climate: informing adaptation (watershed and streams of thought) roger s. pulwarty noaa

Climate: Informing Adaptation(Watershed and streams of thought)

Roger S. PulwartyNOAA

Changing environments……..

Climate variability, land-surface, and streamflow

Physical and biological transformations: Storage, diversions and landscape changes

Changing Goals……….

Prior to 1930s, single-purpose economic benefits (e.g., either transportation or irrigation)

Post-1930s:multiple-purpose criteria including flood control, hydropower, fishing, and recreation.

20th-Century: Two dramatic physical impacts

• Water quality decline from return flows of agricultural and municipal waste water• Large-scale diversions of water from one watershed to another

Geographic Vulnerability of U.S. Residents to Selected Climate-Related Health Impacts

Climate change will interact with many social and environmental stresses

Social trends can increase our vulnerability to climate change• Concentration of

development along vulnerable coasts

• Aging of U.S. population• Increasing urbanization• Population growth in

South and West

““The past century is no longer a fixed guide to The past century is no longer a fixed guide to water management” (Everyone!)water management” (Everyone!)

Long-Term Aridity Changes in the West

• Historical Data Used to Manage Water Resources in 20th Century• However…

• Climate Change is already altering water cycle• More changes are expected • Paleoclimate studies tell us the past has been very different

• Many Institutional Barriers to Change• Laws, Decrees, Compacts difficult to modify• Flood Control rule curves might require EIS to modify• Transferring ag water can be difficult

• Changing Water Demands• More Research Needed

• All these stresses mean water management will be doubling challenging

Extreme Events

Tropical Storms

Droughts/Floods Tropics - El Niño, La Niña

Extratropics - Jet Patterns

Climate Change

Climate Change

WeatherWeather Climate Variability

Climate Variability

Blocking

Change in weather event amplitude and frequency

Teleconnections

Change in climate event amplitude and frequency

Global change Climate Trends

Extremes – Climate Linkage

5

Framework for relating global climate change to local system…

Minimizing uncertainty:

Where is the uncertainty? Where is the uncertainty?

--Problem DomainProblem Domain

-science-science

-organizational-organizational

-community-community

-political-political

- adequate theory- adequate theory-multiple hypotheses-multiple hypotheses & congruent management & congruent management actions.actions.-tractability (complexity) -tractability (complexity) -confronting models w/data-confronting models w/data-independence/ rigor-independence/ rigor-novelty-novelty

Gunderson and others

Managing Uncertainty:

Where is it? Where is it? --Problem DomainProblem Domain

-science-science

-organizational-organizational-community-community-cognitive-cognitive-political-political

- expressions of power- expressions of power- multiple equilibria- multiple equilibria

paths not takenpaths not taken- NONE are scale invariant - NONE are scale invariant - stability of institutions- stability of institutions

novelty of approachesnovelty of approaches-role of epistemic groupsrole of epistemic groups-perception of riskperception of risk-multiple discourses-multiple discourses-juggling domains-juggling domains

"DEAR APPLICANT"

"THANK YOU FOR SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSAL"

"TO SAVE TIME, WE ARE ENCLOSING TWO DECLINE LETTERS..."

"...ONE FOR THIS PROPOSAL AND ONE FOR THE NEXT PROPOSAL YOU SEND US"

"DEAR APPLICANT"

"THANK YOU FOR SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSAL"

"TO SAVE TIME, WE ARE ENCLOSING TWO DECLINE LETTERS..."

"...ONE FOR THIS PROPOSAL AND ONE FOR THE NEXT PROPOSAL YOU SEND US"

Dear Applicant Thank you for submitting your proposal

To save time, we have enclosed two declining letters

One for this proposal, and one for the next proposal

you send us

Overview• Adaptation to what?

• Types of adaptation strategies:Existing and proposed

• Assessing impacts of complex events

• Coping vs adaptation

• Applications vs. adaptation

• Informing adaptation

What would “adaptation” address?

