Science communication includes the efforts of natural, physical and social scientists, communications professionals, and teams that communicate the process and values of science and scientific findings to non-specialist audiences outside of formal educational settings. The goals of science communication can include enhanced dialogue, understanding, awareness, enthusiasm, improving decision making, or influencing behaviors. Channels can include in-person interaction, online, social media, mass media, or other methods. This session invites presentations by individuals and teams on science communication practice, research, and reflection, addressing questions like:

What kind of communication efforts are you engaging in and how you are doing it?
How is social science informing understandings of audiences, strategies, or effects?
What are lessons learned from long-term communication efforts?

This session invites you to share your work and join a community of practice to inform and advance the effective communication of earth and space science.

This is a merged session with 1.4 "Scientists, artists and the Earth: co-operating for the planet"

Everyday challenges such as climate change, pollution, desertification, natural hazards, and animal extinction prompt the need for urgent solutions. While science often takes the lead in providing these solutions, art is typically associated with entertainment. However, a growing community of scientists and artists is emerging to draw attention to pressing issues. Art, with its emotional engagement, becomes a powerful tool for cognitive learning and conveying messages that reawaken a sense of beauty and responsibility for the planet. The collaboration between scientists and artists facilitates the identification of more effective methods to involve people deeply in understanding Earth and encourages sustainable lifestyles. This interdisciplinary collaboration is crucial in communicating complex scientific subjects to non-experts, especially regarding topics like climate change that can be confusing to the public. Both scientific and artistic communities share an interest and responsibility in raising awareness about planetary boundaries and the Earth's fragile stability. Traditional educational methods have addressed these issues, but science-art collaborations play a vital role in co-creating new research avenues and fostering discussions with emotional and human context through the arts. The session aims to explore these dialogues by combining lectures, academic posters showcasing interdisciplinary research, and visual displays of art in action. By symbiotically blending STEM and the arts, the session encourages a discussion on how these disciplines can collaboratively explore and communicate the societal, economic, political, and environmental factors we face, driving improved communication.

Games have the power to ignite imaginations and place you in someone else’s shoes or situation, often forcing you into making decisions from perspectives other than your own. This makes them powerful tools for communication, through use in outreach, disseminating research, in education and teaching at all levels, and as a method to train the public, practitioners, and decision-makers in order to build environmental resilience.

Games can also inspire innovative and fun approaches to learning. Gamification and game-based approaches add an extra spark of engagement and interaction with a topic. Gaming technology (e.g. virtual reality) can transport and immerse people into new worlds providing fascinating and otherwise impossible experiences for learners.

In this session we welcome contributions from anyone who has used games, gaming technology, and/or game-based approaches in their research, their teaching, or public engagement activities.

The effectiveness of disaster risk mitigation actions depends not only on the implementation of specific measures such as safety protocols, but also on how well at-risk communities accept, react and contribute to, or care about them. Involving the at-risk community in the studies of hazards and risks can result in an increased awareness and enhanced knowledge on appropriate mitigation and preparedness options. In this sense, risk communication and citizen science are becoming increasingly significant. Scientists and experts play a key role in establishing confidence in the public opinion and in improving the communication efforts of institutions in charge of the public communication. While the risk communication field offers many best practices that can be adapted by and reproduced in different communities, it also faces many challenges, including reaching the right audiences and conveying the right messages .

This session is dedicated to scientists, science communicators and practitioners with a particular focus on Early Career Scientists. The aim of the session is to create a space for discussion of best practices and theoretical approaches when practicing risk communication or citizen science. We welcome submissions exploring different approaches for producing and sharing risk information related to natural and/or anthropogenic hazards considering key factors affecting risk communication (e.g., stakeholder engagement, cultural awareness and sensitivity, the temporality of risk communication, and uncertainties). Of special interest are contributions addressing the dynamics of risk communication from hazard preparation and response to crisis recovery. Moreover, we encourage contributions on how to evaluate the impacts of such efforts and how to include science communication in a scientist’s daily activities.

