An overview of the scientific literature on uncertainty communication in geoscience

Uncertainty is an inherent part of geoscience research and arises at multiple stages of the scientific process, from data collection and modelling to analysis and interpretation. In recent years, growing attention has been devoted to uncertainty quantification and assessment, alongside increasing recognition of the importance of uncertainty communication. These aspects are closely linked, as robust characterization of uncertainty provides an essential basis for transparent communication within the scientific community and beyond it.

Communicating uncertainty not only plays a key role in improving the understanding of how scientific knowledge is produced, but can also help to foster trust by increasing transparency and contextualizing results. Nevertheless, reluctance to explicitly assess and communicate uncertainty persists, particularly when addressing non-expert audiences. This challenge is especially relevant in the context of natural hazard risk assessment and management: Here, adequate communication of uncertainties can add particularly valuable information for decision-making, risk governance, and a better understanding of the risks at hand among public audiences.

This contribution presents an exploratory, database-driven overview of the scientific literature on uncertainty communication in geoscience, with a particular focus on natural hazards. Using structured queries in the Web of Science database, we examine publication trends over time, disciplinary distributions, thematic emphases, and possible blind spots. Keyword combinations range from general terms such as “uncertainty communication” and “multi-hazard communication” to more specific queries combining uncertainty, communication, and individual natural hazards (e.g., floods, earthquakes, droughts).

Preliminary results indicate that uncertainty communication spans a broad range of scientific categories, while the level of attention varies substantially across hazard types, with flood-related studies being more prominent than others. Initial findings also suggest that multi-hazard uncertainty communication remains comparatively underrepresented, despite the increasing emphasis on multi-hazard and multi-risk assessments in recent research and policy frameworks. The growing volume of publications further highlights the need for systematic approaches to literature mapping, as well as the potential role of data-driven and AI-assisted tools in supporting such analyses.

This research was partially funded by the European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) of the European Commission (EC) through the VOLCAN project (ref. 101193100) and by the 2024 Research Prize of the Dr. K. H. Eberle Foundation to Mohadjer, Pelzer and Dietrich.