Blake Trask 11.30.06 master’s thesis project

1. Frame of Mind: Context and Spatial Scale as it Affects Adaptive Capacity in Pacific Northwest Climate Vulnerability Assessments Blake Trask 11.30.06 master’s thesis project

2. Is my own project intellectually bankrupt? “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.” - Feb. 12, 2002, Department of Defense news briefing • What does this mean?

3. Framing the Question • Maddox (2000) notes that "the best environmental policy depends upon how you frame the question.” George Lakoff

4. The Road Ahead Problems Goals Needs Definitions Application USDA

5. Problems (1) • Uncertainty and Complexity pose problems for Status Quo Management • First Stream Science reduces system complexity and redundancy • Planning horizons are too short to even account for many of the problems that uncertainty and complexity hint at USDA

6. Problems (2) • Climate Change and Variability is a driver in environmental change, but not the only one • Climate change in regions like the Pacific Northwest could serve as a tipping point for already attenuated ecological and social systems USDA

7. Problems (3) • Wicked Problems (Ludwig et al., 2002) • Characterized by radical uncertainty, where there are no experts and dealing with these problems involves more than science, but also how economic and social factors interact with the problem • When considering the impacts they are not always acute and easily identifiable USDA

8. Problems (4) • The literature surrounding vulnerability and climate impacts is in flux and rapidly evolving • Finding an operational definition for some of these terms in the PNW presents a challenge USDA

9. Goals • To find a better way to incorporate uncertainty and complexity into the planning process when considering both climate change and long-range planning • To find a usable definition for adaptive capacity in the context of the PNW

10. Needs (1) - Framing the Problem • Defining and framing of the problem and the understanding of the scale and scope are critical to asking the right questions and to knowing more about the shape of the answers we seek to find • Need to consider the frame of the problem by defining the scale and scope of the social-ecological system of concern USDA

11. Needs (2) - Scenario Planning • Scenario planning may serve as a useful process to address the complexities and uncertainties of the problem at hand • Offers a systematic method for confronting complex environments and uncertain futures in systems that are not always easily manageable USDA

12. Needs (3) - Adequate Information for Scenario Planning Process • Understanding vulnerability in coupled human-environment systems is a central tenet of sustainability science • Vulnerability encompasses a suite of concepts of which adaptive capacity is a part • Adaptation affects the vulnerability assessment and adaptive capacity is a useful proxy to looking at adaptation. USDA

13. Needs (4) - Defining Adaptive Capacity • Acquiring a clearer theoretical understanding of adaptive capacity of local or regional entities and governments and how they shift according to scales can then help us begin to ask the questions about the need and requirements for it in the context of scenario planning. USDA

14. Definitions (1) • Context and the scope of the project in order to bound it • Defining is important as different adaptation strategies and assessments are dependent on the characteristics of the system in question and the client (or stakeholder) of the research (Reilly and Schimmelpfennig 2000). • When something is differential it means that the topic depends explicitly on the system, the scope the scale, and the circumstance of where it is applied. • Thus a definition is important. USDA

15. Definitions (2) • The definition, or how we define these concepts is a central point and it shapes the identification or assessment of the problems as well as the management strategies to be used • Definitions also create boundaries around what we choose to address to make them more manageable and to limit the conversation • Definitions can be used to exclude information as well USDA

16. Bounds to the Project • For this project, adaptive capacity works within the boundaries elucidated as: • Place based • Within a social-ecological system • Limited to a regional to local spatial scale • A developed country setting Alan Bauer

17. Vulnerability and Its Origins • According to the IPCC vulnerability is a function of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity • Its origins in risks, hazards, and food security literature spans back to the 1960s • Global change vulnerability assessments attempt to integrate the previous traditions to address a complex world of multiple stresses USGS

18. Vulnerability and Its Key Components Definition: the receptivity of a given geographic unit to a specific risk or driver that stresses that system What makes a system vulnerable then is not climate change, but instead the state of the system that is impacted by the climate What do exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity look like? USGS

19. Exposure • Exposure spans the extent of possible impacts that could befall a system. • Exposure reflects the components of the given system, exposure is unique to both the system’s scale and composition • Exposure is a differential concept - it is context specific USGS

20. Sensitivity • Describes the quality of how the identified system would respond to the magnitude or frequencies of stresses put upon the exposures of that particular system • Wide tolerance to stress means the system is less sensitive to changes and punctuated shocks USGS

