Mitigating the risks of rapid event attribution in the gray literature

Abstract

he attribution of extreme weather and climate events to a particular cause is an expanding scientific field. Extreme event attribution studies focus on a particular extreme and commonly combine observational and model data to determine whether specific factors (e.g. anthropogenic greenhouse gases) contributed to a specific observed aspect of the event (e.g. its intensity, magnitude, frequency). A key aspect of the development of the field of event attribution is an enhanced focus on operational attribution, in which analyses are conducted promptly after an extreme weather or climate event has been observed, and an attribution statement is made publically through technical reports, websites, blogs and/or the mainstream media. Near real-time attribution analyses are often complemented by later peer reviewed publication.As a result of this rapid disciplinary evolution, scientific practice in the field of attribution ? focused in the first instance on rapidity and broad communication ? diverges notably from traditional approaches to science, in which analyses are peer reviewed and then published, without an emphasis on timeliness. This essay explores facets of this rapid approach to attribution, and specifically investigates the implications of this recent development for scientific practice.