctly matched seven examples of actions with the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation.”
o The majority of respondents (69.1%) have adequate Internet access and speed to receive a variety of electronic information and media; yet, fully 7.4% have limited Internet access or capacity. The rest of the respondents have adequate Internet access, but problems with Internet speed.
o If cost is not an issue, then respondents prefer to receive climate change training in-person, through
lectures, classes, and in small groups.
o If cost is an issue they would prefer to learn about climate change through user-friendly websites with clear graphics, links to background materials, and an ongoing discussion forum.
o Online classes were chosen by relatively few NPS IMR employees responding to the survey.
o Over 75% of respondents reported feeling comfortable reading scientific literature in scientific
8
journals or popular science magazines and news media. Communications, natural resources, environmental compliance, safety and occupational health were among the job categories choosing peer-reviewed scientific journals; Administrative assistants, concessions, custodial, maintenance, and visitor use were among categories choosing popular news media and science magazines.
More details regarding the results of the Online Survey can be found in Section 2 of this report. Interviews An 18 question semi structured interview protocol was developed by the project team. The interviews were conducted in July 2010. Fifteen handpicked IMR employees were interviewed in positions including Park Rangers, Superintendents, Facility Managers, the Employee and Organization Development Officer, the Climate Change Coordinator and the Deputy Regional Director. An assessment of the demographics of the interviewees shows that the group was primarily comprised of older, well educated, NPS employees, distributed throughout the region. More than half of the interviewees worked in managerial jobs. Tenure in current jobs was mostly less than 3 years. Compelling information obtained from these interviews included:
A training program should be flexible addressing technology limitations and allowing employees at our most remote locations to participate.
Interviewees recommended mixed methods of learning, such as classroom learning, hands-on
experience, and electronic media.
The key recommended metrics for content were: o credibility (i.e., rock solid science and transparency about information sources and
uncertainties), o connectivity (i.e., connect global climate change to regional impacts and local
solutions), o relevance (i.e., to individual parks, job duties, desired NPS outcomes), o consistency (i.e., IMR must present a well-articulated climate change message that is
consistent with all of NPS as well as with other Federal climate change messages).
Interviewees recommended this training program for all NPS IMR employees with the highest priorities for upper management, interpreters, resources, scientists, and facilities management staff. Interviewees recommended a voluntary training program. They suggested that the IMR needs to communicate clearly that the Training Program is a priority activity for IMR units and employees. Obtaining employee buy-in is perceived as important for the success of the Program.
Interviewees recommended not reinventing the wheel with the utilization of existing state, regional, and national programs. Within NPS, connect with Facilities Managers’ Annual Conference, NPS Fundamentals Training, Inventory and Monitoring Network, Safety Training Initiatives, Superintendent Webinars, and other sources.
9
Most interviewees suggested protecting park budgets and obtaining funding for a Climate Change Training Program from outside of existing park budgets, and outside of the IMR, if possible
We noted that no interviewees specifically mentioned adaptation to climate change, and this
appeared to be due to a lack of familiarity with climate change terminology
Interviewees recommended follow-up activities to maintain the flow of climate change training program information, such as briefings, Webinars, newsletters, and email. To evaluate the success of the Climate Change Training Program, they recommended the use of surveys and metrics, such as comprehension of climate change science and impacts, implementation of mitigation and adaptation actions by parks, and incorporation of climate change material in job activities.
Some key challenges for the Climate Change Training Program, identified by interviewees,
include: o Inadequate information dissemination and communication technology, o Lack of funding (for education; for implementing actions to reduce impacts), o Clear guidance on actions and policy changes, o Developing and disseminating clear, consistent, convincing messages, o Convincing climate change skeptics within NPS and within the public.
See Section 3 of this report for more details regarding the interviews. Curricula Outlines and Decision Tree Development Curricula Outlines and Decision Tree Development was the next phase in this project. Jobs were categorized in broad categories as follows: operations and administration, interpretation and education, research scientists, planners and engineers and managers. Tools for targeting climate change training were developed. These tools targeted employee categories and their work-related needs. They included the development of training rationales, core topics and curricula, and decision trees with suggested pathways for training. Details regarding these tools can be found in Section 4 of this report. Website Evaluations Next the Website Evaluations (Section 5) were conducted. To perform these evaluations, a rating sheet was developed for use in vetting climate change training resources. 155 websites were initially evaluated containing climate change training, information and resources with a focus on climate literacy, mitigation and adaptation planning. This was culled to 133 unique sites and these sites were evaluated for training resources particular to the needs of IMR employees. Most online climate literacy training is geared toward the general public and would be suitable for the Climate Literacy 1 course. There is a lack of materials for more advanced web-based climate literacy on climate change. Substantial gaps in training on vulnerability assessment, climate change adaptation planning, and making decisions under high uncertainty were found.
10
Conclusions Conclusions are detailed in Section 6 of this report. Given time and budget constraints that limit in-person training throughout the region, survey results and interviews with a selected group of IMR employees lead us to recommend flexible, low or no cost, modular climate change training with an initial emphasis on existing online resources. Additionally our observations of the rapid proliferation of climate information, on the Internet and within the NPS, suggest the need for structures to organize information, in a way that relates closely to employees’ work –related duties. There are several opportunities to leverage federal and NPS efforts to produce, implement, and maintain information and training. These include the NPS Climate Change Response Program, Department of Interior Landscape Conservation Cooperatives and Climate Science Centers, NOAA’s Climate Service initiative, and insights produced by George Melendez Wright Climate Change fellowship research. Project Contributors are also listed in this section of the report. The project team recommends that the IMR will take on the task of implementing a Climate Change Training Program in concert with internal and external partners. The soon to be IMR Climate Change and Sustainability Committee could adopt this project and work towards the implementation of a training program consistent with their draft charter and in coordination with the NPS Climate Change Response Program.
11
Section 1 – Introduction and Methods
Introduction The Intermountain Region (IMR) is one of the most diverse in the National Park Service (NPS) system, with over 90 park units encompassing coastal, desert, mountain and prairie ecosystems. Climate change and vanishing landscapes were among the top five IMR challenges enumerated in an unpublished 2009 report. To prepare for these challenges, the IMR engaged University of Arizona scientists to assess needs for workshops and training to provide IMR employees with information that they could use to manage resources, mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, and plan for adaptation to climate changes. University and NPS investigators refined the project scope and agreed upon the following goals:
assess the climate change knowledge of a representative sample of IMR employees, determine the content, look, feel, and communication media of training modules for
employees, develop a road map linking current and anticipated climate change information needs, and determine how to best leverage existing climate change information resources and to reconcile
information from different sources.
Methods
Recent Relevant Surveys Project Team members were aware of two recent surveys conducted in the Inventory and Monitoring and Fire Programs. Obtaining background and recommendations from these surveys would serve as a good baseline prior to initiating our survey. Thus, interviews were conducted in spring 2010. Appendix A documents interviews with these two Program Managers.
Online Survey To evaluate climate change literacy and training preferences, the team developed a 21 question structured online survey, using Likert-scale, multiple preference, and open-ended questions. Six hundred nine out of 5,379 IMR employees (12.6%) responded to the survey. The sample represented 31 workforce roles, defined by amalgamating 166 unique NPS occupational series. Some roles, such as automotive, engineers, and skilled trades were under-represented.
Our survey analysis does not account for the effects of nonresponse bias; thus, caution should be applied when extrapolating the results to the entire population of IMR employees. The sample used in this study did not account for bias created by self-selection of survey respondents. To evaluate the representativeness of the sample, we compared the percentage of the full IMR workforce in each of the 31 workforce roles with the percentage of the sample in each of the 31 workforce roles (Table 2.1). We found that 23 of the 31 workforce roles (74.2%) in our sample were within 3% of the full workforce, a reasonable representation of the workforce categories. For the following workforce roles, there were differences greater than 3% between the full workforce and our sample: administrative assistance/office support (4.6%), facilities management (-7.3%), interpreter (-12.5%), laborer (3.9%), motor vehicle/automotive (14.2%), natural resources (e.g., biologist, ecologist, geologist, meteorologist) (-3.7%), park guide (3.4%),
12
park ranger/law enforcement (13.6%). (Negative numbers indicate that we oversampled in these workforce roles.) Caution should be applied when extrapolating the sample results to the entire population; results are least robust in representing workforce categories with large differences. The Online Survey used in the project can be found in Appendix B.
Interviews The interviews were conducted after analysis of the survey, and interview questions were informed by survey results and knowledge gaps. For the interviews (n=15), NPS team members selected key informants, across a spectrum of job roles. Interview questions focused on aspects of a training program and organizational challenges. See Appendix C for the Interview Protocol.
Curricula Outlines and Decision Trees A result of analyzing the feedback from the online survey and interviews led to the development of the curricula outlines and decision trees. Five Core Topics (Climate Literacy, Communication, Responses, Decisions and Parks) were identified with 15 individual courses within these core topic areas. Five Decision Trees were developed to address the training needs specific to various job categories. Curricula outlines and decision trees can be found in Section 4 of this report.
Website Evaluations
We initially evaluated 155 websites containing climate change training, information, and resources with a focus on climate literacy, mitigation, and adaptation planning. This list was culled to 133 unique sites, as some were determined inappropriate for the IMR, and on follow-up reviews, others posed sufficient technical challenges (e.g., broken hyperlinks), that we decided to eliminate them from the final report. We made a distinction between resources for training and for information transfer. The former has a well-defined and consistent structure geared toward education, is self-contained, and provides a structured flow from topic to topic. The latter usually consists of loosely organized information and lacks a clearly defined structure for guiding users through related materials. We initially screened web resources based on whether or not they provided training. We next evaluated websites and training materials using criteria modified from a checklist developed by the Climate Literacy & Energy Awareness Network (http://cleanet.org). Our criteria addressed scientific accuracy, pedagogy, usability and technical quality, alignment with our audiences, and an overall rating. In addition, we note that the content and structure of websites are both rapidly changing; some materials available during our initial review were re-organized or added to, which made for a challenging assessment.
13
Section2‐OnlineSurvey
OnlineSurveyDesignTo evaluate climate change literacy and training preferences, the team developed a 21-question structured online survey, using Likert-scale, multiple preference, and open-ended questions. See Appendix B. The survey was comprised of four sections – employee demographics, learning style preferences, a climate change knowledge assessment and a rating of existing climate change training materials.
Demographics
Years of service.
Survey participants had good longevity in their National Park Service (NPS) jobs. Only 18.1% have worked for the NPS for less than two years, and almost half (47.3%) of the 609 survey participants reported having worked for the NPS for over 10 years (Figure 2.1). Most respondents have been in their current position for less than two years (40.4%; Figure 2.2), whereas 32.1% have been in their current position for six or more years.
Managerial representation in the survey sample.
61% of survey participants reported their job responsibilities were of a non-supervisory/non-management capacity, 29% reported being in a supervisory/management capacity while only 10% reported being in an upper management capacity (Figure 2.3).
Representation of job categories in the survey sample.
With regard to the type of employees who completed the survey, 12.6 percent of those who responded, the largest category, were from the Natural Resources group (for example, biologist, ecologist, geographer, geologist, hydrologist, meteorologist), followed by the Interpreters (12.5%). Facilities Management and ‘Other’ tied for third place (8.9%).
A comparison of the number of employees in each employee category with the number of employees that answered the survey, shows that several job categories are under–represented, including: Administrative Assistants/Support, Engineering, Wildland Fire, Laborer, Motor Vehicle/Automotive, Park Guide, Park Ranger/Law Enforcement, Skilled Trade, Trails and Utility Systems. (See Table 2.1 for percentages).
14
Figure2.1.Answerstothequestion“HowlonghaveyouworkedfortheNationalParkService?” expressed as a percent of all survey respondents. (n=609)
18.1%
18.2%
16.4%
47.3%
Less than 2years
2-5 years
6-10 years
more than 10years
15
Figure2.2.Answerstothequestion“Howlonghaveyoubeeninyourcurrentposition?” expressed as a percent of all survey respondents. (n=609)
40.4%
27.5%
17.1%
15.0%Less than 2 years
2-5 years
6-10 years
more than 10years
16
Figure 2.3. Answers to the question “How would you rate your ability to comprehendscientific literature? (Select the most appropriate one)” expressed as a percentage of all survey respondents.
49.0%
34.4%
9.8%
5.1%
1.7%
I feel comfortable readingscientific literature in peer-reviewed scientific journals (forexample, Science, Nature,Journal of Climate, Ecology,Canadian Journal of Forestry,Applied Anthropology, etc.).I feel comfortable readingscientific literature in popularscience magazines (for example,Scientific American, ScienceNews, National Geographic,Discover)
I feel comfortable reading aboutscientific discoveries in popularnews media, such as generalinterest magazines, newspapers,websites (for example., Time,Newsweek, local newspaper)
I feel comfortable hearing aboutscientific discoveries if explainedin common language by anexpert, such as on television andradio (for example, Nova,evening news, talk show)
I do not feel comfortable readingany scientific literature
17
Table2.1.Representativenessofsurveysample,comparedtocompositionofNPSIMRworkforce(actual).