The threat already posed to society from today’s climate variations

Climate-sensitive development paths that might put greater population, ecosystem services, and economies at risk

The potentially high-impact but still critically uncertain additional risks presented by climate change

How do we adapt?

• Infrastructure/assets

• Technological process optimization

• Institutional and behavioral changes or reinforcement

• Crisis, learning and redesign

Upgrade and elevate low-lying roads used to transport machinery, supplies, and workers to and from offshoreoil portsBuild higher bridges to accommodate for sea-level riseDesign equipment to withstand increased wave forces and higher storm surge

Adaptation actions

Addressing Oil Infrastructure Vulnerabilities

Current Plans• Boston, MA

• California

• Chicago, IL

• Colorado

• Homer, AK

• Keene, NH

• King County, WA

• Los Angeles, CA

• Maryland

• Miami-Dade County, FL

• New York City, NY

• Seattle, WA

• Utah

Adaptation Planning Guidebooks

Adaptation: Options and Practices in water resources

• Supply Side Technological – Groundwater storage– Increase Storage

Capacity– Desal of Sea Water– Rain-water storage– Removal of phreatophytes– Water Transfers

– Many have adverse environmental (and social) consequences

• Demand SideInstitutional/Behavioral– Recycle Water    – Reduce Irrigation Demand– Virtual Water– Water Markets– Economic Incentives

including metering, pricing

– For many effectiveness uncertain

NRDC – In Hot Water

If it is so easy why is it so hard?

Multiple competing valuesMultiple, competing objectives

Ecosystemshealth

Hydropower

Recreation

Floodcontrol Agriculture

Consumptiveuse

Pulwarty and Redmond 1997

Complex environmental problems usually involve the greatest/most:

•Assumptions •Estimates•Inputs from the most people•Stakes•Greatest numbers of uncertainty categories

•Opportunity for resorting to “efficiency” anchoring and reduction of complexity for action

If so……..

………so what ?

Why is “communication” not enough?Broad societal processes that create dynamicpressures and unsafe conditions are not easyto change, yet are fundamental to humanVulnerability• The “push” supply of new information by would-be providers of information/technology ,

and the “pull” demand for new information from would-be learners

• More difficult is understanding the socialization of lessons learned by particular individuals and organizations through their own, direct trial and error experiences

Native American Lands in the Four-Corners Region

(Nature, 2009)

Nested Scenarios

NPS, NIDIS and others

Colorado River Interim Guidelines - Time to think-A Robust Solution?

• Operations specified through the full range of operation for Lake Powell and Lake Mead

• Encourage efficient and flexible water use and management in the Lower Basin through the Intentionally Created Surplus (ICS) mechanism

• Strategy for shortages in the Lower Basin2, including a provision for additional shortages if warranted

• In place for an interim period (through 2026) to gain valuable operational experience

• Basin States agree to consult before resorting to litigation

1. Issued in Record of Decision, dated December 13, 2007; available at http://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/strategies.html

2. Mexico water deliveries are not directly effected by these guidelines

(US/DoI Bureau of Reclamation)

There is strong evidence that not all climateRisks are being incorporated in decision making, Even with regard to weather extremes

History is filled with examples of groups andresearchers that have proposed models of societalprogress that turn out in practice to benefit only a fraction of the population

Average Drought Average DroughtWater Use Urban 8.8 9.0 12.0 12.4 Agricultural 33.8 34.5 31.5 32.3 Environmental 36.9 21.2 37.0 21.3 TOTAL 79.5 64.7 80.5 66.0

Supplies Surface Water 65.1 43.5 65.0 43.4 Groundwater 12.5 15.8 12.7 16.0 Recycled & Desalted 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 TOTAL 77.9 59.6 78.1 59.8

Shortage 1.6 5.1 2.4 6.2

1995 2020

California’s Water Use(million-acre feet)

– Workshops and meetings (shared scenario construction; shared model building?)