Scientists, communicators, citizens, and the media: public awareness of climate change calls for interdisciplinary collaboration to create clear and cohesive narratives to reach a wide and diverse audience and create a real impact. Climate change narratives can take different paths and focus on different perspectives, professions, sectors, and the audience addressed. The role of trust is also pivotal, as different publics are likely to reject information, regardless of its accuracy, if the message doesn’t resonate with an individuals' personal experiences.
Contextualization and concurring historical breakthroughs in climate politics can heighten media attention and coverage, but how can climate science communication reach a wide variety of audiences? To engage a diverse public’s attention and involvement in climate sciences, language must be simple, clear, and appealing. The imaginary boundary between the narrator and the audience can be removed thanks to the contribution and cooperation of cross-sectoral professionalism and experiences. Science and data are the starting point, but stories travel far to reach deeper levels of understanding and perception: those linked to our emotions. Words, voices, and images are stepping stones in the construction of innovative climate stories built to increase climate awareness and knowledge, grounded in frontier science research and forged with cutting-edge technological tools. Mixing the power of storytelling and new media possibilities, an innovative form of science communication can be defined and becomes an effective and powerful tool to convey specific information to a diverse public. This accurate information as a basis for awareness is a key tool to avoid that disinformation misleads the public's understanding of complex topics, such as climate change and science. Recent years confirm that disinformation influences the everyday life of citizens, limiting their active participation in the democratic process. This session is also designed to host a space of dialogue among researchers, fact-checkers, and communications experts to assess how disinformation affects science credibility and society and present tools to tackle it, enhancing the quality of information with a positive effect on public trust in science and resilience.

Science has long been a source of inspiration for artists, writers and other creative professionals, but as anyone who has seen a science-based film can tell you, the gap between inspiration and fact can sometimes be wide. So what do you do if you are approached by an artist or creative profession to collaborate on a project? How do you ensure that your subject is represented accurately, whilst at the same time respecting the artist’s creative freedom? And how do you find a creative professional to collaborate with you on your research?

In this short course we will explain some basic tips to help you with these issues, from the very first step of contacting, or being contacted by a creative professional, understanding the collaborative brief and how to write one, how the working styles of artists and scientists are different (and the same) and how to decide where the boundary between fact and fiction lies for you. Drawing experience from artists who have worked with scientists and scientists who have worked with artists across a range of mediums from theatre and opera, to sculpture, dance, creative writing and painting, this short course will give you the information you need to collaborate with confidence.

The research we conduct doesn’t fall into a vacuum. Once published, it enters a large information ecosystem, where we hope that our findings will resonate. As researchers, we devote our whole careers to the study of a narrow field of knowledge. This devotion is not shared by other players in this ecosystem who engage with our research, which might lead to misunderstandings and thus unintentional misinformation. Even others in the ecosystem intentionally seek to spread false information or foster ideologically driven disinformation campaigns. Thus, the players in the ecosystem range from fellow scientists from the same or other disciplines, journalists, politicians, social media influencers, the general public, to troll farms. Clearly, not all of them have or seek an in-depth understanding of the scientific context in which a particular piece of information slots into, and some merely seek to generate attention or outrage with their writing.
Many scientists feel somewhat uneasy in this ecosystem - lacking the tools to engage meaningfully. For example, when talking to journalists, information on the uncertainty of data may not be conveyed for the sake of clear and easy-to-follow storylines. Facts may be simplified or even misrepresented, which might lead to a certain reluctance of scientists to talk to journalists. However, especially this type of direct science-media-interaction is crucial for the debunking of mis- and disinformation.
On the other end of the spectrum is disinformation, which is not a misunderstanding, but happens intentionally: Deliberate false information is a common occurrence that we have all encountered around topics of societal relevance, such as climate change. Real data may be used out of context - or data might be an outright lie, made up for the sake of an argument, presented by questionable ‘experts’. The spread of such disinformation follows a political agenda or a certain ideology. It fosters polarization, disrupts informed decision-making, obstructs constructive dialogue, and subsequently poses a threat to social cohesion and democracy. The extreme end of the mis-/disinformation spectrum are conspiracy theories, which can cause considerable harm to social solidarity and peace.
This short course is a space for researchers to meet with journalists, fact checkers, and media-experienced scientists to provide a platform for questions, mutual understanding and creating a joint force against mis- and disinformation.

