Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Mc neeleynaf april32013_4.1.13


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Mc neeleynaf april32013_4.1.13

  1. 1. Shannon McNeeleyNorth Central Climate Science CenterNatural Resources Ecology Lab, NESB A309Colorado State UniversityFort Collins, Colorado 80523shannon.mcneeley@colostate.edu970-491-1852Assessing Vulnerability and Adaptive Capacityfor Adaptation to Climate Change in Social-ecological SystemsApril 3, 2013National Adaptation ForumDenver, CO
  2. 2. NCA Adaptation DRAFT Key FindingsKey Messages:1. Substantial adaptation planning is occurring in the public and privatesectors and at all levels of government, however, few measures have beenimplemented and those that have appear to be incremental changes.2. Barriers to implementation of adaptation action include lack of funding,policy and legal impediments, and difficulty in anticipating climate-relatedchanges at local scales.3. There is no “one-size fits all” adaptation, but there are similarities inapproaches across regions and sectors. Sharing best practices, learning bydoing, and iterative and collaborative processes including stakeholderinvolvement, can help support progress.
  3. 3. NCA Adaptation DRAFT Key FindingsKey Messages:4. Climate change adaptation actions often fulfill other societal goals,such as sustainable development, disaster risk reduction, orimprovements in quality of life, and can therefore be incorporatedinto existing decision-making processes.5. Vulnerability to climate change is exacerbated by other stresses suchas pollution and habitat fragmentation. Adaptation to multiplestresses requires assessment of the composite threats as well astradeoffs amongst costs, benefits, and risks of available options.6. The effectiveness of climate change adaptation has seldom beenevaluated, because actions have only recently been initiated, andcomprehensive evaluation metrics do not yet exist.
  4. 4. State Adaptation Plans
  5. 5. Adaptation Examples from the Great Plains14. Tulsa, OK, reducing flooding andmanaging stormwater15. Firewise Communities USA is anationwide program of the National FireProtection Association and is co-sponsored by USDA Forest Service, DOI,and the National Association of StateForesters. According to the Texas ForestService, there are more than 20recognized Texas Firewise Communities.16. After the heavy rainfall events of2004 that resulted in significant erosionon his farms, Dan Gillespie, a farmer withNRCS in Norfolk, NE, beganexperimenting with adding cover cropsto the no-till processMap from: Bierbaum, R., Smith, J. B., Lee, A., Blair, M., Carter, L., Chapin, F. S., Fleming, P., et al. (2013). Acomprehensive review of climate adaptation in the United States: more than before, but less than needed.Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 18(3), 361–406. doi:10.1007/s11027-012-9423-1
  6. 6. Adaptation BarriersBarrier Specific ExamplesClimate Change Information and Decision-Making•Uncertainty about future climate impacts• Disconnect between information providersand information users• Fragmented, complex, and often confusinginformation• Lack of climate education for professionalsand the public• Lack of usability and accessibility of existinginformationLack of Resources to Begin and SustainAdaptation Efforts• Lack of financial resources / no dedicatedfunding• Limited staffing capacity• Underinvestment in human dimensionsresearchFragmentation of Decision-Making • Lack of coordination within and acrossagencies, private companies, and non-governmental organizations• Uncoordinated and fragmented researchefforts• Disjointed climate related information• Fragmented ecosystem and jurisdictionalboundaries
  7. 7. Adaptation BarriersBarrier Specific ExamplesInstitutional Constraints • Lack of institutional flexibility• Rigid laws and regulations• No legal mandate to act• Use of historical data to inform futuredecisions• Restrictive management procedures• Lack of operational control or influenceLack of Leadership • Lack of political leadership• Rigid and entrenched political structures• PolarizationDivergent Risk Perceptions, Cultures, andValues• Conflicting values/risk perceptions• Little integration of local knowledge,context, and needs with traditionalscientific information• Cultural taboos and conflict withcultural beliefs• Resistance to change due to issues suchas risk perception
  8. 8. Northwoods Case Study
  9. 9. Illustrative Case Study – NIDIS (National IntegratedDrought Information System)• Useable Technology and Informationfor Decision Support• Financial Assistance• Institutional/Partnerships• Institutional/Policy• Leadership and Champions• drought early warning informationsystems with regional detailconcerning onset and severity;• a web-based portal(;• coordination of federal research insupport of and use of these systems;and• leveraging of 14 existing partnershipsand of forecasting and assessmentprograms.
