Global Change Research Program Research Articles

US National Climate Change Assessment on Forest Ecosystems: An Introduction

Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other greenhouse gases have been increasing since the beginning of the industrial revolution in 1850. Over the next century, increasing gas concentrations could cause the temperature on the surface of the Earth to rise as much as 2‐3°C over historic mean annual levels. Variation in annual climate could also increase. The United States experienced one indication of climate change in 1988: The summer of that year was one of the hottest, driest ever recorded across the nation. Barges were stranded on the Mississippi River, and forest fires burned millions of acres in the western United States. In the eastern United States, temperatures were so high that many factory assembly lines had to be shut down. The former Soviet Union states and China also experienced severe drought, while Africa, India, and Bangladesh witnessed torrential rains and flooding. These events triggered televised congressional debates, which concluded that atmospheric greenhouse gas inputs would very likely increase the intensity and severity of weather patterns during the next 100 years. The potential negative effects of global warming—melting of polar ice caps, a rise in the sea level, reduced agricultural and forest productivity, water shortages, and extinction of sensitive species—were also discussed. These findings prompted the passage of the 1990 Global Change Research Act (GCRA) and the establishment of the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). The program sponsors ongoing research (over $1.6 billion in 2000)

Bush climate research plans draw mixed reaction from NAS panel

The Bush administration provided a guarded progress report on the development of its new climate change research initiatives during a November 19 meeting of the National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Global Change Research. Some committee members, however, criticized the plans as short on specifics and substance. Administration officials told the committee that two initiatives announced by President George W. Bush in June—the Climate Change Research Initiative (CCRI) and the Climate Change Technology Initiative (CCTI)—are nearing final stages of development as part of the fiscal year 2003 budget, and that efforts are being made to closely coordinate these projects with the ongoing U.S. Global Change Research Program (GCRP).

Ocean Biogeochemistry and the Global Carbon Cycle: An Introduction to the U.S. Joint Global Ocean Flux Study

In the early 1980s, ocean scientists were increasingly aware of the importance of biologically active elements, such as carbon, nitrogen and oxygen, in the regulation of climate and its effects on the habitability of the planet. As scientists reviewed details of the processes that control ocean carbon cycling and the links among oceanic, atmospheric and sedimentary carbon pools, it was clear that it was “hard to make the numbers add up” (Brewer et al., 1986). Fluxes of carbon into and out of the ocean were only crudely constrained, and little detail existed on the seasonal, regional and global patterns of carbon uptake and export or the flux of carbon between the ocean and its boundaries. The U.S. Joint Global Ocean Flux Study (JGOFS), a component of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, grew out of the recommendations of a National Academy of Sciences workshop, held in Woods Hole in September 1984. The international program of which it is part was launched three years later under the auspices of the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research. In 1989, as the first field studies were getting underway, JGOFS became a core project of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme. Am ajor ocean flux program was proposed in the U.S. that would include basin-scale process studies, long-term time-series programs and a global survey of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the ocean (see JGOFS Goals below). Extrapolation of results to the global scale would be assisted by the largescale data sets emerging from satellite observations. Advances in numerical and ecological modeling and data assimilation would help us predict the global-scale response of oceanic biogeochemical processes to anthropogenic perturbations. After more than a decade of scientific effort, the success of this study is clearly greater than the sum of its individual parts. With this special issue of Oceanography, we hope to highlight a few of the accomplishments of U.S. JGOFS. The authors were asked to bring to The Oceanography Society audience a synthesis of the changing paradigms of ocean biogeochemistry and its contribution to the global carbon cycle. In this volume, you will see results from the time-series sites near Hawaii and Bermuda, from each of the four major process studies and from the global-scale survey of CO2, conducted in cooperation with the World Ocean Circulation Experiment. The modeling work discussed in this issue has contributed to advances in our understanding of the controls on upper ocean ecosystems and how these might change with future climate scenarios. An early policy of sharing data and rapid and open distribution via the internet has allowed all scientists access to a consistently high-quality database that will be a long-lasting legacy of U.S. JGOFS. Advances in methods highlighted in this issue have

Policy history of the US Global Change Research Program: Part II. Legislative process

8125. E-mail address: rogerp@ucar.edu (R.A. Pielke Jr.). 1The National Center for Atmosphere Research is sponsored by the National Science Foundation. 2The story of the program told in this paper is a synthesis based on materials found in the public record (notably Congressional and administrative documents), published analyses, and in interviews with numerous outside observers, as well as individuals closely involved with the program, from their perspectives on science, administration, and policy. The interviews were conducted over the period 1993}1997, some on record and some o! record. I have chosen not to identify by name many interview sources cited in the text out of consideration for their candor and in recognition that the US Global Change Research Program is an ongoing e!ort with many interviewees having continued involvement in the program. In the text the interviews are cited simply as ([I]nterview with [A]author [year]), e.g. (IA, 1994). See Pielke (1995) for an appraisal of USGCRP implementation through 1994. Global Environmental Change 10 (2000) 133}144

