Abstract

Managers are increasingly being asked to integrate climate change adaptation into public land management. The literature discusses a range of adaptation approaches, including managing for resistance, resilience, and transformation; but many strategies have not yet been widely tested. This study employed in-depth interviews and scenario-based focus groups in the Upper Gunnison Basin in Colorado to learn how public land managers envision future ecosystem change, and how they plan to utilize different management approaches in the context of climate adaptation. While many managers evoked the past in thinking about projected climate impacts and potential responses, most managers in this study acknowledged and even embraced (if reluctantly) that many ecosystems will experience regime shifts in the face of climate change. However, accepting that future ecosystems will be different from past ecosystems led managers in different directions regarding how to respond and the appropriate role of management intervention. Some felt management actions should assist and even guide ecosystems toward future conditions. Others were less confident in projections and argued against transformation. Finally, some suggested that resilience could provide a middle path, allowing managers to help ecosystems adapt to change without predicting future ecosystem states. Scalar challenges and institutional constraints also influenced how managers thought about adaptation. Lack of institutional capacity was believed to constrain adaptation at larger scales. Resistance, in particular, was considered impractical at almost any scale due to institutional constraints. Managers negotiated scalar challenges and institutional constraints by nesting different approaches both spatially and temporally.

Highlights

  • Public lands present an important opportunity for climate adaptation, especially in the United States Intermountain West, where public lands constitute almost half of the land

  • While management approaches to climate change often focus on ecological systems, they engage with social systems because they interact with livelihoods connected to resources from public lands, recreational opportunities, and valued species and ecosystems

  • Some of the differences described below hinge on whether managers were looking to the past to guide their response to climate change, relying on historic ecosystem states and tried-andtrue management approaches, versus looking to the future toward novel ecosystems and innovative strategies

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Public lands present an important opportunity for climate adaptation, especially in the United States Intermountain West, where public lands constitute almost half of the land. While management approaches to climate change often focus on ecological systems, they engage with social systems because they interact with livelihoods connected to resources from public lands, recreational opportunities, and valued species and ecosystems. These decisions have ecological consequences; they are highly political (Pelling 2010; Eriksen et al 2015; O’Brien and Selboe 2015). Especially in the Intermountain West, must contend with varied landscapes that respond differently to climate, many recommend a “toolbox approach”, utilizing a wide range of approaches that include both conventional strategies, such as fuel treatments to reduce wildfire severity, and more novel strategies, such as assisted migration of species (Millar et al 2007). In the face of climate change, resistance is only possible through active intervention, but a hands-off approach could emphasize resilience and might be taken in the face of a regime shift

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call