– Presentations and briefings (incl. locally organized events, e.g. hearings)

– One-on-one technical assistance – Coordination with other ongoing projects– Work with the local media– Web site development and maintenance– Graduate-level courses on climate impacts &

adaptation

Where do science and policy speak

to each other?

?

From climate impactsassessment to waterresources practice—Okanagan, Canada

1990s 2006

Stakeholder Interest•Regional development

•Jobs

•Liability

•Quality of life

Climate Information•Forecasts

•Trends

•Scenarios

outreach

Climate information flow: traditional/technical framing

Climate information

•Forecasts•Trends•Scenarios

Filter / medium

•Hydrograph•Crop model•Health risk•Water demand model•Decision support

tool

Practitioner interest

•Risk assessment•Design standards•Operating rules•Allocations

delivery translation

Technicalframe Application

frame

Non-Climate Information

•Current status •Trends•Scenarios

deliv

ery

outreach

Climate information flow: applications framing

Basic/systemic and applied,vs. adaptation research

Basic/Technical Applications Procedural/

Frame frame Adaptive frame

Quality Relevance

Consistency Compatibility

Economic potential Usefulness

Dissemination Communication

Efficiency Efficiency

Expert Consultative

Direct outcome Direct outcome

Access

Legitimacy

Usability

Capacity

Equity

Co-production

Multiple outcomes

Climate information

•Forecasts•Trends•Scenarios

Filter / medium

•Hydrograph•Crop model

•Health risk model•Water demand model•Decision support

tool

Practitioner interest

•Risk assessment•Design standards•Operating rules•Allocations

usability

accesscapacity

Stakeholder Interest

•Regional development•Jobs•Liability•Quality of lifelegitimacy

Technical frame

outreach

Non-Climate Information

•Current status •Trends•Scenarios

outreach

context

deliv

ery

deliveryA

pp

lication

fram

e

equ

ity

Co

Pro

du

ction

(Pulwarty and Cohen, 2009)

“ALSO, THE BRIDGE IS OUT AHEAD”

• Acknowledge uncertainties in science, but manage the risks

• Focus onimproving decisions

Focus on the critical problems: not just asking but answering the right question

The combination of limate variability and change will likely force decisions reexamining

existing statutory and other laws relating to resourceinterests especially water and energy(but rates of change may be faster than this process)

Near-term challenges to the environment, trust responsibilities, and “Implied right” to protection of the habitat from

environmental/land use degradation

Managing in a changing climate:Adaptation needs

(1) Understand adaptation as being driven by crises, learning and redesign- Role of “surprises” in shaping responses

• Human action in response to projections is reflexive

• Key drivers, such as technological innovation and change, are unpredictable with great accuracy on scales that matter for regional and local decisions-both pressures and solutions

• The system may change faster than the models can be recalibrated, particularly during turbulent periods of transition-Projections may be most unreliable in precisely the situations where they are most desired

• Inactions, actions and consequences

Adaptation needs-(2) Early warning systems for critical thresholds across climate time and space scales: Extremes in the context of change

(3) Derive risk profiles and a portfolio of measures for each location/unit of analysis, identifying the broader economic, social and environmental benefits of each measure along with its costMethodological developments:

• Cost-effectiveness-costs of action and of inaction• Technological Efficiency:Drivers of adoption• Renewables:Viability and offsets• Evaluation: Infrastructure vs emergent events

(4) Science for adaptation-Sustain a collaborative framework between research and management -

Engage both leadership and the public

Scenario planning to address problem-definition and characterize multiple uncertainties-technical as well as institutional capacity

Prioritize and select climate adaptation and resilience measures and revise periodically

(extremes, variability and change) and development•Assumptions-e.g. climate knowledge, forecasts of socio-economic trends and drivers of growth•Effectiveness- Short-term adjustments/coping that constrain or enable longer-term risks•Benefits-adaptation in support of development goals•Limits-to adaptation e.g. ocean acidification

Impediments to the flow of knowledge among existing components

Policies and practices that can give rise to failures of the component parts working as a system