There are times when we find that our general communication tools stop working. One of these times is when we are dealing with risk communication for which we need to reach into our risk communication toolbox and use communication strategies that go beyond sharing scientific facts and data. This short course will equip you with a set of tools and skills you can use to work more effectively in different risk communication environments. Topics covered include basic risk communication principles, cognitive biases, risk perception, trust, and the use of media and social media in risk communication.

Who should join this course? The course is particularly designed for students, early-career and experienced natural hazard scientists and practitioners as well as science communicators who are keen to enhance their risk communication skills.

The course structure includes:
(1) Introduction (5 min)
(2) Expert panel discussion (30 min)
(3) Q&A with panel (25 min)

Those interested in attending this short course, might also be interested in the EOS session session "Challenges and opportunities in risk communication related to natural and anthropogenic hazards."

SPEAKERS
Lydia Cumiskey, Senior Post Doctoral Researcher, University College Cork, Ireland
Marina Mantini, Head Of Communications, CIMA Research Foundation, Italy

If you think your research is important and can make a difference in the world, but aren’t writing papers about making the world realize this, this is the session for you! To us, geoscience communication spans education, outreach, engagement and any studies into how any public (e.g. government, industry, an interest group) interacts with or consumes the geoscience that is your core business.

The session is a drop-in ‘clinic’ with the journal editors, so bring your ideas and questions!

The session will consist of roughly 10 mins of us talking, followed by small group or 1-to-1 discussion with a Geoscience Communication editor about your research idea – or how to integrate research into your geoscience communication activity (i.e. make it publishable).

It doesn’t matter if you know very little already. No question is too basic. It doesn’t matter how well developed (or not) your idea is. We can help you think about how to improve it, and to make it publishable – of course, we’d prefer Geoscience Communication. Alternatively, you could be an experienced geoscience communication practitioner who gets on with doing it, getting results, rather than writing a paper on it. In that case, we’d like to convince you that trying to publish is worth it!

In this session we encourage contributions of general interest within the Higher Education community which are not covered by other sessions. The session is open to all areas involving the teaching of geoscience and related fields in higher education. Examples might include describing a new resource available to the community, presenting a solution to a teaching challenge, pros and cons of a new technique/technology, linking science content to societally relevant challenges/issues, developing critical thinking skills through the curriculum and effective strategies for online/remote instruction and/or hybrid/blended learning. Our intent with this session is to foster international discourse on common challenges and strategies for educators within the broader field of Earth Sciences - let's share, discuss and develop effective practice.

Fieldwork is essential in geoscience, it provides direct and practical experiences, produces valuable data, validates hypotheses, contextualizes findings, encourages discovery, and helps to understand and eventually solve real-world challenges. It is the foundation upon which a significant part of geoscience research and understanding is built. This session is dedicated to exploring the broad range of fieldwork-related topics for education and research. It also provides a safe space to exchange ideas for inclusive fieldwork.
Topics evolve around the organizational and financial aspects of fieldwork, including working with local communities and utilizing and sharing existing infrastructure and expertise both inside and outside of institutions. The session is also open to presenting novel methods for conducting and teaching fieldwork in a safe and welcoming manner. Best practices for managing the field crew, addressing stigmatized subjects (personal hygiene, safety gear, and work attire), and taking into account different needs are a few examples of this.
An additional focus is the utilisation of virtual field models such as digital Outcrop models and their evaluation showcasing features like seamless zooming, rotation, and measurement tools for geological exploration. These models enhance virtual fieldwork for education and professionals, promoting inclusivity and providing access to geological standards and conservation areas. The future focus involves integrating artificial intelligence and machine learning for advanced geological analysis.
This session invites everyone to share their insight about how to conduct scientifically relevant fieldwork in an inclusive, safe, and fun way for every scientist in geoscience.