Policy history of the US Global Change Research Program: Part I. Administrative development

a synthesis based on materials found in the public record (notably Congressional and administrative documents), published analyses and interviews with numerous outside observers, as well as individuals closely involved with the program, from their perspectives on science, administration, and policy. Interviews were conducted over the period 1993}1997, some on record and some o! record. I have chosen not to identify by name many interview sources cited in the text out of consideration for their candor and in recognition that the US Global Change Research program is an ongoing e!ort with many interviewees having continued involvement in the Program. In the text the interviews are cited simply as ([I]interview with [A]uthor [year]), e.g. (IA, 1994). See Pielke (1995) for an appraisal of USGCRP implementation through 1994. *Corresponding author. Tel: #1-303-497-8111; fax: #1-303-4978125. E-mail address: rogerp@ucar.edu (R.A. Pielke Jr). 1 The National Center for Atmospheric Research is sponsored by the National Science Foundation. 2Hansen testied to three main points: (1) that 1988 was the warmest year on record (of the past 100 years), (2) there was a high degree of condence that warming was caused by human activities, and (3) that computer models indicated that the greenhouse e!ect was already large enough to result in extreme events like summer heat waves. Global Environmental Change 10 (2000) 9}25

The Potential Health Impacts of Climate Variability and Change for the United States: Executive Summary of the Report of the Health Sector of the U.S. National Assessment

We examined the potential impacts of climate variability and change on human health as part of a congressionally mandated study of climate change in the United States. Our author team, comprising experts from academia, government, and the private sector, was selected by the federal interagency U.S. Global Change Research Program, and this report stems from our first 18 months of work. For this assessment we used a set of assumptions and/or projections of future climates developed for all participants in the National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change. We identified five categories of health outcomes that are most likely to be affected by climate change because they are associated with weather and/or climate variables: temperature-related morbidity and mortality; health effects of extreme weather events (storms, tornadoes, hurricanes, and precipitation extremes); air-pollution-related health effects; water- and foodborne diseases; and vector- and rodent-borne diseases. We concluded that the levels of uncertainty preclude any definitive statement on the direction of potential future change for each of these health outcomes, although we developed some hypotheses. Although we mainly addressed adverse health outcomes, we identified some positive health outcomes, notably reduced cold-weather mortality, which has not been extensively examined. We found that at present most of the U.S. population is protected against adverse health outcomes associated with weather and/or climate, although certain demographic and geographic populations are at increased risk. We concluded that vigilance in the maintenance and improvement of public health systems and their responsiveness to changing climate conditions and to identified vulnerable subpopulations should help to protect the U.S. population from any adverse health outcomes of projected climate change.

Global networking for assessment of impacts of global change on plant pests

Global change encompasses changes in atmospheric composition, climate and climate variability, and land cover and land use. The occurrence of these changes and their interactive effects on biological systems are worldwide; thus, an effective global change research and impact assessment program must be based on international and interdisciplinary research and communication. With this in mind, several collaborative research networks with a focus on global change have been established in the biological sciences. They include the Global Change and Terrestrial Ecosystems (GCTE) Core Project of the International Geosphere–Biosphere Programme (IGBP) which aims to predict the effects of global change on terrestrial ecosystems, including agriculture and production forestry. Because of the importance of plant pests (arthropods, microbial pathogens, weeds) as yield-reducing factors in agriculture and as early indicators of global change, GCTE initiated a network Activity on “Global Change Impacts on Pests, Diseases and Weeds” with the overall goal of developing a predictive capability for impact assessment and adaptation. The network's specific objectives, contributing research projects, initial results and future challenges are discussed.

The potential health impacts of climate variability and change for the United States: executive summary of the report of the health sector of the U.S. National Assessment.

We examined the potential impacts of climate variability and change on human health as part of a congressionally mandated study of climate change in the United States. Our author team, comprising experts from academia, government, and the private sector, was selected by the federal interagency U.S. Global Change Research Program, and this report stems from our first 18 months of work. For this assessment we used a set of assumptions and/or projections of future climates developed for all participants in the National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change. We identified five categories of health outcomes that are most likely to be affected by climate change because they are associated with weather and/or climate variables: temperature-related morbidity and mortality; health effects of extreme weather events (storms, tornadoes, hurricanes, and precipitation extremes); air-pollution-related health effects; water- and foodborne diseases; and vector- and rodent-borne diseases. We concluded that the levels of uncertainty preclude any definitive statement on the direction of potential future change for each of these health outcomes, although we developed some hypotheses. Although we mainly addressed adverse health outcomes, we identified some positive health outcomes, notably reduced cold-weather mortality, which has not been extensively examined. We found that at present most of the U.S. population is protected against adverse health outcomes associated with weather and/or climate, although certain demographic and geographic populations are at increased risk. We concluded that vigilance in the maintenance and improvement of public health systems and their responsiveness to changing climate conditions and to identified vulnerable subpopulations should help to protect the U.S. population from any adverse health outcomes of projected climate change.