Opportunities for and constraints to learning and institutional innovation

Mapping decision making processes and Mapping decision making processes and climate information entry pointsclimate information entry points

Knowledge “of” a process is not equal Knowledge “of” a process is not equal to knowledge “in” a processto knowledge “in” a process

Expectation

Better integrated understanding of the multiple

functions of climate, socio-economic systems

will lead to greater focus on balanced

conservation as a subject of policy and to more

coherent support among policy makers and

stakeholders

A Complex Portfolio of Drivers

Direct Drivers

Indirect Drivers

EcosystemServices

Human Well-being

Direct Drivers of Change Changes in land use Species introduction or removal

Technology adaptation and use

External inputs (e.g., irrigation)

Resource consumption Climate change Natural physical and biological drivers (e.g., volcanoes)

Indirect Drivers of Change Demographic Economic (globalization, trade, market and policy framework)

Sociopolitical (governance and institutional framework)

Science and Technology Cultural and Religious

Human Well-being and Poverty Reduction

Basic material for a good life

Health Good Social Relations Security Freedom of choice and action

Melillo and others

>1YEAR

10YEARS

30YEARS

100YEARS

SHORT-TERM-Seasonal

DECADE-TO-CENTURY

30DAYS

1-4SEASONS

1. Classic decision analysis,2. Traditional scenario planning,3. Robust decision making,4. Real options, and5. Portfolio planning.

Decision Support Planning Methods: Incorporating Climate Change Uncertainties

into Water Planning

Info: Levi Brekke (lbrekke@usbr.gov),Jim Prarie (jprairie@usbr.gov)

… LC/UC 2007 approach has since been extended to blend paleo-spell and projected climate/hydrology (Reclamation 2009)

Resources Internal freshwater flowsExternal flows

populationAccess % pop with access to potable water

% with access to sanitation% pop with access to water for irrigation

Capacity purchasing power parity per capita income

Gini coefficientWater carrying times

Use domestic water use l/day Share of water use by industry and agriculture adjusted by GDP sector share

Environment Indices of water quality Water stress pollution

Environmental regulation and managementInformational capacityBiodiversity based on threatened species

Use of natural resources

Resource

Access

Use Capacity

Environment

Water Vulnerability Index

50

100

x

x

x

x

x

A weak track record for the implementation of adaptive management:

Successful Modeling failure Implementation failureSuccessful Modeling failure Implementation failure

Paradoxes?

• Decentralization….. better coordination/integrated data. Nation vs. States vs. community priorities: Jurisdictional externalities

• Cumulative reduction of smaller scale risks…… may increase vulnerability to large events

• Planning…….“action” only after crisis or focusing event. Lessons available on particular events but not to gradual changes (or abrupt regime shifts)

• Integrated River Basin management….National vs. States vs. borderlands priorities

• Develop procedural/participatory mechanisms: Coalitions of local stakeholders need to be inclusive and transparent………. but this can lead to power struggles/robustness under stress

• Keep the water flowing for my needs…and, oh yeah ……protect that environment thing

• Tradeoffs between “decision quality” and “acceptability”

• Markets allow flexibility for adjustment to risks in hydrological uncertainty---Meeting other public values through markets, especially environmental requirements, remain difficult

• Risk models are needed but fail just when they might be most heavily relied on: during periods of rapid transition/response curve steepens

What leads to “successful” agreements

•Strong focusing events-windows

•Public and leadership engaged

•Social basis for cooperation exists-–meaningful partnerships–Interjurisdictional

•Collaborative framework between research and management-exists and supported

Big Challenges –plans for water sharing under much greater uncertainty

• Understanding environmental consumptive use trade-offs and environmental management “triage - best bets” given thresholds and irreversibility – and inflow scenarios

• With increasing scarcity we reach thresholds beyond which ecosystem service provision capacities are irreversibly damaged, or require expensive built capital substitutes:

• Floodplain health – amenity, recreational, fishery, existence values• Water of sufficient quality for urban use – salinity, blue green algae, acid

sulfate• Irrigation – orchards, vineyards, dairy herds;

• Triage which things to keep ticking over, which things to let go: this year and in following years with uncertainty

• Building resilience into new Basin plans – planning a wide range of contingencies in – how to share water manage threats, triggers for actions

53CCSP Unified Synthesis Product: Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States

What is needed?