  10. 10. NCA Scanning the Horizons
  11. 11. Outcome versus Context VulnerabilityO’Brien, K., Eriksen, S., Nygaard, L. P., -- Schjolden, A. (2007). Why different interpretations ofvulnerability matter in climate change discourses. Climate Policy, 7(1), 73–88
  12. 12. Diagnostic tool for identifying interpretations ofvulnerabilityO’Brien, K., Eriksen, S., Nygaard, L. P., -- Schjolden, A. (2007). Why different interpretations ofvulnerability matter in climate change discourses. Climate Policy, 7(1), 73–88
  13. 13. Vulnerability framework for a socio-ecological system adapted fromTurner et al., 2003 in Sonwa et al 2012.
  14. 14. VA Research in the North Central Region
  15. 15. Yampa-White Basins Climate and Water Scarcity VAOverall Study Objectives• Understand SES vulnerability to climate variabilityand change in Yampa-White Basins region ofColorado– Based on climate trends and experience to date who,what, when most vulnerable to climate disturbances?• Regional impacts, vulnerabilities, responses to2002 drought– What happened “on the ground” in the Y/W region– How and why did people respond collectively andwithout conflict to 2002 drought?
  16. 16. Yampa-White Basins Region
  17. 17. Study Methodology• Social-ecological systems approach• Bottom-up, participatory, ethnographic• Cross-sectoral, regional scale• Key Stakeholder Interviews• Extensive Interdisciplinary Literature Review• Participant Observation• Document Analysis• Atlas.ti Grounded Theory• Network Analysis
  18. 18. Study MethodologyInterviews– Water commissioners, div 6 engineer– County commissioners and city staff– Conservancy districts (reservoir managers)– CRWCD– Agriculture– Energy– Recreation and tourism– Water Law– Academia– State Parks– CWCB staff (CRWAS, IBCC, BRT)– Federal agency staff (BLM, USFWS)– Russ George on HB1177
  19. 19. Colorado Modified Palmer Drought Severity IndexYampa/White Basins Region 1999-2009Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec1999 3.62 3.49 2.27 3.96 4.44 4.35 5.11 5.24 5.07 3.91 2.64 1.992000 1.87 1.80 1.19 -1.98 -2.30 -2.89 -3.62 -3.62 -2.55 -2.74 -2.36 -2.342001 -2.47 -1.93 -2.43 -2.55 -2.53 -3.28 -3.70 -3.55 -3.77 -3.50 -2.73 -2.782002 -2.84 -3.28 -3.04 -3.70 -4.57 -5.55 -5.94 -5.91 -4.87 -4.18 -3.86 -3.792003 -3.75 -3.19 -3.38 -3.56 -3.32 -3.31 -4.10 -4.80 -4.39 -5.04 -3.81 -3.212004 -3.05 -2.88 -3.73 -3.45 -3.48 -3.75 -3.96 -4.02 -2.76 -1.97 -1.14 -1.262005 -0.62 1.98 1.84 1.88 1.98 3.56 3.78 3.73 3.71 3.88 3.63 2.982006 2.92 2.31 2.53 1.66 0.83 -2.06 -2.36 -2.06 1.38 3.16 2.90 2.492007 2.51 2.56 2.00 1.01 0.85 -1.52 -2.05 -2.07 1.65 1.94 1.15 2.942008 3.22 3.45 3.91 3.70 4.17 4.33 4.06 3.07 3.33 2.56 2.05 2.282009 2.40 1.85 1.50 1.76 1.93 3.04 3.02 2.28 1.95 1.74 1.45 1.58From:
  20. 20.
  21. 21. Anatomy of a Drought: 2002 “Severe” Droughtin the Yampa RiverApril4/18 – Callon RoaringFork4/19 - Callon Bear RUYWCD “allhands”meetingMay 5/1 - Admin onFish Cr &Fortification CrEarly runofflate May/earlyJune (week to10 days early)June Peak flows 1/3of averageOak Creek on calland releases outof SheriffReservoir June 24-Sept 16JulyBy mid-July Stillwaterand Yamcolo hadreleased all availableirrigation water7/12-24 releasesout of ElkheadReservoir forTristateJul/Aug SBS voluntaryban all activities intown and fishing fromStagecoach to Elk R(flows at 17cfs mid-July)Upper Yampavoluntaryreleases out ofStagecoachAugMid-Jul-Sept 18thElkhead &Stagecoach toTristate andHaydenEnd of summer:City of Craig nearlyplaced a callHigh water transitlosses and water notreaching owner’sdiversion structureAug 30 – Xcelreleased fromSteamboat Lakefor Hayden PowerPlantSept9/5-9/18 curtailmentson main stem betweenreservoirs and Tristatepower station in CraigSept 18th RAIN.Reservoirreleases ceased
  22. 22. Drought and the Water-Energy NexusInsert google map of power plants andreservoirs