The Exchanges

Every argument clarity score on this site is built from rows on this page. Each question and answer was assessed with names hidden, the host's own answers included, on four things from 1 to 5: directness (does it answer the question asked), coherence (do the ideas follow), precision (concrete details and clear references), compression (says a lot per word). The weighted mix (30/30/25/15) is the exchange score. A person's published score averages their exchange scores on raw tape only, at least 8 of them, shrunk toward the cohort mean. Full method →

Dr. Lisa Schipper no published score: no usable exchanges on raw tape, and a fair score needs 8+ record → ← everyone

Every exchange below was scored with names hidden, four dimensions each from 1 to 5. An exchange's score is 0.30·directness + 0.30·coherence + 0.25·precision + 0.15·compression. The published score averages the raw tape exchange scores and shrinks small samples toward the cohort mean, so five great answers can't beat twenty good ones. Produced feed rows count only toward coarse estimates, never toward a full score.

clear all ✕
1exchanges match
0on raw tape
0redirected or not addressed
Answered produced feed D 5 · C 5 · P 4 · Cm 4 4.60

Q investments in climate infrastructure in the rest of the world? Maladaptation has been discussed and studied for decades, but it's only now emerging as a mainstream concept, and Dr. Shipper has been one of the researchers at the forefront of studying the impact. So it's not a new term for you, but it's a new term for many communicators. Why is it such a suddenly new term for many people?

A Well, the reality is that in the last 15 years, we've had a lot more adaptation projects, programs, and plans implemented around the world. And also in the last five or six years, we've had a lot of studies done trying to understand the outcomes of these projects. And one thing that we're seeing is that the projects often don't really help people adapt to climate change. So sometimes it would be just sort of wasted money. Whatever they're trying to do isn't, isn't really achieved. But unfortunately, what we're seeing is that the projects are so poorly planned that they actually make people worse off. And in the worst case, this could mean that they're sort of undermining opportunities for future adaptation. So it's important because we're talking now about the need for huge investments in adaptation of climate change around the world. But if some of the, the, the evidence now is showing that we're actually putting money towards things that are making people worse off, Well, what does that mean for the money, and what does it mean for trying to adjust this?

AI assessment note: “in the last five or six years, we've had a lot of studies done”

page 1
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 100 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.