Study group assists in global water cycle program

The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) has appointed a Water Cycle Study Group (WCSG),chaired by George Hornberger of the University of Virginia, to advise the USGCRP agencies on development of a Global Water Cycle Program within the USGCRPThe aim is to define a USGCRP initiative for fiscal years 2001 and beyond. In appointing the group, Robert Corell (then chair of the Subcommittee on Global Change Research) noted that “Deficiencies in our understanding of the global water cycle severely handicap efforts to improve climate prediction and guide water resource planning. Central to this initiative is the establishment of a science community‐based research planning process complemented by an enhanced interagency coordination effort to address the content of this effort for FY 2001 and beyond.”The charge to the WCSG is to “formulate a research strategy and scientific plan for investigating the global water cycle, its role in climate, and the fundamental processes that govern the availability and the biogeochemistry of water resources, [and to] develop the strategy and science plan for a national program.” The WCSG is assisted by a parallel Interagency Working Group (IWG), which is charged with coordinating agency activities with the development of the WCSG science plan.The IWG is cochaired by Rick Lawford of NOAA's Office of Global Programs and Robert Schiffer of NASA's Earth Science Enterprise.

Internationally co-ordinated Global Change research programmes – a prerequisite for Sustainable Development

Internationally co-ordinated Global Change research programmes – a prerequisite for Sustainable Development

The Mid-Atlantic Regional Assessment: motivation and approach

The US Global Change Research Program has initiated a National Assessment of poten- tial impacts from climate change. This paper summarizes the National Assessment process, and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Assessment (MARA) as an example of how the process is being implemented. At the national level, 5 sectoral working groups are assessing impacts on agriculture, forests, freshwater resources, coastal zones and human health. Because different areas of the country will experience impacts to differing degrees, regional assessments simultaneously are examining sectoral impacts identified as likely to be most important within each of 18 US regions. An independent panel of experts, the National Assessment Synthesis Team, is synthesizing the sectoral and regional findings for a national report that provides regional texture. The approach adopted for the MARA is described in the context of the National Assessment process. Such a complex undertaking relies on multiple extensive data sets. The MARA approach to managing the diverse data sets is outlined as a potential guide for similar efforts.

Water cycle study group town hall meeting

The development of a global water cycle initiative for fiscal year 2000 and beyond is the topic of a “town hall” meeting to be held during the AGU Fall Meeting in San Francisco on Monday December 13, from 5:30 p.m.–7:00 p.m.The meeting will be conducted by a water cycle study group appointed by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).The group's charge is to “formulate a research strategy and scientific plan for investigating the global water cycle, its role in climate, and the fundamental processes that govern the availability and the biogeochemistry of water resources, [and to] develop the strategy and science plan for a national program.”

Methodology for Deriving Clear-Sky Erythemal Calibration Factors for UV Broadband Radiometers of the U.S. Central UV Calibration Facility

Abstract In the United States, there are several federal agencies interested in the effects of UV radiation, which has resulted in the establishment of UV monitoring programs each with their own instrumentation and sites designed to address their specific needs. In 1993, participating agencies of the U.S. Global Change Research Program organized a UV Panel for coordinating the different agencies’ programs in order to ensure that UV data are intercalibrated, have common quality assurance and control procedures, and that the efforts among agencies are not duplicated. In order to achieve these goals, in 1994 the UV Panel recommended formation of the U.S. Central UV Calibration Facility (CUCF), which is operated by the Surface Radiation and Research Branch of the Air Resources Laboratory of National and Oceanic Atmospheric Administration. The CUCF is responsible for characterizing and calibrating UV measuring instruments from several U.S. federal agencies. Part of this effort is to calibrate UVB broadband rad...

Ocean Geography vis-à-vis Global Change and Sustainable Development

The associated development of global change research programs and the adoption of a global approach to the ocean by Agenda 21, Chapter 17 have generated an increasing need for investigations into coastal, deep ocean, and island management. To contribute to the development of ocean sciences vis-à-vis this need, in 1996 the International Geographical Union (IGU) launched the Oceans program. In 1998, the International Year of the Ocean, this program was implemented and converted into the Oceans 21 program, convened by the IGU and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO. The epistemological and conceptual backgrounds of this program framework, jointly with its key contents, are presented and discussed, as well as its consistency with the program areas and sectoral issues of Agenda 21.

