Preparing for climate change Despite increasing availability of information about regionally-specific impacts of climate change and the high probability that in the United States adaptation to those changes will be delegated down to the local-county-state scale, few entities are preparing for change. Many barriers: lack of appropriate information, motivation, etc. Today I’m going to describe an effort to change that that we’re involved with – to motivate preparatory action by local entities – development of a guidebook for local governments for preparing for near-term (decades) impacts of climate change. Outline: Efforts to articulate local impacts Use PNW example to illustrate that significant impacts are projected for the coming few decades – on a timescale relevant for today’s planning and decision making. What does preparing mean? Intro partnership/guidebook KC = motivated local government (their track record) Guidebook format, toc, dirt Useful info for scientists/regional climate impacts assessment folks Climate Science in the Public Interest

Outline Terminology: mitigation vs. adaptation Assessing vulnerability White paper assignment Using the guidebook Group start-up

Dealing with Climate Change: Mitigation and Adaptation Mitigation activities Reducing emissions of greenhouse gases There are two main strategies for dealing with climate change: mitigation and adaptation. These two strategies must happen simultaneously given the need to: avoid the most serious projected impacts (by reducing greenhouse gas emissions), and prepare for the impacts that are difficult to avoid at this point. The focus of today’s conference is on the need for adaptation. Adaptation activities Managing the change that occurs as mitigation strategies are implemented. 3

Outline Terminology: mitigation vs. adaptation Assessing vulnerability White paper assignment Using the guidebook Group start-up

Vulnerability Assessment Identify outcome variables of concern (vulnerability of what (over what timescale)?) Identify stressors of concern (vulnerability to what?) Full vulnerability assessment adds consideration of the context, values & objectives; must consider human choices & viewpoints. Vogel & O’Brien 2004

IPCC Definitions How sensitive is a particular system to climate change – that is, how will a system respond to given changes in climate? How adaptable is a particular system to climate change – that is, to what degree are adjustments possible in practices, processes, or structures of systems in response to projected or actual changes in climate? Finally, how vulnerable is a system to climate change – that is, how susceptible is it to damage or harm? (IPCC, SAR 1995, WG2) --- Some analyses also independently examine exposure, or the degree to which a system experiences a fluctuation in climate

The degree to which a system experiences a fluctuation in climate. Exposure The degree to which a system experiences a fluctuation in climate. Sensitivity The degree to which a system changes as external conditions (e.g., the climate) change(s). Adaptability The degree to which a system can recover from adverse changes or take advantage of positive changes, prepare for or adapt to new conditions. EXPOSURE: People make choices all the time that shape their exposure to climate impacts – choices about where to live, or how or what to farm, among others. A dryland farmer in Washington’s Palouse region, for example, is exposed to variability in precipitation amount and timing in a way that his Yakima (Washington) counterpart who irrigates his crops is not. Human activities in one arena can – purposefully or not – alter the climate exposure of other activities or other locations. Not only have increased coastal and floodplain development exposed more people and property to flooding and erosion, but human attempts to protect against such hazards by building jetties and armoring beaches have often shifted the burden (or exposure) to others, e.g., causing erosion in other locations or harming coastal, beach, or estuarine habitat. [1] There is disagreement in the literature over where to draw the lines between some of these components of adaptability, such as sensitivity and exposure. We discuss exposure here because of the clear role human choice plays in shaping vulnerability through choices about exposure. We did not explicitly consider exposure as an independent variable in our preceding analysis of climate sensitivity of natural systems, instead wrapping it into a more generalized assessment of sensitivity. We consider that exposure to near-term climate variability and/or change is beyond a natural system’s control. SENSITIVITY: impacts days

ongoing process (embedded examples of existing adaptations to climate) Characteristics of Adaptation ongoing process (embedded examples of existing adaptations to climate) adaptation = both a policy response and a spontaneous adjustment occurs not in isolation but within complex milieu of ecological, economic, social & institutional circumstances not always successful maladaptation occurs because of other social goals, often short-term milieu: regulatory structures, property rights, social norms, available technologies, knowledge of future climate risks

scale*: local to national, individual to society timing Characteristics of Adaptation reactive vs. proactive intent scale*: local to national, individual to society timing duration*: short- vs. long-term, tactical vs. strategic, adjustment vs. adaptation technological and institutional adjustments effect*: buffer or change to new state * = important to consider when evaluating success

