The nexus represents a multi-dimensional means of scientific enquiry which seeks to describe the complex and non-linear interactions between water, energy, food, with the climate, and further understand wider implications for society. These resources are fundamental for human life but are negatively affected by shocks such as climate change and characterize some of the main challenges for global sustainable development. Given the multidimensional and complex nature of the nexus, a transdisciplinary approach to knowledge development through co-production is needed to timely and effectively inform the decision making processes to build societal resilience to these shocks going beyond the sectorality of current research practice. The paper presents findings from five themed workshops (shocks and hazards, infrastructure, local economy, governance and governments, finance and insurance) with 80 stakeholders from academia, government and industry in the UK to explore the impact of climate and weather shocks across the energy-food-water nexus and barriers to related responses. The research identified key stakeholders’ concerns, opportunities and barriers to better inform decision making centred on four themes: communication and collaboration, decision making processes, social and cultural dimensions, and the nature of responses to nexus shocks. We discuss implications of these barriers and how addressing these can better facilitate constructive dialogue and more efficient decision-making in response to nexus shocks

The COVID-19 imposed lockdown has led to a number of temporary environmental side effects (reduced global emissions, cleaner air, less noise), that the climate community has aspired to achieve over a number of decades. However, these benefits have been achieved at a massive cost to welfare and the economy. This commentary draws lessons from the COVID-19 crisis for climate change. It discusses whether there are more sustainable ways of achieving these benefits, as part of a more desirable, low carbon resilient future, in a more planned, inclusive and less disruptive way. In order to achieve this, we argue for a clearer social contract between citizens and the state. We discuss how COVID-19 has demonstrated that behaviours can change abruptly, that these changes come at a cost, that we need a ‘social mandate’ to ensure these changes remain in the long-term, and that science plays an important role in informing this process. We suggest that deliberative engagement mechanisms, such as citizens’ assemblies and juries, could be a powerful way to build a social mandate for climate action post-COVID-19. This would enable behaviour changes to become more accepted, embedded and bearable in the long-term and provide the basis for future climate action.

The relationship between the energy-food-water nexus and the climate is non-linear, multi-sectoral and time\ud sensitive, incorporating aspects of complexity and risk in climate related decision-making. Current methods of\ud analysis were not built to represent such a complex system and are insufficiently equipped to capture and\ud understand positive and negative externalities generated by the interactions among different stakeholders involved\ud in the energy-food-water nexus. Potential amplification effects, time delays and path dependency of\ud climate policies are also inadequately represented. This paper seeks to explore how knowledge co-production\ud can help identify opportunities for building more effective, sustainable, inclusive and legitimate decision making\ud processes on climate change. This would enable more resilient responses to climate risks impacting the nexus\ud while increasing transparency, communication and trust among key actors. We do so by proposing the operationalization\ud of an interdisciplinary approach of analysis applying the novel methodology developed in\ud Howarth and Monasterolo (2016). Through a bottom-up, participative approach, we present results of five\ud themed workshops organized in the UK (focusing on: shocks and hazards, infrastructure, local economy, governance\ud and governments, finance and insurance) featuring 78 stakeholders from academia, government and\ud industry. We present participant’s perceptions of opportunities that can emerge from climate and weather shocks\ud across the energy-food-water nexus. We explore opportunities offered by the development and deployment of a\ud transdisciplinary approach of analysis within the nexus boundaries and we analyse their implications. Our\ud analysis contributes to the current debate on how to shape global and local responses to climate change by\ud reflecting on lessons learnt and best practice from cross-stakeholder and cross-sectorial engagement. In so doing,\ud it helps inform a new generation of complex systems models to analyse climate change impact on the food-water-energy\ud nexu

In light of increasing pressure to deliver climate action targets and the growing role of citizens in raising the importance of the issue, deliberative democratic processes (e.g. citizen juries and citizen assemblies) on climate change are increasingly being used to provide a voice to citizens in climate change decision-making. Through a comparative case study of two processes that ran in the UK in 2019 (the Leeds Climate Change Citizens’ Jury and the Oxford Citizens’ Assembly on Climate Change), this paper investigates how far citizen assemblies and juries are increasing citizen engagement on climate change and creating more citizen-centred climate policymaking. Interviews were conducted with policymakers, councillors, professional facilitators and others involved in running these processes to assess motivations for conducting these, their structure and the impact and influence they had. The findings suggest the impact of these processes is not uniform: they have an indirect impact on policy making by creating momentum around climate action and supporting the introduction of pre-planned or pre-existing policies rather than a direct impact by truly being citizen-centred policy making processes or conducive to new climate policy. We conclude with reflections on how these processes give elected representatives a public mandate on climate change, that they help to identify more nuanced and in-depth public opinions in a fair and informed way, yet it can be challenging to embed citizen juries and assemblies in wider democratic processes.

Approaches to communicating climate science beyond academia are necessary for enhancing salience, understanding, and engagement and accelerating action. This Primer discusses the heterogeneous manner in which climate change messaging is received by different audiences, how social scientific approaches could help to better tailor climate change messaging to this varied landscape, and how attempts to close this gap must consider the emotional and affective dimensions of climate messaging. We explore how the use of narratives can enhance effective climate science communication and emphasize the importance of evidence-based advocacy in the current era of global challenges, uncertainty, and post-truth.

Climate services entail providing timely and tailored climate information to end-users in order to facilitate and improve decision-making processes. Climate services are instrumental in socio-economic development and benefit substantially from interdisciplinary collaborations, particularly when including Early Career Researchers (ECRs). This commentary critically discusses deliberations from an interdisciplinary workshop involving ECRs from the United Kingdom and South Africa in 2017, to discuss issues in climate adaptation and climate services development in water resources, food security and agriculture. Outcomes from the discussions revolved around key issues somewhat marginalized within the broader climate service discourse. This commentary discusses what constitutes “effective” communication, framings (user framings, mental models, narratives, co-production) and ethical dimensions in developing climate services that can best serve end-users. It also reflects on how ECRs can help tackle these important thematic areas and advance the discourse on climate services.