Role Number Survey ACTUAL % SURVEY %
ACTUAL - SURVEY%
Administrative Assistance/Support (including office support, clerk) 738
5513.7 9.1 4.6
Budget and Accounting 98 27 1.8 4.5 -2.6Communications (for example, audiovisual, writer, editor, telecommunications, theater) 62
161.2 2.6 -1.5
Concessions 34 9 0.6 1.5 -0.9
Contracting/Purchasing 57 13 1.1 2.1 -1.1
Custodial 8 4 0.1 0.7 -0.5Cultural resources (including archeology, historic preservation, anthropology, historian, curatorial) 173
373.2 6.1 -2.9
Engineering (including civil, environmental, general, mechanical) 151
142.8 2.3 0.5
Environmental Compliance/Outdoor Recreation Planner (for example, NEPA) 23
170.4 2.8 -2.4
Environmental Protection (for example, Sustainability) 23
70.4 1.2 -0.7
Facilities Management 106 56 2.0 9.2 -7.3
Fire (Wildland) 220 18 4.1 3.0 1.1
GIS 3 8 0.1 1.3 -1.3
Human Resources, Equal Employment 87 18 1.6 3.0 -1.4
Information Technology 64 13 1.2 2.1 -1.0
Interpreter 20 78 0.4 12.9 -12.5
Laborer 238 3 4.4 0.5 3.9
Landscape Architect 33 3 0.6 0.5 0.1
Maintenance/Mechanical Maintenance 25 14 0.5 2.3 -1.8
Motor Vehicle, Automotive 784 2 14.6 0.3 14.2
Museums, Exhibits, Web-based outreach 74 13 1.4 2.1 -0.8Natural Resources (e.g., biologist, ecologist, geographer, geologist, hydrologist, meteorologist) 538
8310.0 13.7 -3.7
Park Guide/Aid 237 6 4.4 1.0 3.4
Park Manager/Superintendent 77 17 1.4 2.8 -1.4
Park Ranger, Law Enforcement 978 28 18.2 4.6 13.6
Public Affairs/Public Information 29 8 0.5 1.3 -0.8
Safety and Occupational Health 23 5 0.4 0.8 -0.4Skilled Trade (for example, carpentry, masonry, painter, plumber, welding, woodcraft) 159
83.0 1.3 1.6
Trails 34 2 0.6 0.3 0.3
Utility Systems 55 2 1.0 0.3 0.7
Visitor Use 25 21 0.5 3.5 -3.0
Other (please specify) 203 1 3.8 0.2 3.6TOTAL 5379 606 100.0 100.0 0.0
18
Media for a Climate Education and Information Program
Access to electronic information.
The survey participants reported that:
They are able to receive work-related education and training materials via electronic media, that internet and email access is not a problem, and that their office internet speed is adequate to handle large files (69.1%)
Almost 27% percent said that although internet and email access is not a problem, their office internet speed cannot handle large files
Only 7.4% reported having either limited internet access or having trouble with receiving information via the internet, with 2.7 percent reported having limited access to the internet and email, although office internet speed is adequate to handle large files
2.2 percent reported having limited access to the internet and to email, while their office internet speed cannot handle large files, and
2.5 percent reported that they can receive digital information if it is sent on CD or DVD, but not via the internet.
When examining ability to access information from the work area by employee category, we see that: 68.7 percent of employees in each category report that access to Internet and email is not a
problem and their office internet speed is adequate to handle large files, podcasts and other “movie-like” presentations
The second highest selection rate of 24.7 percent corresponds to reports that internet and email access is not a problem but their office internet speed is such that it cannot handle large files, podcasts, and other “movie-like” presentations.
The results presented here are limited by rapid changes in technology. For example, during the time of this study, webinars and cell phone applications have moved from leading edge technology to become widespread. The expectation is that employee access to electronic information will become easier, faster, and more pervasive, with concurrent increase in the density and complexity of available information and tools.
Comprehension of scientific information (self rating). When asked to rate their ability to comprehend scientific literature:
Over three quarters of survey participants reported feeling comfortable reading scientific literature in peer-reviewed scientific journals (49%) or in scientific literature in popular science magazines (34.4%) (Figure 2.3)
Meanwhile, 9.8 percent of participants reported feeling comfortable reading about scientific discoveries in popular news media
5.1% reported feeling comfortable hearing about scientific discoveries in common language by an expert
While only 1.7% reported not feeling comfortable reading any scientific literature
19
Over 93% of survey respondents reported comfort with reading scientific literature or discoveries.
In Table 2.2, below, the employee and media categories are contrasted. Popular news media and science magazines were combined to show that a more popular media approach might be more effective with employee categories such as administrative support, budget and accounting, concessions, custodial, and maintenance. The last column in Table 2.2 shows employee categories where results on media preferences were split in half. Finally, some employee categories are not included in this table because there were not enough respondents to show a significant media preference (i.e., these categories had low sample sizes).
Table 2.2. Comparison of employee categories and science informationmedia sources, in response to the question “How would you rate your ability to comprehend scientific literature? (Select the most appropriate one).”
Media Popular news media and Science Magazines
Peer-Reviewed Scientific Journals
Both
Employee Category
Administrative Assistance/Support (including office support, clerk)
Communications (for example, audiovisual, writer, editor, telecommunications, theater)
Engineering (including civil, environmental, general, mechanical)
Budget and Accounting Cultural resources (including archeology, historic preservation, anthropology, historian, curatorial)
Facilities Management
Concessions Environmental Compliance/Outdoor Recreation Planner (for example, NEPA)
Fire (Wildland)
Custodial Environmental Protection (for example, Sustainability)
Information Technology
Human Resources, Equal Employment GIS Interpreter Maintenance/Mechanical Maintenance Natural Resources (for
example, biologist, ecologist, geographer, geologist, hydrologist, meteorologist)
Museums, Exhibits, Web-based outreach
Park Manager/Superintendent
Park Guide/Aid Public Affairs/Public Information
Visitor Use Safety and Occupational Health
Skilled Trade (for example, carpentry, masonry, painter, plumber, welding, woodcraft)
20
Regarding media sources, participants reported that if cost is not an issue they would prefer to learn about climate change through small groups, in-person lecture series and/or classes of about 10-15 people, whereas if cost is an issue they would prefer to learn about climate change through user-friendly websites with clear graphics, links to background materials, and an ongoing discussion forum. When asked to rate preferred media sources without regard to cost: First choice: small groups or in-person lecture series and/or classes of 10-15 people – ranked
#1 by the majority of employees Second choice: Online classes came in a close second in the rankings, among Facilities
Management, Contracting, Interpreter and Natural Resources Large in-person lecture series and/or classes (30-100 people) ranked second among
Environmental Protection, GIS and Fire employees.
Among the media outlets with the lowest ratings, we found:
Live Webinars, with the opportunity to ask questions and hear others questions/answers and User-friendly websites with clear graphics, links to background materials, and an ongoing
discussion forum (a blog, an “ask the expert” feature, a chat thread).
When asked to rate their preferred media source with regard to cost the responses were more diverse.
First choice: user-friendly websites with clear graphics, links to background materials, and an ongoing discussion forum (a blog, an “ask the expert” feature, a chat thread).
o Administrative Assistance/Support, Engineering, Facilities Management, Interpreter, Natural Resources, Maintenance/Mechanical Maintenance and Museums, Exhibits, Web-based outreach
First choice: Live Webinars, with the opportunity to ask questions and hear others questions/answers.
o Communications employees
First choice: extensive online publications (manuals or books). o Information Technology employees
First choice: Online Class. o Human Resources, Equal Employment employees
First choice: brief printed publications.
o Wildland Fire and Budget and Accounting
First choice: user-friendly websites with clear graphics and links to background materials. o Park Ranger/Law Enforcement
The communication media with the lowest ratings were Online Class and User-friendly websites with clear graphics and links to background materials. Among Cultural Resources, Environmental Compliance, Environmental Protection, Fire, Park Manager, Park Guide,
21
Public Affairs, Safety and Occupational Health, Skilled Trade, Trails, Utility Systems and Visitor Use, the number of survey respondents (sample size) was not large enough to assess which communication media were clearly preferred for these employees.
Climate Literacy
Climate change knowledge (self rating).
NPS IMR employees are pretty confident about their knowledge. Over half of survey participants (53.9%) describe their knowledge of climate change as either excellent (8.3%) or good (45.6%) (Figure 2.4). Only 8.7% described their knowledge as poor or very poor. However, when asked to rate the quality of climate change information provided by the NPS (Figure 2.5), over half (51.2%) reported that the information was of average quality and over a quarter reported that the information was below average (24.7%) or extremely poor (7.9%) quality. A small number of participants felt that the information provided by NPS was of excellent (1.3%) or above average (15%) quality (Table 2.6).
Figure2.4.Answerstothequestion“Howwouldyourateyourknowledgeofclimatechange” presented as a percent of the total number of survey respondents for this question (n=588).
8.3%
45.6%37.4%
6.8% 1.9%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
22
Figure2.5.EmployeeratingsofthequalityofclimatechangeinformationcurrentlyprovidedbytheNPS, to make well-informed decisions or plans about [your] work; answers are presented as a percentage of all respondents answering this question (n=549).
The following assessment of job categories and climate change knowledge pertains to Table 2.3. Excellent. Of the 8.3% of survey respondents that rated their knowledge of climate change as excellent, the highest percentages were in the following job categories: Communications, Cultural Resources, Environmental Protection, GIS, Information Technology, Maintenance, Natural Resources, and Skilled Trade.
When employees were asked to rate their climate change knowledge, 83 percent of employees rated their knowledge as either fair or good. Good. Employee categories where the majority or near majority of employees rated their climate change knowledge as good included: Communications, Concessions, Cultural Resources, Engineering, Environmental Protection, GIS, Human Resources/Equal Employment, Information Technology, Interpreter, Landscape Architect, Maintenance/Mechanical Maintenance, Museums/Exhibits/Web-based outreach, Natural Resources, Park Ranger/Law Enforcement, Public Affairs/Public Information, Safety and Occupational Health, Utility Systems, and Visitor Use. Fair. Employee categories where the majority or near majority of employees rated their climate change knowledge as fair include:
1.3%
15.0%
51.1%
24.7%
7.9%Excellent Quality
Above AverageQuality
Average Quality
Below AverageQuality
Extremely PoorQuality
23
Administrative Assistance/Support,, Budget and Accounting, Contracting/Purchasing, Custodial, Facilities Management, Wildland Fire, Motor Vehicle, Automotive, Park Guide/Aid and Skilled Trade.
The following categories were split in half between good and fair in their rating of climate change knowledge: Environmental Compliance/Outdoor Recreation Planner (for example, NEPA); Laborer; Park Manager/Superintendent and Trails.
Poor/Very Poor. The following job categories had more than 15 percent of employees rating their climate change knowledge as poor or very poor:
Budget and Accounting, Contracting/Purchasing, Human Resources/Equal Employment and Park Ranger/Law Enforcement.
24
Table2.3.Self‐ratingofclimatechangeknowledge,byjobcategory.
What is your role? Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Grand Total
Administrative Assistance (including office staff, clerk) 2 18 24 7 1 52
Budget and Accounting 1 5 11 7 2 26
Communications (for example, audiovisual, writer, editor, telecommunications, theater)
2 7 4 1 1 15
Concessions 0 7 2 0 0 9
Contracting/Purchasing 0 1 7 2 2 12
Cultural resources (including archeology, historic preservation, anthropology, historian, curatorial)
4 17 15 0 0 36
Custodial 0 0 4 0 0 4
Engineering (inc. civil, environmental, mechanical) 1 9 3 2 0 15
Environmental Compliance/Outdoor Recreation Planner (for example, NEPA)
0 7 7 1 0 15
Environmental Protection (for example, Sustainability) 2 3 2 0 0 7
Facilities Management 2 18 26 4 2 52
Fire (Wildland) 1 6 10 0 0 17
GIS 2 4 2 0 0 8
Human Resources, Equal Employment 1 7 6 3 0 17
Information Technology 3 6 4 1 0 14
Interpreter 4 44 25 3 1 77
Laborer 0 1 1 1 0 3
Landscape Architect 1 2 0 0 0 3
Maintenance/Mechanical Maintenance 2 6 5 1 0 14
Motor Vehicle, Automotive 0 0 2 0 0 2
Museums, Exhibits, Web-based outreach 0 9 3 0 0 12
Natural Resources (for example, biologist, ecologist, geographer, geologist, hydrologist, meteorologist)
16 46 21 0 0 83
Other 0 1 0 0 0 1
Park Guide/Aid 1 2 3 0 0 6
Park Manager/Superintendent 1 7 7 1 1 17
Park Ranger, Law Enforcement 0 13 10 5 0 28
Public Affairs/Public Information 0 5 2 0 0 7 Safety and Occupational Health 1 3 1 0 0 5 Skilled Trade (for example, carpentry, masonry, painter, plumber, welding, woodcraft)
2 2 4 0 0 8
Trails 0 1 1 0 0 2
Utility Systems 0 2 0 0 0 2
Visitor Use 0 10 9 1 1 21
Grand Total 49 269 221 40 11 590
25
Adaptation and Mitigation definitions and examples. NPS IMR employees displayed very good ability to match adaptation and vulnerability terms, with over 90% correctly matching definitions to terms for each of the 5 terms (Table 2.4). On the other hand, when respondents were asked to identify mitigation and adaptation strategies from among a list of examples, correct responses ranged between 38-82% – indicating some confusion about these terms when applied to tangible examples (Table 2.5). To the degree that distinguishing nomenclature is important, climate literacy training should emphasize the differences between mitigation and adaptation, perhaps in association with real management actions that have been employed by the NPS. To recap the results: a majority correctly identified the two mitigation strategies, changing the vehicle fleet (78%) and cap and trade legislation (82%). In retrospect, the strategy to “[m]aintain healthy, vigorous trees, and minimize severe disturbance by fire, insects, and disease, in order to keep carbon stored in forests” may be interpreted, in part, as an adaptation option, due to the mention of minimizing disturbance – even though the emphasis is on the last clause, “in order to keep carbon stored in forests.” Around 55% correctly identified this as a mitigation strategy. All of the other strategies – protecting cultural landscapes (44%), home lawn watering (60%), riparian restoration (38%), and promoting landscape connectivity (58%) – are adaptation strategies. The relatively low percentage of correct responses (noted in parentheses above) demonstrates a need to emphasize education in this area. Table2.4.Numberandpercentofrespondentsidentifyingclimatechangedefinitions.Correct responses are in bold font. (n=582)
Definition/Answer Option Adaptation Exposure Mitigation Resilience Vulnerability
Percent Correct
An intervention to reduce the rate of emission or increase the rate of absorption of greenhouse gases.
33 8 535 2 2 92.2%
An adjustment in natural systems in response to a changing climate in order to moderate adverse impacts
528 8 27 15 1 91.2%
Degree to which a system can rebound or recover from a disturbance or stimulus such as climate change
15 5 5 546 8 94.3%
Degree to which a system is susceptible to and unable to cope with adverse effects of climate, including climate change, climate variability and extremes.
