An evaluation of climate risk - Australia Assignments

Assignment 2 – Research Report (45%) 6000 words

An evaluation of climate risk assessment applications of the agricultural

industry.

Assignment 2 requires students to identify three comprehensive publications, either journal articles or industry reports that present a climate risk assessment of agriculture or an agricultural sector (i.e. horticulture, or dairy etc.) from anywhere in the world. Each of these studies are to be treated as a case study.

After reviewing each of the case studies, students are asked to conduct a critical evaluation of the methods and approaches utilised by each study. Based on this evaluation, students are required to explain which methodology provides the most useful, and credible outcomes and which components of the studies worked well to improve the relevance, quality or utility of the assessment.

Evaluation framework:

– What is the scope of the assessment? Spatial / temporal / industry – sector

– Who has commissioned, or funded the study?

– Which method/s have been used?

– Which stakeholder groups have contributed to the study? How?

– Are there other stakeholders who have not contributed to the study, who would have an obvious interest in the case study?

– Which climate variables have been considered?

– Which climate variables have not been considered that you believe are highly relevant?

Explain these in the context of climate drivers, scenarios and projections relevant to the

scope of the study.

– Are the risks identified relevant? Are other obvious risks or impacts missing?

– Do you think that the ratings assigned to each potential risk are realistic? Would some risks

be of more importance to some groups of the stakeholders?

– Do the final rankings align with the ratings previously assigned?

– Has the risk standard or method been accurately applied in this study?

– What is the outcome of the assessment? What strategies or actions have been put in place

as a result?

CLI8001 Climate Risk

Submission:

A research report is required to be submitted as a word document via Turnitin on the course’s StudyDesk submission portal. The evaluation framework can be grouped into sections within the report, so that the reader is able to follow the development and determinations leading to the final report synthesis. Students are encouraged to consider the use of tables, charts and diagrams in the report. Large tables are appropriately placed in the report as appendices, and do not count towards the reports’ word count. Please ensure that a standard academic report structure is adhered to, and that the tone of the report is suitable for an academic audience. Please seek guidance from USQ’s library advisors if there is any uncertainty about these expectations.

CLI8001 Climate Risk

Assignment Two: Research Report – Assessment Rubric

CLI3301 Climate & Env. Risk Assessment

Criterion	Available marks	Insufficient	Developing	Satisfactory	Effective	Comprehensive
Selection of case studies (agricultural risk assessments)	15	Minimal or irrelevant information is presented in response to the research questions.	Case studies are developing, however there are much repetition between the risk assessments. Some are lacking necessary information.	The case studies are mostly useful. However, the detail regarding climate data or the scenario and time period, sector, location etc are lacking in detail which restricts the comparative analysis / evaluations. There may be some confusion in interpreting the risk assessments.	The case studies are mostly developed and well considered. They provide a good range of diverse applications of climate risk assessment in the agriculture industry.	The selection of each case studies’ locations, regional climate variables and potential stakeholders is comprehensive, and well considered. The case studies provide an opportunity for the evaluation to be a meaningful insight into the diversity of application, and purpose of a risk assessment.
Interpretation of the risk assessment methodologies and frameworks	15	There is much confusion about the risk assessment methodology, with a little or no reference to the case studies’ methods in the essay.	Some elements of some of the risk assessment methods are presented, but there is some confusion about what this constitutes, and how they differ.	The report presents the broad features of each risk assessment. Explanations are simplistic and obvious, lacking in critical thinking. Yet they meet the requirements of the assignment.	An understanding of the application of the various risk assessment methods is clearly expressed. Synthesis and evaluations are mostly well done, although the comparison can be repetitive in parts, without insight or critical reasoning.	The risk assessment methodologies of each case study are explained clearly and comprehensively. An excellent understanding of how these were applied, and critical evaluation of the effectiveness of the assessment is apparent in the report.
Comparative Analysis and Synthesis	30	Analysis and synthesis has not been attempted.	Critical evaluations and synthesis have been attempted in part, but are incomplete, incorrect or poorly considered. There is little evidence provided to support claims.	The evaluations and synthesis are mostly quite shallow, yet they meet the minimum requirements of the assignment. Claims are sometimes unsubstantiated, with little evidence presented to support them.	The evaluations, analysis and synthesis mostly demonstrate clarity, sound logic and reasoning. It is clear that the purpose of the assignment is understood, but there is little insight or evidence of critical thinking underpinning outcomes and conclusions.	The evaluations, comparative analysis and synthesis of case studies is well considered, well researched and reflects sound logic and reasoning. Key findings from the reason are well supported by research and analysis, and provide some interesting insights.

CLI3301 Climate & Env. Risk Assessment

Research Report	20	The report submitted does not reflect academic standards.	The report structure is confusing or vague. Introduction and conclusion sections are ineffective or lacking in detail. Presentation of the report may also be inadequate.	Presentation, structure and readability of the report is adequate.	Some minor improvements could be incorporated to improve the report’s structure, presentation and readability.	The report is professionally presented and logically structured. An introduction section is effective in introducing the topic, case studies and purpose of the report. The conclusion is similarly effective in summarising the key findings of the evaluations and synthesis. The report structure is logical, and well defined, with titled sections, tables and diagrams effectively employed to maximise readability.
Language skills and word count	10	Major issues with language skills, poor grammar, lacking vocabulary	Poor language skills, grammar, and lacking vocabulary	Language skills are adequate in communicating the main content of the report. Some editing required to correct spelling and grammatical errors.	Some minor editing required. Language skills, including vocabulary are generally reasonable.	The report is an appropriate length (6000 words +/- 10%), and well edited. The author writes clearly, and concisely, supporting statements with evidence and reasoning. The report is free from spelling, and grammatical errors.
Research Sources and Reference List	10	No reference list provided.	Correct system evident, but not employed properly.	Correct system used, but missing reference information aspects and/or the application of the referencing style is inconsistent.	Correct system used, with most reference information presented.	Correct referencing system used, with all in-text citations correctly presented in reference list at the end of the report.