How do we reduce vulnerability? reduce the exposure of the system to climate fluctuations or their impacts (e.g., by restricting development in a flood plain) reduce the system’s sensitivity (e.g., by requiring homes in the flood plain to be built on stilts increase the adaptability of the system to deal with the effects of climate fluctuations (by providing education about climate risks to encourage relocation or insurance payouts to flooded residents to rebuild their homes) When assessing the adaptation of a natural or human system to fluctuations in climate, it is crucial to define the concept of “successful adaptation” and the temporal and spatial scales for evaluation. If “success” requires a system to survive in largely the same form as it exists today (or existed prior to human intervention), failure to adapt to climate change, for example, may be inevitable. Furthermore, modern insight in ecosystem dynamics reveals the inappropriateness of stability as a measure of successful adaptation. Holling and Meffe’s (1995) Golden Rule for resource management, for example, is to “facilitate existing natural processes rather than control them,” such that those processes allow resource systems to evolve through time and space in ways that foster continuous adaptation. If instead we define “success” as continued ability to provide the same or similar system functions over the long term,[1] the question becomes which system functions are of most concern and how will their provision be judged? Are we concerned about the ability of PNW forests to provide harvestable timber or to support biological diversity? Is the criteria whether homes near today’s current flood plain will be protected in their current locations or whether there will be no homes there to worry about protecting? Criteria for the definition of successful adaptation vary with the spatial scale of evaluation and are weighted and valued differently by different interest groups (Adger et al. 2005b; Naess et al. 2005). Do we want the PNW to continue providing harvestable timber (or supporting biodiversity) over the next 10, 100, or 1000 years? “Scale affects the criteria defining ‘successful’ adaptation, and determines the relevance of different factors influencing adaptive capacity: indicators calculated at one scale may hide substantial variations in adaptive capacity at another” (Adger et al. 2005a). While we might define successful adaptation for salmon as maintaining a sufficiently large, genetically diverse meta-population to ensure species survival over the next 1000 years, crucial questions about scale remain. Survival of which species in which locations would constitute success? Are we interested in the continued existence of salmon somewhere in the world, or the survival of specific stocks within specific watersheds in the PNW? [1] “In the case of a social-ecological system,” write Walker et al. (2002), “we are usually interested in preserving a particular set of general criteria. The system can be in many different states and still meet this set of criteria.”

Building Capacity and Delivering Action Two-Pronged Approach: Building Capacity and Delivering Action Building Adaptive Capacity Addressing institutional, legal, cultural, technical, fiscal and other barriers Activities can be taken independent of specific climate projections Delivering Adaptive Actions Implementing actions to address specific climate vulnerabilities Choice and timing of some actions may depend on specifics of the climate projections So going back to how adaptation planning occurs. Regardless of 11

Risk Assessment Prioritizing actions… Risk = consequence x probability A qualitative assessment in the guidebook although lots of methodologies for quantitative assessments Recognizes that not all impacts are created equal; the risk will vary Can you set your priorities without this step? Sure. 12

What defines success? Define “successful” adaptation survival in largely the same form as it exists today (stability) continued ability to provide the same or similar system functions over the long term Do we want PNW forests to provide harvestable timber or to support biological diversity? I Do we want homes near today’s current flood plain to be protected in their current locations or for there to be no homes there to worry about protecting? Define the temporal and spatial scales for evaluation Criteria for success vary with the spatial scale of evaluation and are weighted and valued differently by different interest groups (Adger et al. 2005). Do we want the PNW to continue providing harvestable timber (or supporting biodiversity) over the next 10, 100, or 1000 years? Indicators calculated at one scale may hide substantial variations in adaptive capacity at another (Adger et al. 2005b). Are we interested in the continued existence of salmon somewhere in the world, or the survival of specific stocks within specific watersheds in the PNW? Efficiency, effectiveness, equity & legitimacy… (Adger et al. 2005). is failure inevitable? which system functions are of most concern and how will their provision be judged?

