Whether you thrill at the chance to tell taxi drivers and dinner-table companions about your research or want to hide every time someone asks, “What do you do?”, we offer an exciting and entertaining science communications challenge for you.

Inspired by the XKCD comic that describes the Saturn V Rocket using only the thousand most common words in English (http://xkcd.com/1133/), we ask speakers to present short (~5-minute) scientific talks using this basic set of vocabulary, determined via the Up-Goer Five Text Editor: http://splasho.com/upgoer5. The talk is preferably about your own research but can also be about a general topic you are interested in.

Why should you contribute to this session? The section below is written using the Up-Goer Five Text Editor:

When you change the words to explain what you do, you:
- Find what is at the heart of your work,
- can now tell ANYONE what you study, because you can make things as simple as they can be, even if that is hard at first,
- show that it matters to you that everyone can really understand what you do.

In addition, this session allows you to submit a second abstract. So you can use it to reach out to a wider audience or show additional work, gain experience in presenting, and train your outreach skills in the process.

For some inspiration, check out the abstracts from last year's session: https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU26/session/57008 or some videos from AGU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxWrerZhfrk. Join us for an interesting and fun session and learn about your and others' research in new and beautifully simple ways!

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.

Visit www.games4geoscience.wordpress.com to learn more about the session.

As evidence of the climate and ecological crisis mounts, climate and environmental scientists increasingly face a question: how to make their results actually matter? To what extent should they incorporate elements of public and civic engagement into their day-to-day research practice? Civic engagement remains rare among scientists, unevenly supported, and often contested on the premise that it is incompatible with scientific neutrality and detrimental to scientific credibility. Yet both public and civic engagement may take many forms — public communication, policy advice, art-science collaboration, advocacy, and civil disobedience — each of these forms raises its own questions of legitimacy, credibility, and personal or professional risks.

This session invites contributions that document, analyse, or reflect on the many ways scientists engage in response to the climate crisis. We particularly welcome works that try to unravel the tensions such engagement raises: between perceived need for neutrality and academic freedom, between critique and defence of science, and between individual initiatives and institutional support. We are interested both in conceptual contributions (philosophy of science, sociology of the scientific field, legal frameworks of academic freedom and civil-service duties) and in concrete experiences — individual trajectories, collective initiatives, and institutional practices — from across disciplines and countries. We want this session to contribute to the discussion on science's relation to society in face of the climate crisis.

A central aim of this session is to connect the initiatives — individual and collective, grassroots and institutional — that are emerging across Europe and beyond, and to foster exchange on what responsible, effective, and sustainable academic engagement can look like. We especially welcome submissions from collectives and networks at any career stage, and welcome reflective and interdisciplinary formats alongside conventional presentations.

All science has uncertainty. Global challenges such as disaster risk, environmental degradation, and climate change illustrate that an effective dialogue between science and society requires clear communication of uncertainty. Responsible science communication conveys the challenges of managing uncertainty that is inherent in measurements, input data, and model outputs, facilitating the society to understand the contexts where uncertainty emerges and enabling active participation in discussions.

Uncertainty communication can play a major role across the risk management cycle, especially during decision-making, and should be tailored to the audience and the timing of delivery. Therefore, research on quantification and communication of uncertainties deepens our understanding of how to make scientific evidence more actionable for risk reduction.

This session invites presentations by individuals and teams on communicating scientific uncertainty, addressing topics such as:
1. Innovative and practical tools (e.g. from social or statistical research) for communicating uncertainty.
2. Visual, verbal and numerical approaches for communicating uncertainty.
3. Pitfalls, challenges and solutions to communicating uncertainty to different audiences (e.g. experts, policymakers, media, general public, first-responders).
4. Communicating uncertainty in risk and crisis situations (e.g., natural hazards, climate change, public health crises).

Examples of research fitting into the categories above include a) new, creative ways to visualize different aspects of uncertainty, b) new frameworks to communicate the level of confidence associated with research, c) testing the effectiveness of existing tools and frameworks, such as the categories of “confidence” used in expert reports (e.g., IPCC), or d) research addressing the challenges of communicating high-uncertainty high-impact events.

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

Social media provides geoscientists with opportunities to connect with diverse audiences, share discoveries, and explain how Earth's processes shape everyday life. However, turning complex research into content that is accessible, engaging, and scientifically robust while also appealing to algorithms remains a challenge. Short formats require concise messages, and the rapidly changing landscape of platforms, along with AI-generated content and misinformation, adds further complexity. The main challenge is capturing attention without losing scientific nuance and turning that attention into meaningful understanding. This session explores how individuals, groups, or institutions can effectively communicate geosciences on social media, covering topics such as climate change, geological hazards, and the history of our planet. We welcome contributions that present practical approaches and creative experiments, such as visual storytelling, humor, short videos, multilingual and community participation, and critical reflections and assessments on what works and what does not. Additionally, we aim to discuss strategies for reaching audiences beyond existing scientific networks, building trust, and evaluating impact beyond just the algorithms.

Contemporary environmental and social challenges, such as climate change, pollution, desertification, natural hazards and species extinction, demand urgent and multifaceted responses. Art, with its own methods and long trajectory of exploring the relationships between human beings and the natural world, constitutes a specific pathway of inquiry and knowledge production. It operates differently from and complementary to scientific research. Art has the ability to evoke emotion and facilitate deep connections, making it a powerful tool for cognitive learning and delivering messages that reignite a sense of beauty and responsibility. Science transforms our understanding of the world. Art transforms the ways in which we perceive, experience, and relate to it. This complementarity makes collaboration between scientists and artists especially fertile. It allows complex questions to be approached through experience, the senses, the body, and the imagination. Art also opens an experiential path toward diverse audiences of different ages, backgrounds, and cultures, with or without specialized knowledge that can enhance scientific communication without replacing it. The scientific and artistic communities share an interest and responsibility in exploring how we inhabit a planet whose systems are under increasing pressure, and in generating new forms of knowledge and dialogue around these transformations. Traditional educational and communication methods have long addressed these challenges. Art-science collaborations open up further pathways for research and dialogue, grounded in direct, embodied experience. But this collaboration is not simply about art communicating or making science accessible: when both disciplines meet on equal terms of exchange, new questions, methods, and languages can emerge that neither discipline would reach on its own. This session aims to explore these interdisciplinary conversations. By bringing STEM and the arts together as equal partners, we want to open a space to discuss how these disciplines can collaborate in the research, exploration, and communication of contemporary social, economic, political, and environmental challenges, and what new forms of knowledge can emerge from this encounter.
We encourage talks on all forms of artistic expression be it visual, audio, or performative. However, we do ask that talks be restricted to artistic expressions in which the end result was produced by a human and not artificial intelligence.

Youth are very aware of climate change, natural hazards, and other global environmental challenges, and many want to do something about it. If we can reach students in their teens, an age when individuals either maintain or lose interest in STE(A)M (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics), we can show how geoscience gives you tools to understand the world and be part of the solution. Additionally, we can demonstrate the value and breadth of a geoscience career. Mission Earth, an initiative supported by the EGU Special Activity Fund, aims to connect students' natural curiosity about the environment to real-world action. During the project, early-career scientists across the globe worked with local youth to share their own career path into the geosciences, as well as impart storytelling and filmmaking skills to empower the students to produce their own short videos about local environmental and geoscience issues important to them. Youth groups were also able to receive a free science show from a Germany-based science entertainer, showcasing how science and curiosity can be fun. In this session, we will discuss successes from the Mission Earth project, best practices learned running a youth filmmaking program, and the environmental issues that are currently of importance to youth. We’ll also engage session attendees in some of the hands-on activities used to teach youth the skills needed to produce their own short films.

Virtual and augmented reality, immersive visualization environments, and related interactive techniques are rapidly transforming the way we communicate, teach, and conduct geoscientific research. These technologies allow learners, stakeholders, and researchers to experience complex processes and datasets in new and engaging ways, from exploring outcrops and landscapes virtually to interacting with model simulations in three dimensions. Their potential spans education and outreach, where they enhance accessibility and engagement for diverse audiences, as well as scientific research itself, where immersive environments can provide novel perspectives on data analysis, hypothesis testing, and collaborative work.
This session invites contributions showcasing innovative uses of virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality, and other immersive techniques across the geosciences. We particularly welcome examples from education, outreach, citizen science, and communication, as well as case studies and technical developments that demonstrate the added value of immersive approaches for scientific discovery. The session aims to foster exchange between developers and users, between research and education, and across disciplinary boundaries to highlight best practices and future opportunities for immersive technologies in geoscience.

Climate and ocean change are deeply interconnected, both as physical processes and as societal challenges. The ocean plays a fundamental role in the climate system, while anthropogenic climate change is altering ocean environments in profound and increasingly visible ways. Addressing these changes requires more than scientific knowledge: it also depends on how that knowledge is communicated, learned, interpreted and used across diverse societal contexts.
This interdisciplinary session explores the intersections of climate and ocean science, communication, education, public engagement and ethics. It invites research and practice that examine how individuals, communities, institutions and decision-makers navigate and interpret climate and ocean science, and how effective communication, learning and engagement drive informed societal responses.
We welcome contributions including empirical studies, theoretical and methodological approaches, case studies and evidence-informed practices addressing a broad range of issues, including but not limited to:
• climate and ocean literacy, education, pedagogical approaches and curricula;
• science communication, media, visualisation and storytelling;
• public engagement and communication with policymakers, stakeholders and communities;
• misinformation and disinformation, trust, risk perceptions and the communication of uncertainty;
• evaluation of communication and educational processes, outcomes, limitations and unintended impacts;
• geoethical perspectives, including climate justice, equity, responsibility and the societal roles of scientists, educators and communicators.
By bringing together researchers, educators, communicators and practitioners, this session aims to advance our understanding of how knowledge about climate and ocean change is communicated, interpreted, negotiated and used across different institutions, communities and publics.

There are many ways to involve the public in geoscience beyond talks, posters and traditional outreach. Museums, research projects and science centres are increasingly experimenting with interactive exhibitions, games, virtual and augmented reality, hands-on activities and citizen science. These approaches can make processes that are difficult to see or understand more tangible, and can give people a more active role in exploring geoscience and the research behind it.
In this session, we would like to bring together people who are developing or using these kinds of approaches. We welcome contributions on interactive exhibitions and installations, digital and immersive experiences, citizen science projects, games, hands-on activities and other forms of public participation in geoscience. Contributions can focus on finished projects, work in progress, or simply on what was learned during development and testing.
We are also interested in the practical side: What works with different audiences? How do you involve stakeholders in developing an activity? How do you balance scientific content with an engaging experience? And how do you know whether an activity actually works? Examples that did not work as expected, or that changed substantially after testing with users, are just as valuable.
The aim of the session is to exchange ideas and experiences between geoscientists, educators, science communicators, museum professionals and developers, and to learn from approaches that have already been tried in different settings. We hope it will also provide a place to find potential connections between projects working on similar forms of public engagement and citizen science.

UNESCO Global Geoparks (UGGps) are territories with significant geodiversity, used to promote geoconservation, geoeducation and geotourism. Over 250 UGGPS around the world are engaged in developing different strategies of communication, adapting it to local cultures and realities. This Session aims to bring together the presentation of best practices related to public engagement with geoscience and geoheritage within the framework of UGGPs. Looking at this diversity will contribute to improving our of Geoscience Communication and Outreach skills.

Science communication is a valuable component of scientific research, policymaking and public engagement - involving natural, physical, and social scientists, communications professionals, and teams who communicate the processes and values of science to non-specialist audiences both within and outside of formal educational settings. The goals of science communication can include enhanced dialogue, understanding, awareness, enthusiasm, influencing sustainable behaviour change, improving decision making, and/or community building. Methods of facilitating science communication can include in-person interaction, online activities through social media, web or app-based activities, press, podcasts or radio, video, and many more. In this session, we invite practitioners and developers of science communication activities / initiatives to explore their processes and learnings on themes like:
- What kind of science communication efforts are you engaging in and how have you developed, iterated and implemented them?
- What are the biggest challenges or successes you’ve had in engaging non-specialist public with science and how have you evaluated these?
- How can geosciences learn from other disciplines (such as social sciences) about understanding audiences, developing communication and engagement strategies, conducting evaluation or understanding the impact of activities?
- What are lessons learned from long-term, impactful, or innovative science communication efforts?
- What have been your experiences with communicating science with emotion, purpose, and values to better connect with your intended audience?
This session invites you to share your learnings and join a community of practice to inform and advance the effective communication of earth and space science. We value contributions across the wide range of science communication activities possible, and all levels of experience - including new, pioneering, innovative and early career contributions- are encouraged to take part.

As the urgency for climate action increases, so does the need for a climate-literate global population — able to understand how the climate system works, how human actions affect it, and how climate change impacts people and ecosystems, and to combine this knowledge with evidence-based reasoning and systems thinking, with the capacity to evaluate evidence, information and perspectives, and with the agency to shape sustainable futures, individually and collectively. This is frequently summarised as fostering concern and hope.
In this session we will explore how scientists can work with educators and communicators to counter mis- and disinformation, develop critical thinking, and support teachers and others to deliver high-quality climate education. This might be through social media, face-to-face or virtual events, engagement with high-level policy or strategy, or research and publications.
We invite individuals and teams to share good practice, insights and reflections on science communication and education practice and research, including:
• What interventions or collaborations have been tried, or are being developed, to bring scientists, educators and communicators together?
• What are good measures of the impact of interventions on the climate literacy of individuals, groups or communities?
• How can scientists become good educators and/or communicators, or form productive partnerships with them?
• How to achieve the right balance between ‘concern’ (understanding the causes and impacts of anthropogenic climate change) and ‘hope’ and/or agency?

Hands-on exploration, conversation, observation, play, and time away from screens are central to how people learn. At the same time, digital technologies, including AI, digital storytelling tools, multimedia platforms, and accessible Earth system science data, are creating new possibilities for teaching and engagement. The challenge is not choosing one approach over the other, but understanding when each can best support meaningful learning. This session invites talks on how educators and communicators balance analogue and digital approaches across Earth system science education and engagement. What kinds of learning are strengthened by technology, and what are better supported through direct experience, construction, discussion, art, play, and time to think? How can AI and other digital tools be used responsibly where they add value while preserving opportunities for curiosity, creativity, exploration, and productive struggle? And as technology makes it easier to access and process information, how do we continue to teach students and the public how to learn, think critically, ask questions, and make meaning? We invite presentations across formal and informal education, public engagement, and lifelong learning to share approaches to balancing digital and analogue experiences, from hands-on and place-based learning to technology-light spaces, creative approaches, AI-supported teaching, and digital storytelling.

This session explores innovative digital and non-digital approaches to hazard and risk education and communication, with particular attention to how they can connect research, policy and practice. It considers hazards and risks arising from natural and human-induced processes, and how innovative methods can strengthen understanding, support evidence-informed decision-making and translate knowledge into action.

