Scientists Map Research Priorities for U.S. Climate Assessments

Rutgers professors help develop a framework identifying knowledge gaps and technical priorities

A group of 175 scientists co-led by a Rutgers University professor have developed a research framework identifying gaps in the evidence needed to assess coastal protection, food production and overlapping climate hazards such as extreme heat and power outages.

The framework maps out scientific and technical priorities for future U.S. climate assessments, including improving local projections, understanding how hazards interact and measuring how well different responses work. It identifies areas where existing research can be brought together and evaluated, as well as questions requiring additional data and investigation.

Published jointly in Earth’s Future and the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, the framework draws on the expertise of 175 authors, most with experience producing climate assessments. The report, “Research Priorities for Robust Climate Assessments in the United States,” covers ocean science, agriculture, economics, human health and other fields.

Robert Kopp, a Distinguished Professor with the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences in the Rutgers School of Arts and Sciences, was one of the three co-leaders of the effort. He also led the preparation of its section on coastal science and contributed to the section on climate interventions, which examined proposed approaches to deliberately alter aspects of the climate system. Pamela McElwee, a professor with the Department of Human Ecology in the Rutgers School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, was a coauthor of the agriculture and food section.

The report is the first publication in the U.S. Climate Collection, a joint initiative of the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society. The collection provides a forum for U.S.-focused research and analyses that bring together findings from multiple studies to support scientific assessments. The new report aims to encourage scientists to submit papers, including to the U.S. Climate Collection, that address the synthesis and research gaps it identifies.

The framework also examines how research priorities vary by region. In the Northeast, questions include how rising seas and severe storms affect coastal infrastructure, while the Southwest section emphasizes drought, water supplies and the combined effects of wildfire smoke and extreme heat. In Alaska, priorities include understanding how thawing frozen ground damages roads, buildings and water systems.

Climate assessments evaluate evidence to explain what scientists know, where findings agree and where uncertainty remains, Kopp said. They translate research into information relevant to infrastructure, public health, emergency planning and investments.

The framework, directed at the scientific community, is intended to provide a roadmap for strengthening the scientific foundation of those assessments, Kopp said. Its contribution is to organize research needs and identify opportunities to evaluate advances across disciplines.

“An assessment brings together the evidence so people can understand what we know, how confident we are and what questions remain,” Kopp said. “This framework maps out the research needed to strengthen that evidence, from better local projections to more reliable ways of evaluating how different responses perform.”

The report was prepared as an independent volunteer effort. It focuses on developments since the Fifth National Climate Assessment, released in 2023.

One recurring research priority is understanding how hazards interact. Heat and drought can occur together, while infrastructure damage can disrupt other essential services. The authors identify ways these combinations affect systems designed around historical climate conditions.

Another priority identified is testing whether scientific models provide enough local details for decisions such as evaluating a town’s flood risks or choosing crops. More detailed projections require evaluation to establish their accuracy, uncertainty and suitability for particular uses.

The agriculture and food section examines research needs to understand climate impacts on water supplies, crop pests, food safety and nutritional quality. Adaptive strategies to these stressors could include different crop varieties, crop rotations and approaches to managing pests and livestock.

These responses can involve trade-offs, McElwee said. Farmers may increase irrigation to maintain crop yields in the face of drought, but this may affect water supplies for other uses.

“For agriculture, the questions posed by climate change extend from the water available to grow a crop to the safety and nutritional quality of the food people eat,” McElwee said. “Bringing that research together can help us understand how different adaptive responses perform, where they have limitations and what their effects may be beyond the farm.”

Evaluating responses is a theme throughout the framework. Seawalls, for example, can protect property while contributing to erosion or affecting coastal ecosystems, the authors noted. They also identified gaps in evidence about how protective measures perform over time and across communities.

The report also examined how income, housing, health and access to resources shape exposure to hazards and recovery, and how local community and Indigenous knowledge can contribute evidence.

The authors note the usefulness of connected national, regional and local assessments, alongside reports focused on specific industries or topics. Smaller, more frequent climate assessment updates could incorporate new findings and lessons from local projects, providing a clearer picture of which conclusions are well supported and where further research is needed.

The report also examined how income, housing, health and access to resources shape exposure to hazards and recovery, and how local community and Indigenous knowledge can contribute evidence.

The authors described a network of connected national, regional and local assessments, alongside reports focused on industries or topics. Smaller, more frequent updates could incorporate new findings and lessons from local projects, providing a clearer picture of which conclusions are well supported and where further research is needed.

Kopp and McElwee were both part of the author team for the Sixth National Climate Assessment, which was dismissed by the Trump administration in April 2025. 

“It’s unclear whether and how the Trump administration intends to produce a Sixth National Climate Assessment, which it is legally required to do in 2027,” said Kopp. “It is our hope that the priorities identified in our paper will serve as a benchmark for evaluating the next climate assessment produced by the U.S. government, while also supporting other assessments across different regions and economic sectors.”

Explore more of the ways Rutgers research is shaping the future