This document outlines the research and policy work of Dr. Zhenghong Tang regarding climate change planning. It discusses three main research questions: (1) how to prioritize wetland conservation under climate change using geospatial modeling, finding playas are vulnerable but a restorable wetland index was developed; (2) an evaluation finding state and local climate plans had moderate analysis and limited adaptation actions; and (3) exploring using citizen science like mobile volunteered geographic information to engage citizens in monitoring and reporting climate impacts and adaptations. The implications discussed include providing guidance to managers prioritizing wetland restoration and the need to better integrate adaptation strategies into development plans and engage citizens in monitoring through new technologies.

1. Zhenghong Tang, Ph.D
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
North Central Climate Science Center
Fort Collins, Colorado
04-05-2013
Planning for Climate Change:
A Planner’s Perspective

2. Outlines
• Research Questions
• Geographic Scope
• Methods
• Policy Implications

3. Research Questions
1. Climate Impacts for Playa Wetlands: How to prioritize playa
wetland conversation programs under climate change scenarios?
2. Planning for Uncertainty: How well did U.S. state and local plans
prepare for climate change and extreme events (drought)?
3. Citizen Science: How to promote citizen engagement for climate
change through Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI)?

4. Research Question 1
Climate Impacts for Playa Wetlands: How to prioritize playa
wetland conversation programs under climate change scenarios?
(Where is a good place to install the pumping stations for wetlands?)
• Geographic Scope: Nebraska 21 Counties (Rainwater Basin Area)
• Methods: LiDAR technology & Geospatial simulation model
Tang, Z., X. Li, Zhao, N., Li, R., Harvey, F.E., 2012, Developing A Restorable
Wetland Index for the Rainwater Basin Wetlands in South-Central Nebraska: A
Multi-Criteria Spatial Analysis, Wetlands, 32:975–984.

6. Rainwater Basin Wetlands
Playa wetlands in the Rainwater Basin provide critical
habitats for 12 million migratory waterfowls to rest and feed.

7. Playas are very vulnerable to climate change.

8. How to prioritize conservation programs
under climate change?

9. LiDAR Technology
Light
Detection
And
Ranging
Vertical Accuracy
- LiDAR : 15 cm
- USGS 10*10m NED : 1-3 m
Horizontal Accuracy
- LiDAR : 1 m
- USGS 10*10m NED : 7-15 m

10. Footprint No: 10015 in Butler County
Functional…. but changing….

12. Multi-criteria Restorable Wetland Index
Vegetation Types
Soil Types
Potential water releasing
Depression Status
Habitat Condition
Data Source: RWB vegetation layer; Score Scale: 0.5-1.0;
Measurement: Hydric vegetation in each footprint;
Justification: Restoration priorities should be given to the footprint with
higher percentages of hydro vegetation.
Data Source: SSURGO soil data layer; Score Scale: 0.5-1.0;
Measurement: Hydro soil types in each footprint;
Justification: Restoration priorities should be given to the footprint with
relatively wetter soil types.
Data Source: Pits volume final 2010; Score Scale: 0.5-1.0;
Measurement: Pit’s water volume in each footprint;
Justification: Restoration priorities should be given to the footprint with
larger water volumes from modified pits.
Data Source: Depression layer; Score Scale: 0.5-1.0;
Measurement: Depressional land in each footprint
Justification: Restoration priorities should be given to the footprint with
lower topographical depression land areas.
Data Source: AHS data layer; Score Scale: 0.5-1.0;
Measurement: by frequency, percentage of functional area in a
footprint, and absolute areas, by HAS in any year of 2004-2009 period;
Justification: Restoration priorities should be given to the footprint with
relatively functioning habitat conditions in terms of the frequency,
areas, and percentages.