Effective education and communication are central to building resilience, yet traditional methods can struggle to engage diverse audiences, connect scientific knowledge with practice or influence policy. Digital tools—including serious games, massive open online courses (MOOCs), simulations, and immersive virtual and augmented reality—can bring hazard scenarios to life and enable learners, communities, practitioners and policymakers to explore uncertainty, cascading consequences, response options and trade-offs. Non-digital methods, including role-play, participatory mapping, scenario workshops, classroom activities and tabletop exercises, can support deliberation, mutual learning, preparedness and policy.

We welcome abstracts exploring the development, application and evaluation of these innovations across contexts ranging from primary to postgraduate education, professional training, policy and implementation. Contributions addressing co-production with communities, policymakers, public authorities and practitioners are particularly encouraged, alongside work examining inclusivity, transferability and outcomes such as learning, engagement, decision-making, policy uptake and institutional change.

By bringing together researchers, educators, policymakers and practitioners, the session will share best practice, showcase cutting-edge tools and methods, and critically reflect on their contribution to hazard and risk education, decision making and practice. A PICO format will combine concise presentations with poster-based interaction and lively cross-sector discussion.

This session explores the diverse and dynamic field of visualization and interaction within the geosciences, with particular emphasis on 3D approaches. It aims to bridge gaps between different scales and forms of geoscientific data, explore their applications, and highlight the importance of visual and interactive methods for scientific interpretation and communication.
We welcome contributions spanning a broad spectrum of geoscientific research and practice. Topics may include the visualization and interactive exploration of data across scales, from microscopic mineral structures to geological formations, subsurface systems, numerical simulations, and planetary-scale models. We also invite applications from fields such as environmental monitoring, resource exploration, natural hazard assessment, geodynamics, and planetary science.
The session welcomes advances in visualization tools, software, hardware, and workflows, including interactive and web-based environments, virtual and augmented reality, and approaches for handling large or time-dependent datasets. This may include tools that allow users to navigate, query, manipulate, or compare geoscientific data and models. Particular attention will be given to methods that enhance the perception, exploration, and understanding of geodata through meaningful interaction.
We invite researchers, professionals, and students developing new visualization and interaction methods, creating compelling geological models, or applying these approaches in novel ways to share their insights and experiences. Although 3D visualization forms a central theme, contributions presenting other innovative approaches to geoscientific visualization and interaction are equally welcome.
By fostering a multidisciplinary dialogue, we hope to stimulate innovation and drive the geosciences forward into new dimensions.

The session aims at collecting relevant experiences on geoheritage in its in situ and ex situ dimensions, that is, geological sites, heritage stones, and geological collections. Experiences should be about geological sites as places that have contributed significant values to society, scientific knowledge, or culture on a national or international level; heritage stones as geological materials that have been significant additions to architecture, engineering, sculpture and cultural heritage; geological collections from museums, universities, and geological survey repositories that have outstanding scientific, historical, and educational value. Aspects of interest include geoheritage conservation, legislation, management, digital inventory, and outreach, including the use of analogs for planetary and space geology.
The session is organised by the International Commission on Geoheritage established by the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), working in collaboration with the International Geoscience Program of UNESCO.

The future of scientific publishing has become one of the defining questions facing modern science. Rising publication costs, increasing dependence on commercial publishing infrastructures, the rapid expansion of AI-assisted workflows, and growing concerns about research assessment have all prompted fundamental questions about who scientific publishing should ultimately serve. The EGU26 Great Debate on scientific publishing highlighted both the urgency of these discussions and the diversity of opinions across the geoscience community. Yet one important perspective remains comparatively underexplored: the collective responsibility of researchers themselves in shaping the publishing ecosystem.
While discussions on scientific publishing often focus on publishers, business models, or policy reforms, researchers themselves remain central actors in shaping the scholarly communication ecosystem. Through their choices as authors, reviewers, editors, committee members, and society members, scientists collectively determine the future of publishing.
Publishing is not an external service provided to science: it is an integral part of scientific practice. Every day, researchers make decisions as authors, reviewers, editors, hiring committee members, grant reviewers, society members, and institutional leaders. These choices influence which journals thrive, how scientific quality is assessed, what incentives early-career researchers receive, and ultimately what kind of publishing landscape future generations of researchers will inherit.
This session invites contributions exploring how researchers can actively shape scholarly communication.
We welcome contributions exploring four interconnected dimensions of scholarly communication: community governance, research quality and trust, incentives and assessment and emerging challenges. We particularly encourage contributions that document successes and failures of publishing initiatives, evaluate publishing policies, assess researcher incentives, or present evidence-based approaches for reforming scholarly communication.
The session aims to bring together researchers from all career stages, particularly early-career researchers, journal editors, publishers, librarians, funders, scientific societies, and research institutions to discuss how publishing can better support open, rigorous, equitable, and sustainable practices in geoscience.

Recent advances in digital technologies, including remote sensing, digital mapping, mobile applications, extended reality (XR) and artificial intelligence (AI), have created new opportunities for geodiversity and geoheritage research, assessment, mapping and monitoring as well as for outreach and geotourism.
For instance, Augmented Reality (AR) can overlay digital content onto real sites and objects, revealing features that cannot be directly observed. Its applications include reconstructing past landscapes, enriching museum collections, and supporting on-site geoheritage interpretation. Virtual Reality (VR), meanwhile, immerses users in a fully simulated environment, providing remote access to geosites, virtual outcrops, museums and field activities.
AI-based methods are also increasingly being explored in geodiversity and geoheritage studies and applications. At the same time, their use raises important questions concerning scientific reliability, data quality, accessibility, inclusivity, intellectual property, and ethical practice.
The session contributions examine the development, applications and critical evaluation of emerging digital and AI-based approaches in geodiversity and geoheritage research. Topics may include, but are not limited to, extended reality, virtual field experiences, 3D modelling and visualisation, digital inventories and mapping, remote sensing, citizen science, AI-assisted assessment and monitoring, mobile applications, digital interpretation, education, outreach, geoconservation, and geotourism.

Climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, natural hazards and other forms of environmental change present challenges not only for understanding Earth systems, but also for how environmental knowledge is produced, interpreted and shared. Across the Earth and environmental sciences, researchers are increasingly collaborating with artists and creative practitioners to develop new ways of engaging with environmental processes, data, places and communities.

Art-science collaboration can extend beyond communicating completed scientific findings. Creative practices may contribute to observation and sensing, working with environmental data, visualisation and representation, field-based inquiry, interpretation of uncertainty and change, participatory research, and engagement with place-based and experiential knowledge. At the same time, a growing range of projects provides practical experience of how such collaborations work in different research and environmental contexts.

This session brings together empirical case studies, methodological contributions and critical reflections on art-science collaboration in Earth and environmental research. We welcome contributions from across the geosciences and environmental sciences, together with collaborating artists, creative practitioners, and humanities and social science researchers, particularly addressing:

(1) art-science collaborations concerning climate, water, biodiversity and ecosystems, pollution, landscapes, natural hazards and other Earth and environmental processes;

(2) creative and arts-based approaches to environmental observation, fieldwork, sensing, mapping, visualisation, sonification, environmental data, modelling and interpretation;

(3) methods combining scientific observations and evidence with local, Indigenous, experiential or other forms of knowledge;

(4) participatory and place-based approaches involving scientists, artists, communities and other partners;

(5) methodological and comparative studies examining how creative practices can be integrated into different stages of Earth and environmental research;

(6) different models of collaboration, including artist residencies, field-based collaborations, museums and cultural institutions, research programmes, laboratories and community partnerships.

Scientists and researchers are more and more finding new ways to present their work to a broad audience. This includes presenting data through a diverse array of visual forms, from conventional graphs and maps to interactive web applications, physical models, art installations, and other forms of tangible media. These approaches to data visualisation can make complex datasets and systems more accessible and approachable to a wider audience. Oftentimes they can reveal patterns that are difficult to see in raw data and they provide new ways of communicating scientific results to both specialised and general audiences. At the same time, the choice of which specific visual medium is used influences what can be shown, what is emphasised, and how the data are interpreted.

This session invites contributions exploring the use of physical and digital media to visualise scientific data. We welcome work that showcases data visualisation in unique ways including, but not limited to; maps, interactive visualisations, virtual and augmented environments, physical or tactile representations, and artistic approaches. Contributions may focus on the development of new techniques, the application of existing approaches to scientific problems or data, or reflections on how different visual forms affect the interpretation and communication of scientific data and research.
We particularly encourage contributions that consider the relationship between the data, the medium through which they are presented, and the people using or experiencing the visualisation. Examples from all scientific disciplines supported by EGU are welcome, as are approaches that cross the boundaries between scientific visualisation, design, art, and public engagement. And we particularly encourage contributions from underrepresented groups and countries.

A surprising visual can make us pause, notice a pattern, or ask a question we had never considered. How can we bring that potential into the way we explore and communicate data?

This session invites creative, unconventional, still-in-the-works, and carefully crafted approaches to data visualisation. We are interested in work that combines imagination with clarity: visuals that reveal relationships, communicate uncertainty, tell compelling stories, and invite audiences to explore. Contributions may address scientific discovery, education, public engagement, or decision-making at the interface of environment and society.

We welcome experiments with visual storytelling, animation, interactive exploration, hand-drawn graphics, physical data objects, immersive experiences, and combinations of visualisation with sound or touch. How can familiar datasets take unfamiliar forms? When does playful design deepen understanding? How can we make complex information accessible while preserving its nuance?

Scientists, designers, artists, educators, and communicators are invited to share methods, examples, collaborations, and lessons from experiments (including those that did not work as expected). We aim to inspire new ways of seeing data and offer practical ideas participants can bring into their own research and communication.

Art makes use of materials of geological origin: stones, pigments, mortars, metals, etc.; geology, in turn, has been depicted in various ways in art throughout art history; geosciences present their observations and discoveries in a visual form that can be regarded as an artistic expression. The entanglements of art and natural sciences are multiple, bidirectional, and have given rise to hybrid fields of research: Technical Art History, considering the materiality of artworks; archaeometry exploiting the intrinsic information contained in the artistic matter to trace back its origin and fates; Eco-critical art history, which draws on the environmental dimension of works of art – such as historical landscape painting – to critically explore the history of the environment and its changes.
In this session, we aim for a rich and diverse transdisciplinary dialogue of colleagues with multiple backgrounds and thus welcome a broad range of contributions in fields such as:
- Geosciences in artistic representation, e.g. as sources to study environmental changes, as indicators of the evolution of symbolic and scientific perception of geological objects and phenomena, natural hazards, etc.
- Artwork materials and their transformations over time as physical/chemical repositories or archives of environmental history, including air, water and soil pollution (e.g. stone degradation in urban areas)
- Geomaterials (stone, pigments, metals, precious stones) used in works of art (sculptures, metal objects, paintings, jewellery, etc.) and their intrinsic properties as an indicator of provenance or as a criterion of authenticity; the conservation issues specific to these materials.
- Artistic production and networks in geological landscapes with indigenous/local artistic use of geomaterials, artist migration to geo-resource-rich regions, transport of geomaterials to artistic centres, artistic geomaterials as indicators of power and prestige…

'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 all related fields in higher education with a particular interest in current innovations and trends in geoscience education research. Examples might include describing a new resource available to the community, presenting a solution to a teaching challenge, pros and cons of a new educational technique/technology e.g. generative AI and chat bots, linking taught 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 people teaching in higher education - let's share, discuss, reflect and develop effective practice and educational scholarship.

The landscape of earth science education is shifting quickly due to emerging technologies and shifting priorities, which present both challenges and opportunities in pedagogy. Satellites, genetic sequencing, long-term in situ sensors, model results and reanalyses, digitized collections and citizen science are producing massive datasets, requiring students in earth and environmental sciences to learn scientific computing skills to utilise them. However, many students in earth and environmental science degree programs report lacking the computational skills needed to work with earth observation data.
At the same time, ubiquitous access to computing can help universities meet goals around educating more scientists by accelerating learning and lowering the barrier to entry with technologies such as virtual labs and cloud-based learning environments. Emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence, further expand these possibilities but also raise questions about ethical use and how best to support meaningful student engagement and scientific understanding.
This session invites researchers, educators, industry practitioners, and representatives from other organisations working in Earth and environmental science education to share innovative and effective approaches to developing geospatial and computational skills in Earth and environmental science education. We welcome contributions describing successful courses, programmes, learning environments, and other educational tools, as well as experiences evaluating their impact and accessibility. We are particularly interested in highlighting initiatives with a proven track record of targeting and including intersectional identities traditionally under-represented among earth, environmental and/or computer scientists.
This session is being organized jointly with a short course with the same name, where there will be a hands-on opportunity to share educational tools. If you are looking to demonstrate your educational tool or module in an interactive setting, we encourage you to apply to this session, and we will contact you about the short course.

Fieldwork is an essential component of geographical research, providing opportunities to test hypotheses, observe real-world phenomena, and measure natural in-situ process-interactions that are essential for calibrating and validating theoretical and physical models. However, even with the best planning, the reality of capturing real-world phenomena can prove challenging, with unforeseen failures with technology, inclement weather, and broken or missing hardware threatening to halt further data collection. As such, fieldwork often requires technological or methodological innovation on a limited budget with minimal resources in short timeframes. This interactive session seeks to pool the diverse fieldwork experiences from researchers working across the full range of geographic environments to empower the next generation of field researchers and build resilience into their field expeditions, thus maximising the potential for data capture and strengthening confidence in the field. We specifically seek solutions to common or unanticipated challenges, as well as challenges that are less well broadcast in the field and ultimately develop an online community case book. 

We invite researchers and technicians from all career stages with experiences spanning the full spectrum of geographic research to contribute to the session and particularly encourage contributions from early career scientists, teachers, those who lead or plan educational fieldtrips, and those from diverse backgrounds.  

Science is best learned by doing, but the beginning of a scientific career is rarely easy. This session invites reflections on the challenges encountered during research, ranging from forgetting a screwdriver during a field day to not being able to compile software. Sharing challenges and their solutions is critical for Early Career Scientists, as it can (1) lead to the development of better protocols for fieldwork, modeling, and data analysis, (2) reduce impostor syndrome and self-doubt, and (3) highlight the human side of science through people in the community and their lived experiences.

The goal of this session is to bring together a wide variety of experiences, stories, and people. We invite submissions from any geoscientific field in two specific categories:

First, any submissions that showcase a specific problem, your Eureka moment, and your solution. The goal of these submissions is to show that unforeseen problems happen to everyone, but that it is possible to overcome them. Examples may include (but are not limited to):
• Designing computing codes that run with fewer computational resources
• Using sensors, technologies, and data beyond their traditional applications
• Developing computational workflows that integrate different approaches in novel ways (e.g., machine learning, trap cameras, and social media)
• Merging methods from several disciplines into new approaches.