New NRC report calls for improved U.S. climate modeling strategy

A coordinated national strategy in the United States for climate modeling is essential, states a recent report by the Climate Research Committee (CRC) of the National Research Council. The report draws a number of significant conclusions regarding the state of the country's high‐end climate modeling, and, in conjunction with better coordination, addresses resource availability and the prioritization of advanced modeling.The CRC report contains two major findings. First, although individual federal agencies may have established well‐defined priorities for climate modeling research, no integrated national strategy exists to focus U.S. climate modeling efforts. These efforts include the broad objectives of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), the needs for comprehensive contributions to the science base of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change, and the wide‐ranging needs of the scientific community No coordinated mechanism exists for prioritizing these needs or ensuring that these priorities are adequately addressed.

NRC on Global Change

The News & Comment article “Global change fights off a chill” by Andrew Lawler (12 June, p. [1682][1]) provides a good summary of the recent National Research Council (NRC) report ([1][2]) by the U.S. Committee on Global Change Research and the Board on Sustainable Development. The NRC report calls for a refocus of U.S. global change research in response to the “impressive array of scientific accomplishments” and on the evolution of federal policies over the last decade of the U.S. Global Change Research Program's (USGCRP's) existence. The NRC report justifiably bemoans the recent deterioration of surface-based data collection programs. The report also dwells on the allocation of funds among the various federal agencies and scientific approaches in the USGCRP. A pie chart in the News article shows three-quarters of the total USGCRP budget going to NASA, and the NRC report states that 61% of the USGCRP budget supports space-based observations, while “only 11% of USGCRP observations [were] devoted to in situ measurements.” The implication is that NASA's part could be used more effectively elsewhere in the USGCRP for surface-based studies. Such comparisons ignore the fact that NASA's Earth observation programs serve other national interests. Over half of what USGCRP calls its budget is being used to build an infrastructure of space-based, global, monitoring systems for scientific, human welfare, and commercial purposes. The NRC report admits that if funding for Earth observations from space were cut, the transfer of funds from NASA space missions to other agencies within the USGCRP would be “unlikely.” We agree that the allocation of limited resources requires careful consideration. Surface measurements provide unique and crucial data, but satellites are the only practical way of getting consistently calibrated, real-time observations over the whole globe. Both are needed to achieve a useful understanding of the Earth System. We also believe the NRC report and the News article may give the wrong impression that all of NASA's research is space-based when, in fact, most of NASA's global change science funding (which is about 14% of the total USGCRP budget) goes to independent research institutions to do in situ studies. Finally, it seems unfortunate that, given NASA's role in the USGCRP, no NASA scientists were on the NRC report committees. 1. [↵][3]Overview Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade (Academic Press, Washington, DC, 1998). [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.280.5370.1682 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text

Closing the Carbon Circle

The Kyoto treaty9s spotlight on the carbon cycle is already helping to drive a major overhaul of the multibillion-dollar U.S. Global Change Research Program (Science, 12 June, p. 1682). This week9s lead Focus stories explore the major scientific uncertainty underlying the Kyoto treaty--how much carbon is stored and released by the world9s forests (see p. 504)--and how a global monitoring system will track carbon dioxide flux between land and air (see p. 506).

Global Change Fights Off a Chill

Scientists in the U.S. Global Change Research Program point with pride to an accurate forecast of the recent El NiA±o as a demonstration of the success of the multibillion-dollar effort to understand Earth9s climate system. But that example may not be enough to head off concerns that the complex and multidisciplinary program has generated too little in the way of concrete results. Long a target of political conservatives, the global change program is now being urged by its supporters to take a more focused approach and to come up with ways to quantify its progress.

Program begins assessing the consequences of climate change

The nation's attention has recently become focused on climate change. But long before this season's El Niño hit the California coast and the Kyoto Conference made global warming a subject of news reports, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) embarked on a national assessment to focus federal agency research on the regional consequences of climate change. The USGCRP provides a framework for federal agencies to conduct research that increases our understanding of the Earth system and provides sound scientific information for national and international decision‐ making on global change issues.The USGCRP member agencies are now engaged in a national assessment of the consequences of climate variability and change for the United States. The main components of this assessment process have been a series of regional workshops, an Aspen Global Change Institute meeting of regional workshop participants that was held July 29–August 7, 1997, to begin to synthesize the workshop results, and a national forum, which was held in Washington, D.C., last November to engage a broader range of stakeholders in defining issues to be addressed in the assessment.

Our Changing planet: The FY global change research program

Our Changing planet: The FY global change research program