That is, we need more scholars who can:

understand and expand the interface between policy and science

are a force pulling us towards fundamental use inspired research

move seamlessly across disciplines

are methodological innovators without becoming technicians

are institution builders

Science: Credibility and Uncertainty

• Public views of science often adhere to the old Popperian model (theory, hypothesis, critical test, better theory, …) that implies linear progress and continual progress toward truth and exactitude

• When policy advocates discover that they can thrive on scientific ambiguity, they can highlight and exaggerate the significance of scientific disagreement, downplaying the degree of scientific agreement

• Policymakers and the public often have deterministic understandings of the physical/natural world that lead to exaggerated expectations of the possibilities for eliminating uncertainty.

Usual stakeholder interaction–Concentrates on the incorporation of new knowledge or experience into existing models, decision processes and practices

Adaptive framing:–The most important learning involves values, norms, goals, and the basic “framing” of issues in terms of the drivers and importance–Innovative partnerships incl.joint research

Responding to developing events

• No single communication-diffusion model is best for all processes

• Idealized forecasts and decision environments form difficult benchmarks to beat

• Simpler diffusion models tend to to forecast response better than more complex ones

• Uncertainty can be used as a dodge to avoid what are really tough policy decisions

• “Projections” have become mediating tools in the dialog among actors, resistors, decision-makersi.e. not necessarily a “consensus builder” but highlights potential tension and exposes perceptions of risk and uncertainty

e.g. water leasing vs. permanent transfers

How much information is enough?What are the most effective combinations of format and contents?

Participatory approaches can help to build the science-policy bridge

Role of local experts (practitioners, stakeholders) in climate change impacts-adaptation research

Local context (planning, decision-making)Data, operational perspectivesProfessional networksLocal governments

“Experts” become extension agents for local adaptation

Role of research community changes from initiator of studies to resource for community-based assessmentsBroadens base of investments in impacts-adaptation researchPotential for increased support for monitoring

But a bit of humility helps-neither group knows the answer apriori

Thank You!

Problem-solving approaches: System uncertainty and decision stakes (Adapted with permission from Functowicz and Ravetz)

Consultancy (Specific

applications&output)

AppliedSciences

(Forecasts/Impacts)

>2 nd Order Contexts (Regional risk assessments

Decision-support)Decision Stakes:

Problem solvingapproach

System Uncertainty Physical systems and linkages

Economics and Social Dimensions

Backup slide

Problems:• The “push” supply of new information by would-be providers

of information/technology , and the “pull” demand for new information from would-be learners

• More difficult is understanding the socialization of lessons learned by particular individuals and organizations through their own, direct trial and error experiences

Commonalities and Differences: Scenarios

What are the common issues to pay attention

to, across all scenarios?

What are the important

differences across

scenarios?

Need for monitoring – water, caves, are we monitoring the right things?

Thinning forested areas/ prescribed fires Thinning of the fields and carrying capacity Triage / prioritization / tough choices Impacts on paleo and cultural resources Invasives Staff training Focus on conservation, sustainability, and

water management Cave relatively undisturbed

Types of communication Amount of lead time to educate and build

support Degree of hands-on manipulation (eg.

greater improvement needs for the novel ecosystem

Resources and monitoring available The extent of partnerships

Availability and willingness of partners to engage

National Park Service Scenarios Development

Is the research compatible with existing

decision models?

Is the research accessible to policy/decision maker?

Are policymakers receptive to the

problem and to research?

Is the research relevant for decisions?

Analysis of usefulness for policy/decision making arena

Goals, Criticality, time frame, basis for decisions,usability,entry points, experience

Are the sources/providers of information credible

to the decision maker?