Second, any submissions that provide an Early Career Perspective on the challenges in your field, geoscience in general, or combining life and science, and proposed solutions. Examples may include (but are not limited to):
• Community initiatives that facilitate the use of fieldwork techniques and computational resources.
• Grand challenges framing from a perspective that highlights equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI).
• Community perspectives and synthesis to reduce barriers of entry in transdisciplinary paths focused on problem-solving.
• Juggling how problem-solving was applied to a research career (e.g., having a family, migration)

Since 2016, this session series has provided a welcoming forum for discussing equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the geosciences. At a time when EDI initiatives are facing significant challenges in many parts of the world, we invite researchers, practitioners, decision-makers and policy analysts to join us in sharing experiences, exchanging ideas and identifying actions that can help build a more inclusive, equitable and supportive geoscience community.

The session will explore the factors contributing to the under-representation of different groups—including those defined by gender identity, sexual orientation, racial and cultural background, disability, religion, nationality or geography, socioeconomic status, age and career stage—and will provide an opportunity for constructive dialogue on both persistent challenges and effective solutions.

We welcome contributions that present research, data, case studies, personal experiences or examples of good practice. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Role models who inspire and support others through their experiences and/or their contributions to advancing equality, diversity and inclusion.
• Evidence of imbalanced representation, preferably supported by data, in awards, medals, grants, leadership positions, invited talks and publications.
• Perceived and structural barriers to inclusion at the individual, institutional and cultural levels.
• New and innovative approaches to identifying and overcoming barriers.
• Gender Equality Plans (GEPs) in European host institutions: successes, challenges and lessons learned.
• Effective initiatives and best practices, including:
- mentoring programmes;
- professional networks;
- targeted funding schemes;
- institutional initiatives; and
- conference and meeting practices that foster inclusion.

We particularly encourage contributions that reflect on the impact of recent socio-political developments on EDI activities, as well as experiences of sustaining or advancing inclusive practices in changing institutional, national or international contexts.

The session is co-organised with support from the European Research Council (ERC).

Scientific conferences are an important part of scientific infrastructure. Their design and organization influence whom we meet, which research we discover, how early-career scientists can engage with established researchers, and ultimately how knowledge is shared within our community.

The EGU General Assembly has evolved over the years, introducing new presentation formats, digital tools, hybrid participation, and increasingly diverse opportunities for scientific interaction. However, the scale of the meeting creates challenges and raises questions about how the conference experience could be improved.

For instance:
-What lessons can be drawn from other conferences and experimental formats?
-How could the overall programme structure be optimized to reduce fragmentation and overlaps?
-How might navigation and orientation throughout the conference be improved?
-Can participants be encouraged to engage with research beyond their immediate scientific fields and foster interdisciplinary collaboration?
-How can we better support “opportunistic” participation, where attendees spontaneously join sessions, and what implications would this have for scheduling, signage, and session design?
-How can different presentation formats be better balanced, and which alternative formats could foster deeper scientific discussion?
-How could poster sessions be organized to better support interaction and exchange? Could alternative organization, structure, and timing be explored?
-How can networking and informal exchange be supported, especially for early-career participants?
-How can the conference support inclusivity and accessibility for a diverse community, including hybrid participants?
-How can participant feedback be integrated into future changes?

We invite contributions from across the EGU community, including quantitative analyses, surveys, experiments, comparisons with other conferences, experience reports, prototypes, and unconventional ideas.

We particularly encourage contributions that go beyond identifying problems and instead propose or evaluate possible solutions. The session aims to create a space for structured discussion among participants, going beyond a traditional sequence of presentations, and to collect concrete proposals emerging from the community.

We believe that our collective experience of the EGU General Assembly provides a valuable basis for exploring how future meetings can foster better scientific exchange, discovery, and collaboration.

This session aims to provide a platform to highlight and discuss the diverse experiences of women in the geosciences, as well as the challenges and opportunities they encounter throughout their careers. We welcome contributions that share personal perspectives, institutional practices, leadership roles in projects and research addressing gender equity in geoscience. Topics may include, but are not limited to: career progression, work–life balance, mentoring and role models, fieldwork experiences, inclusivity in research teams, and structural or cultural barriers within academia, industry, and policy.
We particularly encourage submissions that offer solutions, best practices, or new initiatives fostering a more inclusive geoscience community. By bringing together these contributions, the session seeks to promote dialogue, raise awareness, and inspire actionable steps toward greater gender equity and diversity in the field.

Geoscientists inform decisions with environmental, social, and economic consequences, so their responsibilities extend beyond scientific analysis. Challenges such as climate change, risks, and sustainable resource management require ethical engagement with society. Geoethics examines the ethical, social, and cultural implications of geoscience, promoting responsible, just, inclusive, and transformative approaches. Through case studies and interdisciplinary discussion, this session explores how geoethics can shape responsible geoscientific practices and policies. We welcome theoretical, methodological, and practical contributions on topics including:
• Ethical and social aspects of the geosciences, particularly at the interface between geoscience, society, politics, and decision-making
• Responsible and sustainable management of georesources, including surface water, groundwater, soils, rocks, minerals, and energy resources
• Ethical and social aspects of geoscience and environmental education and communication
• Geoethics in relation to natural hazards, georisks, and disaster risk reduction
• The ethical and social significance of geoheritage, geodiversity, geoconservation, geotourism, and geoparks
• The role of the geosciences in achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals
• Ethical and social issues related to climate change
• Ethical challenges associated with emerging frontiers in the geosciences, such as geoengineering and deep-sea mining
• Ethical implications of data life-cycle management, big data, and the use of artificial intelligence in the geosciences
• Ethical questions across geoscience disciplines, including economic geology, engineering geology, hydrogeology, palaeontology, forensic geology, medical geology, and planetary geoscience
• Integrity in geoscience research and practice, publication ethics, and professional conduct
• Inclusivity, diversity, harassment, discrimination, accessibility, and disability in the geosciences
• The respectful and meaningful integration of Indigenous and local knowledge into the geosciences
• Neocolonialism in geoscience research and practice
• Geoscience diplomacy and ethical and social issues in international geoscience cooperation, including the role of geoscientific knowledge in fostering dialogue, collaboration, and peace
• The philosophy of the geosciences and the history of geoscientific thought

Scientific software is fundamental to modern geoscientific research, yet its development and maintenance often receive less attention and recognition than the scientific results it enables. Time constraints, limited resources, and the pressure to deliver scientific outcomes can lead to software practices that compromise reproducibility, traceability, and long-term sustainability, ultimately limiting the reuse of methods and opportunities for scientific collaboration.

This session explores how good software development practices contribute to reproducible, sustainable, and open geoscientific research. We invite contributions sharing practical experiences, methodological approaches, and lessons learned in areas such as software design, modularisation, documentation, testing, version control, portability, and data workflows. We particularly welcome contributions addressing the challenges of implementing and maintaining these practices in real-world research environments.

We also encourage discussions on the opportunities and challenges of AI-assisted software development, including its implications for code quality, reproducibility, maintainability, and scientific responsibility. Hence, with this session we aim to foster an exchange on how software development can be better integrated into scientific practice and recognised as an essential component of research quality and scientific integrity.

Geoscience is critical to environmental decision-making. For scientific evidence to be trusted, challenged, reused, and communicated responsibly, the research behind it must be as open, transparent and reproducible as possible. While the technical building blocks for computational reproducibility are well-established, their adoption remains uneven, and sustaining reproducible workflows in daily research and operational settings remains challenging. Ultimately, open science requires more than just technical tooling; it demands a cultural shift in how scientific knowledge is created, shared, and evaluated.

This session bridges technical solutions and daily research practice, exploring both practical approaches to reproducibility and the human factors that shape their adoption. We invite contributions that move beyond the basic "how-to" of reproducibility tools to explore how we can support widespread, sustainable, and equitable use across the geosciences.

Topics may include:

» Reproducible workflows in practice: Approaches to data governance, analysis design, documentation, automation, and long-term access to geospatial code and data.
» Culture, community & vulnerability: Concerns around sharing (e.g. public scrutiny, imposter syndrome, data ownership, credit) and ways to normalize sharing non-traditional research outputs.
» Incentives & evaluation: Assessing how institutional structures (i.e., funding, hiring, promotion) can better reward research robustness and reproducibility alongside scientific novelty.
» Global equity & infrastructure: Digital and governance disparities, resource constraints, and the often invisible work required to make research reusable across communities and regions.
» Education & capacity building: Integrating computational literacy, open-source practices, and reproducibility principles directly into geoscience education.
» Systemic & institutional change: The roles of journals, publishers, funders and science communication in moving beyond checkbox compliance to foster a vibrant open science ecosystem.

We welcome technical guidelines, case studies, qualitative and interdisciplinary research, institutional strategies, practitioner perspectives, communication approaches, and honest accounts of reproducibility challenges, failures, and lessons learned. Together, we aim to spark constructive dialogue on how we can collectively move toward a more transparent, collaborative, equitable, and socially impactful geoscience ecosystem.

Sitting under a tree, you feel the spark of an idea, and suddenly everything falls into place. The following days and tests confirm: you have made a magnificent discovery — so the classical story of scientific genius goes…

But science as a human activity is error-prone, and might be more adequately described as "trial and error". Handling mistakes and setbacks is therefore a key skill of scientists. Yet, we publish only those parts of our research that did work. That is also because a study may have better chances to be accepted for scientific publication if it confirms an accepted theory or reaches a positive result (publication bias). Conversely, the cases that fail in their test of a new method or idea often end up in a drawer (which is why publication bias is also sometimes called the "file drawer effect"). This is potentially a waste of time and resources within our community, as other scientists may set about testing the same idea or model setup without being aware of previous failed attempts.

Thus, we want to turn the story around, and ask you to share 1) those ideas that seemed magnificent but turned out not to be, and 2) the errors, bugs, and mistakes in your work that made the scientific road bumpy. In the spirit of open science and in an interdisciplinary setting, we want to bring the BUGS out of the drawers and into the spotlight. What ideas were torn down or did not work, and what concepts survived in the ashes or were robust despite errors?

We explicitly solicit Blunders, Unexpected Glitches, and Surprises (BUGS) from modeling and field or lab experiments and from all disciplines of the Geosciences.

In a friendly atmosphere, we will learn from each other’s mistakes, understand the impact of errors and abandoned paths on our work, give each other ideas for shared problems, and generate new insights for our science or scientific practice.

Here are some ideas for contributions that we would love to see:
- Ideas that sounded good at first, but turned out to not work.
- Results that presented themselves as great in the first place but turned out to be caused by a bug or measurement error.
- Errors and slip-ups that resulted in insights.
- Failed experiments and negative results.
- Obstacles and dead ends you found and would like to warn others about.

For inspiration, see the collection of BUGS - ranging from clay bricks to atmospheric temperature extremes - at https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU25/session/52496

Across geoscience, software is central to how research is conducted, shared, and reproduced. From the complex Earth-system simulations on high-performance computers to processing raw instrument data from fieldwork, software is a cornerstone of the modern open science process.
Supporting this collaborative research effort involves not only researchers, but many other digital research technical professionals (RTPs), for example research software engineers (RSEs) and data stewards. As the saying goes, “Better Software, Better Research” and their unique skills enable more efficient, reproducible, openly accessible science.

This session highlights how engagement between researchers and RTP/RSEs enhances science, facilitates collaboration and communication, and supports sustainable reuse of research outputs across domains. We aim to build a RTP/RSE community at EGU, recognise their contributions, and facilitate future collaboration. To achieve this we invite stories of both success and failure, with lessons learned to be shared with others. How has the engagement of RTP/RSEs on a project enhanced scientific quality or facilitated transfer of research to operation?

We want to hear about cross-cutting software or workflows developed and used across the geosciences and beyond. We welcome examples of software reuse: where adopting and extending existing tools and workflows enabled new science, and where making software publicly available has had an impact across communities. How were these projects conceived, supported, and their userbase grown? Beyond the software, we also invite contributions that explore how open software intersects with open data, reproducibility studies, the application of FAIR principles or reuse in ways that would not otherwise have been possible.
Finally, we invite talks on research software policy. How are projects funded, what is the role of RTP/RSEs in this process, and how does this differ between institutions? How are teams built and organised to have the greatest effect - centralised vs. embedded - and how are careers developed and recognised? What impact can RTP/RSEs have on technical policies and training within their institution, for example around environmental/green computing initiatives, the use of generative AI, or advocating for open science principles?

We solicit submissions from anyone working towards open science across academia and industry sharing transferable experiences relating to any of the above.

Science is deeply intertwined with societal and geopolitical issues. Geopolitical conditions affect the choices that we make about which research to fund, whose knowledge to value, where to collaborate and who can attend academic conferences. Geoscientists cannot ignore the human and environmental consequences that stem from their work, both direct and indirect, all the way from disaster risk management to war and conflicts. This geoethical challenge, for example, is urgent in Earth observation, where many satellites operate with dual-use capabilities for both scientific and military purposes. In many cases, scientific tools have enabled massive resource exploitation under neocolonial structures. Security discussions remain crucial during conflict, but securitisation raises real questions about the ethical, social and environmental aspects of scientific practice.

This session invites presentations that address questions such as:
- Should and how should geoscientists conduct research and sustain cooperation in geopolitically fragile or unstable regions?
- How do geopolitical tensions or decisions influence geoscience research and cooperation, and what can geoscientists do about it?
- In what ways do political decisions and borders influence geoscience research priorities and Earth system studies?
- What responsibilities do scientists carry when their research tools or data are used to harm or kill people or ecosystems, inadvertently and on purpose?
- What roles can and should academic institutions like geoscience university departments and the EGU play in supporting at-risk scholars and facilitating academic advocacy?
- How do military funding and trade shape the direction and outcomes of geoscience research?
- What role, if any, should academic activism play in fostering non-militarised research and prioritising human and environmental protection?
- What strategies can geoscientists adopt to address geoethical dilemmas and resist complicity in violence?

We welcome insight and case studies that show how geoscientific knowledge may prevent or escalate conflict, increase transparency regarding the impacts of war (such as InSAR monitoring of building damage) or intersect with resource extraction, forced migration and regional instability and war.

In recent years, technologies based on Artificial Intelligence (AI), such as image processing, smart sensors, and intelligent inversion, have garnered significant attention from researchers in the geosciences community. These technologies offer the promise of transitioning geosciences from qualitative to quantitative analysis, unlocking new insights and capabilities previously thought unattainable.
One of the key reasons for the growing popularity of AI in geosciences is its unparalleled ability to efficiently analyze vast datasets within remarkably short timeframes. This capability empowers scientists and researchers to tackle some of the most intricate and challenging issues in fields like Geophysics, Seismology, Hydrology, Planetary Science, Remote Sensing, and Disaster Risk Reduction.
As we stand on the cusp of a new era in geosciences, the integration of artificial intelligence promises to deliver more accurate estimations, efficient predictions, and innovative solutions. By leveraging algorithms and machine learning, AI empowers geoscientists to uncover intricate patterns and relationships within complex data sources, ultimately advancing our understanding of the Earth's dynamic systems. In essence, artificial intelligence has become an indispensable tool in the pursuit of quantitative precision and deeper insights in the fascinating world of geosciences.
For this reason, aim of this session is to explore new advances and approaches of AI in Geosciences.

