A Plausible Range:
Some Observations on How Resource
Resource Managers are Tackling
Managers are Tackling
Climate Change Uncertainties
Machida Session on Risk, Communicating Science, Policy & Uncertainties
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 –
8 June 2010 –
MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Forest, Blue River, Oregon
HJ Andrews Forest Blue River Oregon
Gregg Garfin, Molly Cross, Katja Brundiers, Carolyn Enquist,
R li d Bark,
Rosalind
B k David
D id Gori,
G i P
Patricia
ti i G
Gober,
b Patrick
P t i k McCarthy,
M C th
Katharine Jacobs
II present two case studies on addressing and communicating uncertainties present two case studies on addressing and communicating uncertainties
in the context of adaptation to climate change. One focuses on water resources
AWRA – November 12, 2009
for metropolitan Phoenix, the other focuses on ecosystem management across
the Southwest.
CONTEXT
AWRA – November 12, 2009
Attention getter #1
Declining levels of large
Colorado River reservoirs
reservoirs.
Attention
getter #2
Attention getter #3
Widespread, regional
stand‐replacing fires
stand‐replacing fires
If seeing is believing, as the previous slides indicate then
indicate, then examining the future is a worthwhile and necessary endeavor. CHANGE: What and Why?
• Research coordination network
Knowledge exchange network
• Knowledge exchange network Source: IPCC, 2007
AWRA – November 12, 2009
Assessment of Climate Impacts on the S f
Surface Water Resources for Central Arizona
f C
l i
COCONINO
APACHE
Phoenix Phoenix
Water Water
Supplies
NAVAJO
M
MOHAVE
PAGE
FLAGSTAFF
KINGMAN
HOLBROOK
ST. JOHNS
PRESCOTT
YAVAPAI
PARKER
PHOENIX
GREEENLEE
LAPAZ
GILA
GLOBE
MARICOPA
FLORENCE
CAP Canal
YUMA
13,000 Sq. Mile
13
000 S Mil
Project Watershed
Project Area
Project Area
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
YUMA
GRAHAMCLIFTON
PINAL
SAFFORD
TUCSON
COCHISE
PIMA
SANTA
CRUZ
NOGALES
BISBEE
Maricopa County, AZ
Supply (line) is projected to exceed demand (bars), even without consideration of
climate
li t ffactors.
t
Management
M
t concerns include
i l d water
t resources, water
t quality,
lit
potential flood damage to infrastructure, and watershed conditions that can
contribute to flooding, sediment transport, and water quality issues. Thus, the
central issue is not climate change,
g , but water supply
pp y reliability.
y
Figure from: Kohloff, K. and D. Roberts, 2007. Beyond the Colorado River: is an
international water augmentation consortium in Arizona’s future? Arizona Law
Review 49:257-295.
Give Us A
Plausible
Range
g
AWRA – November 12, 2009
“More accurate prediction is not wanted. Predictions are almost always wrong I want to know what a
wrong. I want to know what a plausible future is. What are credible ranges? How much shortage, and for how long? I want to think about many
how long? I want to think about many futures, and, with the assumption in mind that they are open, I’d build adaptive capacity ”
adaptive capacity.
Which
Model
Should We
Use?
Models were chosen, based on needs for a variety of future precipitation regimes (wet, moderate, dry) and the faithful representation, by models, of past climate characteristics, such as ENSO and the North American monsoon. AWRA – November 12, 2009
Methodology
Note: our approach examines both statistical and dynamical GCM downscaling.
Workshops
p
While
While awaiting results of climate and hydrologic modeling, we have conducted workshops on awaiting results of climate and hydrologic modeling we have conducted workshops on
paleohydrology, uncertainty, Colorado River paleohydrology
, uncertainty, Colorado River streamflow
streamflow projections, and in the future we will address modeling results, operational modeling outcomes, and presentation to a wider public.
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
?
#$^&+
!!!
!?
!
Discussion Support
Discussion Support
Borrowing a concept, “discussion support,” from Australian colleagues, our collaborative process allows us to explore the nuances and caveats in hydroclimatology, modeling, uncertainty, societal factors, and decision‐making contexts. Nelson, R. et al., 2002. Infusing the use of seasonal climate forecasting into crop management practice in North East Australia using discussion support software. Agricultural Systems 74: 393‐414.
GHG Emissions
Data
GCM
GCMs
Hydrologic
& Vegetation
Models
Laws, Policies
Policies,
Institutions
Economics
In workshops we examined key biophysical (left) and social (right) Uncertainties associated with projecting future climate, water demand, and so on.
