Visualizing volcanic ash forecasts: scientist and stakeholder decisions using different graphical representations and conflicting forecasts

Mulder, K. J., Lickiss, M., Harvey, N. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0973-5794, Black, A., Charlton-Perez, A. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8179-6220, Dacre, H. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4328-9126 and McCloy, R. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2333-9640 (2017) Visualizing volcanic ash forecasts: scientist and stakeholder decisions using different graphical representations and conflicting forecasts. Weather, Climate and Society, 9 (3). pp. 333-348. ISSN 1948-8327 doi: 10.1175/WCAS-D-16-0062.1

Abstract/Summary

During volcanic eruptions, Volcanic Ash Advisory Centres issue ash advisories for aviation showing the forecasted outermost extent of the ash cloud. During the 2010 Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull eruption, the UK Met Office produced supplementary forecasts of quantitative ash concentration, due to demand from airlines. Additionally, satellite retrievals of estimated volcanic ash concentration are now available. To test how these additional graphical representations of volcanic ash affect flight decisions, whether users infer uncertainty in graphical forecasts of volcanic ash, and how decisions are made when given conflicting forecasts, a survey was conducted of 25 delegates representing UK research and airline operations dealing with volcanic ash. Respondents were more risk-seeking with safer flight paths and risk-averse with riskier flight paths when given location and concentration forecasts compared to when given only the outermost extent of the ash. Respondents representing operations were more risk-seeking than respondents representing research. Additionally, most respondents' hand-drawn no-fly zones were larger than the areas of unsafe ash concentrations in the forecasts. This conservatism implies that respondents inferred uncertainty from the volcanic ash concentration forecasts. When given conflicting forecasts, respondents became more conservative than when given a single forecast. The respondents were also more risk-seeking with high-risk flight paths and more risk-averse with low-risk flight paths when given conflicting forecasts than when given a single forecast. The results show that concentration forecasts seem to reduce flight cancellations while maintaining safety. Open discussion with the respondents suggested that definitions of "uncertainty" may differ between research and operations.

Item Type	Article
URI	https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/68953
Identification Number/DOI	10.1175/WCAS-D-16-0062.1
Refereed	Yes
Divisions	Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Department of Psychology Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Arts and Communication Design > Typography & Graphic Communication Science > School of Mathematical, Physical and Computational Sciences > Department of Meteorology
Publisher	American Meteorological Society
Download/View statistics	View download statistics for this item