Advertisement

Climatic Change

, Volume 146, Issue 1–2, pp 75–88 | Cite as

Adaptation pathways: ecoregion and land ownership influences on climate adaptation decision-making in forest management

  • Todd A. Ontl
  • Chris Swanston
  • Leslie A. Brandt
  • Patricia R. Butler
  • Anthony W. D’Amato
  • Stephen D. Handler
  • Maria K. Janowiak
  • P. Danielle Shannon
Article

Abstract

Climate adaptation planning and implementation are likely to increase rapidly within the forest sector not only as climate continues to change but also as we intentionally learn from real-world examples. We sought to better understand how adaptation is being incorporated in land management decision-making across diverse land ownership types in the Midwest by evaluating project-level adaptation plans from a suite of forest management projects developed through the Climate Change Response Framework. We used quantitative content analysis to evaluate 44 adaptation-planning documents developed through the Framework’s Adaptation Workbook within two ecoregional provinces of the Midwest. This approach was used to assess the components of adaptation planning, including the resources that adaptation actions targeted within planning documents, the climate changes and impacts of concern, and the adaptation strategies managers identified. Analyses of adaptation plans show that the most frequent climate changes and impacts of concern included alterations in the amount and timing of precipitation, increased vegetation moisture stress, and forest pest and pathogen impacts. Individual projects identified a diversity of adaptation options, rather than focusing singly on actions that aimed to resist climate impacts, enhance resilience, or transition systems. Multivariate analyses indicate that ecoregion and land ownership influenced adaptation planning, while the type of resources and the climate change impacts managers were concerned with were significantly correlated with the adaptation strategies selected during planning. This finding reinforces the idea that one-size-fits-all guidance on adaptation will be insufficient for land managers. Perceptions of relevant climate impacts differ based on regional and ownership contexts, which naturally leads to differences in preferred adaptation actions.

Keywords

Climate change Adaptation Forest management Natural resource planning 

Supplementary material

10584_2017_1983_MOESM1_ESM.docx (262 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 261 kb)