An important issue, raised by Dave White (ASU), is that of how climate change is framed in public li t h
i f
di
bli
discourse, which can affect decision‐‐making uncertainty.
decision
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
Elasticities
Precipitation
Temperature
J. Vano, D. Lettenmaier – Reconciling Projections of Future Colorado River Streamflow
The Range
is Not
Broad
Enough!
oug
AWRA – November 12, 2009
Tension: What Defines Plausible?
Scientific Plausibility
• Probability
• Validation
• Consensus
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
Policy Plausibility
• Infrastructure Risk
p
• Perception
• Political Risk
Communication
•
•
•
•
Transparency vs. Editorial Corrections
I
Importance and urgency: Invest now!
t
d
I
t
!
Uncertainty: Regulatory documents
Good news of building resilience
Challenges suggested by our interactions with water resource managers, include open discussion of uncertainties, conveying the urgency of adaptation planning, inserting uncertainty language into regulatory frameworks that often rely on clear distinctions, and conveying past successes in building resilience in the face of change and uncertainty
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
What is Valued?
•
•
•
•
Safety in numbers
Cross‐fertilization
Modeling
Region‐specific consensus
Workshop participants value the experience of knowing that many share their concerns Workshop
participants value the experience of knowing that many share their concerns
and challenges in adaptation planning, interactions among fellow resource managers and with scientists (similarly scientists value discussions with fellow scientists and with resource managers), improved understanding of climate and hydrologic modeling, and hearing the scientists discussion of what constitutes plausible projections for the region
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
Southwest Climate
Ch
Change
IInitiative
iti ti
http://www.nmconservation.org
SWCCI: Southwest Climate Change Initiative. A partnership, led by TNC. Working on multijurisdictional pilot project watersheds in New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, and Utah. This effort,
funded by TNC and R.J.Kose, uses a modified adaptive management framework developed by
NCEAS. The process involves active participation by workshop participants, and fosters direct
dialogue between ecosystem managers, scientists, and others. Thanks to C. Enquist (TNC,
Univ. of Arizona), D. Gori (TNC-NM), P. McCarthy* (TNC-NM), M. Cross (Wildlife Conservation
Society), A. Bradley (TNC-NM), Betsy Neely (TNC-CO), Joan Degiorgio (TNC-UT), Ed Smith
(TNC-AZ). Further info: http://www.nmconservation.org/projects/new_mexico_climate_change
*lead contact
Erosion
Fire
Thanks to Craig Allen (USGS, Bandelier National Park)
Shown here: key ecosystem change concerns
Mortality
y
Management
Management concerns include species migration
Typical SWCCI workshop participants include federal and state agencies NGOs
agencies, NGOs, and universities.
Future Climate
Global Model
Regional Model
Future Hydrology
Vegetation Model Output – where available
Kirsten Ironside et al., Northern Arizona University
Molly Cross, Wildlife
Climate Change Adaptation Framework Conservation
Society
Planning
Implementation
Specify management
objective
Conceptual
model
Info
needs
Sce a os &
Scenarios
Impacts
Monitor &
evaluate
Adjust
actions?
ti
?
Revisit
objectives?
Implement
pe e t
Strategic
actions
Feasibility &
Priorities
Action
Plan
Conceptual
models foster
understanding
of the system,
and allow for identification
of management
of management
intervention
points
Increased temperature
Early snowmelt
Reduced summer flows
Higher water temperature
Habitat loss
Typical cascade of impacts
Increased temperature
Snow fences
Snow fences
Early snowmelt
Reduced summer flows
Recreation and water
Recreation and water
Higher water temperature
Vegetation
Habitat loss
Typical cascade of impacts and possible adaptation strategies
Typical cascade of impacts and possible adaptation strategies
Feasibilityy
• Barriers and Opportunities
–Economic
E
i
–Political, social, cultural
–Who needs to participate?
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
Barriers, Uncertainties, Needs
•
•
•
•
Attitudes
Biophysical Science
Management Science
Visualization
Workshop participants noted the need to address public concerns about climate change, garner further information about baseline relationships between ecosystems and climate, g y
g
y
more thoroughly evaluate the effectiveness of management actions that are currently used, and better visualize future climate‐affected landscape and ecosystem changes
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
What is Valued?