Why assess vulnerability? To understand actual implications of climate change To provide a do-nothing benchmark for evaluating response options Identify priority areas for action (high exposure, high sensitivity, low adaptatibility) Guide decision makers in planning (via identification & evaluation of adaptation options) management days = case studies in vulnerability assessments

Integrated Assessment of Climate Impacts on the Water Resources of the Columbia River Basin Sensitivity, adaptability, vulnerability of Columbia River water resources to climate variability and change (Miles et al. 2000) Stressors = climate variability and change, plus population growth, changing environmental values/operational priorities Outcomes of concern = Columbia River water resources operating objectives (reliability) Miles et al. 2000: Climate variability Sensitivity of streamflow Observed response Coefficient of variability (relatively low) Sensitivity of water resources  Reliability = f(flow) Hydropower/flood control vs. fish Adaptability of water resources Technological adaptability: Could you manage differently? No. Institutional adaptability: Could you manage differently? No. Vulnerability of water resources = f(sensitivity, adaptability) Low with respect to floods, high with respect to droughts Climate change ( exposure, threshold)

Who’s preparing?

King County, WA Revamping county levee system Replacing 57+ “short span” bridges with wider spans Replacing undersized culverts Incorporating low impact development techniques to reduce stormwater runoff Revamping county levee system Bringing water reuse plant online Evaluating impacts of sea level rise on wastewater infrastructure

City of Olympia, WA $150,000 allocated to start on climate change adaptation strategy Installing 2 GPS station downtown to better assess subsidence and uplift in the downtown area Implementing Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) technology to improve topographical elevation information (over aerial photography) for more accurate hydrologic modeling and vulnerability analysis A hydraulic computer model will be developed to better evaluate the interactions between stormwater and streamflow

City of Olympia, WA cont’d Relocating primary water supply from surface water source to higher elevation groundwater source. Developing a 3-10 year work plan to implement longer-term adaptation actions such as changes in building codes, FEMA flood hazard zone, and utility infrastructure. Partnership building 2009-2010 activities include: Evaluating current high tides and Deschutes River flooding Assessing potential impacts on drinking water aquifers.

Washington State PAWG Recs Broad range of recommendations related to: Enhancing emergency preparedness and response; Incorporating climate change and its impacts into planning and decision-making processes; Restoring and protecting natural systems and natural resources; Building institutional capacity and knowledge to address impacts associated with climate change; More effectively managing and sharing best available data; and Educating, informing and engaging landowners, public officials, citizens and others. Adaptation recommendations released Feb 2008 by Prep/Adaptation Working Groups (PAWGs) established under the Washington Climate Change Challenge (EO 07-02) 20

Outline Terminology: mitigation vs. adaptation Assessing vulnerability White paper assignment Using the guidebook Group start-up

White Paper You will work in a group to develop a climate vulnerability and adaptation assessment for a real-world jurisdiction (management and/or policy-making body) in the Pacific Northwest. In this project, your team will take the role of a consultant to the jurisdiction, that is, analyzing and discussing options and trade-offs. You will recommend a course of action while providing enough information for your client to decide whether they agree with you. Specifically, we expect you to assess and describe the utility of using one or more of the following types of climate information: seasonal to interannual climate forecasts, current understanding of range of regional natural climate variability, and/or projected anthropogenic climate change.