21. Resiliency • Resiliency describes the state of the system and how much it can absorb before it shifts to another stability state • It describes the ability to absorb, to self-organize, and to learn whereas vulnerability is about the susceptibility of a system to be harmed (Adger 2006) • The social choice of whether or not a stability regime is perceived as desirable is another question altogether. USGS

22. Adaptive Capacity • A characteristic that represents the potential to implement adaptation as a response to the sensitivity described as a component of vulnerability USDA

23. Adaptive Capacity • Key factors: • Social learning (active adaptive management) • A precursor to adaptation • Factors related to development (economic wealth, infrastructure, institutions) USDA

24. Adaptation and Adaptive Capacity • Adaptive capacity can be seen as the prerequisite to successful adaptation. • Adaptive capacity does not encompass the components of the actual response (Adger and Vincent 2005). • Adaptive capacity is probably a better proxy for making management and policy prescriptions than is looking at adaptation, (Adger and Vincent 2005). USDA

25. Spatial Scale and Adaptive Capacity • Comparisons between spatial scales • Implications of spatial scale USDA

26. Indicators • Measuring adaptive capacity with indicators is difficult. (Smit and Wandel 2006). • What does one look for when looking at indicators of adaptive capacity at smaller scales? Sightline

27. Criteria • (1) An interdisciplinary knowledge base • (2) Be place based • (3) Consider multiple stresses • (4) Examine differential adaptive capacity • (5) Incorporate perspective and history as well • (6) Consider both short- and long-term effects, consequences, and possible ties • (7) An explicit consideration of a criteria for valuation Sightline

28. Response Indicators • Measurements that attempt to view how effectively society (or a local government) is responding to the problems that the vulnerabilities (or the indicators used) expose (Alberti 1996). Sightline

29. Importance of Stakeholders • Local stakeholder knowledge and scenario planning • Stakeholders are important because of the nature of the differential situations where drivers and circumstances change vulnerabilities and the adaptive capacities into endemic qualities specific to that place or system Sightline

30. Indicators and Adaptive Capacity • Not the end all be all, but an important step in asking about adaptive capacity • Maybe of more utility as a methodology in asking stakeholders or those involved in the system what adaptive capacity looks like in the context of the system in question Sightline

31. Synthesis for Environmental Planning • The importance of defining the scope and in interpreting the information adequately • Spatial scale is unique because it changes the conception of what vulnerability looks like. • Adaptive capacity serves as a useful proxy for viewing future SES responses to both short- and long-term changes. • Indicators, or maybe more accurately a way to measure adaptive capacity either qualitatively or quantitatively, help inform us if adaptive capacity exists in a system at the spatial scale observed. • By incorporating a criteria of how to assess adaptive capacity, and then by thinking about good indicators, we can improve the information that serves as inputs into the scenario planning process. • What would one look for in determining adaptive capacity and how would it change according to scale? USGS

32. Scenario Planning • What is it? • Steps in a scenario planning process: These steps include: (1) identification of a focal issue (2) assessment (3) Identification of alternatives (4) building scenarios; (5) Testing scenarios; and (6) policy screening • Why scenario planning?

33. Two Places to Consider • Two areas chosen to give a rough representation of adaptive capacity’s differences between scales • Each scale that they represent can help point researchers toward future research objectives and potential management plans • A lot of the uncertainty in both regions is less to do with climate change and more to do with the social and ecological responses, hence the need to be place-based and focused on response. USDA

34. Skagit River Watershed • The Skagit River Watershed represents a complex geographic region with conflicting resource uses and goals. • This scale is potentially more personal, which relies on context and history between individuals more • Its smaller population and more limited geographic diversity make a stakeholder process more manageable USDA

35. Columbia River Basin • Major resource concerns within this basin that are dependent on the river include hydropower, irrigation, municipal and industrial uses, recreation, trade, and salmon • More potential for scale mismatches because of its larger size and the potential for problems with depth • Within this scale, both the social and geographical aspects figure to be more complex • Do stakeholders even identify with such a large scale? Alan Bauer

36. Shifts • My point is to not solve the problems of each representative region, but instead to point out the need and maybe make some guesses about what shifts would look like.

37. My Thoughts • Columbia River--constrained by federal regulations (top-down relationships); its greater complexity poses more problems and a more heterogeneous concept of what adaptive capacity means • Skagit--also constrained by state and local requirements; because its scale is more identifiable, a stakeholder process may be more manageable, but not necessarily less contentious; less of a concern for sub-scales within the watershed

38. A Conversation With You the Audience • What are the primary differences in linkages between scales of the magnitude between the Skagit and Columbia? • Is it possible to make similar characterizations between the two or not?