Abstract

Uncertainty is fundamental to avalanche risk management, yet public avalanche forecasts have not communicated it as consistently as other hazard characteristics. The Conceptual Model of Avalanche Hazard addresses what type of avalanche problem exists, where it is found, how likely it is, and how large it may be, but not “How sure are you?” . Our prior research found that although forecasters routinely assess uncertainty, many struggle with when and how to communicate it within existing tiered structures. This paper develops considerations for communicating forecast uncertainty more effectively across user levels.

Using a systems-thinking approach, we examine three components of the forecast system – hazard, users, and products – and distill our understanding into four questions: Is the uncertainty decision-relevant, and to whom? What can users reasonably understand and act on? Where in the tiered structure should it appear, and how should it be communicated? We apply these questions to three high-uncertainty situations and to an existing operational element, the confidence statement, to illustrate how communication needs shift with the nature of the uncertainty.

Across these situations, decision relevance, reducibility, and user capacity varied independently, so no single approach applied across uncertainty types. Broadly relevant or irreducible uncertainty warranted direct messaging placed prominently in the forecast, while uncertainty relevant to narrower audiences suited deeper tiers with plain-language support. From these patterns, we offer five recommendations for avalanche warning services. Uncertainty communication should not be a fixed forecast component, but adapted in placement, content, and format to its nature and to users’ capacity to respond – above all, relevant, actionable, and appropriate to user’s decision-making contexts.

You can download Eeva’s paper by clicking here.