13. 8,875
(75.5%)
1,792
(15.2%)
901
(7.7%)
192
(1.6%)
Restorable Wetland Index (RWI)
By number of footprints (and percentage)
RWI: 2.5-3.0 (Low
restoration potential)
RWI: 3.1-3.5
(Medium-low
restoration potential)
RWI: 3.6-4.0
(Medium-high
restoration potential)
RWI: 4.1-5.0 (High
restoration potential)

14. 8,208
(69.8%)
2,891
(24.6%)
322
(2.7%)
339
(2.9%)
Rainwater Basin Wetland Function Conditions in the
Annual Habitat Survey
Non-functional acres
(0% )
Medium-low
functional acres (0-
50% )
Medium-high
functional acres (51-
75% )
High functional acres
(>75%)

15.  It provides a scientific ranking system for
federal/state/local wetland managers (USFWS, USDA-
NRCS, USGS, NGPC, NDEQ) to implement the future
wetland conservation programs.
 It provides measurable evidence for Nebraska’s Wetland
Program Plan in implementing full hydrologic
restorations for wetlands.
Policy Implications

16. Research Question 2:
1. Planning for Uncertainty: How well did U.S. state and local
plans prepare for climate change and extreme events (drought)?
Tang, Z., Brody, S.D., Quinn, C., Chang, L., Wei, T., 2010, Moving from Agenda
to Action: Evaluating Local Climate Change Action Plans, Journal of
Environmental Planning and Management 53(1): 43-62.
Fu, X, Tang, Z., 2013, Planning for Drought-Resilient Communities: An
Evaluation of Local Comprehensive Plans in the Fastest Growing Counties in the
U.S., Cities (10.1016/j.cities.2013.03.001)
• Geographic Scope: National Study (including the north central region)
• Methods: Content Analysis & Plan Evaluation Protocol

18. Policy Implications:
Local climate change action plans:
High level of “awareness”,
Moderate “analysis capabilities”
Relatively limited “action approaches”
Focus predominantly on the built environment
(e.g. energy, transportation, wastes, and buildings)
Pay little attention to the natural environment
(e.g. ecosystem, agriculture, rural lands)

19. Land Use Planning for Extreme Event (Drought)

20. Land Use Planning for Extreme Event (Drought)

21. State Planning for Extreme Event (Drought)

22. Components a
Number of
indicators Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Dev.
1. Hazard Analysis 6 0.0 10.0 4.8 2.48
1. Vulnerability Analysis 8 0.0 10.0 5.4 2.18
1. Risk Management 30 1.6 9.4 4.8 1.81
Total b 44 4.0 26.8 15.1 5.41
(a: component score range: 0-10; b: total score range: 0-30)
State Drought Plan Quality for Extreme Event

23. Policy Implications:
Local/State Drought Planning:
Limited awareness and preparedness for water shortages and drought
Fail to integrate drought mitigation/adaptation strategies into their
long-term development plans
Typically address emergency responses well
Generally weak in adaptation, involvement, implementation

24. Research Question 3:
Citizen Science: How to promote citizen engagement for climate
change through Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI)?
• Geographic Scope: Nebraska & National
• Methods: VGI (Similar idea like “COCORAHS”, but in mobile platform)

25. Green Infrastructure My Rain Barrels My Rain Gardens
Planning in a Geospatially Mobile-Enabled Society

26. Low Impact Development Atlas (Web-Mapping)
http://web.uri.edu/riss/lid/lid-map/

27.  VGI empowered by GPS-enabled electronic mobile
devices and location-aware social media/networks is an
important approach to monitor/report climate
vulnerability and adaptation practices.
 It is still a challenge to link the technologies and citizen
interests.
Policy Implications

28. (1) A Baseline-Tracking-Evaluation Database:
Evaluate existing governmental plans/documents
in this region to build a baseline database to
track/compare future efforts in climate change
(2) A Crowdsourcing Climate Adaptation Atlas
Use mobile-based VGI platform to build an atlas for
citizens/stakeholders in climate change vulnerability
assessment and adaptation implementation
Potential Collaborations

29. Thank you!
ztang2@unl.edu