Priorities for wind-waves research

Diana Greenslade, Mark Hemer, Alex Babanin, Ryan Lowe, Ian Turner, Hannah Power, Ian Young, Daniel Ierodiaconou, Greg Hibbert, Greg Williams, Saima Aijaz, João Albuquerque, Stewart Allen, Michael Banner, Paul Branson, Steve Buchan, Andrew Burton, John Bye, Nick Cartwright, Amin ChabchoubFrank Colberg, Stephanie Contardo, Francois Dufois, Craig Earl-Spurr, David Farr, Ian Goodwin, Jim Gunson, Jeff Hansen, David Hanslow, Mitchell Harley, Yasha Hetzel, Ron Hoeke, Nicole Jones, Michael Kinsela, Qingxiang Liu, Oleg Makarynskyy, Hayden Marcollo, Said Mazaheri, Jason McConochie, Grant Millar, Tim Moltmann, Neal Moodie, Joao Morim, Russel Morison, Jana Orszaghova, Charitha Pattiaratchi, Andrew Pomeroy, Roger Proctor, David Provis, Ruth Reef, Dirk Rijnsdorp, Martin Rutherford, Eric Schulz, Jake Shayer, Kristen Splinter, Craig Steinberg, Darrell Strauss, Greg Stuart, Graham Symonds, Karina Tarbath, Daniel Taylor, James Taylor, Darshani Thotagamuwage, Alessandro Toffoli, Alireza Valizadeh, Jonathan van Hazel, Guilherme Vieira da Silva, Moritz Wandres, Colin Whittaker, David Williams, Gundula Winter, Jiangtao Xu, Aihong Zhong, Stefan Zieger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleOtherpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Australian Forum for Operational Oceanography (FOO), started in 2015, established a working group to focus on wind-waves. One of the aims of this working group was to identify the key priorities of wind-waves research. This undertaking has been driven by Australian needs, but Australia is just one part of the larger international waves community; results of this process are also relevant to other marine-focused nations. The process to identify research priorities engaged both researchers and stakeholders in a democratic, collaborative, and iterative process. The main steps were 1) soliciting possible research questions via an online survey, 2) reviewing and editing the questions at a face-to-face workshop, and 3) ranking the research questions. A total of 360 survey invitations were emailed to possible participants, with 69 respondents. Half of these were from research organizations, and the remainder from private industry, service providers, or government. The survey gathered a list of ideas that were consolidated to 155 suggestions, which were further reviewed by participants at a wind-waves research symposium and then ranked via a voting process. A second round of online voting was then undertaken that specifically targeted the industry and stakeholder community. The top five priorities were identified, and are referred to here as “tier 1” priorities. A further 10 priorities were identified, and are referred to here as “tier 2,” providing a total of 15 top-ranked priorities.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)505-507
Number of pages3
JournalBulletin of the American Meteorological Society
Volume101
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2020

Cite this