A two-and-a-half-day Geosciences Information For Teachers (GIFT) workshop which will give selected teachers the opportunity to learn about various topics related to the theme of 'Teaching Geoscience Today for Tomorrow', including geochronology, mass extinctions, energy transition resources and solar radiation modification, among others. These topics will be presented by renowned scientists. Teachers will also have the opportunity to participate in hands-on sessions covering Earth observation applications, the use of virtual reality in risk education and analogue modeling. During the GIFT workshop, teachers will have the chance to interact with each other and share ideas and experiences on how to implement their acquired knowledge in their school teaching programmes and communicate it to young students.

Participants, the GIFT teachers, will be divided into small groups and rotate through hands-on thematic workshops exploring Earth observation applications, the use of virtual reality in risk education, and analogue modelling. The activities will provide practical experience with innovative tools and approaches for teaching geoscience topics and preparing students for the future.

Geoscience is advancing rapidly while societies face increasingly pressing challenges related to climate change, natural hazards, water resources, environmental change and the sustainable use of Earth resources. Yet both frontier research and these rapidly evolving issues can take time to reach the classroom.

This session explores how frontier geoscience and pressing societal issues can be brought into teaching, making today’s science accessible, meaningful and engaging for students. Teachers are invited to share their experiences and approaches for translating recent discoveries, emerging research questions, new observations, methods and datasets into educational activities and resources.

Contributions may address topics across the geosciences and may involve real scientific data, field observations, experiments, digital tools, remote sensing, citizen science, inquiry-based learning, or interdisciplinary projects. Particular attention is given to approaches that allow students not only to learn established scientific knowledge, but also to engage with science in the making and to understand how geoscientists investigate the major challenges facing our planet and societies.

By sharing classroom and field experiences from different countries and educational contexts, this session aims to strengthen the connection between today’s geoscience research, tomorrow’s challenges and the classroom.

As an open poster session, it also provides an opportunity for the wider EGU community to discover and exchange around educational approaches developed within and beyond the GIFT community.

Earth Science is a compulsory component of many European school curricula and plays a critical role in understanding major global challenges. However, it often receives limited visibility and attention within school education. This concern is also reflected in the declining number of students enrolling in Earth Science degree programmes at university level.
The session will showcase projects, teaching strategies, educational resources, and innovative approaches designed to engage students and strengthen the role and relevance of Earth Science in the classroom.
Contributions addressing the development, implementation, or evaluation of Earth Science curricula are also particularly welcome, including experiences related to national education policies, curriculum frameworks, and legislative reforms. Comparative perspectives from different countries are encouraged, particularly where curriculum changes or policy initiatives have highlighted effective practices, opportunities, limitations, or critical issues that may be transferable across different educational contexts.
Participants are invited to share their experiences, research, and ideas to strengthen international collaboration and build a broader network supporting Earth Science education, including its relevance for policy and governance.

Disasters caused by natural hazards can have long-lasting impacts on economic, social, and ecological systems. These challenges are increasingly complex in a world facing multiple, interconnected, and recurring hazards. Decisions made during disaster response and recovery can redirect resources and attention away from long-term risk reduction, while recovery itself can provide opportunities to reduce future risk and strengthen resilience. Recovery processes can also create opportunities for transformative change, enabling a shift towards more sustainable, low-carbon, and equitable development pathways.

Understanding how recovery and resilience develop over time, and how they can be effectively supported, is therefore important. Yet definitions, assessment approaches, and applications vary widely across disciplines and contexts, making it difficult to compare and understand recovery and resilience across systems, scales, and time, and to identify effective actions and investments to support long-term resilience.

This session focuses on disaster recovery and longer-term resilience building, and how these processes can be better understood, assessed, and supported in science and practice. We welcome research on individual hazards as well as multi-hazard, compound, and consecutive events, and studies addressing recovery and resilience across spatial and temporal scales. The session brings together methodological advances, empirical evidence, and practical experiences to improve our ability to adapt to and recover from disasters while advancing long-term sustainability goals.

We encourage contributions on topics including:
- empirical analyses of disaster recovery and resilience, and their dynamics over time;
- methods, indicators, and frameworks for assessing recovery and resilience;
- links between recovery, disaster risk reduction, climate adaptation, and resilience building;
- resilience and recovery in multi-hazard, compound, or consecutive disaster contexts;
- adaptation synergies and trade-offs in resilience-building and risk-reduction actions, including implications for long- term sustainability;
- decision-making and prioritisation of resilience-building investments and actions;
- practical applications, case studies, and lessons from science–practice collaboration.
- build back better and transformative recovery: opportunities and barriers to align recovery and resilience building with sustainable development goals.

Early Warning Systems (EWS) are a cornerstone of disaster risk reduction, protecting lives and livelihoods through timely, actionable information. Their efficacy depends not only on scientific robustness but also on integration across disciplines, from risk knowledge and hazard detection to communication and community and institutional response. Despite ambitious targets in the Early Warnings for All (EW4ALL) action plan and the Sendai Framework towards multi-hazard, all-vulnerability, and impact-based EWS, gaps persist between these ambitions, operational realities, and the supporting science. This session fosters dialogue on EWS implementation and methodological innovation among researchers working toward more effective, inclusive, and actionable systems.

We invite contributions from all disciplines and sectors involved in EWS development and implementation, including natural hazards science, atmospheric and hydrologic research, social sciences, and disaster management practice. We welcome work on any element of the early warning value chain, from forecasting advances to tools, platforms, or systems in use or development, as well as reflections on successes and failures in closing the gap between ambition and action. We encourage submissions addressing:
■ Early warning and anticipatory action: frameworks, tools and multi-stakeholder implementation in translating early warnings into effective disaster response and preparedness;
■ Impact-based approaches: methods for designing and implementing impact-based EWS;
■ Technological innovations: advances in AI, machine learning, Earth observation, IoT and other technologies in EWS components;
■ Risk communication and community engagement: strategies that integrate behavioral and psychological insights, build trust, and ensure effective warning dissemination, particularly at community level;
■ Data integration and system interoperability: approaches to integrating diverse data sources and addressing challenges in cross-agency data sharing and platform integration;
■ Bridging ambition and implementation: case studies showing how scientific progress translates into operational practice.

This session is developed in cooperation with the RiskKAN Working Groups "Warnings and Preparedness for a Riskier World" and "AI for Complex Climate Risk Mitigation".

Disasters caused by natural hazards can lead to long-lasting disruptions across economic, social and ecological systems. Climate change and systemic risks can intensify these impacts through compound, concurrent and cascading events. Floods, wildfires, heatwaves, storms and droughts result from interactions between physical, social, human and economic drivers, challenging approaches that assess hazards in isolation. Their impacts are also unevenly distributed: some households may face displacement, debt or poorer health for years, while others recover much faster.

Strengthening resilience is therefore central to disaster risk reduction and recovery. Yet limited empirical evidence and the diversity of resilience definitions, measures and applications make it difficult to understand how resilience develops and for whom. This calls for frameworks and methods that capture resilience mechanisms across interconnected systems, while also examining how resilience is experienced by households, communities and different social groups.

This session seeks to advance an inter- and transdisciplinary perspective on systemic resilience to multi-hazards. We welcome contributions on single, compound and cascading hazards, particularly where they improve understanding of resilience mechanisms, drivers and strategies.

Topics include:
• Conceptual and analytical approaches for assessing, measuring and modelling resilience, including process- and outcome-based methods.
• Systemic resilience mechanisms linking hazards, infrastructure, ecosystems, institutions and outcomes for people.
• Human and demographic dimensions, including differences in exposure, coping and recovery; displacement and mobility; health, wellbeing and livelihoods; social protection and informal support.
• Strategies and interventions for building resilience, including early warning systems, nature-based solutions, infrastructure, digital technologies, AI and adaptive planning.
• Justice and equity, including local knowledge, historical and cultural perspectives and climate-resilient development.
• Drivers, constraints and enabling conditions for multi-hazard resilience.
• Comparative and longitudinal studies across regions and scales.
• Stakeholder engagement through citizen science, participatory methods, co-production and research-practice partnerships.

We encourage local, regional and global contributions from interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research.

Rapid urbanization, land-use change, environmental degradation and socioeconomic vulnerability are increasingly interacting with hydroclimatic hazards, resulting in complex risks that cannot be solved with conventional hazard mapping or gray infrastructure alone. Nature-Based Solutions (NbS), ecosystem restoration and integrated risk management are powerful means to reduce hazards and build socioeconomic resilience. Advances in GIS, Earth Observation, hydrological modeling, machine learning and GeoAI enable the accurate identification of risks, mapping of vulnerabilities and spatial targeting of adaptation interventions.
This session convenes interdisciplinary researchers working across hydroclimatic hazards, geospatial science, GeoAI, NbS and community resilience.
Key scientific themes include:
1. Hydroclimatic variability and hazard dynamics (extreme rainfall, flood generation, catchment processes)
2. GIS, Earth Observation, GeoAI, and spatial modeling (machine learning, decision-support tools)
3. Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) and ecosystem-based adaptation (wetlands, green infrastructure, spatial prioritization)
4. Socioeconomic vulnerability and community resilience (adaptive capacity, local coping mechanisms, governance)
5. Integrated climate resilience and sustainable development (risk-informed planning, science-policy links)
Existing studies typically address hydrological modeling, NbS, vulnerability and community resilience separately. This session builds on discussions of how to embed these dimensions within coherent and actionable climate resilience frameworks. We are seeking global case studies from cities, river basins, wetlands and rural landscapes to link technology innovation with ecosystem-based adaptation and evidence-based decision making.

Storylines, defined as “physically self-consistent unfoldings of past events, or of plausible future events or pathways,” can be used to describe risks and impacts of climate-driven trends or extreme events while making uncertainty, assumptions and decision relevance explicit. They provide a powerful framework to investigate short- to long-term climate risk pathways driven by the interplay of hazard, exposure, vulnerability and response capacity, including compound and cascading risks, stress testing of systems, and intervention options in uncertain futures. As boundary objects across climate science, disaster risk reduction, adaptation, social sciences and operational decision-making, they can support dialogue across disciplines, but also reveal that communities do not always share the same definitions, evidence standards or expectations of use. 
This session brings together researchers and practitioners working across climate science, impacts and risk assessment, disaster risk reduction, social sciences and decision practice to advance the physical understanding, methodological development and application of climate risk storylines. We welcome contributions that span the full chain from physical climate modelling and event attribution to impact analysis, participatory co-production, and the translation of scenarios into real-world decision contexts.
We invite abstracts that address, among others:
a) Physical and impact-based climate storylines, including past events, attribution studies, downward counterfactuals and plausible future extremes
b) Methods for integrating quantitative and qualitative knowledge, and linking climate and non-climate risk drivers across scales
c) Conceptual models and frameworks for combining hazards, exposure, vulnerability, response capacity and cascading impacts
d) Applications of storylines and scenarios for stress testing, impact and risk assessment, early warning systems, adaptation planning and policy support
e) Participatory and co-production approaches that enhance relevance, transparency, robustness and uptake for decision-making
f) Reflections on terminology, quality criteria and responsible translation of storylines across scientific, policy and practice communities
By bridging physical modelling, socioeconomic pathways and stakeholder-driven approaches, this session aims to strengthen the role of storylines as shared, transparent and actionable tools for managing climate risks in a rapidly changing world.

Natural hazards, such as floods, wildfires, droughts, and storms, are becoming increasingly frequent and severe due to the synergistic effects of climate change, environmental degradation, and the intensification of human activities. The growing complexity of these events demands long-term, high-resolution, and cross-domain environmental data to support monitoring, early warning, and comprehensive risk assessment. Environmental Research Infrastructures (RIs) provide an essential foundation for such an integrated approach by enabling standardized data collection, harmonized observation protocols, and shared analytical tools. Recent advances in open science and FAIR data practices, alongside emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and digital twins, have expanded the potential of RIs to enable real-time monitoring and forecasting. However, persistent challenges remain in linking these infrastructures across domains, ensuring interoperability, and translating scientific outputs into decision-ready knowledge for diverse stakeholders, including civil protection agencies, policy-makers, and the public.

This Session invites Research Topics which aims to strengthen the contribution of Environmental Research Infrastructures to understanding, forecasting, and managing natural hazards within multi-hazard frameworks. It seeks to explore how improved coordination, data integration, and innovative technologies can enhance the capacity of RIs to deliver timely and actionable intelligence. The goal is to highlight practical examples and theoretical developments that demonstrate the integration of heterogeneous environmental observations, the application of machine learning and digital twin technologies, and the coupling of scientific data with operational and policy mechanisms. In doing so, the Research Topic will support progress toward a resilient and risk-informed society through the more effective use of RI services in disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation.

The scope of this Session / Research Topic encompasses cross-domain environmental monitoring and the operational use of RIs for hazard-related applications. It encourages contributions from research, technical, and policy communities to foster integration and knowledge transfer across sectors.

Deep geological repositories (DGRs) remain the preferred option in many national programs for the long-term management of high-level radioactive waste (HLW). Their development requires studies of complex geological systems, processes over extended time scales, and assessments of uncertainties and safety. The results must then be translated into safety arguments and regulatory decisions that are transparent, robust, and understandable to the various stakeholders and to society.

In this session, we are particularly interested in how the results obtained from site characterization, geological and numerical modeling, uncertainty analysis, and long-term safety assessment are evaluated and used in site selection, safety cases, and the licensing. We seek contributions that address how different national programs and regulatory systems handle geoscientific evidence and uncertainty; how responsibilities and interactions are organized among implementing agencies, regulatory authorities, policymakers, scientists, NGOs, local communities, affected populations, and the general public; and how transparency, participation, communication, and differing perceptions of risk influence these processes.

Ethical and legal aspects of decisions with very long-term / intergenerational consequences are also welcome. Comparative perspectives and lessons learned from various national disposal programs are particularly encouraged.

DGRs remain the central theme of the session. However, we also welcome transferable lessons from other subsurface activities, including geological carbon storage, geothermal energy, and methane storage.

By bringing these perspectives together, the session aims to better understand how geoscientific evidence can support technically sound, transparent, and societally legitimate decisions for the long-term disposal of radioactive waste.