Format & Content Aim your paper directly at the people who could make the change you propose – remember that this is a policy proposal.* (You may need to include some additional background information that the instructors would need to understand the paper.) 10-15 pages long (including figures, tables, and references). Include a one page executive summary. Include a consideration of the following elements and the interaction among them: The natural/environmental context The economic context The institutional/legal context * Requires “defining the users/clients and understanding their perspective” (Jacobs)

Components of Analysis A characterization of your client's decision-making environment and their management and policy-making limits and responsibilities A list of your client's primary “pre-climate” vulnerabilities and issues of concern (as previously perceived/identified by your client and/or others) A climate sensitivity assessment (based on information about natural climate variations/available climate forecasts OR climate change projections for your client's region, likely climate impacts in that region, and an analysis of the sensitivity of your client's planning areas to those climate impacts) A climate adaptability assessment (an assessment of your client's ability to adapt to the relevant climate impacts) A climate change vulnerability (risk) assessment (based on your analysis of the consequences, magnitude and probability of climate impacts, as well as your evaluation of your client's risk tolerance and community values) A climate preparedness planning proposal, which will include: A list of (all) potential adaptation options A discussion of budget constraints, political and jurisdictional constraints A proposed prioritization of planning areas for action and specific climate adaptation strategies Some other questions to consider: Are there specific barriers that must be overcome before improved or innovative use of climate information is possible? How do you propose that your client overcome them? Are there consequences to ignoring climate information?

Questions we’ll be asking as we read your paper What are your client’s policy/management goals & objectives? How will climate affect them and their ability meet those goals? What choices does your client have to respond to climate information? To what aspects of climate is your client most vulnerable? According to which criteria (ecologic, economic, political)? Why should we believe that the proposed course of action is viable, given the “real world context” (economic and institutional realities) of your client’s situation?* What barriers must be overcome before the proposed improved use of climate information is possible? How do you propose to overcome them? What are the risks of following your proposed course of action? * Think about Jacob’s conditions for providing useful services/products.

Important Dates April 14 Group assignments, Start-up workshop Meet with Nate & Amy to discuss potential topic(s) April 30 Prospectus Due May 14 In-class white paper workshop June 2 & 4 In-class presentations June 10, Noon Final paper & self/peer evaluation due April 9 Bring list of potential topics/issue areas April 14 Group assignmentsApril 14-29Meet with instructors to discuss potential topic(s)April 30 Prospectus dueMay 14In-class white paper workshopJune 2 & 4 In-class presentationsJune 10, NoonFinal paper due

Outline Terminology: mitigation vs. adaptation Assessing vulnerability White paper assignment Using the guidebook Group start-up

Setting the course for adaptation: A guidebook for planning for climate change Collaboration between UW Climate Impacts Group and King County, Washington Published by ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability Detailed description of why and how to prepare for global warming at the local/regional scale Strategies for reviewing current policies and procedures for implementing adaptive responses Tips for managing the risk and uncertainty associated with global warming Sector-specific adaptation strategies and planning resources

Brainstorming Adaptation Actions

Breaking Down Sensitivity… c e The pink indicates the “goal” for this particular stage. 30

…and Adaptability

The Outcome…

Outline Terminology: mitigation vs. adaptation Assessing vulnerability White paper assignment Using the guidebook Group start-up

Group Start-Up Lessons from experience... Brief discussion on success in working in groups

new one = “common view” http://catalyst.washington.edu/web_tools/sharespaces.html

Group Start-Up: ID challenges Different languages, vocabularies & standards of knowing Allocate effort & time for clear communication Invest strongly in problem definition early in the project Biases and prejudices that accompany disciplinary training Self-awareness & respect for/willingness to learn about other methods/approaches Nicholson et al. 2002. Ten heuristics for interdisciplinary modeling projects. Ecosystems 5: 376-384. Lele and Norgaard. 2005. Practicing interdisciplinarity. BioScience 55: 967-975.

Group Start-Up Share personal information about yourself Identify your skills that may be useful to the team Identify your preferences about how you like to work with others Identify your team’s strengths and weaknesses Discuss various roles/responsibilities of teamwork and who will fill those roles Establish plans for collaboration in the near term Introduction: What can you do to become a team... get to know each other disclose personal information about yourself identify the skills that you bring to the group identify your preferences about how you like to work with others Discussion of roles: ensure that all group members are sure what their roles in the group are. Define & distribute tasks