Science-policy interface for marine plastic pollution: how can visualisations contribute to decision-support?

Abstract Plastic pollution is detrimental to nature and human health both at local and global levels. Through this study, we explore the perceptions of the marine plastic problem and solutions by stakeholders in Ålesund, Norway in a focus group setting. We used three visualisation-based interventions aiming to improve the overview of the problem, uncertainty communication and empathy. Firstly, decision-support tools (DSTs) with visually intuitive statistics of the most frequently found litter types were used by the participants in their discussion. Secondly, a visual citizen science exercise enabled them to experience scientific uncertainty first-hand. And thirdly, images of fish gills with plastic fibres were shown as an illustration of the local effects of marine plastic on wildlife. We sorted the proposed solutions per leverage point categories according to intent, design, feedback and parameters, and found an overwhelming majority under parameters, i.e. the shallowest leverage point category. There was little change in the leverage point categories throughout the focus group. We also explored the participants’ interpretation of scientific information and specifically risk and uncertainty. We found the uncertainty communication intervention to be a powerful trigger for a sense of urgency and a better understanding of scientific uncertainty. On the other hand, the results from the empathy intervention were challenging to interpret as several factors played into the dynamic of the conversations. Some participants expressed sadness, others highlighted the inadequacy of current regulations, and others still attempted to diffuse the tension. Based on our findings, we question the use of analytical DSTs alone, and define a research agenda on how visualisations can help high quality action-driven decisions through uncertainty communication and empathy to stimulate the sense of urgency needed. We provide some thoughts on how we, as scientists, can better reach decision-makers to build mutual trust and encourage wise, empathetic policy development grounded in scientific evidence.