Socio-ecological systems are shaped by dynamic interactions between environmental processes and human and institutional decision-making. These interactions are central for understanding natural hazards and risks, where societal interventions aimed at managing natural systems may generate intended and unintended outcomes, which themselves shape future possibilities for action. Together, these interactions can generate complex patterns of vulnerability and risk, but also create capacities for adaptation and resilience. Understanding such dynamics requires modelling approaches capable of representing feedbacks and interactions across scales, non-linear processes, and emergent outcomes.
This session invites contributions that use modelling and simulation to investigate the dynamics of risk, vulnerability, resilience, and adaptation in socio-ecological systems. We particularly welcome approaches that explicitly integrate social and environmental processes, including agent-based modelling, system dynamics, hybrid and coupled models, participatory modelling, network approaches, and other computational or simulation-based methods.
The session focuses on how individual and collective decision-making, institutions, and biophysical processes interact over time and across scales. Relevant topics include, but are not limited to, natural hazards and disaster risk, land-use dynamics and competition, adaptation and recovery, environmental change, and the emergence of systemic risks and resilience trajectories.
The session particularly welcomes contributions addressing mountain regions and other spatially constrained socio-ecological systems, where competing demands for land and resources, environmental change, and hazard processes interact in complex ways. However, contributions from other geographical and socio-ecological contexts are equally encouraged.
We aim to bring together researchers from the geosciences, social sciences, social ecology, ecology, geography, risk research, and related fields to discuss how modelling can improve our understanding of complex socio-ecological dynamics and support the analysis of future pathways towards more resilient and sustainable socio-ecological systems.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are becoming increasingly important tools in volcano science, with applications spanning geophysical monitoring, remote sensing, numerical modelling, volcano-tectonics, igneous petrology, geochemical data analysis, and volcanic hazard assessment. These approaches offer new opportunities to automate tasks, enhance modelling strategies, analyse increasingly complex datasets, and accelerate knowledge discovery. At the same time, their integration into scientific research introduces important methodological and epistemological challenges, including understanding what AI models actually learn, assessing the physical and geological meaning of identified patterns, and ensuring transparency, reproducibility, robustness, and interpretability.
Beyond their predictive capabilities, AI and ML also raise broader questions about how data-driven methods contribute to scientific understanding. In volcano science, where observations are often incomplete and direct constraints on subsurface processes are limited, identifying correlations is not necessarily equivalent to understanding the mechanisms that generate them. Integrating domain knowledge, physical constraints, and causal reasoning may therefore help develop approaches that are both effective and scientifically meaningful. These issues become especially important in high-risk contexts such as volcanic hazard assessment, risk mitigation, crisis management, and risk communication.
This session welcomes contributions across volcano science, including geophysics, remote sensing, experimental and numerical modelling, volcano-tectonics, igneous petrology, geochemistry, monitoring, and hazard assessment. We particularly encourage work on data-driven discovery, physics-informed ML, automated data analysis, model interpretability and explainability, uncertainty assessment, reproducibility, and the integration of AI-derived results with geological and physical understanding. We also welcome emerging approaches such as digital twins and agentic AI, as well as epistemological perspectives on how AI may influence scientific inference, explanation, hypothesis generation, and scientific understanding. Finally, the session welcomes studies on the responsible use of AI in volcanic-hazard applications and its interaction with scientists, volcano observatories, stakeholders, and decision-makers.

Society faces immense challenges when natural hazards and disease outbreaks co-occur. For example, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the immediate response after natural hazard events was often complicated, because of travel restrictions and local lockdown measures. This arguably led to increased exposure to other hazards such as earthquakes or tropical cyclones (e.g. the 2020 Zagreb earthquake, tropical cyclones Eta and Iota in Honduras). Natural hazards can also trigger the outbreak of diseases, such as cholera and outbreaks following the devastating floods in Pakistan in August 2022. The co-occurrence of natural hazards and diseases creates cascading effects that worsen the overall impact. Consequently, natural hazards can be associated with public health emergencies. A limited understanding of these cascading impacts creates operational, ethical, and decision-making challenges for society, disaster management, and humanitarian organisations.

Building on the RiskKAN working group on disasters and diseases and the NHESS special issue "The convergence of disasters, diseases and health impacts", this session invites contributions on:
- the probability and dynamics of (climate-sensitive) disease outbreaks following natural hazards;
- health and health-system impacts as components of disaster risk;
- the compounding of hazard exposure and disease burden under climate change;
- integration of health metrics into multi-hazard risk frameworks;
- new measurement approaches, including remote sensing combined with public health and socio-demographic data;
- disease risk modeling for early warning systems and anticipatory action;
- and the synergies and trade-offs of disaster risk reduction measures in outbreak contexts.

This session focuses on hazard events and their interaction with disease dynamics and health systems, and the consequences for disaster risk management. We welcome quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods work at any scale, and particularly encourage submissions from epidemiology, public health and humanitarian practice.

Recent years have seen extraordinarily large events and disasters originating from the high-mountain cryosphere in the Himalaya and beyond. Some of those events in the last five years include the 2021 Melamchi debris flow in Nepal, the 2021 rock-ice avalanche in Chamoli, Uttarakhand, India, or the 2023 South Lhonak GLOF, Sikkim, India.
The most devastating was the 26 August 2026 Rasuwa disaster in Nepal. A very large rock slope failure occurred on the northern slopes of Langtang Lirung (7240 m asl), together with the overlying glacier with an estimated failure volume of 110 to 130 million m3; it produced a rock-ice avalanche that rushed into the Lendhe valley and gradually transformed into a debris flood that devastated the Bhote-Koshi and Trishuli valleys on a length of more than 100 km, through Rasuwa, Nuwakot, Dhading, Gorkha, and Chitwan districts and across the border into Gyirong County, Tibet Autonomous Region. The path of destruction down the valleys is far beyond any historical monsoon-type flood. More than 1,500 people have confirmed dead, around 5,000 are missing, many have been injured, and large number of infrastructures have been damaged or lost. About 10% of Nepal’s hydropower production was wiped away. Total estimated loss as per preliminary estimate is USD 2.7 Billion (6.7% of Nepal’s GDP) and estimated cost for re-building is USD 4.8 Billion (11.8% of Nepal’s GDP).
In this context, understanding the processes behind increasing cases of cryosphere-originated disasters risks in the Himalayan region in South Asia, assessing hazards and residual risks, and identifying ways forward to minimize future risk is critical to support resilient development and planning of societies in the Himalayan region and beyond.
This session aims to bring together the various multi-disciplinary research that has been conducted in the weeks and months after the disaster. It includes but is not limited to aspects such as pre-disaster development in the source area, conditioning and potential preparatory or triggering factors of the initial rock slope failure, attribution to climate change, flow processes and dynamics of the avalanche and debris flood, landscape impact and longer term change, loss and damage estimates, implications for hazard and risk analysis in the region and related recommendations.
We also invite contributions on analysis of other recent large events in the region that can foster insights into the above outlined aspects.

Remote sensing is a critical tool for data collection and observation of floods and surface water dynamics, especially in regions where field surveys and gauging stations are limited, such as remote or conflict ridden areas and data-poor developing nations. The integration of dynamic variables derived from remote sensing (e.g. water extent, depth and width, river slope and cross sections, flow velocities, land cover and land use) into hydraulic models offers the potential to significantly enhance our understanding of hydrological processes and improve predictive capabilities. Case studies from the Global South are strongly encouraged, as are contributions from ungauged and transboundary basins where satellite observations are the primary record.

This session invites cutting-edge presentations on advancing surface water and flood monitoring and mapping through remotely-sensed data, focusing on:
-Flood and surface water mapping from satellite and airborne sensors, including commercial constellations and emerging observation concepts
-Machine learning, deep learning and foundation models for water body detection and flood segmentation
-Flood mapping in challenging environments such as urban, vegetated, arid, and cloud-persistent regions
-Multi-sensor and multi-frequency fusion for consistent flood extent retrieval
-Flood hazard, risk and impact mapping from Earth observation
-Assimilation of satellite-derived flood extent and inundation maps into hydrological and hydraulic models
-Calibration and validation of hydrological and hydraulic models using remotely sensed observations and field measurements, as well as the creation and use of benchmarks, uncertainty quantification methods, and standards for this purpose
-Monitoring surface water dynamics and change such as seasonal water body variation, wetland extent, river planform
-Operational rapid mapping and emergency response, and the path from research product to sustained service or tool
-Multi-satellite data products and services for improved monitoring of surface water dynamics including floods

Early career and underrepresented scientists are particularly encouraged to participate.

The increase in global surface temperatures has changed the frequency and magnitude of socio-natural hazards and extreme weather events. Climate change is reshaping hydrometeorological patterns across the globe, with increasingly pronounced effects in sensitive regions, such as the Amazon. The Amazon Basin is a region of exceptional hydrological, climatic, ecological, and societal importance. Its diverse environments, extending from the Andes to the lowland rainforest and major river systems, are exposed to multiple hazards, including floods, droughts, extreme precipitation, landslides, riverbank erosion, and wildfires. Climate variability and change, land use transformations, deforestation, and infrastructure development can modify hazard processes, exposure, and vulnerability, creating complex and evolving risks.

Understanding these hazards requires moving beyond isolated events to investigate interactions across spatial and temporal scales. Extreme rainfall can trigger flooding, landslides, and sediment transport, while prolonged drought and heat can create conditions that favour vegetation fires and disrupt river navigation and water availability. Such processes may generate cascading impacts on ecosystems, infrastructure, livelihoods, and communities, including indigenous peoples and traditional riverine populations. Therefore, this session aims to bring together researchers and practitioners working on the drivers, dynamics, interactions, and consequences of socio-natural hazards throughout the Amazon Basin.

We welcome interdisciplinary studies combining observations, remote sensing, modelling, and local knowledge to advance hazard understanding, monitoring, forecasting, and risk reduction. Topics include, but are not limited to:
• Drivers of extreme weather events, such as heavy rainfall, prolonged drought, and heatwaves;
• Hydrological hazards, including floods and flash floods, sediment dynamics, river meandering process;
• Geological hazards: riverbank erosion, "terras caídas", gully erosion, landslides.
• Wildfire hazards and their interactions with drought, vegetation, and land use change;
• Compound and cascading hazards, and their spatial and temporal dependencies;
• Hazard monitoring, early warning, forecasting, and modelling using field observations, remote sensing, and emerging analytical methods;
• Exposure, vulnerability, risk assessment, and disaster risk reduction, including the integration of scientific and local knowledge.

The purpose of this session is to:
(1) showcase the current state-of-the-art in global and continental scale natural hazard risk science, assessment, application and uptake in decision-making;
(2) foster broader exchange of knowledge, datasets, methods, models, and good practice between scientists and practitioners working on different natural hazards and across disciplines globally; and
(3) collaboratively identify future research avenues.

Reducing natural hazard risk is high on the global political agenda. For example, it is at the heart of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Paris Agreement. In response, the last decade has seen an explosion in the number of scientific datasets, methods, and models for assessing risk at the global and continental scale. Increasingly, these datasets, methods and models are being applied in collaboration with stakeholders during the decision-making process. Understanding how risk information is translated into decisions and actions is becoming increasingly important. This includes the co-production of knowledge with stakeholders, communication of uncertainty, governance of transboundary risks, and the role of risk assessments in supporting policy development, adaptation planning, and disaster risk reduction strategies

We invite contributions related to all aspects of natural hazard risk assessment at the continental to global scale, with particular emphasis on how risk information is generated, communicated, and used to support decision-making across sectors, scales, and borders. Topics include:
• single hazards, multi- or compound hazards;
• all facets of risk, including hazard, exposure and vulnerability;
• risk mitigation under current and future conditions (climate & socio-economic);
• the use of risk information in decision-making, policy development, adaptation planning, and disaster risk reduction;
• novel globally-applicable approaches for leveraging global datasets and models to inform local risk assessment and decision-making.

Geomorphic systems are increasingly exposed to interacting climatic, environmental and anthropogenic changes that alter the magnitude, frequency and spatial organisation of Earth-surface processes. Understanding landscape responses requires moving beyond individual process domains and viewing geomorphic systems as interconnected networks in which changes can propagate across spatial and temporal scales. Connectivity provides a framework for assessing system structure and its changes, interactions between processes and structural properties, and geomorphic sensitivity—the strength of system responses to internal and external forcing. Responses may be gradual or, when thresholds are crossed, involve abrupt transformations.

This session invites contributions examining geomorphic and hydrological connectivity and its role in the propagation of change, or “transmission sensitivity”, within and across fluvial, hillslope, aeolian, coastal, glacial and periglacial environments. We welcome studies on how material, energy and process connectivity influence geomorphic responses to climate change, land-use change and other human impacts, and how feedbacks between process domains generate cascading or compound responses. Contributions may address sediment, water, ice, wind or biogeomorphic connectivity, including structural, functional and temporal dimensions.

Particular emphasis is placed on gradual versus abrupt geomorphic change, including thresholds, tipping points, regime shifts, extreme events and cascading hazards. We encourage contributions combining observations, monitoring, remote sensing, modelling, experiments and conceptual approaches to identify controls on geomorphic sensitivity and transitions between alternative states.

The session also seeks to link fundamental geomorphic understanding with management and societal challenges. Contributions addressing natural hazards and risks, landscape resilience, river and coastal management, sediment management, ecosystem restoration, nature-based solutions, adaptation and decision-making under environmental change are particularly encouraged.

By bringing together researchers across traditionally separated geomorphic domains, the session aims to foster an integrated understanding of how connectivity controls geomorphic sensitivity, how disturbances propagate through landscapes, and how geomorphic systems evolve under accelerating environmental change.

Earth resilience is the capacity of the intertwined human-Earth system to resist, recover, and regenerate back to a Holocene-like and habitable functioning in response to human pressures. A deeper understanding of Earth system resilience is key to charting safe operating spaces for prosperous and equitable future human development. Recent assessments of Earth system integrity highlight the deteriorating resilience of our planet, with planetary-scale human pressures (such as greenhouse gas emissions and land-use change) pushing the Earth system into the uncharted territory of the Anthropocene. Of particular concern are risks of triggering nonlinear changes in large-scale components of the Earth that can undergo abrupt, often irreversible state shifts once critical thresholds are crossed. Examples include the Greenland ice sheets, the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation, and major ecosystems such as the Amazon rainforest. Their interactions may trigger tipping cascades, where the destabilization of one element increases the risk of others tipping, thereby amplifying Earth system change and undermining long-term Earth resilience.

The Earth system’s future trajectory is now co-shaped by human–Earth system feedbacks, where human activities both drive and respond to biophysical change. Fossil fuel use, deforestation, and land-use intensification contribute to destabilizing Earth system dynamics, while societal responses - such as mitigation policies, technological innovation, or behavioral shifts - can either reinforce unsustainable trajectories or create stabilizing feedbacks. In this context, research is uncovering the potential for social tipping dynamics, which could accelerate decarbonization and foster transformative pathways towards global sustainability to revitalize and regenerate Earth resilience.

We invite contributions on all topics relating to Earth resilience, planetary boundaries, safe operating spaces, tipping points in the Earth system, positive (social) tipping, as well as their interactions and potential domino effects. We welcome studies that use Earth system modelling, integrated human-Earth system models, from conceptual approaches to data-driven analysis to investigate nonlinear dynamics, abrupt shifts, and tipping points, as well as contributions exploring social transformation processes and their role in shaping a more sustainable future for people and the planet.