•
•
•
•
“Not depressing”
Biophysical science
Deconstructing complex problems
Partnership
Workshop participants value the action‐oriented approach of the workshops, improved Workshop
participants value the action oriented approach of the workshops improved
understanding of climate and hydrologic modeling, hearing the scientists’ discussion of what constitutes plausible projections for the region, the fact that the framework allows them to deconstruct ecosystem complexity in order to identify feasible management strategies, and the opportunities to develop a partnership for moving forward
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
SOME
THOUGHTS
AWRA – November 12, 2009
Resource managers
value information about
other efforts to develop
climate change
adaptation
d t ti plans.
l
Information about
planning initiatives in
other sectors, or by
other agencies is
highly valued.
www.atsutane.net/2009/07/you-are-not-alone.html
Building trust is essential to building capacity and the relationships needed to y
make science useful to society, and for adaptation planning to move forward
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
T t
Trust
The apparent overnight success of the Beatles took 5 years of playing small clubs. Similarly, we should expect that preparing to adapt to climate change will take years of partnership h ld
h
i
d
li
h
ill k
f
hi
building, knowledge exchange, and scenario planning before we achieve overnight success.
Photos: Google Image Search
What is
Different
This Time
A
Around?
d?
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
GHG Emissions
Data
GCM
GCMs
Uncertainty, formerly a feature and topic to be avoided at all costs, has become the foundation for exploring adaptive management and scenario planning approaches to address climate change.
Hydrologic
& Vegetation
Models
Laws, Policies
Policies,
Institutions
Economics
While science translators are still valued resource
valued, resource managers value hearing the science “straight from the horse’s mouth” … hearing directly from science experts allows for improved
for improved understanding of the cascade of plausible impacts of climate change, and lends to h
dl d
the credibility of the science message.
There is more emphasis on looking at resource
management t
in a holistic way,
rather than isolating aspects
g p
of complicated
systems. This includes examination
of interactions
of interactions between climatic
and non‐climatic
factors
Gloom and doom will not convince resource managers motivate
managers, motivate them to take action, nor will it draw in the publics with which they need to interact
A challenge from resource managers to scientists:
managers to scientists: convincingly convey the urgency of climate change adaptation planning to potentially skeptical publics, while conveying the uncertainties and nuances of modeling and cascades of
modeling and cascades of possible impacts, in order to maintain credibility
Visualizing
the the
Future
Another challenge: A
th h ll
Visualization of future climate, landscapes, water supplies, effects of policy choices, and so on…if seeing is believing, then good visualization is fundamental to building
fundamental to building capacity and support for climate change adaptation
“Gaining insight into how decisions are made, then, can be considered an important part the most important part of scientist–stakeholder interactions.”
From: Jacobs, K., G. Garfin, M. Lenart, 2005. More than just talk: connecting From:
Jacobs K G Garfin M Lenart 2005 More than just talk: connecting
science and decisionmaking. Environment 9: 7‐21.
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
“As long as scientific uncertainties and d ii
decision stakes are high, the aim of finding k
hi h h i
f fi di
the ‘solution to the scientific puzzle’ is in principle unachievable.” “Instead, a post‐normal science is needed “I
t d
t
l i
i
d d
that aims at common commitments to approaches for dealing with uncertainty and value diversity in such complex policy issues.”
Kloprogge P, van der Sluijs JP, 2006. The inclusion of stakeholder knowledge and perspectives in integrated assessment of climate change. Climatic Change 75:359‐389.
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR
SWCCI Project Team
Patrick McCarthy,
Carolyn Enquist, Dave Gori,
Anne Bradley (TNC-NM)
(TNC NM)
Ed Smith, Sara Hurteau,
Rob Marshall, Marcos Robles,
Gita Bodner (TNC-AZ)
(TNC AZ)
Molly Cross (WCS)
Tim Sullivan, Betsy Neely((TNC-CO)
Evan Girvetz (TNC)
Joan Degiorgio, Joel Tuhy,
Barry Baker (TNC-UT)
Lisa Graumlich,
Gregg Garfin (U Arizona)
Linda Mearns (NCAR)
Jack Triepke (USFS-R3)
Deborah Finch, Karen Bagne
(USFS RMRS)
(USFS-RMRS)
Joe Barsugli (WWA)
For more information & report downloads: www.nmconservation.org
Acknowledgments
Phoenix
y
• University of Arizona
• Rosalind Bark, Chris Castro, Francina g , Eleanora Demaria, Matej
,
j Durcik, ,
Dominguez,
Kathy Jacobs, Peter Troch, Connie Woodhouse
• Arizona State University
g
,
j
,
,
• George Basile, Katja Brundiers, Bill Edwards, Pat Gober, Tim Lant, Dave White, David Sampson p
8 June 2010 – MTNCLIM 2010 – HJ Andrews Experimental Forest, Blue River, OR