2 11 4 9 554 95.5%
Degree, duration, or extent to which a system is in contact with a climatic disturbance.
4 553 4 5 14 95.3%
26
Table2.5.Numberandpercentofrespondentsidentifyingadaptationandmitigationexamples. Correct responses are in bold font. (n=553)
Example/Answer Options Adaptation Mitigation I don’t know Percent
Correct
Replacement of an agency’s fleet of conventional vehicles with gas-electric hybrids.
113 430 10 77.8
Maintain healthy, vigorous trees, and minimize severe disturbance by fire, insects, and disease, in order to keep carbon stored in forests.
226 304 18 55.5
Passage of cap-and-trade legislation to limit greenhouse gas emissions.
62 451 34 82.4
Putting additional resources into preserving and protecting cultural landscapes from climate related degradations.
239 286 23 43.6
Changing home lawn watering schedules to conserve water.
328 215 8 59.5
Restoration of streamside vegetation to enhance groundwater infiltration and increase baseflow.
210 325 14 38.3
Promote connected landscapes, in order to aid species in migration.
320 203 27 58.2
Other Definitions. The climate definition questions posed challenges to respondents, and are clearly an area of emphasis for a climate literacy program.
Seventy-five percent of survey respondents correctly noted that weather describes short-term phenomena
16.5% identified weather as the statistical expression of climate variability, which is not the correct answer, but is often used, colloquially, as a description of weather
Only 44.5% correctly defined climate variability; most mistook a climate trend as the definition of climate variability (Figure 2.6)
A large majority of respondents (86%) correctly identified El Niño as a phenomenon originating in the Pacific Ocean, with differential effects across the U.S. (Figure 2.7)
The 12.4% of respondents who identified El Niño as a generator of large Katrina-like storms are technically wrong; however, La Niña is associated with a greater frequency of Atlantic Ocean tropical storms – so, they were not too far off.
27
Figure2.6.Answersto“Climatevariabilityis:” expressed as a % of the total (n=575)
47%
44%
9%
A consistent long-termtrend caused bynatural factors.
The year-to-yearchanges in climate.
I don’t know.
28
Figure2.7.Answerstothequestion“WhatisElNiño?” expressed as a percent of the total responses (n=578).
0%
13%
86%
1%
A megastorm that alwaysbrings a lot of snow to theNorthern Rocky Mountains.
A climate cycle thatsometimes generates largestorms, like HurricaneKatrina in the Gulf ofMexico.
A climate phenomenon inthe Pacific Ocean basinthat creates different effectsin different parts of theUnited States.
I don’t know.
29
Climate Change Impacts in the U.S. Survey participants’ knowledge of climate change impacts in the U.S. and in the IMR was varied. The majority of participants reported correct answers for each of the 5 impacts questions. 90% or more reporting correctly on the risk of Gulf Coast sea level rise, increased likelihood of
both flood and drought for the Southwest, and increased risk of mountain pine beetle infestation
However, only 75% responded correctly that the amount and rate of future climate changes during the next 100 years depends primarily on human-caused emissions. This bears further investigation, as the relatively low percentage of correct responses may reflect beliefs that other factors are more important than GHG emissions, or beliefs that recent global warming is not human caused
Only 59% responded correctly that increasing frequency of heavy downpours is a clear trend in the U.S. Parts of the IMR have not experienced this phenomenon; thus, responses may reflect the bias of a regional perspective.
Human-caused Climate Change phenomena and mechanisms, and their impacts. Almost 94% of respondents correctly noted that “[i]t is possible to have individual extremely
warm or cold years, even when the overall trend is toward warming temperatures,” – which is a fundamental factor in understanding climate variability in the context of temperature trend-driven climate changes
Only 36% correctly noted that alternating wet and dry periods are still possible, given climate change in the IMR, which is another tenet of understanding climate variability in the context of trend-driven climate change (Figure 2.8)
The almost 18% who responded that IMR region precipitation should decrease may not be all wrong – if they are thinking only of the southwestern part of the IMR; this misperception may be a nuance of the fact that the IMR spans 20+ degrees of latitude (from Texas to Montana).
30
Figure2.8.Answerstothequestion“IftheclimateoftheNPSIntermountainRegionischangingduetohumancauses,then:” expressed as a percent of the total responses (n=567).
Two questions focused on fundamental mechanisms of climate change. One asked respondents to rank the major influences on global temperature during the last 50 years, and part of the intent of the question was to see if respondents could make a distinction between the ozone hole and global warming, and to see how many believe that urban growth is a key factor in global temperature. We measured the response through an average rating (where low values indicate high ranking as the #1 influence on climate) and overall counts within the top 3 influences.
3%
36%
18%
10%
33%
If we get a decade of wetconditions in the north part of theregion and at the same time adecade of dry conditions in thesouth part of the region, then itproves that the climate changetheory is wrong.
It is consistent with climatechange science to have a drydecade followed by a wetdecade.
Precipitation in the region shoulddecrease.
Natural climate variations will nolonger impact the region.
I don’t know.
31
A majority of respondents correctly identified accumulation of greenhouse gases as the major influence in the last 50 years, and many gave high ratings to deforestation – another major influence on global temperature
Few identified volcanic eruptions, which have a strong influence on year-to-year variations in global temperature
A fairly large number of respondents identified growth of cities as a strong influence. In retrospect, this answer can be interpreted in more than one way; for example that urban temperatures are influencing climate records, or that city growth contributes in multiple ways, such as through deforestation and land cover change associated with development
A fair amount of respondents incorrectly attributed strong influence to solar variability or the ozone hole. These responses indicate that a climate literacy program should emphasize the fundamental mechanisms of climate change; the responses also point toward possible follow-up questions on the responses and
Around 85% of respondents correctly noted that the greenhouse effect is produced by the accumulation of certain atmospheric gases. The greenhouse effect, and its causes (human and natural), is so fundamental to understanding climate change, that 15% seems like a very high number of respondents to have answered incorrectly.
NPS Climate Change Information A question on the quality of NPS climate change information referred to earlier, shows that a substantial percentage of respondents (~33%) find NPS climate change information to be of below average or poor quality, and only 16% find it to be of above average or excellent quality (Figure 2.5; Table 2.6). This information provides a baseline for measuring the success of NPS IMR climate literacy and climate change planning education and information programs.
With regard to quality of climate change information provided by the NPS that employees currently have to make well-informed decisions or plans about [their] work, the majority of employee categories reported that the information was of average quality
The majority or near majority of employees in the Environmental Compliance/Outdoor Recreation Planner, GIS and Safety and Occupational Health categories reported that the information provided by NPS was of below average quality
On the other hand, the majority or near majority of employees in the HPublic Affairs/Public Information and Park Manager/Superintendent categories reported that the information provided by NPS was of above average quality and
Finally, employees in the Park Ranger/Law Enforcement and Information Technology categories were split between average and below average quality while the Trails category was split between above and average quality of the information.
32
Table2.6.RatingofthequalityofclimatechangeinformationprovidedbytheNPS. (n=549)
What is your role?Excellent Quality
Above Average Quality
Average Quality
Below Average Quality
Extremely Poor
Quality
Grand Total
Administrative Assistance/Support (including office support, clerk)
0 6 23 13 5 47
Budget and Accounting 1 1 12 6 3 23
Communications (e.g., w riter/editor, theater, audiovisual, telecommunications)
0 2 6 5 2 15
Concessions 0 1 4 2 7
Contracting/Purchasing 0 1 5 5 1 12
Cultural resources (including archeology, historic preservation, anthropology, historian, curatorial)
0 3 20 9 2 34
Custodial 0 1 3 0 0 4
Engineering (including civil, environmental, general, mechanical)
0 3 7 5 0 15
Environmental Compliance/Outdoor Recreation Planner (for example, NEPA)
0 2 4 9 0 15
Environmental Protection (for example, Sustainability)
0 2 3 1 0 6
Facilities Management 0 4 32 6 5 47
Fire (Wildland) 1 1 10 3 1 16
GIS 0 1 0 5 1 7
Human Resources, Equal Employment 1 5 4 4 2 16
Information Technology 0 1 5 5 2 13
Interpreter 0 14 40 16 3 73
Laborer 0 0 2 0 1 3
Landscape Architect 0 0 2 0 2
Maintenance/Mechanical Maintenance 0 2 7 1 3 13
Motor Vehicle, Automotive 0 0 2 0 0 2
Museums, Exhibits, Web-based outreach 1 1 7 3 0 12
Natural Resources (for example, biologist, ecologist, geographer, geologist, hydrologist, meteorologist)
2 11 46 16 3 78
Other 0 0 1 0 0 1
Park Guide/Aid 0 1 4 1 0 6
Park Manager/Superintendent 1 6 5 2 0 14
Park Ranger, Law Enforcement 0 4 10 10 2 26
Public Affairs/Public Information 0 3 2 1 1 7
Safety and Occupational Health 0 1 1 2 1 5
Skilled Trade (for example, carpentry, masonry, painter, plumber, w elding)
0 2 3 0 2 7
Trails 0 1 1 0 0 2
Utility Systems 0 0 1 0 1 2
Visitor Use 0 2 8 7 2 19
Grand Total 7 82 280 137 43 549
33
A final question asked for open-ended answers regarding information most urgently needed to address climate change in NPS IMR employees’ work generated 299 responses of greatly varying length. We categorized the answers as follows:
Access to information (7) Communication of climate change science or policy to the public (27) Communication of climate science (e.g. to skeptics, and how the media portrays science,
what is junk science, etc.) (11) Communication within NPS (12) Communication of climate change policy (within NPS) (8) Communication with other federal agencies (1) Impacts of climate change (often specific to the IMR) (48) Mitigation and Adaptation (need for information or suggestion of strategies) (39) Monitoring strategies (10) Policy guidance (needed or suggested) (37) Research (needed) (7) Risk assessment (needed) (4) and Understanding of climate change (87).
Some responses related to more than one category, but we report these only by our primary classification. Most responses pertain to:
issues of communication (e.g., with the public; within NPS) comprehension of climate change science (e.g., needs for specific information or syntheses
of science articles; opinions on whether the science is real) policy guidance/mitigation and adaptation/risk assessment (e.g., pleas for improved
planning; suggestions to allow telecommuting; needs for guidance on selecting green products) and
impacts of climate change (e.g., information to inform the public; information on how climate change is affecting particular parks).
There were few direct requests for research, but research is implied in requests for guidance and information on specific impacts. There were only a few needs regarding access to information, but these may be systemic (e.g., “centralized website”). The discussion of climate change topics elicits strong expressions from individuals. This topic evoked powerful feelings from respondents ranging from disgust with the current situation, concern for the next generation, to a disbelief that climate change is actually occurring.
34
Section3–Interviews
Demographics(Questions1‐6)
Brief Summary. An assessment of the demographics of the interviewees shows that the group was
primarily comprised of older, well educated, NPS employees, well distributed throughout the region.
More than half of the interviewees worked in managerial jobs. Tenure in current jobs was mostly less
than 3 years.
Age Number
34 – 45 4
46 – 55 7
54 – 65 4
Academics (Highest degree completed) Number
High School Diploma 1
Bachelors 5
Engineering English/Creative Writing Park Management Biology Landscape Architecture
Masters 7
Forestry Resource Conservation Business Natural Resources Policy History/Museum Studies Education
Doctorate 2
PhD JD
Location of Employment Number
Montana 3
Arizona 3
Wyoming 2
Colorado 4
Texas 3
35
Current Position Number
Research Coordinator 1
Park Superintendent 5
Facility Manager 1
Acting Regional Chief Facilities Management 1
Chief Park Ranger 2
Landscape Conservation 1
Chief Interpretation/Management Resources 1
Regional Climate Change Coordinator 1
Deputy Regional Director 1
Human Resources Specialist 1
Total years in current position Number
0 – 3 9
4 – 10 6
Employees under your direct supervision Number
0 2
0 – 5 6
6 – 10 2
11 – 15 1
Over 20 4
YourExperience(Questions7‐8)Brief Summary. Interviewees suggested that effective training programs in which they participated had
the following general characteristics: (a) they mix learning methods (e.g., lectures, exercises, role play,
field instruction), (b) they involved hands‐on or on‐the‐job learning components, and (c) they involved
interaction with others. Interviewees valued trainings that encouraged networking, were thought
provoking, and allowed them to draw upon personal experience. Those who had taken part in climate
change trainings particularly valued the integration of global‐scale changes with local‐scale
changes/impacts and local solutions.
36
Table.3.1–ExperienceswithClimateChangetrainingprograms.Have you ever participated in a climate change
training program? Number
Yes
4
Scenario planning workshop by Holly Hartmann in March 2010
Self-Education Using Webinars & Videos
Formal briefings carried out by DC staff for the Superintendents
George Wright Society Meetings1
No
11 Webinars George Wright Society Meetings1
Four out of fifteen interviewees reported participating in climate change training programs. When asked
about benefits derived from participating in a climate change training program, interviewees responded
that they valued getting scientific back‐up and information on climate change and tools for interpreting
scientific data. Other important benefits derived from those experiences were education and
interaction.
When asked to provide an example of those benefits derived from participating in a climate change
training program, the interviewees reported receiving an overview on climate change. Others reported
understanding scenario situations on climate change, understanding adaptation strategies and coming
together with peers to discuss gaps. Another interviewee reported as a benefit, meeting partners
working on climate change within the region, having networking opportunities and getting assistance
and sharing information and resources. Finally, interviewees also reported that training helped them
understand global climate changes and how those changes affect biophysical processes and individual
regions. In other words, it helped them see the associations between changes in one part of the world
and they influence other parts of the world.
Interviewees were also asked to describe a profound training experience, including the benefits they
derived from the experience, as well as what they liked about it and what skills they gained. Responses
to this question included their initial training at the time of joining NPS, on the job training experiences,
and different types of educational programs. The common thread among educational programs was the
use of methods that incorporate classroom experiences with experiential learning exercises.
1 Note that one interviewee identified this experience as training on climate change while another did not consider it formal training on climate change.
37
NPS new employee training was described by several interviewees as a very positive experience. An
aspect that was particularly valued was an introduction to and history of the NPS. Some interviewees
described a program conducted at the Albright Training Center (ATC), which provided an introduction to
park functions. The ATC program was an off‐site residential training program. Interviewees reported
varied durations of the ATC training, including as long as two and half months, and as short as 3 to 4
days. Some interviewees described federal law enforcement training received at the time of joining NPS.
The common thread among these NPS new employee trainings is that they provided interviewees with
exercises in which they had to draw from their own personal experience and these often resulted in
profound insights. Other key aspects of NPS new employee trainings included the following:
they had interactive elements
they were thought provoking
they allowed employees to get away from daily routines
they included work with peer groups.
Interviewees felt that the combination of different types of learning methodologies is what made the
experiences successful, and that they enjoyed and appreciated mixed method trainings. They gave
examples of the mix of methods used, which included: using multiple instructors, providing hands on
experience/activities in addition to classroom courses, exercises to illustrate principles conveyed in
courses, scenario based training, group exercises, field exercises, field trips and practical exercises. The
use of role play and real world scenarios to learn skills was reported as a positive attribute of these
training experiences. Some of these programs also gave employees a chance to work at certain duties
and then receive training on tasks. The combination of classroom learning and field or hands‐on
exercises was noted as particularly effective.
Interviewees reported that the most important benefits derived from those experiences were:
Education
Interaction
Shared experience
Developed peer networks
The other interviewees felt that the most profound training experiences were highly participatory, such
as on the job training. These interviewees felt that classroom‐only training is not very effective. For
these interviewees, it was more useful to engage in a particular activity and learn on the job. This type of
training was regarded as more favorable because it gives individuals the opportunity to work on real and
very complex issues and learn while solving problems.
Finally, some interviewees described several training experiences related to their job functions or areas
of expertise. The format of most of these sessions included: people were working together in small
groups, case studies, lectures delivered by instructors with vast expertise and credibility, role playing,
open discussion sessions, reference materials, multidisciplinary group training, targeted training to teach
specific skills through small groups and online programs. Again, the effectiveness of these experiences
was tied to the use of multiple learning methodologies during training.
38
Interviewees reported enjoying the participatory nature of the trainings, the opportunity to build
relationships, receiving detailed and novel information, receiving practical education relevant for their
current job functions and receiving verbal and visual messages that were well synchronized.
Interviewees reported of skills learned in these programs that they still use today including how to
manage people, leadership skills and facilitation skills.
When asked about what they thought the goals of a climate change training program should be,
interviewees suggested the following overarching objectives:
provide science‐based understanding of climate change
provide information on impacts to parks
suggest mitigation solutions
address potential counter‐arguments to climate change findings
train resource professionals, in particular, and
articulate NPS climate change policy.
We noted that no interviewees specifically mentioned adaptation to climate change, and this appeared
to be due to a lack of familiarity with climate change terminology. Key responses are listed in Table 3.2.
39
Table3.2.–SuggestedgoalsofaNationalParkServiceclimatechangetrainingprogram.Based on your experience, what outcomes would you like to see as a result of a climate change training
program?
Area Comment
Provide a basic understanding/information on climate change.
Provide science‐based education on climate change, where items presented are backed up by real science.
The scientific data that backs climate change is debatable thus make sure that the information is solid.
To give participants better understanding of climate change and impact on the park.
Provide a solid science background
Differentiating between climate change and weather change.
Provide all employees access to credible information about climate change.
Address what are the approaches and strategies for managers
Develop a program with detailed information and novel data for those participating
Discuss Impacts to Parks and Visitors and Mitigation Efforts
Teach how climate change impacts the parks and their visitors and any activities that can be done to reduce the impacts.
Explain how NPS employees and visitors can become involved in carbon footprint reduction and sustainability actions.
Link climate changes elsewhere to changes in parks. Connect to change in other parts of the globe. What do we do about it? The issue feels overwhelming.
Connect climate change to their work experience
Provide climate change education that is relevant to employees and accounts for their ability to process information and their job functions. Level of sophistication should vary from employee to employee depending on the impact they have on the carbon footprint of the NPS. Relate to their impact and what they can do on their own.
Train resources professionals to identify impacts and monitor them at the parks
Address Climate Change Skeptics
Convince leadership that CC is genuine.
Understanding that this is a rapidly evolving science
Not sure that peers understand that change is happening.
Train Resource Professionals
Provide good talking points
Tools on how to engage people to talk about climate change
Train interpreters and managers by providing general education and climate change information at the individual park unit level
Outline NPS’ Climate Change Policy
Understand the leadership’s position on climate change.
Share consistent information across the NPS.
Provide a consistent and fair message to NPS employees from the federal government
Not Sure Unable to answer what should be the goals of a National Park Service climate change training program.
Don’t have enough information.
40
FutureClimateChangeTrainingPrograms(Questions9‐18)Brief Summary.
Preferred Characteristics of the Training Program
Flexibility – A program with flexible training options is needed, in order to accommodate work schedule constraints (e.g., law enforcement) and issues of:
o geography (e.g., employees at remote locations; region‐specific climate change information and solutions), and
o technology limitations.
Style – Interviewees recommended mixed methods, such as classroom learning, hands‐on experience, electronic media. They put special emphasis on:
o hands‐on, in‐the‐field, and on‐the‐job learning experiences o interactive learning (whether face‐to‐face, or through electronic media) o group learning and opportunities to engage in conversation about the topic, and o special attention aimed at avoiding information overload – thus, information must be
tightly packaged (e.g., FAQs, executive summaries, or fact sheets).
Content – The key recommended metrics for content were; o credibility (i.e., rock solid science and transparency about information sources and
uncertainties) o connectivity (i.e., connect global climate change to regional impacts and local solutions) o relevance (i.e., to individual parks, job duties, desired NPS outcomes), and o consistency (i.e., IMR must present a well‐articulated climate change message that is
consistent with all of NPS and this should be consistent with other Federal climate change messages).
Audience: All NPS IMR employees. Highest priorities: upper management, interpreters, resources staff,
scientists, facilities management.
Tensions: Interviewees recommended a voluntary training program. They suggested that the IMR needs to communicate clearly that the Training Program is a priority activity for IMR units and employees. Obtaining employee buy‐in is perceived as important for the success of the Program.
Linkages: Don’t reinvent the wheel; connect with existing state, regional, and national programs. Within
NPS, connect with Facilities Managers’ Annual Conference, NPS Fundamentals Training, Inventory and
Monitoring Network, Safety Training Initiatives, Superintendent Webinars, several others.
Tension: This could generate a lot of extra work for NPS.
Funding: Most interviewees suggested protecting park budgets and obtaining funding for a Climate
Change Training Program from outside of existing park budgets, and outside of the IMR, if possible.
Follow‐up and Evaluation: Interviewees recommended follow‐up activities to maintain the flow of
climate change training program information, such as briefings, Webinars, newsletters, and email. To
evaluate the success of the Climate Change Training Program, they recommended the use of surveys
and metrics, such as comprehension of climate change science and impacts, implementation of
41
mitigation and adaptation actions by parks, and incorporation of climate change material in job
activities.
Challenges: Some key challenges for the Climate Change Training Program, identified by interviewees,
include:
Inadequate information dissemination and communication technology
Lack of funding (for education; for implementing actions to reduce impacts)
Clear guidance on actions and policy changes
Developing and disseminating clear, consistent, convincing messages, and
Convincing climate change skeptics within NPS and within the public.
In the third part of the interview, the questions focused on ways in which NPS could invest effectively in
climate change training programs.
Programs, Audiences, Linkages. The first question in this section asked interviewees to think about what
kinds of programs or initiatives would be most beneficial to NPS staff and/or to the public. The majority
of the responses to this question emphasized the need for flexible training opportunities that do not
require traveling. It was noted that virtual training using telecast, Webinars and video conferencing
capabilities would be suitable, because NPS is spread out throughout the country – often in remote rural
areas. Another reason noted for the need for flexibility was that parks have different workloads
depending on the time of year and region; thus training should be available for those who need it and
when they have the time for it. Interviewees suggested developing succinct materials that could be used
by those who are busy and/or with park visitors. Suggestions included:
one page briefs that address frequently asked questions (FAQs) targeted to specific groups of NPS employees
a regional climate change newsletter
pamphlets or wayside materials and
a permanently fixed plaque that employees and visitors could read.
Suggestions for training included the use of workshops and lectures. The use of interdisciplinary
programs with mixed experiences that address different learning styles was also suggested. One
interviewee recommended starting with a web based program and then moving on to interactive group
events. There was a suggestion for mixing different employee groups, so employees can learn about
how climate change affects different parts of the national park system, and so they can see connections
and cascades of impacts through different jobs and responsibilities. One resource that could be
leveraged for training is the inventory network resource groups that meet at least once a year. Note: The
Inventory and Monitoring program is comprised of primarily natural resource professionals and may not
provide the diverse employee grouping mentioned above.
In parks or employee categories for which Internet connectivity is an issue, DVDs were suggested as an
alternative. It was also noted that the most effective park training was that done in the field i.e., where
instructors came to the parks and trained people on the job. This type of training might also be best for
facilities management staff and those who are most skeptical of climate change science, because
42
face‐to‐face training would provide the opportunities to address skepticism in a transparent and
interactive manner. It was also noted that for other types of employees (resource specialists and
scientists) classroom training will be beneficial.
In terms of the content of the program, interviewees suggested that the program discuss initiatives
currently underway to reduce the NPS carbon footprint. Some suggested that the training program
should also address the following kinds of questions:
What is climate change?
What does the science of climate change tell us?
What does and does not contribute to climate change?
What do we need to do to create a sustainable world?
What mitigation and adaptation strategies are recommended?
The programs should also address traditional ecological knowledge of native people, while working with
tribal colleges and other outside partners to develop a better understanding of native environments.
Interviewees also noted that it is important to have programs that integrate climate change training
with work experience. The program should work with people where they are and use tools that are
already available. One example offered as a model to follow was the recently implemented safety
programs, which have received a lot of attention and have brought about a culture of change to increase
levels of safety and the knowledge level regarding safety procedures. Along with this proposal, it was
also suggested that effective training include actual projects that are relevant and that need to be
developed or implemented. This would allow for an investment in needed projects and provide
employees with an opportunity to learn about climate change as they perform their job. Examples of
such projects include: lining retrofits, solar power training, LEED and green training, among others.
Interviewees suggested that the staff be trained using existing resources, like the Albright Training
Center, and that the training program should coordinate with or leverage existing programs, such as
science programs, research programs and cooperative ecosystem programs. Interviewees
recommended that the training last 1‐2 days for most employees; managers should have the option of a
longer experience which could include face to face training. Distinctions for scientists and nonscientists
were also suggested in terms of programming.
Finally, when describing the kinds of programs that would be most beneficial, interviewees mentioned
the need to provide training or education to the public. One interviewee suggested creating a junior
ranger program, with a badge to certify education for children and evidence of training to their families.
For effective public education, one interviewee suggested that NPS interpreters receive priority
attention, as they provide most of the information received by the public. It was suggested that ranger
talks on climate change be developed and complemented with visual images on the impacts of climate
change. It is important to address programs used for external outreach, which includes ensuring that
“canned messages” are clear so they can be communicated correctly. Examples of formats for these
messages include: brochures; websites (i.e., ensuring that materials are easy to find on NPS and
43
individual park websites); visitors programs at parks (evening programs, tours, video screens), and any
other outreach opportunities.
The majority of interviewees suggested that the main target audience(s) of the program should be all
employees. However, they recommended that the training program should be tailored to specific
categories of employees, rather than using a one size fits all approach. It was also noted that it is
important to invest in training, but employee buy in should be obtained first. Interviewees identified
specific high priority categories of employees for whom training would be critical. The most prominently
and frequently mentioned categories of employees were:
Upper Management(Resources Staff
Interpreters
Scientists
Inventory and Monitoring Personnel
Facilities Management, and
Green Team (more extensive training).
Interviewees noted that upper management training was essential to engage a wide employee base and
to obtain buy‐in from employees. They noted that interpreters and others who engage regularly with
the public, and resources staff require training in order to perform their job duties effectively; scientists
and inventory and monitoring personnel were mentioned for a similar reason. Facilities managers were
mentioned, due to their responsibilities in purchasing materials and building projects.
In tandem with the subject of the main audience for climate change training, interviewees also inserted
remarks about the style and content of training that might be most effective for certain groups of
employees. For example, they noted that DOI Learn is not liked by NPS employees. Instead it was
suggested that a variety of training opportunities be made available. They emphasized training to
develop those skills that will advance the objectives of NPS. The audience will depend on the objective
of the program. Interviewees noted that training will be most effective, if it ties education on climate
change science and principles with information on solutions. For example, effective training would link
global climate changes with regional/local impacts and mitigation and adaptation strategies that could
be implemented by parks or individuals (visitors). Some suggested that scientists may require training in
specific areas, whereas more general training would be appropriate for senior management and
interpretive staff. Superintendents, it was noted, should receive training that provides a wide‐ranging
overview (“360 view”) on climate change. For employees who need broad overviews and/or whose
duties leave them with little time to digest extensive materials, brief executive summaries were
recommended as a means of conveying information. New employees could watch a DVD which
highlights the policy, science and actions to address climate change in the field that are expected of NPS
employees. Finally, current employees could have a 15 to 20 minute online refresher course that
provides general climate change information.
When asked about other programs or initiatives with which this program could be linked, interviewees
identified the following programs:
44
NPS fundamentals training
Superintendent Webinars
Sustainable Practices
Inventory and Monitoring Network
Internet Connections
Safety Training Initiatives
Natural Resources Program
Sustainability Programs
Facility Managers’ Annual Conference
Advisory Groups, and
Leadership Groups (networks of communications).
Most interviewees felt that programs should leverage existing climate change initiatives. Linkages
should be used to gain an advantage, not delay implementation process. Interviewees felt that the
climate change training program should be linked to specific groups within NPS to ensure that programs
are fully integrated with other services, programs and employees:
Maintenance
Facilities Management
Interpretation
Superintendents
Specialists from national‐level NPS Climate Change program
Communications Specialists, and
Climate Change Coordinators (liaisons).
Two interviewees mentioned that they were not sure how this program could be linked. Another two
mentioned that they felt that the topic was important enough to be a stand‐alone program and it should
not be linked.
Voluntary or Mandatory Climate Change Training? The majority of interviewees felt that training should
be voluntary. Interviewees felt that mandatory training gives a negative impression, that it feels
burdensome, and that when things are mandated it puts people off and makes them resentful. They felt
that the importance of the topic would capture employee attention and draw participants. They also
expressed that really compelling marketing could also make employees want to participate. One
interviewee suggested that superintendents could use their monthly meetings to educate on climate
change with materials that are interesting and locally relevant.
45
Table3.3.Climatechangetraining:mandatory,voluntary,oronlymandatoryifneededforcarryingoutjobduties(i.e.,“ifapplicable”)?Participation in Climate Change Training Responses
Mandatory 2
Mandatory, if applicable 4
Voluntary 9
Although voluntary was the preferred choice, interviewees also noted (a) that making training
mandatory would “get the job done” and (b) if employee buy in was needed, then training should be
mandatory. Special emphasis was placed on the need to ensure that the example of other mandatory
trainings at NPS be avoided. As one interviewee said: “If it gives specific actions for NPS employees then
we should make it mandatory. If t is science and policy, voluntary.”
Other interviewees expressed that training should be mandatory if applicable. Some of these
interviewees felt that climate change training should be mandatory for resource professionals while the
rest of the NPS employees, including seasonal workers, should have voluntary web‐based training, not
necessarily through DOI Learn, made available to them. Other interviewees felt that everyone should
have working knowledge of climate change and suggested coordinating a brown bag lunch seminar
where everyone is invited.
Training Opportunities. With regard to what types of climate change training opportunities should NPS
offer (as posed in the question – “one big program delivered over a few days, or a menu where
individuals may choose different modules at their convenience”), most interviewees suggested that a
menu of modules offering different experiences was the best choice. The modules should be
individualized for certain groups and available at employees’ convenience. It was suggested that the
modules be an all‐inclusive experiential learning process. One interviewee noted that some employee
groups, such as law enforcement, may need to do training off site so that it is not interrupted by other
competing demands. For these groups, modules completed online at their own pace would be helpful,
as well as offsite meetings.
Webinars were identified as an ideal tool to provide content that is less technical and can be made
available to seasonal workers. Webinars could be publicized to all employees.
Another suggestion for a training module was to sponsor a “climate change day” where everyone goes
out to the field for a few hours to look at an area affected by climate change. This would provide an
opportunity to participate in a program out in the field, where impacts are more noticeable to see what
happens to the park due to climate change. This suggestion is consistent with responses to other
interview questions, in which interviewees noted that field exercises and hand‐on experiences are
effective and necessary supplements to classroom learning.
Other interviewees felt that classes or training delivered over a few days should be available to regular
NPS employees. This type of training was described as more effective or engaging than Internet‐based
46
training. It was suggested that Internet training be used to deliver more advanced training, following
general information delivered in face‐to‐face classroom settings. Another interviewee noted that
learning style preferences may vary throughout the organization: some groups may prefer a class
oriented approach while other groups may prefer online training with links to additional information.
Although modular training was identified as the best overall option (“training opportunity”),
interviewees suggested that modular training be complemented using: large group sessions, small group
sessions, online classes, DVDs, and podcasts. It was also noted that any technology used requires that
the equipment necessary is available to employees.
The geography of the National Park system within the Intermountain Region presents challenges that
require individualized approaches. One aspect has to do with the remoteness of park locations. To
address remoteness, training opportunities should include telnet training (via satellite), programs at
each park with guest presenters, and using new technologies that provide individual connections. In
addition to the remote locations, the vast expanse of the IMR prompted some interviewees to propose
that training materials highlight climate change evidence, impacts, and solutions for sub‐regions of the
IMR and individual parks.
Other interviewees suggested that one singular message be developed regarding climate change and
the science of climate change. This NPS IMR unified message could then be delivered through several
media, to allow employees to choose the medium that works best for them. Interactive training, using
face to face methods, was strongly recommended due to preferences for alternatives to classroom
learning. One interviewee noted interactive training opportunities should be encouraged, regardless of
whether they are presented in face to face trainings – and that the use of interactive electronic media
should be encouraged, as long as the presentation was engaging and interactivity was emphasized.
Funding an IMR Climate Change Training Program. Funding sources for a Climate Change Training
Program were also addressed during the interviews. Interviewees were specifically asked if existing park
or program budgets should be used be used to pay for training or should others fund sources be made
available.
Table3.4.HowshouldtheNPSIMRfundaclimatechangetrainingprogram?Funding Sources for a Climate Change Training Program
Responses
Funding sources outside existing park or program budgets
10
Funding sources within existing park or program budgets (suggestions include the following)
5
Cooperation from all parks and offices Cost sharing formula (80%/20%)
between parks and regional office Optional for parks and programs to pay Take a small percentage of funds from
parks to do training programs
47
The majority of interviewees felt that funding sources outside existing park or program budgets should
be made available for climate change training. Suggested funding sources include:
Environmental training source
National Level
Regional Office
New Congressional Appropriation, and
Reassess current appropriations and reassign monies.
Some of the reasons for these answers included:
parks are already inadequately funded
partners who might be interested in helping could be identified, and
training is not perceived as engaging.
It was also noted that training for Superintendents should be paid by the region.
Several interviewees felt that if this was a high enough priority, then funding from a separate source
should be provided. One interviewee suggested that new training should be addressed at the regional
level, but noted that for their program there is no regional training budget. Thus, if the training program
was made a priority for the region, then their program would receive training funds and, if not, then it
would be an unfunded mandate that is unlikely to receive attention from their program/unit. At the
same time, if NPS leadership identifies this topic as an important one then funds may be allocated. It
was also noted that taking money from parks to fund this program might discourage participation,
because taking existing funding from parks would be strongly resented.
Sources of Information. Interviewees were asked about how they stay current with the science and
understanding of climate change; which follow‐up activities would be most helpful after the “training
program”; and how they would assess if the program had achieved its goals.
Interviewees reported several sources of information which they use to stay current with the science
and understanding of climate change, as follows:
News media, including o Radio (National Public Radio was mentioned specifically), Magazines (e.g., Newsweek),
Television
Websites (Internet and intranet sites – National Park Service, CNN, Wall Street Journal, NOAA and local newspapers)
Webinars (DC ‐ monthly)
Albright Training Centers’ fundamentals training
Newsfeeds on smartphones o National Public Radio‐Environmental Issues o MSNBC‐Environmental News, o Nature o Public Broadcasting System (PBS) o Los Angeles Times
48
o Environmental feed from usa.gov
Scientific literature in peer reviewed journals (mentioned by only one person)
Park Science (a “reliable” internal NPS publication)
Books
Park materials sent by resources division, and
U.S. Fish and Wildlife climate cooperative.
The aforementioned sources are consistent with survey results, which indicated high NPS IMR employee
usage of radio and television news sources and the Internet.
Follow up activities. Interviewees reported several follow‐up activities that would be most helpful after
implementation of the climate change training program:
Climate friendly park certification
Newsletter (from the region)
Webinars (monthly – use DC’s or regional)
Email (send links to NPS sites, media sites, science sites, etc.) o Emails with two minute video (link or attachment) to remind people of what they
learned
Podcasts
One‐page briefs
Combination of activities that address different learning styles
Use inventory and monitoring networks to disseminate information
Publications
Routine briefings for Superintendents, and
Regional website with current information.
Evaluation. Interviewees also reported several measures that could be used to assess if the program had
achieved its goals or to evaluate the program:
Demonstrated understanding of climate change and impacts Review failure and success stories from the field Reduction of carbon footprint Reduction in miles driven or energy consumed Individual park statement of actions that they will take on climate change Success in implementing mitigation and adaptation strategies Understanding of basic definitions (climate change terminology) Implementation and incorporation of the material learned in their job activities, and Practice communicating about climate change.
Interviewees also reported several tools that could be used to assess if the program had achieved its
goals or to evaluate the program:
Post-implementation survey to assess knowledge acquired Pre/post survey to assess knowledge acquired Self-evaluation survey assessing changes in behavior or work style, and
49
Program goals, once established, should be used as measurement tools.
Relationship of Climate Change Training Program to existing or similar programs. When asked about
how this new training program should relate to existing State, National and Regional climate change
training programs and other similar programs, interviewees expressed concerns about ensuring that the
messages provided are consistent with the federal government’s message. Interviewees repeatedly
expressed concern about making sure that the messages delivered are consistent and coordinated with
the messages communicated by other agencies about climate change.
Repeatedly, interviewees suggested the sentiment “don’t reinvent the wheel” – i.e., existing resources
on climate change, available from other organizations, should be used and that this new program should
be integrated into existing programs. It was also noted that the program should not duplicate efforts nor
be redundant. Interviewees felt that this program should identify and evaluate state, national and
regional programs that may be used with some adjustments as necessary for NPS employees. It was also
important that the program be sustainable. It was also suggested that science be used to support NPS
actions and outline NPS policy.
Some interviewees felt that NPS had the opportunity to be a leader in climate change training at the
federal level. These interviewees felt that there was no program at NPS that would be similar to climate
change training, and were not aware of any similar initiatives. Yet they noted that there are many
initiatives implemented at NPS that are not connected or related; thus, it might be possible that there
are opportunities for linkages that they are unable to identify. They also noted that NPS had existing
resources, such as websites and Webinars, which could be connected.
Finally, an interviewee felt that linking this training program to other initiatives would be very difficult,
because it would require a full time employee to figure out what the agencies are doing and what’s out
there. Other interviewees expressed not being aware of any programs to which this training should be
related.
NPS Information Delivery. Interviewees were asked to identify, in their opinion, the major information
delivery issues for NPS with regard to climate change. The following issues/areas were identified:
Lack of Time o To figure out where things are o To read information o For people to assemble the information o To distribute information o Online training is not particularly good. Have a menu of experiences.
Communication o Overloaded with communications/information o Discerning [reliability] among information sources (including email) o Not receiving information in a concise format
50
o Information hoarding (i.e., lack of information sharing among NPS employees) o Learning and using podcasts to provide information o Enough data not being communicated o [Inadequate or insufficient] Information delivery among NPS employees o Misinformation among employees o Providing consistent information to the parks in a timely way o Sharing information among parks o Falling behind the curve on new technology o Providing information at an appropriate time and in an adequate format o Providing Webinars that are scheduled and options that are available when they need it. o How to engage in a continuous conversation about climate change
Funding o Resources to distribute information o Educational programs are not well funded to ensure training for all employees o Ability to have the resources to deliver programs
Policy o Making policy without understanding field implications o Revising DOI policy on training, due to impossibility of a regional gathering for ALL
employees o Understanding what actions to take o Understanding how to be a leader o Understanding and taking appropriate responses to climate change o How to continuously refine policy
NPS Workforce o Geographic spread (employees are spread out) o Some employees in remote areas
Isolation of employees
Inadequate computer access o Diversity of employees makes it difficult to craft general messages that work for
everyone across the country. o Overcoming barriers to achieve buy in from employees
NPS Climate Change Challenges. Interviewees were asked to identify, in their opinion, the major
challenges faced by NPS today with regard to climate change. In this question several issues/areas were
identified:
Climate deniers or skeptics about climate change as well as those resisting change
Communication o Scientific messages about climate change o To the public, including take home messages for children
51
o Creating communication strategies and program overview o Communicating impacts of climate change to the general public. o Coordinating information from parks, region and other federal agencies o Messages should be clear and less controversial o Outreach programs and messages should be clearer o Getting climate change stories to the public
Funding was identified as a challenge that makes mitigation efforts imperative. Lack of funding impacts the ability to work on: o Projects to reduce impacts o Projects to address climate change o Projects that improve efficiency
Impacts o How to deal with impacts o Understanding what are the impacts to individuals o Documenting impacts using scientifically valid methods
Mitigation and Adaptation o Getting employees to change their behavior o Getting visitors to take home change messages o Get ahead of the curve and mitigate so the problems do not become greater
Education o Educate legislators and conduct interagency workshops o Lack of knowledge and awareness of cc o People don’t know what CC is don’t have a commitment to it and don’t know what it is tied to
Policy o Bureaucracy makes it difficult to react quickly to protect species/wildlife. o Changing how we think about parks and natural resources o Protecting the environment for visitor enjoyment o Changes take a long time to implement and human perspective is very short o Time to focus on climate change o To start out small to ensure success and build from there
Science o Lack of scientific information makes it difficult to do long term planning
This response pertained to two issues: lack of policy or operational guidance from science information, and the challenge of planning in situations where there is deep uncertainty
o Rapid climate changes make it difficult to protect environment and species
52
Table3.5.Probableparticipationinaclimatechangetrainingprogram.Would you participate in climate change training program in the near future?
Responses
Yes (note: individual responses were for answers of “maybe” or “yes, if…”
12
Yes, if the NPS goal/mandate is for everyone to be trained
Yes, if scheduling permitted supporting it. Also would ensure that enough time and resources can be invested.
Yes, but depends on the content.
No, not interested 0
Maybe 3
Depends on timing and length of the program and whether the information will be relevant to me. If its detailed and a 2 day thing probably not. If it was about 2 hr Webinar on being a better global citizen.
depends on schedule
Maybe (Please explain) ‐ depends on how long is the training, how much it costs. Would want to ensure that there’s some improved skill set derived from participation.
53
When asked to provide any additional comments, interviewees mentioned:
They expected the University of Arizona team to provide new ideas to us and not feeding back what was heard from NPS. [Note: this individual suggested that the University of Arizona investigators díctate a solution for the NPS IMR, rather than asking NPS employees about their needs and preferences.]
For this program to be successful ownership and engagement at all levels of the organization is necessary.
This training must address climate deniers and skeptics and explain why there’s really no climate change controversy.
NPS must assume environmental leadership [on the issue of climate change]
NPS needs to craft messages about climate change that are consistent with those of the federal government
NPS must work alongside indigenous communities and engage them as partners to ensure their experience is included.
There should be more training slots available for programs like the scenario planning training coming up in Denver.
Inventory and monitoring networks should be used to ensure that all areas of the agency are working together.
In addition, we note the following additional concerns that were mentioned in response to other
questions:
The Climate Change Training Program must be cognizant of cultural sensitivities, especially with respect to Native Americans. NPS IMR is encouraged to partner with Native American communities, in order to garner their perspectives on climate change and to incorporate their traditional knowledge in Training Program materials
Interviewees used phrases such as “well articulated tangible outcomes,” and “results driven” to describe goals for the Climate Change Training Program, and suggested that if the Program did not cleave to these intentions, then it would be perceived as a waste of time
54
Section4–CurriculaOutlinesandDecisionTreeDevelopment
Methods We first categorized NPS jobs in broad categories as follows: operations and administration, interpretation and education, research scientists, planners and engineers, and managers. We did this by evaluating the 31 job categories and creating the 5 training categories mentioned above and identified in Table 4.1.
We then developed several tools for targeting climate change training with associated employee categories and their work-related needs. These include training rationales (Table 4.2), core topics (Table 4.3), and curricula that outline key concepts (Tables 4.4-4.8), and decision trees that associate topics with employee categories and suggest pathways for training (Figure 4.1-4.5).
We recommend that all employees receive training in the core topics of basic climate literacy, NPS policies and actions within their park, and the essentials of mitigation actions that relate to their job duties. If employees interact with the public as part of their duties, we recommend training in communicating climate change information (Table 4.4).
Additional training recommendations reflect the needs of specific job categories. For example, park interpreters and educators serve as the primary NPS interface with the public and may provide climate change training to other employees. Thus, we recommend that interpreters and educators receive training in more topics, including adaptation to climate change, and at a deeper level, in order to effectively communicate climate change principles and answer questions from the public and fellow employees (Figure 4.2). In contrast, planners and engineers may design infrastructure, evaluate mitigation compliance actions, and develop adaptation strategies. They also may need to prepare for casual public engagement, depending on their job duties. We recommend that planners and engineers receive deeper training in the core topics, and training in adaptation and in decision-making under uncertainty (Figure 4.4), including scenario planning and other decision frameworks (Table 4.6). Climate literacy for planners and engineers includes a technical understanding of uncertainties in climate and hydrology model projections and implications for flood frequency estimation (Table 4.3). Similarly, planners and engineers need a more technical understanding of federal regulations for compliance with environmental standards (see Mitigation 3, Table 4.5). Providing information at the deeper levels mentioned above might require in-person or online training that allows for real-time interaction with the instructor.
55
Table4.1.Climatechangetrainingcategories Role Training Category
Administrative Assistance/Support (including office
support, clerk) operations and administration
Budget and Accounting operations and administration
Communications (for example, audiovisual, writer,
editor, telecommunications, theater) operations and administration
Concessions operations and administration
Contracting/Purchasing operations and administration
Custodial operations and administration
Cultural resources (including archeology, historic
preservation, anthropology, historian, curatorial) research scientist
Engineering (including civil, environmental, general,
mechanical) planners and engineers
Environmental Compliance/Outdoor Recreation Planner
(for example, NEPA) planners and engineers
Environmental Protection (for example, Sustainability)
planners and engineers
Facilities Management manager
Fire (Wildland) operations and administration, manager
GIS operations and administration
Human Resources, Equal Employment operations and administration
Information Technology operations and administration
Interpreter interpretation and education
Laborer operations and administration
Landscape Architect planners and engineers
Maintenance/Mechanical Maintenance operations and administration
Motor Vehicle, Automotive operations and administration
Museums, Exhibits, Web‐based outreach interpretation and education
Natural Resources (for example, biologist, ecologist,
geographer, geologist, hydrologist, meteorologist)
research scientist
Park Guide/Aid interpretation and education
Park Manager/Superintendent manager
Park Ranger, Law Enforcement operations and administration
Public Affairs/Public Information interpretation and education
Safety and Occupational Health operations and administration
Skilled Trade (for example, carpentry, masonry, painter,
plumber, welding, woodcraft) operations and administration
Trails operations and administration
Utility Systems operations and administration
Visitor Use interpretation and education
56
Table4.2.Climatechangetrainingjobcategories,rationalesandabbreviatedcurricula.
Category Training Rationale Sample Curricula Operations and administration
Inform mitigation behavior; prepare for casual engagement with public
Climate literacy; National Park Service climate change policy and actions; workplace mitigation actions; procedures for addressing questions from the public
Interpretation and education Primary interface with the public; support mitigation compliance efforts; train other employees
In-depth climate literacy; National Park Service climate change policy and actions; workplace mitigation actions; adaptation planning and actions; in-depth procedures for addressing questions from the public
Research scientists Inform research practice and methods; inform development of science information for mitigation and adaptation decision making; lay groundwork for collaboration with other scientists; prepare for casual engagement with the public
Technical climate literacy; science to support mitigation planning; adaptation planning and actions; procedures for addressing questions from the public
Planners and Engineers Inform mitigation compliance and development of adaptation strategies; inform approaches for addressing uncertainty in decision making; prepare for casual engagement with the public
Technical climate literacy; mitigation planning and compliance regulations; in-depth adaptation planning and actions; frameworks for addressing uncertainty in decision making; procedures for addressing questions from the public
Managers Depending on level of management: inform mitigation and adaptation strategy policy and program development; inform approaches for addressing uncertainty in decision making; prepare for engagement with the public; prepare for partnerships and collaboration
In-depth climate literacy; mitigation planning and compliance regulations; in-depth National Park Service climate change policy and actions; adaptation planning and actions; frameworks for addressing uncertainty in decision making; in-depth procedures for addressing questions from the public
57
Table4.3.CoretopicsandmotivatingquestionsforIntermountainRegionclimatechangetraining.Topic and course Motivating questions
Climate Literacy
Climate Literacy 1 What is the evidence for global climate change and how does it relate to historic change in my local situation?
Climate Literacy 2 At a deeper level, what does the evidence show, and what do climate models project for my region?
Climate Literacy 3 What information do National Park Service scientists need for their investigations?
Communication
Communication 1 How do I address climate change questions from park visitors?
Communication 2 How do I address questions from policy-makers, public officials, and skeptics?
Responses
Adaptation 1 How can we adapt?
Adaptation 2 What strategies should I consider for my Park?
Mitigation 1 What can I do (in my job)?
Mitigation 2 What can we do (National Park Service, regionally, society)?
Mitigation 3 What are the relevant mitigation compliance and planning regulations, protocols, and considerations?
Decisions
Climate Change Decisions 1 How should I deal with the uncertainties associated with climate change?
Climate Change Decisions 2 What is the scientific background needed to support decision making?
Parks
Parks 1 What's going on in my park?
Parks 2 What's going on in the National Park Service and in the parks?
Parks 3 What policies, actions, and collaborations pertain to my park and throughout the National Park Service?
58
Table4.4.ClimateliteracycurriculaoutlinesCourse Curriculum Outline
Climate Literacy 1
Rationale: Basic climate change science for laypeople, that highlights the connections between global-scale climate system changes and their local conditions
Climate change: global to local
What changes climate? o Natural factors, greenhouse effect, past climates
Evidence of change o Global temperature, oceans, snow and ice, drought, ecosystems,
greenhouse gas emissions How sure are scientists?
o Observations, paleoclimate, models, confidence Local historic context
o Local and traditional knowledge of historic climate and extremes U.S. initiatives
o NPS, Department of Interior Landscape Conservation Cooperatives Climate Science Centers
Climate Literacy 2
Rationale: More in-depth examination of climate change science, for those needing extra depth, and to support knowledge for public engagement
In-depth evidence of change and projections of the future
Build on Climate Literacy 1, by adding depth and climate system detail, such as:
o Global carbon cycle o Climate system feedbacks (e.g., ice-albedo) o How global atmospheric circulation affects regional climate
Teleconnections (e.g., El Niño) o Fundamentals of global observation networks
Basics of projected climate changes and impacts for the U.S. o Regional and local observed climate change impacts, and the
certainty of connections between them o Climate extremes and sea level rise o Why small changes matter
Climate Literacy 3
Rationale: Greater depth for those needing to apply climate science to research, planning and infrastructure design
Climate change science for scientists
Build on Climate Literacy 1 & 2 Tools and Resources
o Climate change projections and probabilities o Monitoring: local and regional networks, and data o Climate science and service programs
Models o Deconstructing the black box: how do global climate models work? o Basics of integrated regional scale modeling
Hydrologic and land surface models Terrestrial processes and feedbacks
o Assumptions and uncertainties Projected extremes in contrast with historic observations Climate and hydrologic nonstationarity and methods for dealing with
nonstationarity o Statistical and dynamically downscaling o Methods and limitations
Monitoring issues o Global, national, regional, and local networks o Non-official observations and citizen science
59
Table4.5.CommunicationcurriculumoutlinesCourse Curriculum Outline
Communication 1
Rationale: Support casual outreach and interaction with the public
Casual Outreach
Talking points on climate change science, mitigation and adaptation, impacts and responses
Addressing skeptics o Common approaches o Resources
Public perceptions and attitudes Dealing with fear (especially for speaking with children) NPS resources for the public
Communication 2
Rationale: Support extensive outreach with the public, including decision-makers, public officials, skeptics, and others.
Extensive Outreach
Talking points on climate change science, mitigation and adaptation, impacts and responses
Addressing skeptics o Myths and misconceptions o Basics about climate models, climate system
observations o Resources
Public perceptions and attitudes Dealing with fear (especially for speaking with children) Group exercises
o Practices for effective communication Department of Interior policy
o When do you refer someone up the chain of command? NPS resources for the public
60
Table4.6.ResponsestoclimatechangecurriculaoutlinesCourse Curriculum Outline
Adaptation 1
Rationale: Address the needs of those engaged in extensive outreach, science and research, managers
How Can We Adapt?
Defining adaptation Understanding adaptation frameworks, including vulnerability assessment, exposure,
adaptive capacity Introduction to pathways for impacts
o Natural forcings (exposure to climate) o Human stressors (e.g., urban expansion, ORVs) o Multiple stressors and their intersections
Examples and case studies of adaptation actions o Use the “5 Rs” to ground the examples
Resistance, Resilience, Response, Realignment, Reduction (Millar et al., 2007 in Ecological Applications)
o Note: deeper treatment than in the Parks 2 Implementation
o Facilitation and adaptation actions Facilitation actions include monitoring and planning
Sector-specific issues Identifying opportunities to build adaptation into job duties and/or visitor services
o What can the public do? Resources and pathways for going further or more deeply into this subject
For wide scope option: overview of adaptation planning and actions at multiple geographic scales: individual, Park, region, nation
Adaptation 2
Rationale: Address the needs of those engaged in implementing adaptation plans and strategies, including regulations and policies
Adaptation Strategies for Implementation
Review of impacts pathways The science of impacts
o Vulnerability assessment methods and tools o Some sector-specific content
Review adaptation frameworks o Adaptive management o Uncertainty and adaptation
Scenario planning Narratives Climate projections
o Geographic context Parks affiliated with the trainee’s park, NPS challenges
o Time horizons for adaptation planning o Concrete adaptation tools and methods related to the 5-R’s
Evaluation and metrics o Determining whether actions are successful
Rules, regulations, policies Inventory and assessment Accountability Keeping up with developments in your field Collaboration and existing programs
o NPS Climate Friendly Parks o Department of Interior
Landscape Conservation Cooperatives Climate Science Centers
Funding opportunities Connecting adaptation with mitigation
Overview option for managers (keep these topics at 30,000 ft. level; don't go into the details of
61
regulations, policies, etc.)
Mitigation 1
Rationale: Essential understanding of mitigating climate change, and typical mitigation measures and practices
What Can I Do (in my job)?
Basics of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions o Defining mitigation o Human and natural greenhouse gas emissions o How you can calculate your own emissions o Examples of mitigation actions
Inventory and assessment NPS Climate Friendly Parks Customizing mitigation actions to my job
o Details will differ depending upon job duties e.g., concessions vs. law enforcement
Mitigation 2
Rationale: Address the needs of those engaged in mitigation work, management, collaborations with planners/designers, extensive outreach
What Can We Do (NPS, regionally, society)?
Basics of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions o Defining mitigation o Human and natural greenhouse gas emissions o How you can calculate your own emissions o Examples of mitigation actions
Inventory and assessment NPS Climate Friendly Parks Customizing mitigation actions to my job
o Details will differ depending upon job duties e.g., concessions vs. law enforcement
Mitigation actions and planning (basics) o Different scales
individuals, national parks, regional, national Communication issues Train the trainer option
Mitigation 3
Rationale: Prepare those engaged in planning and infrastructure design. Provide an overview for high-level managers, whose job duties involve oversight of planning, infrastructure development, and enforcement of policies and regulations.
Mitigation Compliance and Planning
Review of emissions pathways The science of mitigation Mitigation tools and methods Rules, regulations, policies Inventory and assessment Evaluation and accountability Keeping up with developments in your field Existing programs
o NPS Climate Friendly Parks o Opportunities for collaboration
Within NPS Cross-agency Regional Local
o Funding opportunities Connecting mitigation and adaptation
Overview option for managers (keep these topics at 30,000 ft. level; don't go into the details of regulations, policies, etc.)
62
Table4.7.DecisionscurriculaoutlinesCourse Curriculum Outline
Decisions 1
Rationale: Examination of approaches to climate change decision making under uncertainty, for management and planning
Uncertainty and Decision Frameworks
Varieties of uncertainty o Differences, depending on time scales, spatial scales
Decision approaches o Review of adaptation planning framework o Scenario planning o Robust decision-making
Design of robust plans Quantitative approaches
o Structured decision-making o Uncertainty and NEPA, ESA
Managing uncertainty within public processes Federal and Department of the Interior policy Tools and resources
Decisions 2
Rationale: Exploration of the science of decision making under uncertainty, for scientists whose work is needed to support management and planning
Science to support decision-making (at the ground level)
Vulnerability assessments Varieties of uncertainty
o Differences, depending on time scales, spatial scales Decision approaches
o Review of adaptation planning framework o Scenario planning o Robust decision-making
Design of robust plans Quantitative approaches
o Structured decision-making o Uncertainty and NEPA, ESA
Adaptation rules, regulations, accountability Federal and Department of the Interior policy Tools and resources
63
Table4.8.NationalParksandClimateChangecurriculaoutlinesCourse Curriculum Outline
Parks 1
Rationale: Basic information for laypeople and employees, on how the NPS is addressing climate change at the level of an individual park and affiliated units within the region
What's going on in my park? (At the level of geographically affiliated units)
Impacts o Global to Local
Review of how global climate changes manifest locally
o The science of impacts Observed impacts (pictures, data/graphs) Projected impacts (possible surprises and abrupt
changes) Responses
o How are National Parks preparing? Introduction to the “5 Rs” (with examples)
Resistance, Resilience, Response, Realignment, Reduction (Millar et al., 2007 in Ecological Applications)
o Partnerships with other parks, agencies, local governments Resources (in case you want to know more...)
Parks 2
Rationale: More depth of information about NPS climate change response, planning, and approaches, for those engaged in outreach, management, planning
What going on in NPS and in the Parks?
Impacts o Global to Local
Review of how global climate changes manifest locally
o The science of impacts Concepts
Feedbacks, thresholds, cascades of impacts Observed impacts (pictures, data/graphs) Projected impacts (possible surprises and abrupt
changes – emphasis on complexity) o Detection and attribution of impacts
Uncertainty o Inventory and monitoring o Keeping up to date
Responses o How are national parks preparing?
Introduction to the “5 Rs” (with in-depth examples) Resistance, Resilience, Response,
Realignment, Reduction (Millar et al., 2007 in Ecological Applications)
Emphasize goals, methods, outcomes o Programs and priorities
Department of Interior Landscape Conservation Cooperatives
o Big picture view of partnerships and institutional level responses
Resources (in case you want to know more...) o Courses and information on adaptation, climate change
decisions Parks 3
Rationale: In-depth
What is the NPS game plan? Who is doing what in my park and in the NPS?
o Connections between actions at many levels
64
information on policies, actions, and collaborations in my park and throughout the NPS, for high-level managers, and those involved in extensive collaboration outside the NPS
o International, national, Intermountain Region, affiliated parks, local
o Partnerships and collaborations o The NPS climate change training program o Update on the most recent NPS news about
o Policy developments o Collaborations o Accomplishments
o Resources for keeping up to date
65
Figure4.1.Climatechangetrainingdecisiontreefortheoperationsandadministrationjobcategory. This includes employees, such as administrative office workers, concessions personnel, law enforcement, and so on.
66
Figure4.2.Climatechangetrainingdecisiontreefortheinterpretationandeducationjobcategory.
67
Figure4.3.Climatechangetrainingdecisiontreefortheresearchscientistjobcategory.
68
Figure4.4.Climatechangetrainingdecisiontree,fortheplanningandengineeringjobcategory. This personnel who plan and design structures, as well as those who evaluate plans, and examine regulatory compliance in planning.
69
Figure4.5.Climatechangetrainingdecisiontree,forthemanagementjobcategory. This includes leaders, such as park superintendents, as well as resource managers who make decisions about resource stewardship and protection.
70
Section5–WebsiteEvaluations
Websiteassessment We initially evaluated 155 websites containing climate change training, information, and resources with a focus on climate literacy, mitigation, and adaptation planning. This list was culled to 133 unique sites, as some were determined inappropriate for the IMR; and on follow-up reviews, others posed sufficient technical challenges (e.g., broken hyperlinks), that we decided to eliminate them from the final report. We made a distinction between resources for training and for information transfer. The former has a well-defined and consistent structure geared toward education, is self-contained, and provides a structured flow from topic to topic. The latter usually consists of loosely organized information and lacks a clearly defined structure for guiding users through related materials. We initially screened web resources based on whether or not they provided training. We next evaluated websites and training materials using criteria modified from a checklist developed by the Climate Literacy & Energy Awareness Network (http://cleanet.org).
Our criteria addressed scientific accuracy, pedagogy, usability and technical quality, alignment with our audiences, and an overall rating (Table 5.1). The spreadsheets created to evaluate websites are detailed in Table 5.2. These spreadsheets are posted at http://www.snr.arizona.edu/projects/nps-imr. In addition, we note that the content and structure of websites are rapidly changing; some materials available during our initial review were re-organized or added to, which made for a challenging assessment. Most online climate literacy training is geared toward the general public and would be suitable for our “Climate Literacy 1” course (Tables 4.2, 4.3). The COMET program website (http://www.comet.ucar.edu/) contains Climate Literacy 1 training, and some material suitable for more detailed climate literacy training; COMET, a partnership between the University Center for Atmospheric Research and the National Weather Service, also provides in-person training for a fee, which may be useful to meet the training preferences of Intermountain Region employees, given ample budgets. In contrast to the abundance of online training on climate variability and weather processes and phenomena, there is a lack of materials for more advanced web-based climate literacy on climate change. Survey results indicated that many IMR employees feel comfortable with reading material from peer-reviewed literature, which is abundant online and in Federal government synthesis reports (e.g., U.S. Global Change Research Program); however, the specifics of disciplines like climate modeling and atmospheric physics may require further engagement via Webinars, or in person, in order to provide sufficient detail to NPS engineers, scientists, and upper-level managers. The NPS IMR may consider choosing from the menu of options suggested by the Website Ratings spreadsheet, and augmenting web-based and print materials with recorded and opportunistic Webinar presentations, given through the USDA-Forest Service Climate Change Resource Center, the National Conservation Training Center, COMET, NOAA/National Weather Service, and NCAR.
71
We found substantial gaps in training on vulnerability assessment, climate change adaptation planning, and making decisions under high uncertainty. Much of what constitutes training on adaptation planning is available from websites in the United Kingdom (e.g., United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme; UKCIP) or Australia (e.g., University of Queensland). The UKCIP website offers adaptation guidance tools (“Adaptation Wizard”), and a structured, interactive process for working through the basics of adaptation planning; access to the adaptation planning tools is free, but requires online registration. Of course, the specifics of examples from United Kingdom, such as policies, climatology, regulations, and so on, will require some translation, in order to make case studies more concrete to IMR employees. The USDA-Forest Service Climate Change Resource Center website provides a short course for land managers, entitled “Adapting to Climate Change” (http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc/hjar/index_st.html). The site offers several web-based video presentations on adaptation to climate change, for example, but the scope and specific case studies may not meet IMR needs for park-specific, or management-level specific training. An attractive, but somewhat costly in the short run, alternative, are courses offered at the National Conservation Training Center (NCTC), through their Conservation Science & Policy courses (http://training.fws.gov/CSP/CSP_course_curriculum.pdf). NCTC courses emphasize structured decision making; we were unclear on the degree to which these courses address decision making in situations of high uncertainty, which is required for climate change planning.
In addition to online training in the areas of adaptation and vulnerability assessment, there are many detailed information sources, some of which are endorsed by multiple Federal agencies. For example, we identified a multi-agency report, released in 2011, entitled “Scanning the Conservation Horizon,” on guidance for vulnerability assessment – a key facet of climate change adaptation planning. Another well-regarded text (report) source is “Preparing for Climate Change: A Guidebook for Local, Regional, and State Governments,” which was produced by the University of Washington Climate Impacts Group and ICLEI (Cities for Sustainability). The guidebook provides a step-by-step process for adaptation planning; elements of the guidebook have been incorporated into NPS scenario planning exercises. We note that local government is probably a similar scale of governance to that of a National Park; thus, we believe that the ICLEI/UW guidebook contains information relevant to National Parks.
With regard to suggested courses in Communication 1 and 2, we identified very few online training sources. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service offers “Intro to Communicating Climate Change - A Webinar Series for Communicators.” Some other sites, such as Colorado State University’s “100 Views of Climate Change” include Webinars on communicating climate change. Susan Burr (CIRES, University of Colorado) teaches classes on climate change communication and responding to those skeptical of human-caused climate change (Holly Hartmann, personal communication). The National Weather Service (NWS) employs Ms. Burr to train climate resource personnel in NWS forecast offices; thus, her work has been vetted by a Federal agency that puts a high premium on providing reliable and credible information.
72
Most other online climate communication resources are from academic websites that focus primarily on public perceptions about climate change (e.g., George Mason University, Yale University). Studies featured on these websites indicate that climate literacy initiatives can address concerns of people who are skeptical of anthropogenic climate change, because they are cautious, doubtful, or need more evidence (Leiserowitz et al., 2010); in contrast, skeptics who doubt the legitimacy of scientific evidence and the scientific process – a small proportion of American society – will not be won over by information, such as that included in a literacy program.
The largest gap in training materials associated with our suggested courses and curricula, relates to materials specific to the NPS mission and to individual parks or affiliated parks within a region. An independent project that is developing an Implementation Plan for the Climate Change Response Strategy has identified tools, training, topics, and other materials related to climate change and NPS resource management. We mapped some of these materials to our curricula. However, in general, development of materials for the Parks 1-3 courses will require further investment in human resources; the Climate Friendly Parks Program and Climate Change Response program are rapidly developing appropriate resources, but scaling them to individual parks will still be a challenge.
The lack of online training in some topic areas suggests that the IMR target resources toward subject areas for which there is little online training, developing courses and training related to adaptation and decision making under uncertainty, rather than devoting resources to basic climate literacy, for which there is abundant information and adequate training resources. Additionally, the IMR may consider using information and materials from diverse sources rather than relying on structured training to meet the needs of some job categories.
Finally, in the scope of work for this project, NPS IMR colleagues noted a need (reinforced in survey results) for reconciling information from different resources. There is no single answer to this question, as studies from different bodies of researchers often have specific foci (e.g., a particular region), or they seek to advance science through methodological innovations; thus, results may not line up precisely. In addition, the climate change information landscape is rapidly changing, and will continue to change, as new initiatives bring forth updated information. We can expect a refinement in results when the next U.S. National Climate Assessment report is released in 2013, and when the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report is released in 2014. We recommend that the NPS IMR adopt a flexible process for administering climate change training, in order to keep up with new materials. We offer this advice for establishing a safe process for recommending specific sources, which is embedded in our criteria for reviewing online materials: rely on materials that have attribution from credible sources that have been developed by trained professionals, that refer to IPCC assessment reports, and that keep material up-to-date. With respect to the credibility and legitimacy of climate change source material, the safest bet is to rely on materials developed by the U.S. Global Change Research Program, as such material receives the fullest vetting, including peer-review and agency review. In order, after the USGCRP, is material from Federal agencies, universities, and then NGOs; these entities are the most likely to follow a rigorous peer-review process and vetting. Again, their results may not line up exactly, but they are likely to appear as shades of grey, in a continuum of information.
73
Table5.1.Criteriaforevaluatingclimatechangetrainingresources. Category/Questions Scientific Accuracy Is an attribution provided that represents a credible source, such as a university or government agency? Has the resource been developed and/or reviewed by trained professionals, i.e., scientists? Resource includes reference to IPCC 2007 Does the resource present valid and/or accurate concepts? Are links to the original data sources provided? Where appropriate, are references, bibliographies and other supporting material provided? Do citations contain peer-reviewed material published since 2007? Pedagogic effectiveness Has the resource been developed and/or reviewed by trained professionals, i.e., teachers? Are learning objectives clearly stated? Does the training include different forms of presenting information (e.g., text, graphics, audio, video, interactive exercises)? Are prerequisite skills and understandings accurately indicated? Is there any indication that common preconceptions and/or misconceptions are addressed? Is there testing on the material learned? Does the resource provide a vehicle for asking questions or seeking further information beyond the activity? Does the resource provide a clear and comprehensive guidance for teachers to effectively teach the activity? [ONLY for training the trainer] Ease of use & technical quality Is the resource free of distracting or off-topic advertising? Has the website won any relevant awards? Are hyperlinks functional and up-to-date? Do hyperlinks take the learner offsite for any components of training? Are training materials and tools freeware? Does the resource meet technical criteria that make it ready for use? Is necessary material available in printable hand-out form? Audience Operations and Administration Interpreters, Education Specialists, Trainers Planners, Designers, Engineers Research Scientists Resource "on-the-ground" Management Upper Management (users of Executive Summaries) Overall Rating of Relevance High Priority (Resource likely to be included in collection of excellent resources) Medium Priority (Resource meets basic standards) Low Priority (Resource meets basic standards, but is of lower priority) Hold for Later Review (Keep in pool for another review at later stage) Excellent but Incomplete (Excellent and relevant, but needs improved activity sheet) Do Not Include (Resource doesn't meet basic standards)
74
Table5.2.Spreadsheettoolsidentification.
Carpe Diem West Academy Tools
A list of nearly 70 websites with Resource Name, Type, Description and URL link provided. Type is defined into the following categories of Data Tool, Guidance Tool, Information Tool, and/or Training. The websites focus on tools and training related to water resources management, and were identified as part of an independent project. Additional information about this project is available at: CarpeDiemWestAcademy.org
Website Evaluations A list of 68 websites identified by the columns –Full Citation, URL, Medium, Course, Concepts, Sector, Short description, Sources, and Rating. The ‘Medium’ and ‘Course’ columns detail the applicability or tie to the type of course(s) proposed in Section 4 of this report.
CCRPCrossOver A spreadsheet that identifies tools, training, and other topics related to climate change and NPS management that have been discussed as part of an independent project to develop an implementation plan for the NPS Climate Change Response Strategy. Holly Hartmann has been involved with that effort and developed the CrossOver spreadsheet to identify internal NPS work that has a correlation to the proposed IMR Courses. Spreadsheet columns are Topic, IMR Course, Tools/Manuals, Collaborations, Issues, and Policies. IMR Course column provides abbreviated links to proposed course. For example, A1 is Adaptation 1, C2 is Communications 2, CD1 is Climate Change Decisions 1.
Training Rating Sheets
Eight separate worksheets detailing the preliminary steps of gathering information within the website evaluation phase of this project.