References

  1. Anhalt-Depies CM, Knoot TG, Rissman AR, Sharp AK, Martin KJ (2016) Understanding climate adaptation on public lands in the Upper Midwest: implications for monitoring and tracking progress. Env Manag 57:987–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archie K, Dilling ML, Milford JB, Pample FC (2012) Climate change and western public lands: a survey of US federal land managers. Ecol Soc 17:20–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bengston DN, Butler BJ, Asah ST (2009) Values and motivations of private forest landowners in the United States: a framework based on open-ended responses in the National Woodland Owners Survey. In D.B. Klenosky, C.B. Fisher (Eds.) Proceedings of the 2008 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-42: 60–66, Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research StationGoogle Scholar
  4. Bierbaum R, Smith JB, Lee A et al (2013) A comprehensive review of climate adaptation in the United States: more than before, but less than needed. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Glob Chang 18:361–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brandt L, Derby Lewis A, Fahey R, Scott L, Darling L, C S (2016a) A framework for adapting urban forests to climate change. Environ Sci Policy doi:  10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.005
  6. Brandt LA, Butler PR, Handler SD, Janowiak MK, Shannon PD, Swanston CW (2016b) Integrating science and management to assess forest ecosystem vulnerability to climate change. J For. doi: 10.5849/jof.15-147 Google Scholar
  7. Brandt L, He H, Iverson L, et al. (2014) Central Hardwoods ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Central Hardwoods Climate Change Response Framework project. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-124, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, 254 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Butler P, Swanston C, Janowiak M, Parker L, St. Pierre M, Brandt LA (2012) Adaptation strategies and approaches. In: Swanston C, LAnowiak M (eds) Forest adaptation resources: climate change tools and approaches for land managers, Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-87. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, pp 15–34Google Scholar
  9. Butler P, Iverson L, Thompson III F, et al. (2015) Central Appalachians forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Central Appalachians Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-146, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, 310 ppGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlton JS, Angel JR, Fei S et al (2014) State service forester’s attitudes toward using climate and weather information when advising forest landowners. J For 112:9–14Google Scholar
  11. Cleland DT, Avers PE, McNab WH, Jensen ME, Bailey RG, King T, Russell WE (1997) National hierarchical framework of ecological units. Ecosystem management applications for sustainable forest and wildlife resources:181–200Google Scholar
  12. D’Amato AW, Bradford JB, Fraver S, Palik BJ (2011) Forest management for mitigation and adaptation to climate change: insights from long-term silviculture experiments. For Ecol Manag 262:803–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duveneck MJ, Scheller RM (2016) Measuring and managing resistance and resilience under climate change in northern Great Lake forests (USA). Landsc Ecol 31:669–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. FAO (2012) Forest management and climate change: stakeholder perceptions. Forests and climate change working paper 11. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  15. Fisichelli NA, Schuurman GW, Hawkins Hoffman C (2016) Is ‘resilience’ maladaptive? Towards an accurate lexicon for climate change adaptation. Env Manag 57:753–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ford JD, Berrang-Ford L, Lenikowski A, Barrera M, Jeymann SJ (2013) How to track adaptation to climate change: a typology of approaches for national-level application. Ecol Soc 18:40–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Handler S, Duveneck MJ, Iverson L, et al. (2014a) Minnesota forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Northwoods Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-133, Newtown Square, PA; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 228 ppGoogle Scholar
  18. Handler S, Duveneck MJ, Iverson L, et al. (2014b) Michigan forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a report from the Northwoods Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-129, Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 229 ppGoogle Scholar
  19. Holling CS, Meffe GK (1995) Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conserv Biol 10:328–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Iverson LR, Thompson FR, Matthews S et al. (2016) Multi-model comparison on the effects of climate change on tree species in the eastern U.S.: results from an enhanced niche model and process-based ecosystem and landscape models. Land Ecol doi: 10.1007/s10980-016-0404-8
  21. Janowiak MK, Swanston CW, Nagel LM et al (2014b) A pratical approach for translating climate change adaptation principles into forest management actions. J For 112:424–433Google Scholar
  22. Janowiak MK, Iverson L, Mladenoff DJ et al (2014a) Forest ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis for northern Wisconsin and western Upper Michigan: a report from the Northwoods Climate Change Response Framework. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-136. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, 247 ppGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnston MH, Edwards JE (2013) Adapting sustainable forest management to climate change: an analysis of Canadian case studies. Canadian Council of Forest Ministers, Ottowa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  24. Keenan R (2015) Climate change impacts and adaptation in forest management: a review. Ann For Sci 72:145–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kruskal JB, Wish M (1978) Multidimensional scaling. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Littell JS, Peterson DL, Millar CI, O'Halloran KA (2012) U.S. National Forests adapt to climate change through science-management partnerships. Clim Chang 110:269–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Luce CH, Vose JM, Pedeson N, Campbell J, Millar C, Kormos P, Woods R (2016) Contributing factors for drought in the United States forest ecosystems under projected future climates and their uncertainty. For Ecol Manag 380:299–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McCune B, Grace JB (2002) Analysis of ecological communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR, 300 ppGoogle Scholar
  29. Millar CI, Stephenson NL, Stephens SL (2007) Climate change and forests of the future: managing in the face of uncertainty. Ecol Appl 21:2145–2151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Morin MB, Kneeshaw D, Doyon F, Goff HL, Bernier P, Yelle V, Blondlot A, Houle D (2015) Climate change and the forest sector: perception of principal impacts and of potential options for adaptation. For Chron 91:395–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Moser SC, Ekstrom JA (2010) A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 107:22026–22031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Brien KL, Wolf J (2010) A values-based approach to vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Clim Chang 1:232–242Google Scholar
  33. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Friendly M, et al. (2016) Package ‘vegan’. http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/vegan/vegan.pdf
  34. Petersen B, Hall KR, Kahl K, Doran PJ (2013) In their own words: perceptions of climate change adaptation from the Great Lakes region’s resource management community. Env Pract 15:377–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ramsfield TD, Bentz BJ, Faccoli JH, Brockerhoff EG (2016) Forest health in a changing world: effects of globalization and climate change on forest insect and pathogen impacts. For 89:245–252Google Scholar
  36. Rodriguez-Franco C, Haan TJ (2015) Understanding climate change perceptions, attitudes, and needs of Forest Service resource managers. J Sust For 34:423–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smit B, Wandel J (2006) Adaptation, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability. Glob Env Chang 16:282–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Steenberg JWN, Duinker PN, Bush PG (2011) Exploring adaptation to climate change in the forests of central Nova Scotia, Canada. For Ecol Manag 262:2316–2327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stein BA, Glick P, Edelson N, Staudt A (2014) Climate-smart conservation: putting adaptation principles into practice. National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C., 262 ppGoogle Scholar
  40. Swanston CW, Janowik MK, Iverson L et al. (2011) Ecosystem vulnerability assessment: a report from the Climate Change Response Framework Project in Northern Wisconsin. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-82, Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 142 ppGoogle Scholar
  41. Swanston CW, Janowik MK, Brandt LA et al. (2016) Forest adaptation resources: climate change tools and approaches for land managers, 2nd edition. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-87-2, Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 161 ppGoogle Scholar
  42. Vose JM, Peterson DL, Patel-Weynand T (2012) Effects of climatic variability and change in forest ecosystems: a comprehensive science synthesis for the US forest sector. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-870. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 265 ppCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Walsh J, Wuebbles D, Hayhoe K et al (2014) Our Changing Climate. In: Melillo JMRT, Yohe GW (eds) Climate change impacts in the United States: the third national climate assessment. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, D.C., pp 19–67Google Scholar
  44. Weed AS, Ayres MP, Hicke JA (2013) Consequences of climate change for biotic disturbances in North American forests. Ecol Monogr 83:441–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. West JM, Julius SH, Kareiva P, Enquist C, Lawler JJ, Petersen B, Johnson AE, Shaw MR (2009) US natural resources and climate change: concepts and approaches for management adaptation. Env Manag 44:1001–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wise RM, Fazey I, Stafford Smith M, Park SE, Eakin HC, Archer Van Garderen ERM, Campbell B (2014) Reconceptualizing adaptation to climate change as a part of pathways of change and response. Glob Env Chang 28:325–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Woodruff SC, Stultz M (2016) Numerous strategies but limited implementation guidance in US local adaptation plans. Nat Clim Chang 6:796–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht (outside the USA) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Todd A. Ontl
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chris Swanston
    • 1
    • 2
  • Leslie A. Brandt
    • 3
  • Patricia R. Butler
    • 4
  • Anthony W. D’Amato
    • 5
  • Stephen D. Handler
    • 2
  • Maria K. Janowiak
    • 2
  • P. Danielle Shannon
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.USDA Northern Forests Climate HubHoughtonUSA
  2. 2.Northern Institute of Applied Climate ScienceUSDA Forest Service Northern Research StationHoughtonUSA
  3. 3.Northern Institute of Applied Climate ScienceUSDA Forest Service Eastern RegionSt. PaulUSA
  4. 4.Northern Institute of Applied Climate ScienceMichigan Technological UniversityHoughtonUSA
  5. 5.Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural ResourcesUniversity of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations