Development of forecast information for institutional decision-makers: landslides in India and cyclones in Mozambique

Budimir, Mirianna; Sneddon, Alison; Nelder, Issy; Brown, Sarah; Donovan, Amy; Speight, Linda

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-5-151-2022

Articles | Volume 5, issue 2

https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-5-151-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-5-151-2022

© Author(s) 2022. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 5, issue 2

Research article

|

25 May 2022

Research article |

| 25 May 2022

Development of forecast information for institutional decision-makers: landslides in India and cyclones in Mozambique

Mirianna Budimir, Alison Sneddon, Issy Nelder, Sarah Brown, Amy Donovan, and Linda Speight

Download

Final revised paper (published on 25 May 2022)
Preprint (discussion started on 16 Nov 2021)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'General and section specific comments', Anonymous Referee #1, 21 Nov 2021

Attached comments - general and by section

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-31-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Mirianna Budimir, 18 Feb 2022
  
  The authors appreciate the time the reviewer has taken to provide comments and suggestions. Please see attached pdf for author responses.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-31-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on gc-2021-31', Anonymous Referee #2, 13 Dec 2021

The paper highlights and responds to a gap in research on the process of developing forecast bulletins for decision-makers i.e. professional, institutional users. It includes many practical and helpful insights from the process, as examined in two different cases.

Some comments and suggestions are given below:

Context: Consider using diagrams/figures to concisely convey the various flows of information and stakeholder relationships (Users, Intermediaries and Producers) for clarity.

Methodology: The choice of cases appears to be fairly pragmatic and the methodology would benefit from further explanation and justification of the choice and the implications for the subsequent analysis.

Results: A strength is the level of detail and granularity provided in the results section. Giving specific examples, for example the choice of words or colours, transparently allows the reader to see into the process of co-production and development of bulletins and means that these insights are not lost in over-generalisation. However, I think that consistency and signposting of when you are writing about which case and the similarities and differences, could be improved for clarity. Consider whether summary tables could be helpful.

Second paragraph of 5.3 Information vs. advice - seems to be more about complexity. Is this a theme in itself?

Considerations: This more discursive section aims to bring together insights from the results for others developing forecasts and bulletins for natural hazards. A topic of importance that I feel is not adequately addressed is that of accountability - who (among all stakeholders - producers, intermediaries and users) is ultimately accountable for the information provided and its impacts? And how has this been considered throughout the bulletin development process?

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-31-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Mirianna Budimir, 18 Feb 2022
  
  The authors appreciate the time the reviewer has taken to provide comments and suggestions. Please see attached pdf for author responses.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-2021-31-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (25 Feb 2022) by John K. Hillier

AR by Mirianna Budimir on behalf of the Authors (04 Apr 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (20 Apr 2022) by John K. Hillier

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (25 Apr 2022)

ED: Publish as is (04 May 2022) by John K. Hillier

ED: Publish as is (05 May 2022) by Sam Illingworth (Executive editor)

AR by Mirianna Budimir on behalf of the Authors (05 May 2022) Manuscript

Short summary

This paper extracts key learning from two case studies (India and Mozambique), outlining solutions and approaches to challenges in developing forecast products. These lessons and solutions can be used by forecasters and practitioners to support the development of useful, appropriate, and co-designed forecast information for institutional decision-makers to support more effective early action in advance of disasters.