Urban environments are at the frontline of risk, shaped by rapid expansion, climate shocks, informality, and socio-economic pressures. This session welcomes contributions that cover the full spectrum of urban risk - from physical monitoring and modelling, to dynamic vulnerability assessments, to urban governance frameworks and resilience policy. We particularly welcome contributions that (a) address urban risk in the Global South and (b) address risk in small urban centres, where much of the projected urban growth will occur.

Potential themes include:
-Multi-hazard profiles of urban centres: compiling case studies and theoretical evidence for potential hazard interrelationships at the city scale
-Smart sensing and digital twins: exploring the use of AI, crowd-sourced data and big data to understand urban risk dynamics
-Urban expansion and adaptation: understanding how both formal and informal growth of cities interact with the urban hazardscape
-Policy, governance and management aspects of urban risk and resilience
-Early warning systems and anticipatory action: methods to combine local knowledge and predictive capabilities to issue effective early warnings in cities

We welcome interdisciplinary approaches, including:
-Case studies
-Modelling
-Empirical data collection and monitoring
-Inclusive methods such as stakeholder engagement, citizen science and participatory approaches
-Innovative methods in AI and machine learning
-Frameworks and tools for measuring risk and resilience

This session provides an interdisciplinary forum for researchers, policy-makers, and practitioners to share cutting-edge research and practical insights, highlighting diverse approaches to understanding and reducing urban risk.

Extreme events such as tropical cyclones, heatwaves, and earthquakes threaten populations worldwide. Climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of many natural hazards, which can interact with community exposure, inequalities, and vulnerabilities to cause substantial harm. These harms include forced migration, health and wellbeing effects, and other societal impacts. A growing literature at the intersection of the natural and social sciences examines the impacts of extreme events on populations, as well as people’s behavioral, attitudinal, and emotional responses.

Understanding the diverse societal impacts of natural hazards requires approaches that connect knowledge across disciplines, scales, and sectors. Yet, the challenges of doing so remain underexplored. Challenges include methodological choices, scales of analysis (e.g., regional, national), and means of translating scientific outputs into actionable information for policy and practice. This session provides a platform for contributions that bridge disciplines and sectors to better understand societal impacts of, and responses to, extreme events and related compound hazards.

We invite contributions including, but not limited to, studies of:
- Challenges for interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral collaborations
- Migration, displacement, and immobility due to extreme events
- Health and wellbeing effects of climate change and extreme events
- Food production and security in relation to extreme weather
- The interplay between climate change, environment, and conflict
- Environmental attitudes and behaviors influenced by extreme events

Knowledge co-creation can be defined as a collaborative process, focused on an iterative interaction leading to new knowledge – e.g. a new understanding of a problem. A key element of co-creation is the inclusion and integration of diverse knowledge systems, including traditional and indigenous knowledge systems. Experiences of ways to recognize, valorize and integrate traditional and indigenous knowledge in geosciences in a just and equitable way are present but they still receive little attention and are not recognized as fundamental milestones towards more inclusive, effective, and sustainable scientific practices. This section welcomes experiences of inclusion of traditional and indigenous knowledge in geosciences, including reflections on the governance and management of indigenous data. Approaches focusing on the decolonization of geosciences, recognition of the role of native scientists and avoiding parachute sciences and data extractivism are particularly encouraged.

Co-organized by the Working Group on Co-Creation of Water Knowledge of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences: https://iahs.info/Initiatives/Scientific-Decades/helping-working-groups/co-creating-water-knowledge/

In the Anthropocene, water resources are under unprecedented stress. To address these challenges and develop actionable, sustainable solutions, we need a thorough understanding of not only the hydrological cycle but also its interactions with other complex physical systems and social dimensions. To do this effectively, we need to move beyond a “science-as-usual” approach and leverage transdisciplinary knowledge. This includes actors such as scientists, policymakers, local communities and indigenous peoples, NGOs and local associations, media, and businesses. Each of these brings a unique perspective and expertise, and we must value their contributions not simply as sources of information or data, but as knowledge holders and active contributors to problem framing, knowledge production, solution development, and decision making.

Practices such as co-creation can help bring these different forms of knowledge into dialogue, make assumptions and uncertainties explicit, identify conflicts and synergies, and collectively explore alternative pathways towards, to arrive at integrated solutions for complex water management issues. This vision fits within the framework of the IAHS HELPING decade, which emphasises bottom-up approaches that recognise and empower local stakeholders and local know-how.

This session welcomes studies on co-creation approaches in hydrology and water resources management. More specifically, we welcome studies including, but not limited to: experiences and case studies of participatory and co-creation approaches applied to hydrology and water resources management; co-modelling approaches and socio-hydrological studies involving participation of stakeholders; the role of digital technologies and artificial intelligence in facilitating or transforming co-design; meta-analyses, review of other experiences, and literature reviews; critical geography, political ecology, new conceptual frameworks, and other critical approaches to co-creation and stakeholders involvement in water resources decision making.

Co-organised by the Working Groups on Co-Creation of Water Knowledge and Citizens and Hydrology (CANDHY) of the International Association of Hydrological Sciences:
https://iahs.info/Initiatives/Scientific-Decades/helping-working-groups/co-creating-water-knowledge/
https://iahs.info/Initiatives/Working-Groups/Candhy/

This session explores how creative, interactive and participatory approaches are reshaping risk communication and engagement across the geosciences, disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. Inspired by the approach being developed within the Horizon Europe AMPLIFY , which combines creative, participatory and scientific methods to support more inclusive and trusted risk communication, the session looks beyond one-way information provision towards dialogue, experimentation, co-creation and collective learning.
We invite contributions on serious games, simulations, role-play, scenario-based and counterfactual exercises, storytelling, arts-based methods, citizen science, co-design, participatory mapping and other innovative formats that support people in understanding, interpreting and acting on risk. We are particularly interested in how these approaches can engage diverse, vulnerable or underserved publics, integrate scientific and local knowledge, and strengthen preparedness, trust, risk awareness, behavioural change and collective action before, during and after disasters.
The session welcomes empirical studies, methodological papers, comparative analyses, case studies, conceptual contributions and lessons learned from research and innovation projects in disaster risk reduction, anticipatory action, climate resilience and adaptation. Contributions addressing climate-related risks, multi-hazard contexts, community resilience, transferability across regions and cultures, and the scalability of participatory approaches are especially encouraged.
A key focus will be on evaluation: how can the effectiveness of interactive and creative approaches be assessed, and how do they perform compared with, or in combination with, more conventional communication channels? We particularly welcome contributions proposing indicators, evaluation frameworks, mixed-method approaches, or evidence on short- and long-term impacts of creative and participatory methods on disaster preparedness and resilience.

Citizen science and community-based approaches are increasingly used in disaster risk reduction (DRR), particularly where formal monitoring networks are sparse, resources are constrained, or locally observed changes are poorly captured by conventional systems. Yet their potential extends far beyond filling observational gaps or recruiting communities as data collectors. When genuinely participatory and co-created, citizen science can influence what questions are asked, what is monitored, whose knowledge is recognised, how decisions about risk are made.
This session explores citizen science as a process of knowledge co-production, rather than simply a method of data collection. We therefore invite empirical, methodological and conceptual contributions that examine citizen science and participatory approaches to natural hazards across the Global South and other data-scarce, remote or marginalized contexts.
We welcome studies addressing, among others:
- Community-based hazard monitoring, forecasting and early warning for hazards such as floods, landslides, droughts, earthquakes, volcanic unrest…;
- Co-design and co-production of monitoring systems and risk-reduction strategies – moving beyond communities as data collectors towards participation in interpretation, decision-making and action;
- Relationships between scientific, local and Indigenous knowledge, and their integration into institutional risk management frameworks;
- Ethical and equity considerations – power, trust and data ownership – in co-designing citizen science with communities experiencing high hazard exposure;
- Citizen-generated data – from low-cost technologies to qualitative, non-digital and place-based approaches – for filling observational gaps in data-scarce regions;
- Capacity strengthening and community ownership as pathways to the long-term sustainability of participatory monitoring networks;
- Comparative and transferable lessons (what can/cannot be transferred across different geographical, cultural and institutional contexts);
- Examples of failure, unintended consequences, contested knowledge and lessons learned, alongside successful practice.
By bringing together researchers, practitioners, and those working directly with communities, this session will create space for critical reflection on citizen science practice. Alongside presentations, we propose dedicated discussion time to identify shared challenges, evidence gaps and priorities for future research and collaboration.

Indigenous Peoples have lived with active landscapes and environmental change for millennia, developing sophisticated knowledge systems grounded in long-term observation, oral traditions, cultural practices, and enduring relationships with place. These knowledge systems provide important insights into Earth surface processes, including volcanic activity, earthquakes, landslides, floods, coastal hazards, environmental change, and the stewardship of culturally significant landscapes.

Addressing complex geohazard and geoheritage challenges increasingly requires approaches that move beyond knowledge sharing towards ethical, reciprocal, and sustained partnerships. This session explores how Indigenous communities, researchers, practitioners, and decision-makers can work together to co-produce knowledge and co-develop solutions that are meaningful, locally relevant, and respectful of Indigenous rights, values, governance, and data sovereignty.

We invite contributions that examine ethical engagement practices at the interface of Indigenous knowledge and geoscience, including collaborative research design, community-led monitoring, participatory hazard assessment, geoheritage stewardship, Indigenous governance, and approaches that foster mutual learning and benefit. We particularly welcome case studies that highlight how equitable partnerships and the respectful weaving of Indigenous and scientific knowledge systems can strengthen understanding of dynamic Earth processes, support disaster risk reduction, enhance geoheritage outcomes, and build trust across knowledge communities.

By focusing on ethical and reciprocal engagement, this session aims to advance more inclusive geoscience practices and showcase pathways for co-developed geohazard and geoheritage solutions that are scientifically robust, culturally appropriate, and socially just.

Across Europe, a wide range of geoscience-relevant legislation is currently moving through the policy pipeline — from critical raw materials and deforestation regulation, to the Climate Resilience Framework, the Soil Monitoring Law, and the Nature Restoration Law. For many researchers, these processes and how to engage with them remain opaque.

This session explores how geoscience can inform policy, regulation and decision-making, and how researchers and other stakeholders in science can engage effectively with policy processes to deliver societal benefits beyond academia. We welcome contributions from researchers, policymakers, practitioners, industry and NGO representatives, and others working at the science–policy–society interface.

We particularly encourage presentations that share concrete examples of how engagement happened in practice: what pathways were used, what worked, what did not, and what can be learnt from these experiences. This may include engagement at different stages of the policy-decision cycle, such as responding to public consultations, contributing to advisory groups, participating in national delegations, providing formal or informal science advice to decision-makers, or contributing to the design and implementation of legislation, directives, strategies and regulations. We also welcome highlights of current and recent policy developments relevant to the geosciences where the research community can engage.

By bringing together perspectives from both science and policy, the session aims to foster an open exchange on how science–policy engagement works in practice, where it falls short, and how it can be improved. We seek to create a space where researchers and policymakers can share experiences, ask questions and learn from one another, including through the proposed associated Splinter Meeting during the EGU 2027 week.

Climate change is one of the defining societal challenges of the 21st century, and its impacts increasingly affect communities worldwide. By the time of EGU27, a “super El Niño” fuelled by unprecedentedly high tropical Pacific sea surface temperatures is expected to exacerbate extreme weather and rainfall patterns in many parts of the world, causing severe impacts and potentially lasting damages. Despite growing evidence, political and societal responses remain inadequate for mitigation, adaptation, and loss and damage, resulting in persistent vulnerabilities and accumulating impacts on societies and ecosystems. This shortfall in climate action has prompted citizens and organizations to pursue legal action, seeking remedies for climate-related damages and putting pressure on decision-makers to commit to and implement meaningful emission reductions. This interdisciplinary session invites contributions that advance the integration of insights from the geosciences into legal practice. We welcome new scientific methods to support legal arguments, as well as inter- and transdisciplinary approaches on the consolidation of scientific insights in climate litigation, and on the effective communication of scientific findings to legal practitioners and the broader society. Submissions may also address questions of climate change and impact attribution, responsibility, human, non-human and broader environmental rights, burden sharing of efforts, translation between science and law, and science communication, that link beyond disciplinary boundaries. Please note that all first authors of an abstract to any Programme Group (PG) within the General Assembly are allowed to also submit a second regular abstract to a Geoscience & Society (GS) session like this one.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML), including Deep Learning, Computer Vision and Remote Sensing techniques, are increasingly used across the geosciences for hazard forecasting, Earth observation, environmental monitoring, climate services and other applications that may inform operational and policy decisions. Examples such as Google Flood Hub, GraphCast, ECMWF’s AIFS, post-disaster damage assessment pipelines and geospatial foundation models show the growing potential of these approaches. However, strong performance on standard benchmarks does not automatically make an AI-derived product suitable for high-stakes decisions.
This session asks what AI-enabled geoscience needs to demonstrate before it can be relied upon in operational, policy or governance contexts. We welcome contributions that move beyond conventional performance metrics and address reliability, uncertainty, transparency, robustness and practical usability. Technical approaches may include Physics-Informed Neural Networks, uncertainty quantification methods such as Conformal Prediction or Bayesian Neural Networks, and Explainable AI approaches assessed against the information needs of end-users and decision-makers.
Relevant contributions may examine validation against rare or out-of-distribution events, uncertainty communication, robustness across locations and time periods, data quality and bias, reproducibility, provenance and traceability, and approaches to operational readiness, including Technology Readiness Level frameworks. Contributions based on systems tested or used in practice are particularly encouraged, including early warning systems, automated hazard mapping, environmental monitoring, climate adaptation tools and Earth observation applications for disaster risk reduction.
The session will also address the governance and societal implications of AI-derived scientific evidence, including standards and regulatory frameworks, human oversight, algorithmic bias, equity, public trust, stakeholder participation, accountability and the potential for AI-supported decisions to affect communities differently.
The aim is to connect geoscientists developing AI methods with those working on how scientific evidence is assessed, communicated and governed. The central question is not only whether an AI model works, but whether there is sufficient transparent, robust and actionable evidence to justify its use in real decisions.

The rapidly changing cryosphere due to climate change is creating increasingly urgent adaptation and socio-economical challenges: sea level rise, mountain and glacier collapse, land subsidence, glacial lake outbursts, and impacts on ecosystems, sustainable energy production, livelihoods and cultural heritage. Recent events in mountain regions like Nepal, Tibet, Peru and Switzerland are showing us that rapidly melting glaciers, snow and permafrost are triggering catastrophic hazards directly threatening local communities safety, vital infrastructure, livelihoods, water security, and cultural heritage. Slow-onset events like sea-level rise are affecting communities that have little to no responsibility for such impacts. Yet, fragmented communication of both scientific knowledge and the urgency to act continues to expose important bottlenecks at the interface between science, policy and society.

This session invites researchers, policymakers, government agencies, practitioners and other stakeholders working across these interfaces. We welcome examples of successful and unsuccessful engagement, alongside critical reflections on persistent gaps around cryosphere-related challenges. How can researchers engage effectively with decision-makers? What kind of knowledge or scientific input do policymakers or stakeholders need, and in what form? Where does available science fall short of what decisions require? Our aim is a space for mutual exchange and learning that builds capacity, communication and collaboration across the science-policy-society interface.