The opportunities for citizen science approaches to environmental research, and climate monitoring in particular, have recently expanded. One of the reasons for this is the availability of a wide range of low-cost measurement equipment, making it possible to carry out citizen science-based measurement missions with a large number of participants.
In scientific research, low-cost sensors provide individual and community-based scientists with tools to collect data on air and water quality and various environmental parameters. These sensors are often characterised by their simplicity and low cost. In addition to stationary weather sensors, the widespread use of sensor-equipped mobile weather stations is an optimal approach for collecting crowd-sourced information on meteorological variables such as temperature, humidity, wind speed and other climatic factors in regions lacking conventional weather station coverage.
However, there are many factors to consider in such citizen science activities, e.g. selection criteria for suitable sensors in relation to the particular research question, selection criteria for suitable citizens to reach e.g. a large coverage of a certain area, implementation of optimal quality control metrics and mechanisms for the collected data, and how to enable the best possible use of these citizen science data. Recently, there are commendable examples of strategies for effectively engaging citizen scientists in scientific research. However, it is also important to select and use effective communication tools to keep motivation high throughout the whole research process.
The aim of this session is therefore to provide a platform for the exchange of effective strategies or tools already in use in relation to the above points.

Research, especially for early career scientists (ECS), starts with the spark of an idea but then often challenged by empirical or methodological road bumps and seemingly dead ends. In Earth Science research, we face a diverse range of challenges, including (1) access difficulties, whether for field sites, equipment or data, (2) problems of temporal and spatial scaling and extrapolation and (3) a lack of methods, theory, or knowledge or (4) every day live challenges as a scientist. In this short course we address some of those 'problems'. In discussing these challenges, we seek to find possible solutions, suggest new research approaches and methods, and encourage further networking amongst all scientists.

The short course follows the concept of a participatory, structured and timed discussion. We will start the session with 2 minute ‘pop-up’ presentations outlining three to four challenges, which are discussed for 45 minutes in breakout groups. The discussions are facilitated, and guided by the idea that you don’t have to be an expert to understand a problem – you might likely contribute a fresh perspective or relate from your background. We present the solutions and suggestions from each breakout group in a final penal discussion.
This short course lives by your input in two ways. First, in the preparation by letting us know, if you have a ‘problem”, and second by active participation during the short course.
To ensure a safe and open discussion we expect a non-hierarchic, respectful, and constructive communication which will empower and encourage the participants to identify and approach problems faced in the Earth Sciences.
If you have a 'problem' you would like to discuss in the networking session with us, please send a short statement (3-4 sentences) of your idea or challenge and your motivation for solving it to us, by March 1st, 2024.

Following the success of previous years, this session will explore reasons for the under-representation of different groups (gender identities, sexual orientations, racial and cultural backgrounds, abilities, religions, nationality or geography, socioeconomic status, ages, career stages, etc.) by welcoming debate among scientists, decision-makers and policy analysts in the geosciences.

The session will focus on both obstacles that contribute to under-representation and on best practices and innovative ideas to remove those obstacles. Contributions are solicited on the following topics:

- Role models to inspire and further motivate others (life experience and/or their contributions to promote equality)
- Imbalanced representation, preferably supported by data, for awards, medals, grants, high-level positions, invited talks and papers
- Perceived and real barriers to inclusion (personally, institutionally, culturally)
- Recommendations for new and innovative strategies to identify and overcome barriers
- Best practices and strategies to move beyond barriers, including:
• successful mentoring programmes
• networks that work
• specific funding schemes
• examples of host institutions initiatives
- COVID-related data, discussions and initiatives

This session is co-organised with the EGU early career scientists (ECS) and the European Research Council (ERC).

Scientific knowledge is crucial for shaping policies related to climate, environment, sustainability, and resources. To have an impact on politics, research needs to communicate in a way that addresses needs and offers solutions. However, it is important to identify the most effective science policy formats that can contribute to enriching political debates. While there are now many resources available to scientists who would like to engage in the policymaking process, finding specific information or practical examples that relate to a specific discipline or field of research can be challenging.

This session aims to bridge that gap by highlighting success stories from scientists who have engaged in policy and made critical societal impacts – either on a European, national, or local level – across different scientific disciplines and science officers who have facilitated successful science-policy-dialogues. It will also aim to examine the various challenges that researchers face when engaging on the science-policy interface and various strategies that others have taken to manage and overcome them.

This session is relevant for scientists and science officers from all career levels and science disciplines and will provide space for follow-up questions and a discussion with the participants at the session and at a splinter meeting on EGU Monday.

Climate change represents one of the defining societal challenges of the 21st century. However, the response to this challenge remains largely inadequate across the board. Adaptation or mitigation measures taken by countries or companies fall short of what is required to ensure a safe and healthy life for populations around the globe, both today and in the future. The shortfall in climate action has led to a sharp increase in climate lawsuits globally, either to receive compensation for suffered climate damages or to force decision makers to commit to the necessary emissions reductions. In this session, we invite contributions that help bridge the communication gap between science and law in the courtroom. Contributions can include outreach or communication efforts, new scientific methods that can support legal efforts, and inter- and transdisciplinary perspectives on how to integrate geoscience insights in litigation. We also welcome contributions that reflect on how questions of climate change and impact attribution, responsibility, human rights, and burden sharing of efforts can be effectively translated across disciplinary boundaries.

Geoscience knowledge and practices are essential for effectively navigating the complexities of the modern world. They play a critical role in addressing urgent global challenges on a planetary scale (including, climate change and its social, humanitarian, and health impacts), informing decision-making processes and guiding education at all levels. However, the response to these challenges remains largely inadequate across the board.
By equipping both citizens and the wider societal stakeholders with the necessary knowledge background, geosciences empower them to engage in meaningful discussions, shape policies, contribute to reduce inequities and injustice, and implement solutions for local, regional, and global social-environmental problems. Within this broad scope, geoethics strives to establish a shared ethical framework that guides geoscientists’ engagement with sensitive and significant issues concerning the interaction between geoscience and society.
This session will cover a variety of topics, including theoretical and practical aspects of geoethics, ethical issues in professional practice, climate and ocean education, geoscience communication, and strategies for bridging the gap between geosciences and society.
This session is co-sponsored by the International Association for Promoting Geoethics, the Commission on Geoethics of the International Union of Geological Sciences and the Chair on Geoethics of the International Council for Philosophy and Human Sciences (www.geoethics.org).

Geoscientists are actively engaged in advancing knowledge pertaining to current climate change and environmental crisis, and disseminating it to a broad audience, from the general public to policymakers and stakeholders.

To date, efforts to trigger radical transformations, whether by political, economic, or civil society actors, have overwhelmingly fallen short of the urgent actions recommended by scientific institutions such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) or the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Some scholars argue that the underlying issue lies not primarily in the absence of information (Oreskes, The trouble with the supply-side model of science, 2022), but rather in the power dynamics among various stakeholders and that recognizing this is fundamental (Stoddard et al., Three Decades of Climate Mitigation: Why Haven’t We Bent the Global Emissions Curve?, 2013).
This session targets the diverse roles that geoscientists can play in accelerating the radical transformation of our society to address the current ecological crisis.

Key questions include: How to engage with civil society, stakeholders and policymakers to ensure the implementation of research findings into appropriate policies? How to assess and reduce the ecological footprint of scientific institution, as to show exemplary pathways to the rest of society? How to expand outreach and training efforts, and towards who, the general public or specific stakeholders such as elected representatives, civil servants, economic actors, or even fellow academics? How to contribute and assist legal actions against private or public entities? Should scientists engage in disruptive actions and civil disobedience to transform their own institutions and press on problematic actors, such as the fossil fuel industry?
 
We invite contributions that address these questions, whether from a theoretical perspective or through firsthand experiences. We are particularly interested in examples of research projects or collaborations that have attempted to assess their impact on any of the strategies given above (e.g., ecological footprints, policies, litigation, communication, or pressing on relevant stakeholders). Interdisciplinary work, spanning fields like philosophy, history, sociology, and their application to science or broader societal aspects, is highly encouraged.

Science’s “open era” is here (to stay?). Data and software repositories make it possible to share and collectively develop tools and resources. Diamond open-access publishing and pre-print servers are breaking barriers to knowledge exchange. Free virtual meetings make science more accessible to those interested in listening, or speaking.

The benefits for the community are clear – better communication and more collaboration foster scientific advancement. It is therefore surprising that the vast majority of data-, tool-, and knowledge-sharing initiatives rely on the community and the community alone, without financial support from funding bodies and more often than not lacking the recognition they deserve.

We aim to bring together individuals and teams who have, in any way, served the wider geoscience community through knowledge, data, or tool creation and/or distribution. Such efforts include – but are not limited to – online learning platforms, transdisciplinary databases, open-access software and publishing.

Ultimately, this session seeks to:
1. Be a space for sharing, advertising, discussing, and recognising the value of existing resources and initiatives
2. Discuss the challenges faced by those behind them (i.e., lack of funding and institutional support) and possible strategies to eliminate these
3. Inspire new efforts, initiatives, and projects

After the session, we intend to (i) bring together all resources and initiatives in one, ever-growing collection that anyone can access and contribute to (such as a Zenodo Community https://zenodo.org/communities/academic-community-resources/), and (ii) write a follow-up paper describing the initiatives presented and the insights gained in the session.

Research data infrastructures (RDIs) serve to manage and share research products in a systematic way to enable research across all scales and disciplinary boundaries Their services support researchers in data management and collaborative analysis throughout the entire data lifecycle.

For this fostering of FAIRness and openness, e.g. by applying established standards for metadata, data, and/or scientific workflows, is crucial. Through their offerings and services, RDIs can shape research practices and are strongly connected with the communities of users that identify and associate themselves with them.

Naturally, the potential of RDIs faces many challenges. Even though it is clear that RDIs are indispensable for solving big societal problems, their wide adoption requires a cultural change within research communities. At the same time RDIs themselves must be developed further to serve user needs. And, also at the same time, the sustainability of RDIs must be improved, international cooperation increased, and duplication of development efforts must be avoided. To be able to provide a community of diverse career stages and backgrounds with a convincing infrastructure that is established beyond national and institutional boundaries, new collaboration patterns and funding approaches must be tested so that RDIs foster cultural change in academia and be a reliable foundation for FAIR and open research. This needs to happen while academia struggles with improving researcher evaluation, with a continuing digital disruption, with enhancing scholarly communication, and with diversity, equity, and inclusion.

In Earth System Science (ESS), several research data infrastructures and components are currently developed on different regional and disciplinary scales , all of which face these challenges at some level. solutions
This session provides a forum to exchange methods, stories, and ideas to enable cultural change and international collaboration in scientific communities, to bridge the gap between user needs, and to build sustainable software solutions.

Societal challenges in the 21st century are interconnected and complex. The amount of information needed to make an informed decision that adequately considers policy options is increasing and a broad range of scientific evidence is required to deal with them. However, despite the demand for more information, it can be difficult for scientists to know where their expertise is needed and how to create policy impact.

This session will provide an introduction into some key ‘science for policy’ themes and provide specific details about when and how scientists can engage with policy to increase the impact of their efforts. It will also provide resources and tips for scientists so that they can start their science for policy journeys. The last part of the Short Course will include a Q&A with those working on the science-policy interface. This session will be relevant to all career levels and scientific disciplines.

Contributing to the policymaking process is a great way to engage with those outside of academia and to ensure your research has an impact! During this session, a panel of experts will build on the concepts outlined in the ‘Science for Policy 101’ Short Course by providing participants with an overview of the competences and skills that can help ensure that your policy engagement is meaningful and has an impact!

In the first half of the session, participants will be introduced to the Science for Policy Competence Framework Smart4Policy self-assessment tool created by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre. The panelists will then provide an outline of the European policy landscape and some of the specific mechanisms that scientists can use to engage with it.

While it is recommended that participants attend the ‘Science for Policy 101’ Short Course before this session, it isn’t necessary.

