GLOBAL CHANGE EDUCATION
The Use of System Dynamics Concepts for Science and Policy Interface
DAN S BERNSTEIN
Rockefeller College
University at Albany, State University of New York
135 Western Avenue
Albany, New York 12222
E-mail: DB8038@cnsvax.albany.edu
My primary research interest is in improving communication between atmospheric scientists on
the one hand and the general public and policy makers on the other hand. Miscommunication is
delaying the implementation of effective policy intended to mitigate global climate change caused
by human intervention.
Solutions to the problem of global warming will have to be formulated by policy makers
working cooperatively with scientific experts. This global problem will require global cooperation
and solutions. If there is to be rational and effective policy regarding global warming, policy
analysts and the public need to better understand the environment. Effective communication and
education are paths to better use of scientific knowledge. A higher level of understanding can lead
to better analysis and design of the best policies for reducing the rate of environmental change or
adapting to it.
On November 30, 1995, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated that
the balance of evidence suggests that there is human influence on global climate caused mostly by
fossil fuel use, land use change, and agriculture. (Science, Vol. 270, 12/8/95) This panel
concluded that without action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions temperature change could cause
widespread climatic disruption. The panel, a United Nations group of 2,500 scientists from
around the world advises the parties to the 1992 treaty limiting greenhouse gas emissions. The fact
that it could conclude that climate change was influenced by human activity and could cause
climatic disruption demonstrates the overwhelming nature of the evidence, and the perceived
pressure to address this problem.
The Science Policy Gap:
This gap is what we might call the lack of communication between experts in atmospheric
science and non-experts. The terms expert and non-expert are vague and need definition in the
context of this paper. When used here expert will mean researchers in atmospheric science. It will
not mean policy experts in this field. It is specifically applied to those with formal training in
atmospheric science. All others are viewed as non-experts in this context. It should be clear from
this definition that the group of non-experts is quite large and there will be a broad and varied
range of understanding within this group.
Experts in this field have been analyzing these connections for years but are unable to clearly
explain how the global climate system works to either policy makers and/or the public. Policy
makers have already been intervening by developing policies aimed at limiting greenhouse gas
emissions. However policy makers desire a greater understanding or a more definitive answer
1
Global Change Education. Page 2
about the essential parts of our atmospheric and ecological systems so that policies can be more
effective and future research funding can be targeted to the specific areas.
With this in mind I have developed what I call a Pocket Model of the global environment. For
details of this model see .A Pocket Model of Global Warming for Policy and Scientific Debate by
Bernstein, Richardson, and Stewart, the System Dynamics conference proceedings, 1994,
Organizational Environments, p.8. This model is intended to be scientifically accurate yet small
enough to be understood by people who are not. modelers or atmospheric scientists.
The Pocket Model is intended to illustrate in a general and accurate way the basic structure and
interactions which take place within the environmental system. This model will be used to teach a
variety of audiences about global ecosystems. Participants should gain a more accurate
understanding of existing scientific knowledge about global environmental systems. This
knowledge should give these participants a more rational understanding of environmental
mechanisms and an understanding of why we need to reduce emissions. It may give participants
new insights into potential policies for reducing emissions.
Experiment:
The challenge is to develop a method for effectively communicating the basics of the Pocket
Model so that participants will focus on the structure of the model and learn about the
environmental system. The long term goal of this research is to narrow the communication gap
between policy makers and experts. In order to do this information about how well an audience
can learn from the model is required. The intent is to teach and develop presentation materials that
are effective while keeping the audience interested.
The learning which takes place I would call model based learning but it is different than the
way the term is commonly used in the system dynamics literature. Generally when we use the
term model based learning the application is the learning laboratories used at MIT to train
managers and explore the basic dynamics of management systems. In this case I am referring to a
model which reflects the current understanding of the global ecosystems and the use of this model
as a basis for teaching groups of people.
At this date I have taught two undergraduate classes in atmospheric science. Because I was
interested in information about whether the students had leamed from these lectures I gave pre and
post treatment surveys.
This data was collected not to engage in educational research where I compare one type of
treatment with another to find the most effective teaching method. I am interested in discovering if
system dynamics concepts can be used in teaching atmospheric science and in what types of
presentations are effective. This is as much a test of the materials I am developing as in testing the
learning of the students.
The material taught to the class was not the Pocket Mode! but smaller models of the
sub-systems or sectors. The Pocket Model contains a heat, water and carbon sector. The class
models were individual models of the heat and carbon systems. This dividing up of the model was
done to simplify the teaching process. What I had in mind was a stepping up to the larger Pocket
TH
Global Change Education Page 3
Model once the dynamics of the smaller models were understood. This method follows the logic
of the urban dynamics models used by Alan Graham in Introduction to Urban Dynamics.
Other teaching materials were overhead transparencies of standard atmospheric science
textbook diagrams, STELLA diagrams of the models, and diagrams of the individual stocks, flows,
and feedback loops. The diagrams were of small parts of the model so I could explain piece by
piece how the model worked and how this related to what was known about the earth ecosystems.
The next step were diagrams of the feedback loops illustrating how heat affects evaporation
generating water vapor, which is a heat trapping gas. Water vapor also affects cloudiness which
both traps and reflects heat. During class I had two overhead projectors available. On one I
placed the standard atmospheric textbook diagrams of the heat system while on the other I placed
the STELLA diagrams of the model. I traced the formal model feedback loops and showed the
corresponding loops in the textbook diagram.
By questioning the class about the connections between variables and feedback loops I
completed explanation of the models and moved on to simulation. I used this to illustrate different
scenarios and more importantly to demonstrate how different parts of the system can control the
strengths and weaknesses of the feedback effects. One dramatic illustration was increasing cloud
albedo (reflectiveness) which almost completely eliminates all global warming. This same process
was repeated with the carbon sector.
At the current time I have used these teaching methods on two classes of undergraduates.
Both classes were very different both in the interests of the students and in the classroom setting.
Between now and the conference I will arrange other presentations and analyze data on the results.
Future Research:
Communication of knowledge is an important part of the research process. To date there is a
great need to improve the communication between the scientific experts in atmospheric science
and both the general public and policy makers. The reason for this is not due to any lack of skills
on either side. The science gap is slowing the ability of policy makers to develop effective policy
for the mitigation of global warming gases.
The next step in my research agenda is to complete development on a teaching and
presentation techniques which explain the Pocket Model as clearly and concisely as possible. What
follows is the bringing together of both policy making experts and atmospheric science experts to
discuss the Pocket Model. This will lead to an informed discussion between these two groups.
The intent is to create an environment where these two groups can communicate to each other
effectively.
3