We invite contributions from across all realms of the cryosphere—including glaciers, ice sheets, permafrost, sea ice, snow, lake and river ice—and encourage perspectives on challenging and emerging topics. These may include communicating concepts such as climate overshoot and tipping points and their implications for populations to non-expert audiences, the role, potential risks and framing of geoengineering and other intervention proposals in cryosphere policy debates, countering misinformation and rebuilding trust in science, and addressing how cryospheric research can better support adaptation, resilience and long-term planning.

Cold cloud thinning covers proposed climate interventions that looks to seed ice clouds with efficient ice nucleating particles, so they trap less outgoing longwave radiation. With cirrus cloud thinning, seeding aims to shift ice formation away from homogenous to heterogenous freezing nucleation, producing fewer but larger ice crystals that fall out faster, giving thinner, shorter-lived clouds. More recently, mixed-phase cloud thinning has sought to target supercooled clouds over the polar oceans in the winter, where cloud glaciation could reduce longwave radiation from reaching the surface and so help slow sea ice loss. Model estimates of the resulting cooling varies from net negative to net positive when clouds are overseeded, and much of this spread comes from processes that are difficult to constrain, such as the competition between nucleation modes, pre-existing ice, small-scale updrafts, and gravity waves.

This session focusses on work that helps improve our understanding of the ice cloud processes that decide whether cold cloud thinning could work, and what its side effects might be. We welcome laboratory studies of ice nucleation and possible seeding particles, field experiments including targeted glaciogenic seeding, in situ and satellite observations of cirrus and mixed-phase clouds (including early results from EarthCARE), and modelling from process- to global-scale climate models. Natural analogues are of interest, since mineral dust, volcanic eruptions and aviation all perturb ice clouds in ways that let us test seeding hypotheses in the atmosphere. Contributions on detectability, attribution, risks, and wider impacts are also welcome, and we encourage early career researchers to submit.

The growing availability of hydrological data products derived from Earth observations, reanalysis systems, numerical models, in situ monitoring networks, and data assimilations has transformed our ability to monitor and understand the terrestrial water cycle.
These products have become indispensable for supporting applications ranging from flood and drought management to water resources planning, agriculture, ecosystem monitoring, and climate adaptation. Yet product selection still often relies on general and often partial performance rankings that may not reflect the requirements of a specific process, scale, hydrological regime, model, hazard, service, or decision. They also may not reflect large differences in the spatial distribution and historical depth of the supporting data.
This session invites contributions that explore how hydrological data products should be assessed, compared, and used to maximize their scientific and societal value, based on the intended application. We encourage discussions on methodologies that go beyond traditional validation and consider aspects such as uncertainty, robustness, consistency across scales, interoperability, usability, and fitness for purpose.
Particular emphasis is placed on understanding how different user communities define product quality and how assessment frameworks can better reflect their needs.
Topics include, but are not limited to:
● Assessment, benchmarking, , and uncertainty assessment of satellite-derived, reanalysis, model-based, and integrated hydrological datasets.
● Fitness-for-purpose assessments of gridded products for scientific analyses, models, operational services, climate applications, and decision-support systems.
● Scale dependence, representativeness, and cross-product consistency.
● Experiences from operational services and real-world applications that reveal strengths and limitations of existing products.
● Case studies demonstrating how dataset choice influences hydrological analyses, forecasts, or management decisions.
● Emerging approaches for evaluating products in the context of digital twins, Earth system modelling, and climate services.
● Analyses or discussions addressing the influence of changes in the constelation(s) of Earth orbiting satellite.
The session welcomes contributions from data producers, hydrologists, remote sensing scientists, model developers, operational agencies, policy experts, and end users.

River basins worldwide are increasingly confronted by a twin challenge whereby excess sediment from accelerated erosion threatens water quality, aquatic ecosystems, infrastructure and reservoir capacity (too much), whilst sediment deficits downstream compromise river, delta and coastal resilience (too little). These challenges are being amplified by climate change, land-use change, infrastructure development, pollution, resource extraction and increasing pressures on food, water and energy security. While advances in sediment science have greatly improved knowledge, significant challenges remain in translating evidence into effective policies, governance frameworks and management actions.

This session aims to advance dialogue on how scientific understanding of river basin sediment dynamics, and associated contaminants, can better support governance and decision making across the source-to-sink continuum. It interconnects with the International Sediment Initiative (ISI), a flagship initiative of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Hydrological Programme (IHP), which was established to strengthen the links between sediment science, policy and management and to promote sustainable sediment management at local, regional and global scales.

Focusing on the science-policy-practice interface for erosion & sedimentation within river basin and channel processes, we invite contributions that demonstrate how sediment science is supporting policy development, environmental regulation, river basin management, disaster risk reduction, climate adaptation and ecosystem restoration at local, national and international scales. We welcome contributions that move beyond process understanding and methodological development to examine the uptake, application and impact of sediment knowledge in decision-making contexts.

Relevant to researchers, practitioners, policymakers and international organisations, the session will provide a forum to share experiences, lessons learned and emerging approaches for translating sediment science into policy and practice, with the aim of strengthening sustainable sediment management across local to global scales.

Research in stratigraphy, sedimentology and paleontology has wide-ranging implications for society, from renewable energy applications to geoheritage conservation, and policy decisions pertaining to conservation and hazard management. While this societal relevance has been increasingly recognized, dedicated venues for showcasing this translation of research into practice remain limited. This session aims to address a pertinent question: what can stratigraphy, sedimentology and palaeontology offer to decision-making, conservation policies and industry? In doing so, it seeks to foreground the intersection of academic research with societal application. Contributions may address, but are not limited to:
1. The role of these fields in geoheritage conservation
2. Paleontology and paleoecology in environmental conservation
3. Stratigraphy and sedimentology in hazard management and resource mitigation in the context of climate change
4. Stratigraphy, sedimentology and paleontology in renewable energy management and sustainable mining
While many studies touch on societal themes more broadly, this session places particular emphasis on research that can demonstrate a clear pathway from scientific evidence to practical applications in policy, conservation, environmental management or industry. We particularly welcome contributions that illustrate how databases, FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) data workflows, methodologies, or specific research outputs can play a concrete role in decision-making and/or industry applications, thereby facilitating the translation of research into practical applications.

The energy transition is reshaping the geography of resources, production, infrastructure and trade. Growing demand for critical raw materials is creating new centres of extraction and processing; clean-technology manufacturing is concentrating in some regions while expanding into others; and new energy and transport infrastructures are changing how technologies, materials and energy move across regions. These shifts are unfolding alongside geopolitical fragmentation, industrial policy, environmental constraints and growing concern over the resilience of global value chains.
This session invites research on the changing spatial and material foundations of the energy transition. We welcome contributions that:
examine critical raw materials, resource availability, extraction and processing;
investigate clean-technology manufacturing, innovation, deployment and shifting centres of production;
analyse renewable-energy, electricity, hydrogen, transport and other infrastructure associated with the transition;
study trade, logistics, supply-chain networks and changing patterns of global interdependence;
explore recycling, substitution, material efficiency and circularity;
examine how geopolitics, industrial policy, finance and strategies for diversification or domestic production reshape transition pathways; and
investigate how environmental burdens, economic opportunities, vulnerabilities and benefits are distributed across producing and consuming regions, workers and communities.
We particularly encourage studies that connect physical and technological change across these domains: how resource endowments influence industrial development; how manufacturing and infrastructure choices create new dependencies; how trade and policy reshape the location of production; and how strategies for resilience, security and circularity alter outcomes across regions.
By bringing together perspectives from geoscience, energy systems, industrial ecology, economics, geography and the social sciences, the session aims to build a more integrated understanding of how the geography of the energy transition is evolving, and what those changes imply for resilient, sustainable and equitable transition pathways.

Climate change is creating increasingly dynamic and interconnected challenges for human–environment systems, while conventional approaches to climate-risk assessment often struggle to capture nonlinear interactions among hazards, infrastructure, human behaviour, institutions, and environmental change. Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI), geospatial data science, machine learning, and digital technologies provide new opportunities to understand, predict, and enhance climate resilience.

This session brings together interdisciplinary research exploring how data-driven and AI-enhanced approaches can advance the assessment, modelling, and practice of climate resilience. We particularly welcome contributions that move beyond conventional vulnerability and risk assessment toward understanding adaptive capacity, resilience dynamics, and pathways for proactive adaptation. Topics include GeoAI and spatial-temporal data analytics; AI-enhanced climate-impact and resilience modelling; integration of machine learning with agent-based and other process-based models; human mobility, behaviour, and social networks; urban digital twins and interactive visual analytics; remote sensing and Earth observation; data-driven assessment of adaptation potential; and AI-supported planning and decision-making.

We encourage empirical, theoretical, methodological, and applied contributions across different hazards, spatial scales, and geographical contexts. Particular interest lies in approaches that integrate physical and social data, combine data-driven and knowledge-driven modelling, incorporate stakeholder and human dimensions, or translate AI-based insights into actionable adaptation strategies.

By bringing together researchers from climate science, geography, environmental science, data science, AI, and related disciplines, the session aims to advance a human-centred and solution-oriented research agenda for climate resilience and explore how emerging technologies can support more effective, adaptive, and sustainable responses to climate change.

Composite indicators for vulnerability and resilience — SoVI, ND-GAIN, INFORM, national climate risk indices — have proliferated across research and policy communities over the past decade. Yet the pathway from indicator to institutional action remains under-theorised. Which indicators actually enter governance processes? At which scales are they legible? Where do they reshape decisions, and where do they merely accompany them?
This session invites contributions that trace this pathway across scales, from household and neighbourhood measurement to municipal, regional, and national adaptation planning. We are particularly interested in ageing societies, where compound climate–demographic pressures — heat exposure, social isolation, care-system strain, mobility loss — expose the limits of conventional indicator frameworks and demand new integrations across environmental, health, and social data.
Contributions are welcome on:
• Methodological advances in composite vulnerability and resilience measurement, including uncertainty quantification, sensitivity analysis, and integration of qualitative evidence
• Governance case studies where indicators demonstrably shaped adaptation policy, risk allocation, or resource distribution — and where they did not
• Cross-national comparisons of indicator uptake across governance systems (EU, East and Southeast Asia, Global South)
• Participatory and community-based measurement approaches that bridge technical and lived-experience knowledge
• Applications focused on ageing populations, long-term care systems, and intergenerational climate risk
• Institutional and knowledge-brokering mechanisms that translate indicators into decisions
The session welcomes both quantitative and qualitative work, single-country deep dives and comparative studies. By bringing measurement scientists, governance scholars, and practitioners together within GS, we aim to build a shared vocabulary for the indicator–institution link and to support the emerging Climate Resilience and Sustainability subdivision as a durable interdisciplinary platform.

Rapid urban growth is reshaping the relationships among water, heat, and land in arid and semi-arid cities. These cities often face chronic water scarcity, yet they can also experience short, intense rainfall and episodic flooding. Urban expansion, land-cover change, and rising demand for cooling and urban greening further alter surface energy balance, evapotranspiration, runoff, and water use. For example, irrigation-based greening may reduce summer heat but increase pressure on already limited water supplies, while rapid surface sealing can intensify runoff during short, high-intensity storms. These processes create difficult trade-offs, and adaptation measures may reduce one risk while shifting pressure to another part of the urban system.

This session focuses on how coupled water–heat–land processes shape climate risk and resilience in rapidly developing arid and semi-arid cities. We welcome studies on urban growth, heat stress, water availability, hydrological extremes, land-use change, and ecosystem processes, drawing on field observations, remote sensing, modelling, and comparative case studies.

We are particularly interested in adaptation strategies that address multiple interacting risks rather than single hazards, including urban greening and cooling, blue-green and nature-based infrastructure, and water-sensitive planning. We also welcome work examining trade-offs among water conservation, flood management, thermal comfort, ecological quality, and urban development.

Across arid and semi-arid regions, similar interventions can produce very different outcomes because of differences in climate, water availability, urban form, and land-use context. This session therefore asks when, where, and under what conditions water–heat–land trade-offs can be reduced or resolved, rather than simply displaced.

Climate change is increasingly interacting with rapid urbanization, socioeconomic transformation, environmental degradation, and uneven development across Asia. Floods, droughts, tropical cyclones, sea-level rise, salinity intrusion, landslides, etc., and compound extremes are affecting communities, ecosystems, infrastructure, livelihoods, and economic development. These challenges are particularly significant in emerging and developing regions, where high exposure often coincides with limited resources, institutional constraints, and social inequalities.
At the same time, communities, governments, researchers, and other actors across Asia are developing diverse ways to anticipate, absorb, adapt to, and transform in response to climate risks. Understanding which approaches are effective, under what conditions, and how they can support long-term climate-resilient development remains a major scientific and policy challenge.
This session brings together interdisciplinary research on the assessment, mechanisms, practices, and pathways of climate resilience in emerging and developing Asia. We welcome contributions that connect climate hazards and environmental change with social, institutional, technological, and policy responses, including:
 Measurement and assessment of climate resilience and climate-resilient development
 Innovative technologies, modelling approaches, and nature-based solutions for climate adaptation
 Empirical case studies, best practices, and lessons from successful and unsuccessful resilience initiatives
 Governance, institutional capacity, and policy mechanisms for climate resilience
 Community resilience, socio-cultural dimensions, equity, justice, and local knowledge
 Methodological advances in climate resilience research, including GIS, remote sensing, participatory methods, and data-driven approaches
 Adaptation pathways, transformative resilience, and opportunities for scaling up effective solutions
 Theoretical, conceptual, comparative, and review studies on climate resilience in emerging and developing Asia.

Biodiversity loss and climate change amplify one another through coupled ecological and societal processes, yet their risks are still assessed and governed largely in parallel. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals call for integrated action, but operational frameworks capable of connecting climate hazards, ecosystem condition, biodiversity responses, human vulnerability and governance capacity remain fragmented.
This session advances a resilience-based science-policy agenda for aligning biodiversity goals with climate mitigation, adaptation and disaster risk reduction. We invite conceptual, methodological and empirical contributions that: (1) identify cascading, compound and cross-scale climate-biodiversity risks, thresholds and feedbacks; (2) develop integrated indicators and assessment frameworks linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, carbon, adaptation and equity; (3) combine Earth observation, in situ monitoring, environmental DNA, ecological and climate models, artificial intelligence, scenarios and uncertainty analysis; (4) evaluate synergies, trade-offs and maladaptation in nature-based solutions, ecosystem restoration, protected areas, renewable-energy transitions and land- and sea-use planning; and (5) examine governance arrangements, finance, stakeholder networks and monitoring, reporting and review systems that connect the Convention on Biological Diversity, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and related policy processes.
Comparative studies and place-based evidence from terrestrial, freshwater, coastal, marine and urban socio-ecological systems are especially welcome, including work with Indigenous Peoples and local communities. By bringing together geoscientists, ecologists, social scientists, practitioners and policymakers, the session will distil transferable methods and context-sensitive pathways for ecological security and just, climate-resilient development.

