Geology topics

Amanda L. Sesser

Publications and source records attributed to Amanda L. Sesser.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Holistic understanding of uncertainty for collaborative and proactive global change decision making

Global change is accelerating and pushing the planet's ecosystems beyond the range of historical observations, creating increasing uncertainty in future system conditions. Despite general agreement that proactive environmental action is warranted, environmental decision conversations often end by identifying additional data needed to reduce uncertainty before taking novel action. Given the inherent uncertainty in complex issues such as global change, quantitative data alone are likely insufficient to support proactive environmental action. Holistic understanding of uncertainty includes scientific quantification of uncertainty paired with emotional responses and transcendental grounding to help people work together toward proactive action in uncertain decision contexts. Holistic understanding arises from the four ways in which humans perceive the world, termed the Four Realms: Physical (e.g., how I observe), Mental (e.g., how I think), Emotional (e.g., how I feel), and Transcendental (e.g., how I connect to greater meaning or purpose). Environmental scientists and decision makers are generally trained in Physical and Mental Realm observation and analysis, but not in how to apply Emotional and Transcendental Realm understanding. Emotional and Transcendental processing occurs in scientists and decision makers whether it is acknowledged or not and contributes to different people interpreting the same information in different ways. Thus, when the role of Emotional and Transcendental Realms in an individual's interpretation process is not understood, it can derail conversations and perpetuate the status quo. Explicitly recognizing all Four Realms can bring people together across differences and inspire shared, novel decision making even in increasing uncertainty. To illustrate the benefits of holistic understanding, we share stories from our experiences in environmental decision contexts. Because accessing the Four Realms requires experiential and embodied techniques, while still relying on core scientific tenets of observation and analysis, we also present techniques for readers to learn to feel their own emotional understanding and connect to their own transcendental understanding. Holistic understanding can enhance data-driven decisions by recognizing that human responses to uncertainty inherently include interactions between emotions, thoughts, transcendental connections, and behavior. Ultimately, holistic understanding can help anchor data-driven decisions in intra- and interpersonal connections, inspiring action in the face of uncertainty.

Ecosphere↗

USGS2026

Action in uncertainty: Data-driven decisions that acknowledge emotional responses and transcendental connections

The increasing uncertainty with global change often stifles action and results in calls for more data before moving beyond status quo environmental decisions (Mahapatra & Ratha 2017; Ripple et al. 2017; Montefalcone et al. 2025). Advancing science and collecting more data is crucial; however, science alone (i.e., “western” or “positivist” science, as described in Fuller, 2001; Reid et al. 2020) may be insufficient to reduce uncertainty to a comfortable level for decision making. Therefore, increasing personal and collective capacity to make proactive decisions may require decision makers to recognize that their own understanding of the world, and therefore interpretation of scientific data, is influenced by all Four Realms of human perception: Physical, Mental, Emotional, and Transcendental (Wolf 2017; Dukes et al. 2021; Clifford et al. 2022). In the ESA Special Session, Action in Uncertainty, we introduced four questions to help participants increase cognitive awareness of how all Four Realms may affect their understanding in uncertain environmental decision contexts: 1. Physical: How do I observe uncertainty through the five senses (feel, see, hear, taste, smell)? The physical realm is what people observe, including ecological data observations and experimentation. 2. Mental: How do I think about uncertainty using logic, reason, and language-based understanding? The mental realm is how people think about the world, including scientific theory, modeling, and decision frameworks. 3. Emotional: How do I feel in uncertainty? The emotional realm is a person’s subjective emotional state, such as fear, curiosity, defensiveness, and awe. 4. Transcendental: How do I connect to something greater than myself in uncertainty? The transcendental realm includes people’s sense of purpose, responsibility for others, or moral code.

ESA Bulletin↗

USGS2025

Integrating the resist–accept–direct framework into natural resource decision-making processes for climate adaptation

The resist–accept–direct (RAD) framework for climate adaptation is a useful tool, particularly when conservation practitioners know they need to address climate change but do not know where to start or when they struggle to implement conservation actions that are outside the status quo. Some conservation practitioners may view RAD as a decision process that will lead them through selecting climate adaptation actions to meet their objectives; however, RAD may be better suited for use with existing decision processes. RAD can improve adaptation planning processes by helping conservation practitioners examine a broader portfolio of climate adaptation actions. Choosing the actions that meet organizational objectives and long-term goals relies on a sound decision process through which to select RAD-generated actions to implement across space and time. The good news for conservation practitioners is that RAD can easily be integrated into the decision processes they are already using—that is, a new decision process for RAD is not necessary. We examined 6 commonly used decision frameworks in the context of RAD for climate adaptation: structured decision-making, adaptive management, conservation standards, climate-smart conservation, strategic habitat conservation, and scenario planning. Each decision framework can easily incorporate RAD methodologies to create climate adaptation menus and portfolios within existing structures, allowing conservation practitioners to continue to utilize existing frameworks for their valuable decision-making tools. Integrating the RAD framework can enhance them by explicitly considering future uncertainties and providing a menu of climate adaptation actions for navigating changing ecosystems.

Conservation Biology↗

USGS2020

Co-producing knowledge: The Integrated Ecosystem Model for resource management in Arctic Alaska

Assessments of climate-change effects on ecosystem processes and services in high-latitude regions are hindered by a lack of decision-support tools capable of forecasting possible future landscapes. We describe a collaborative effort to develop and apply the Integrated Ecosystem Model (IEM) for Alaska and northwestern Canada to explore how climate change influences interactions among disturbance regimes, permafrost integrity, hydrology, and vegetation, and how these dynamics in turn influence resource management decisions. This process emphasizes co-production of knowledge among decision makers, scientists, major funders, partners, and stakeholders. We highlight research findings based on IEM applications in Arctic Alaska, as well as successes and challenges of the co-production process. The overall framework and lessons from our work with the IEM are relevant to other collaborative efforts outside the Arctic that aim to develop a decision-support tool or an undertaking of equivalent scope.

Alaska↗