Geoscience has a long history, wound up with the history of science itself, and thus with colonialism and colonial thinking. We see the manifestation of this colonial history in practices such as “parachute science”, where international scientists, usually from higher-income countries, conduct field work or collect data and samples in another country, usually of lower income countries, and then elaborate the data and publish scientific papers without involving local scientists and/or local communities from that nation. This is an example of scientific neo-colonialism. We see this in the exploitation of local people whose lands are visited for field work and in the exclusion or partial extractive collaboration with in-country geoscientists. Part of this disparity between researchers is also reflected in the difference in experience of access to funding, ease of mobility, issues of visa and fear of speaking out against the status quo.
Building on an EGU2023 short course and Great Debate, here we propose a more informal session to provide participants with an introduction to the colonial background of geosciences, defining the terminology and outlining efforts to decolonize geosciences. Our goal is to raise awareness among the EGU members who may unintentionally be part of neo-colonial research practices and open up a space to discuss solutions. We also aim to open up the discussion for geoscientists on the receiving end of such practices to share stories, ideas and experiences to build a more inclusive, responsive community of practice.

What does 'ethics' mean and what is the role of ethics in your daily practices as a scientist? Where and how do ethics enter into your geoscientific research and teaching? Although ethics as a subject of study is traditionally the domain of social sciences and humanities, as scientists we are confronted with ethical questions and decisions every day. In the context of climate emergency, mass extinction and global social injustices, it is increasingly important to understand the role played by our research and the systems and structures within which our work is embedded. Ultimately, we could ask ourselves a question: does our research contribute to building a world that corresponds to our values?

This interactive workshop will ask geoscientists to delve beyond our individual research interests to consider how our work as academics intervenes in these big ethical questions. Participants will reflect on ethical questions and case studies related to geoscientific practice and be introduced to ideas and materials drawn from other disciplines such as philosophy, sociology, and political sciences.

The workshop is designed and led by an interdisciplinary team including geoscientists, social scientists and humanities scholars. Participants will be provided with materials which can be freely repurposed and reused, whether to teach aspects of (geo)scientific ethics or to inspire discussion amongst colleagues in the context of environmental and social crisis.

To facilitate discussion, we will have a maximum of 40 participants.

In this short course, we will introduce students and early-career researchers to the principles of Open Science, data, and software, as well as the benefits open practices can have for their own research careers, for science, and for society. Participants will have the opportunity to explore the practical impact of Open Science for their work. Participants will develop their digital presence, including using an ORCID to build a permanent profile of their work, and will make a plan to share their data, software, and publications as openly as possible. We will go over the open science outcomes and tools that advance research and collaboration and practice hands-on skills to advance participants’ careers through open science practices.
Participants in this short course will be able to define open science, discuss the benefits and challenges of open science, and identify practices that enable open science. Participants will develop their digital presence, including using an ORCID to build a permanent profile of their work, and will learn strategies for sharing research outputs, data, and software as openly as possible. This course is designed for students or other researchers new to open science; no previous experience with publishing research is required.

The EGU Education Committee (EC) organise Geosciences Information for Teachers (GIFT) workshop. These are two-and-a-half-day teacher enhancement workshops. Selected top-level scientists working in the Earth sciences offer the invited teachers talks centered on a different theme every year. Teachers are also provided with teaching strategies and activities related to the theme.
In 2024, the topic will be: 'The Changing Climate of our Planet’.
GIFT 2024 will propose lectures, hands-on activities and poster session for 80 teachers selected in Europe.
The main objective of the GIFT workshops is to spread first-hand scientific information to science teachers of secondary (and primary) schools, significantly shortening the time between discovery and textbook, and to provide the teachers with material that can be directly transported to the classroom. In addition, the full immersion of science teachers in a truly scientific context and the direct contact with world leading geoscientists are expected to stimulate curiosity towards scientific research that the teachers then transmit to their pupils.
Since 2003, The annual evaluation data and feedback from the teachers involved indicate the great success of this strategy for the teachers, their colleagues and their pupils.

The EGU Education Committee organises Geosciences Information for Teachers (GIFT) workshops. This poster session focuses on 'Teaching Climate Change at School'. Abstract submission is open for teachers participating in the GIFT workshop and for all other authors.

Practical sessions with resources that are easy to use in the classroom are proposed during GIFT. These sessions, in small groups, take place in this room (-2.33).
A total of 4 practical activities will be presented to teachers attending GIFT.