Ten years after the Paris Agreement, global climate action has bent the curve of projected warming, but a temporary overshoot of 1.5°C is now unavoidable. Even full implementation of all announced NDCs, long-term strategies and net-zero pledges falls well short of what's needed, and global emissions continue to rise. This session looks to explore how we can achieve the lowest temperature outcome feasible in 2100, as well as the timing of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions globally, in line with the requirements of the Paris Agreement and Article 4.1. We do this through three angles: where we stand, where we are headed, and how to get back on track.

First, where the world stands. The latest climate science is essential to understand the actions necessary to minimize the extent and duration of overshoot. Here we welcome submissions that quantify the latest science around anthropogenic emissions and warming, or that assess changes in the Earth system with implications for overshoot such as updates to climate sensitivity or tipping point dynamics. At the same time, continued development and technological progress is potentially opening up new opportunities (and challenges) for mitigation pathways, looking across developments in electro-tech, innovative new technologies, and AI. We welcome submissions which capture these latest developments and explore how they could impact on mitigation pathways.

Second, where the world is heading under current policies and targets. We welcome submissions that quantify our current emissions and energy system trajectories and assess the implications of this for global temperatures and associated impacts.

Third, where we need to go: what it will take to limit the magnitude and duration of any eventual overshoot. Here we welcome submissions that cover the pace and shape of decarbonization pathways able to limit peak warming and bring temperatures back down after mid-century, through multiple interlinked levers including fossil fuel phase-out; electrification of buildings, transport and industry; methane abatement and other short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs); and scaling up carbon dioxide removal. We are particularly interested in assessing the feasibility of different options, and aim to interrogate the actions that can most plausibly limit the magnitude and duration of overshoot. Each of these levers is examined at global, regional and sectoral resolution.

Climate change is reshaping the interactions among land use, ecosystems, human activities, and spatial development, creating interconnected risks that extend across administrative and geographic boundaries. At the same time, land systems provide a critical arena for climate mitigation, adaptation, ecosystem restoration, and sustainable development. Strengthening climate resilience therefore requires moving beyond sectoral and place-based interventions towards integrated approaches that connect land-system dynamics with spatial planning and governance across scales.
This session explores how land systems can be understood, managed, and transformed to strengthen climate resilience and sustainability. We particularly welcome research examining the interactions between land-use and land-cover change, climate risks, ecosystem services, human well-being, and spatial development, as well as studies investigating how planning and governance can mediate trade-offs, enhance synergies, and support resilient development pathways.
Contributions may address urban, peri-urban, rural, regional, and coupled human–environment systems and employ empirical, modelling, remote-sensing, spatial analytical, participatory, or comparative approaches. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:
• land-system responses and vulnerability to climate change and extreme events;
• land-use and spatial planning for climate mitigation, adaptation, and resilience;
• interactions and trade-offs among climate resilience, ecosystem services, biodiversity, and socio-economic development;
• nature-based solutions, ecosystem restoration, and multifunctional land management;
• cross-boundary, multi-level, and regional governance of climate and land-system risks;
• spatial inequalities, environmental justice, and differentiated adaptive capacities;
• Earth observation, spatial modelling, GeoAI, and decision-support tools for climate-resilient land governance;
• pathways for translating land-system science into planning, policy, and implementation.
By bringing together geoscientists, land-system scientists, planners, social scientists, practitioners, and policymakers, the session aims to strengthen dialogue across disciplines and scales and advance place-sensitive, evidence-based approaches to climate-resilient spatial governance.

African–European research and capacity-development partnerships play an important role in addressing the interconnected challenges of climate change, water security, land degradation, food security, and sustainable development. Over recent years, increasing attention has been given not only to strengthening scientific capacity, but also to ensuring that collaborative research translates into practical solutions and long-term societal impact.

Building on previous discussions on capacity development and African–European research cooperation, this session focuses on the next step: how partnerships can evolve from individual projects and training activities towards sustained research capacity, institutional strengthening, locally led innovation, and implementation.

We invite contributions examining innovative and equitable approaches to African–European collaboration across climate change impact and adaptation, water and land management, environmental sustainability, and related fields. Particular attention will be given to co-creation of knowledge, long-term institutional partnerships, early-career researcher development, research mobility, South–South and African–European networks, science–policy–practice interfaces, and mechanisms for translating research into locally relevant solutions.

The session welcomes both successful examples and critical reflections on challenges such as unequal partnerships, short-term funding cycles, continuity beyond individual projects, and the measurement of capacity-development and societal impacts. Contributions from researchers, practitioners, policymakers, funders, and capacity-development programmes are encouraged.

This session will showcase innovative approaches to multi-(hazard) risk assessment and management, focusing on advancing the understanding of risk components (hazard, exposure, vulnerability, and capacity) in multi-hazard settings, as well as applications of multi-hazard thinking in disaster risk reduction (DRR) and climate change adaptation. Effective DRR and the translation of research results into practice require considering multiple hazards and their interactions as highlighted in international frameworks and reports, including the Sendai Framework, the IPCC’s AR6, and the EUCRA.
Multi-(hazard) risk assessment examines how interactions among hazards shape exposure and vulnerability through hazard impacts and adaptation measures, particularly in the context of climate change and slow-onset hazards (e.g., droughts). Yet, conventional frameworks still often overlook interrelated hazards and risks, opening the door to unintended consequences. The session will highlight a spectrum of approaches to multi-(hazard) risk, from analysing hazard interactions and vulnerability dynamics to characterising multi-hazard exposure. It will also discuss good practices and persistent challenges in managing multi-(hazard) risk across spatial and temporal scales. Finally, the session will engage with work on societal implications of multi-hazards, including societal impacts and resilience to multi-hazards. By addressing the full risk management chain, this session will identify research gaps, synergies, and opportunities for collaboration across disciplines and hazard types.
We welcome abstracts presenting original research, case studies, and critical reflections across the DRR cycle. Suggested topics include:
- Multi-(hazard) risk methodologies addressing interacting hazards, exposure, vulnerability, and impacts;
- Tools and frameworks for multi-(hazard) risk assessment and management;
- Cross-sectoral approaches that integrate physical, social, economic, environmental, and institutional dimensions;
- Implementation of DRR measures from a multi-hazard perspective, with attention to synergies and trade-offs between hazard-specific measures;
- Multi-hazard early warning systems;
- Societal implications of multi-hazard risks;
- Resilience in the context of interacting hazards.

Climate hazards consistently expose and often intensify socioeconomic inequalities. Vulnerability to extreme events is not evenly distributed within or across societies; rather, it is shaped by existing social, economic, and political conditions. As such, inequality, defined as the uneven distribution of resources, opportunities, and power has been recognised by the United Nations and other global policy frameworks as a central factor influencing progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
This session invites interdisciplinary contributions, bringing together geoscientists, social scientists, economists, and policy experts to examine the complex and often compounding interactions between social inequalities and climate hazards such as floods, heatwaves, droughts, storms, landslides, and wildfires across different scales, including within countries, between countries, and across continents.
Topics of interest include (but are not limited to):
-Case studies illustrating how environmental and social inequalities intersect.
-Types of inequality: social, gender-based, infrastructural, recovery time, education, income source, wealth distribution, climate justice, food security
-Impacts of climate hazards: displacement, fatalities, psychological and physical health, developmental setbacks.
-Long-term recovery challenges: absence of recovery, prolonged recovery periods, slower developmental trajectories.
-Historical and political-ecological perspectives on disasters and their long-term societal impacts.
-Innovations in data, metrics, or methods (e.g., AI, remote sensing, socio-environmental modelling) for assessing inequality and disaster risk across spatial and temporal scales.

Social-science and humanities (SSH) research is crucial for informing ambitious, effective, just and societally acceptable climate action. This session highlights how SSH insights on social metabolism, labor transitions, perceptions and societal readiness, institutional dynamics, justice, needs and capabilities, and power relations can enrich and reshape diverse modeling approaches. We aim to provide a platform for interdisciplinary work that broadens what models and scenarios can represent, clarifies their limits, and strengthens connections across methods and disciplines.
We welcome contributions that:
integrate SSH concepts and methods into integrated assessment models (IAMs), energy–economy–environment models, energy-system models, or other analytical frameworks;
use empirical, qualitative or participatory approaches to inform model assumptions, structures, constraints and scenario design;
engage with normative dimensions such as fairness, feasibility, responsibility and societal acceptance, including in emerging areas such as carbon dioxide removal and other climate-response strategies;
connect justice questions to marginalized or disadvantaged communities, particularly in the Global South;
examine how governance, institutions, finance, law, power relations, and material and human needs shape transition pathways;
investigate social outcomes of modeled scenarios, including distributional, labor, health and wellbeing implications; and
explore how new data, methods and technologies can address, or reproduce, gaps in whose experiences and priorities are represented in climate analysis.
We particularly encourage work engaging with distributive, procedural, recognitional, transitional and other dimensions of justice, as well as studies that provide meaningful two-way connections between social science and modeling communities. Contributions need not themselves be modeling studies where they provide empirical, conceptual or normative insights that can inform how climate and energy scenarios are developed, evaluated or interpreted.
By convening these perspectives, the session seeks to advance interdisciplinary approaches that make climate and energy modeling more relevant, inclusive and transparent about both what it represents and what lies beyond its scope.

Extreme weather and climate events can disrupt many aspects of human societies, including physical and mental health, livelihoods, food and water service, infrastructure, and human mobility. Yet these impacts are still often assessed one hazard at a time, even though severe consequences frequently arise from interacting hazards. Compound events may involve concurrent, sequential, spatially connected, or preconditioned hazards, and their impacts can be nonlinear, cascading, and greater than the sum of impacts associated with individual hazards.

This session focuses on the impacts of compound weather and climate events on human societies. We welcome research on diverse types of compound events, including, but not limited to, heat and drought; drought followed by wildfire; extreme heat combined with wildfire; tropical cyclones accompanied or followed by extreme rainfall, flooding, and storm surge; and rapid transitions between opposing climate extremes. Contributions may examine mortality and morbidity, mental health, migration and displacement, food and water insecurity, livelihood losses and financial security, health-system burdens, infrastructure failure, conflict, and structural inequality. We particularly encourage work addressing unequal exposure, vulnerability, adaptive capacity, resilience, and recovery.

This session welcomes empirical, modelling, qualitative, participatory, and mixed-methods studies at any spatial scale. Relevant topics include definitions and metrics; detection and attribution; historical trends and future projections; evidence linking compound events to human outcomes; causal inference and uncertainty assessment; integration of climate data with administrative records, surveys, remote sensing, and community knowledge; and applications to early warning, anticipatory action, adaptation, preparedness, risk communication, and equitable risk reduction.

By bringing together climate and Earth-system science, epidemiology, public health, geography, economics, sociology, demography, engineering, disaster-risk research, and public policy and practice, the session aims to advance knowledge of how compound events are anticipated, measured, experienced, and managed.

Environmental issues are not only ecological but also societal and cultural. To address them effectively, we need to understand how human societies interact with the environment. This session highlights the importance of social science in environmental research and vice versa, and invites contributions that explore how interdisciplinary collaboration can lead to innovative and sustainable solutions. We welcome scientists from all disciplines of environmental and social sciences, data analysts, methodologists, and metadata experts to share their insights, case studies, and challenges. We aim to foster meaningful discussions and exchange of ideas across academic groups, research infrastructures, the private sector, and policy makers. By integrating the expertise of social scientists with environmental research, we can develop a more comprehensive and holistic understanding of environmental problems leading to pathways for viable climate action plans and supporting policies. Let's work together to contribute to a more sustainable relationship between people and the environment.
Topics may include, but are not limited to:
– Climate action plans and solutions for green and sustainable cities
– Cultural heritage and environmental sustainability
– Environmental policy and governance
– Air quality and climate indicators
– Sustainable agriculture and land use
– Biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services
– Climate adaptation and resilience
– Development of resilient communities through disaster risk reduction
– Citizen and participatory science and public engagement
– Best practice methodologies for specific use cases
– Metadata standards for integration of data from different research domains
– Project reports or infrastructure requirements related to multidisciplinary use cases

Hydrology has a long history, with many of its concepts, methods and observations developing through a combination of scientific advances, practical needs and contributions from different research communities. Looking back at this history can help us understand how ideas in hydrology have developed, changed and sometimes been forgotten.
This session invites contributions on the history of hydrological concepts, methods, observations and models, as well as on the people, institutions, projects and research communities that have shaped the discipline. We are particularly interested in examples where looking at the past can improve understanding of current hydrological practice, including historical data, approaches that have been abandoned or overlooked, traditional and indigenous knowledge, and lessons from past successes and failures.
We also welcome contributions on how (traditional) hydrological knowledge is passed on and how it has supported sustainable water management across different cultures over long periods. How does research become established knowledge, and how does it eventually find its way into textbooks and teaching? A considerable gap often exists between scientific research and what becomes established textbook knowledge: findings that are already well established may take many years to enter teaching, while others may be simplified or interpreted differently as they are passed on.
The session aims to bring together different perspectives on the history of hydrology and to discuss how understanding the development of the discipline can contribute to both current research and the education of future hydrologists.

Environmental research is increasingly expected and needed to produce societal impact, i.e. “an effect on, change or benefit to the economy, society, culture, public policy or services, health, the environment or quality of life, beyond academia” (Reed, 2018). However, a persistent gap remains between research outputs and societal needs, controlled by strongly disciplinary education and the research-driven supply of new knowledge and services. Thus, the realization of the research impact potential (whether, how, and for what purposes) by relevant stakeholders remains uncertain.

We propose bridging this science-societal impact gap through two broad pathways. First, we need inter- and trans-disciplinary training and capacity-building in geosciences, but also among professionals; this pivotal need is further emphasized in current research funding instruments. Addressing complex environmental challenges requires diverse competencies and transferable skills. Higher education and life-long/wide learning are critical approaches in closing the gap, often referred to as universities' “third mission” (Secundo et al., 2017).

Second, we need development and better adoption of stakeholder- and demand-driven research practices throughout the research process, from co-design and co-production of research projects towards output communication and implementation tailoring. This includes closer collaboration both with the public sector and with the private sector stakeholders.

The demand-driven approach includes mapping of stakeholder needs and ongoing management processes, and co-creation of research outputs with stakeholders.

This session welcomes empirical and conceptual contributions along the broad two societal impact strands:

1. Societally impactful education and capacity-building in geosciences

2. Societally impactful research practices

We invite contributions covering all aspects of bridging the science-societal impact gap in geosciences, across the transition from case studies to theoretical and conceptual works. The session will facilitate exchange, learning, and networking around interdisciplinarity, collaboration, and impact pathways. The targeted output of our session will be one or a set of articles synthesizing the identified academic approaches and pathways to bridge the research-societal impact gap.