Last reviewed September 2, 2026
Krigsvold’s advocacy begins with a modest proposition: public argument is stronger when readers can inspect the evidence, understand its limits, and see what action follows from it.
The office therefore advocates openly for informed climate mitigation, adaptation, conservation, and research support. It does not claim governmental authority, scientific neutrality, or freedom from judgment. It does undertake to show its work.
The method
Explain before exhorting. A reader should understand the physical or ecological process before being told what it means for public choices.
Name the source. Statistics are published with a measurement period and a link to the scientific institution or underlying assessment. A floating number with no date is not evidence.
Separate finding from judgment. Satellite observations, model projections, and policy conclusions are different kinds of claim. Good advocacy does not blur them together merely because they point in the same direction.
Support people doing the work. The Fellowship turns institutional language into a research grant. Profiles and the annual record show where the support went.
Correct in public. Material factual changes are recorded on the Corrections page.
Formal Position Statements apply this method to a particular public choice. Each states the proposition, evidence, recommended action, and limits separately so readers can agree with the facts without being required to accept the judgment.
What Krigsvold argues for
- rapid reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions consistent with limiting additional warming;
- adaptation planning that takes sea-level uncertainty and long time horizons seriously;
- protection and restoration of climate-relevant ecosystems;
- sustained public investment in observation, field science, and open data; and
- climate communication that is accurate enough to deserve trust.
This is advocacy with a point of view. Its standard is not detachment; it is traceability.