75
Section6–Conclusions
Conclusions Based on survey results we found that most NPS IMR employees have a reasonable grasp of observed climate impacts and some key phenomena, but climate literacy training must emphasize distinctions between climate variability and trend-driven change, future projections for the IMR, and nuances in terminology essential to the NPS Climate Change Response Strategy. Given time and budget constraints that limit region-wide in-person training, survey results and interviews with a selected group of IMR employees lead us to recommend flexible, low or no cost, modular climate change training with an initial emphasis on existing online resources. We found adequate online training resources for addressing basic climate literacy, but a lack of online training for topics such as adaptation to climate change. We developed several tools for designing climate change training, including key topics, curriculum outlines, and decision trees for matching content with job duties.
With respect to reconciling information from multiple or contradictory sources, we refer to the criteria for reviewing online materials (Table 4.8). We suggest that the NPS IMR rely on materials that have attribution from credible sources that have been developed by trained professionals, that refer to IPCC assessment reports, and that keep material up-to-date. The most credible and legitimate sources are those developed by the U.S. Global Change Research Program; USGCRP material receives the fullest vetting, including peer-review and agency review. Material from Federal agencies, universities, and then NGOs; these entities are the most likely to follow a rigorous peer-review process and vetting. Again, their results may not line up exactly, but they are likely to appear as shades of grey, in a continuum of information.
Survey and interview results, and our observations of the rapid proliferation of climate information, on the Internet and within the NPS, suggest the need for structures to organize information, in a way that relates closely to employees’ work-related duties. Challenges for implementing climate change training include keeping pace with changing information in this dynamic environment, and producing IMR-specific materials. We suggest that there are several opportunities to leverage federal and NPS efforts to produce, implement, and maintain information and training. These include the NPS Climate Change Response Program, Department of Interior Landscape Conservation Cooperatives and Climate Science Centers, NOAA’s Climate Service initiative, and insights produced by George Melendez Wright Climate Change fellowship research. The upcoming U.S. National Climate Assessment effort will bolster efforts to develop region-specific and up-to-date materials.
76
ProjectContributors Gregg Garfin, School of Natural Resources and the Environment, 325 Biological Sciences East, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, [email protected]
Holly Hartmann, University of Arizona, Arid Lands Information Center, 1955 E. 6th Street,
Tucson, AZ 85719-5224, [email protected]
Mabel Crescioni-Benitez, School of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721,
Theresa Ely, National Park Service Intermountain Region, 12795 W. Alameda Parkway,
Lakewood, CO 80228, [email protected]
John Keck, National Park Service, Montana/Wyoming State Coordinator, 5353 Yellowstone
Road, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001, [email protected]
James W. Kendrick, Northeast Region Archeology Program, 115 John St., Lowell, MA, 01852 [email protected], formerly with El Morro National Monument
Kristin Legg, Greater Yellowstone Network, 2327 University Way Suite 2, Bozeman, MT 59715 [email protected], formerly with Zion National Park
Janet Wise, National Park Service Intermountain Region, recently retired
Lisa Graumlich, College of the Environment, University of Washington, Ocean Sciences Building, 1492 NE Boat Street, Suite 200, Room 209, PO Box 355355, Seattle, WA 98195-5355 [email protected]
Jonathan Overpeck, Institute of the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, [email protected]
Acknowledgments We thank the employees of the NPS Intermountain Region for their enthusiastic response to our survey, and for making time for interviews during the spring and summer of 2010. We thank Lisa Graumlich, Jonathan Overpeck, Chris Hansen, Kiyomi Morino, Zack Guido and Mike Crimmins for their insights and suggestions.
References Leiserowitz, A., E. Maibach, and C. Roser-Renouf, 2010: Climate change in the American Mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in January 2010. Yale University and George Mason University Project on Climate Change, 10 pp. [Available online at http://environment.yale.edu/uploads/AmericansGlobalWarmingBeliefs2010.pdf.]
77
AppendixA‐InterviewswithNPSColleaguesforSurveyGuidance
Interview with Intermountain Region Inventory and Monitoring Coordinator
Bruce Bingham (Bruce) explained the functioning of the Inventory and Monitoring Program (I&M) and the I&M seven networks it is composed of and how part of their role of providing monitoring and other scientific information in managing their natural resources. Bruce explained that the I&M program conducted a survey where they asked park management employees how they want their information delivered and how they wanted to access information. He also mentioned two workshops where the objectives were to improve communication between scientists and managers in order to enhance the integration of science and management. Many of the results of the workshops were presented during the 2007 George Wright Symposium and published in symposium special issue of the George Wright Forum on integrating science and management in 2007 http://www.georgewright.org/backlist_forum.html#Anchor-24-35882 (link to publication).
With regards to the survey, Bruce noted:
� It is often challenging to get people to respond
� Survey was sent out through internal networks to resource managers and superintendents (park chief). No specific method of sample selection was used.
� It was a paper survey returned through email.
With regards to the survey results, Bruce noted:
� The survey revealed that the higher within the organization the individual was the more concise they wanted the information. They preferred to have a 1-2 page briefing on the topic. They preferred to receive a document containing key points substantiated by data.
� In terms of general communication, it was important to consider: frequency of meetings, and meeting format (symposium v informal gathering)
� Regarding uses of information, Bruce noted that decision making is sometimes made with very limited information. Other influences on decision-making: political information, social values and science information. It’s the interaction of all these factors that makes policy created and implemented by upper and middle managers, respectively. Rather than focusing on the use of different sources of information, Bruce suggested that it was important to consider how real science and agency policy align. Other factors that come into consideration in setting policy include the local economy around the park, the economy of the park and the visitors and their interests.
� In considering how do people learn best, Bruce noted that many people reported getting significant amounts of information on-line and learning from the media.
Bruce suggested looking into DOI-Learn courses and how to use it as a potential educational tool. It
78
would allow for modules to be posted and groups can be brought up to speed as the need arises. It would also be important to create face to face modules for some groups or topics. One specific area to educate employees about would be using science to make management decisions. Another challenge identified is the need to develop a common language within NPS to talk about Mitigation and Adaptation. These areas need to be clarified so that all may understand what is referred to when these terms are used. Additionally, one other area of interest/need is clarifying the spatial/.temporal effect on climate change. In other words, it is important that employees understand how climate change affects or impacts their individual park or unit.
Bruce clarified that the findings of their survey are very specific and only applicable to a small segment of the NPS-IMR workforce. Bruce suggested we look at the NPS office in DC that does park wide surveys and web based surveys for advice.
Bruce offered to mail a copy of the final report on the survey as well and as a copy of the paper presented at the George Wright Forum which was based on the survey.
Contact:
Bruce Bingham National Park Service Intermountain Region Office Inventory and Monitoring Coordinator 12795 W. Alameda Parkway Lakewood, CO 80228 (303) 987-6706 [email protected]
79
Interview with Intermountain Region Fire Ecologist
I discussed with Linda Kerr (Linda) about her experiences in working on surveys and educational programming within the NPS. She discussed a project, which she had worked on with the Bureau of Land Management where they were tasked with taking scientific data and translating it for the general public. The project was about the Snake River Birds of Prey Conservation Area in southern Idaho and providing information to the public about the unique qualities of the conservation area. Within the NPS Fire and Aviation Program for the Intermountain Region, the fire effects monitoring program deals with educating and informing many different levels of people. These levels include coworkers interested in treatment effectiveness, managers interested in impacts from fire to park resources and/or to public values, the scientific community where sharing findings is critical to moving on to other research topics or adding to baseline information, and to the public. Objectives include translating information for a wide variety of audiences. Information was developed and disseminated by various NPS employees through scientific papers, journal or other print media, through symposia, and by Communication/Education Specialists such as Michelle Fiddler at Saguaro National Park, 3693 S. Old Spanish Trail, Tucson, AZ 85730 ([email protected]) (520) 733-5136, work or (520) 400-2932, cell.
When asked what educational methods she has used in her work to educate employees and visitors on fire effects, fire ecology, and other fire topics such as fire prevention, she gave the following list:
1. Instructor to Classroom Presentations 2. Presenting Papers (symposium) 3. Publishing Papers (only works for a limited few) 4. Informal opinions at meetings 5. Annual reports (sent as a link via e-mail) Linda also mentioned that in communicating with an audience she felt it was most important to target the audience. If the communication goes to a line officer or manager it is also important to have an executive summary. These are helpful in communicating with the members in the higher levels of the organization. By providing a brief summary that presents the topic in a context that is relevant to the audience (i.e. discusses topics of interest to them) you ensure that you hit their radar screen and the issue is given attention.
Linda suggested that middle managers like to have more information to have a better understanding of the topic. Scientists are used to collecting information on a particular subject and determining what works. Any interaction with them needs to take into account their customs of collecting and interpreting data. Meanwhile communication with coworkers/peers is extremely important and is usually most effective when done in a face to face interaction. Linda explained that decisions are not solely made based on data, additionally personality and politics (credibility) play into it.
80
When discussing how people best learn, several methods were mentioned:
1 Visual Learner -learn through seeing... These individuals learn best from visual displays. 2 Auditory Learners - learn through listening... They learn best through verbal lectures, discussions, talking things through and listening to what others have to say. 3 Tactile/Kinesthetic Learners -learn through moving, doing and touching... Tactile/Kinesthetic persons learn best through a hands-on approach, actively exploring the physical world around them. Linda suggested that in her experience visual learning seemed to include the most people and it could be used across groups as long as the message was tailored to the audience.
Developing a common language about mitigation and adaptation would allow delivery of information to a broader audience. It seems improbable that a survey would reach the entire NPS-IMR employee population because of the different modes of receiving information.
Contact:
Linda Kerr NPS - Intermountain Regional Office PO Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 (303) 969-2883. [email protected]
81
AppendixB–On‐lineSurveyProtocol
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
AppendixC–InterviewProtocol
91
APPENDIX C. Interview Protocol
CLIMATE CHANGE TRAINING ASSESSMENT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
Hello, my name is Mabel Crescioni and I’m with the Institute for the Environment at University of Arizona. How are you today? Before we start the interview, I need to go over some information with you to make sure you fully understand what we’ll be doing today. The purpose of this interview is to help us understand the climate change training you have participated in may have had on you and to get your suggestions on the future of this type of training.
I also want to remind you that your participation in this interview is completely voluntary, and you may stop the interview or skip any question at any time. Simply tell me you’d like to quit the interview or skip a particular question to do this.
This interview should take about one hour and ‘will be recorded unless you tell me that you do not want your interview recorded or in which case ‘I will only be taking notes about your comments as we move through the questions’. Again, you can stop the recording/interview at any time by telling me to do so. All information will be kept confidential. You are one of about fifteen NPS employees who we plan to interview. In our reports, we will combine the information from all of our interviews. We will not mention anyone’s name or include any identifying information. If for any reason we want to use your individual story and identify you by name, we will ask for your written permission first and for your review and approval of your story before it is used. If you do not approve, we will not use it.
I also wanted to let you know that you can contact Theresa Ely, at (303) 969-2653 with questions about this project.
Do you have any questions?
Do you give your consent to participate in this study? Great - let’s start.
Is it ok for me to turn on my recorder?
First, let’s talk about the outline of this interview.
· First, I’ll ask you basically where you have worked and positions held, to get an overview.
· Then, I’ll ask you about the general influences of climate change training on you.
· Next, I’ll ask you about your preferred media sources.
· After that, I’ll ask you if you can recall any specific stories that illustrate how what you learned...
· Finally, we ask for your comments about climate change training. OK? Let’s begin:
Part One: Demographics
92
1. Age a. 25 – 35 b. 34 – 45 c. 46 – 55 d. 54 – 65 e. 66 or over 2. Academics (highest grade completed) a. High School Diploma b. Associate Degree c. Bachelors (field/major): ____________ d. Masters (field/major): ______________ e. Doctorate (field/major): _____________ 1. Location of Employment (Specify State) ________________________ 2. Current Position (Specify) ______________________________ 5. Total years in current position a. 0 – 3 years b. 4 – 10 years c. 11 – 15 years d. 16 – 20 years e. Over 20 years 6. Total number of employees under your supervision (Zero should be a separate category as this would indicate a lack of supervisory responsibility and the next category should be 1-5) a. 0 – 5 b. 6 – 10 c. 11 – 15 d. 16 – 20 e. over 20 Part Two: Your Experience 7. Have you ever participated in a climate change training program? Yes or No. a. If no, skip ahead to question c. If yes, explain the most important benefit you derived from that experience. b. Can you give an example? What was the situation? What was the impact or result, and why was this important? c. Tell us about your most profound training experience. Describe what you liked about it, the format of the training and the skills you use today. 8. What should be the main outcomes of a National Park Service climate change training program? What evaluation questions should be addressed in the future? Part Three. Future Climate Change Training Programs
93
The IMR is pursuing this project to obtain information to guide us in the development of future climate change training programs at the National Park Service. Let’s now talk about the entire system of climate change training at NPS. 9. Recognizing that the NPS wants to know how to invest effectively in climate change training programs. a. What kinds of programs or initiatives would be most beneficial to NPS staff and/or to the public? b. Who should be the main target audience(s)? Why? (New employees? Senior employees? Specific fields at NPS or general for all audiences?) c. Linkage: How might these programs or initiatives be linked together? 10. Should climate change training be mandatory, mandatory if applicable or voluntary? Why or why not? Are there any staffing groups who do not need to be trained? 11. What types of climate change training opportunities should NPS offer? (One big program delivered over a few days, or a menu where individuals may choose different modules at their convenience.) ? 12. How would you recommend the IMR fund a Climate Change Training Program? (Should existing park or program budgets be used to pay for training or should others fund sources be made available.) 13. What kind of follow-up activities would be most helpful after the “training program” is concluded? 14. What should the relationship of this new training program be to the existing State, National and Regional climate change training programs and other similar programs? 15. In your opinion, what do you think are the major information delivery issues for the NPS? 16. In your opinion, what are the major challenges faced by your organization today with regards to climate change? 17. Would you participate in climate change training in the near future? A. Yes B. No, not interested C. Maybe (Please explain) 18. Is there anything else you would like to add? Thank you very much!