March 2024
·
13 Reads
This page lists the scientific contributions of an author, who either does not have a ResearchGate profile, or has not yet added these contributions to their profile.
It was automatically created by ResearchGate to create a record of this author's body of work. We create such pages to advance our goal of creating and maintaining the most comprehensive scientific repository possible. In doing so, we process publicly available (personal) data relating to the author as a member of the scientific community.
If you're a ResearchGate member, you can follow this page to keep up with this author's work.
If you are this author, and you don't want us to display this page anymore, please let us know.
March 2024
·
13 Reads
February 2022
·
93 Reads
·
10 Citations
The impacts of climate change (CC) on natural and cultural resources are far‐reaching and complex. A major challenge facing resource managers is not knowing the exact timing and nature of those impacts. To confront this problem, scientists, adaptation specialists, and resource managers have begun to use scenario planning (SP). This structured process identifies a small set of scenarios—descriptions of potential future conditions that encompass the range of critical uncertainties—and uses them to inform planning. We reflect on a series of five recent participatory CC SP projects at four US National Park Service units and derive guidelines for using CC SP to support natural and cultural resource conservation. Specifically, we describe how these engagements affected management, present a generalized CC SP approach grounded in management priorities, and share key insights and innovations that (1) fostered participant confidence and deep engagement in the participatory CC SP process, (2) shared technical information in a way that encouraged informed, effective participation, (3) contextualized CC SP in the broader picture of relevant longstanding or emerging nonclimate stressors, (4) incorporated quantitative approaches to expand analytical capacity and assess qualitative findings, and (5) translated scenarios and all their complexity into strategic action.
August 2021
·
207 Reads
·
25 Citations
Climatic Change
Scenario planning has emerged as a widely used planning process for resource management in situations of consequential, irreducible uncertainty. Because it explicitly incorporates uncertainty, scenario planning is regularly employed in climate change adaptation. An early and essential step in developing scenarios is identifying “climate futures”—descriptions of the physical attributes of plausible future climates that could occur at a specific place and time. Divergent climate futures that describe the broadest possible range of plausible conditions support information needs of decision makers, including understanding the spectrum of potential resource responses to climate change, developing strategies robust to that range, avoiding highly consequential surprises, and averting maladaptation. Here, we discuss three approaches for generating climate futures: a Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP)-ensemble, a quadrant-average, and an individual-projection approach. All are designed to capture relevant uncertainty, but they differ in utility for different applications, complexity, and effort required to implement. Using an application from Big Bend National Park as an example of numerous similar efforts to develop climate futures for National Park Service applications over the past decade, we compare these approaches, focusing on their ability to capture among-projection divergence during early-, mid-, and late-twenty-first century periods to align with near-, mid-, and long-term planning efforts. The quadrant-average approach and especially the individual-projection approach captured a broader range of plausible future conditions than the RCP-ensemble approach, particularly in the near term. Therefore, the individual-projection approach supports decision makers seeking to understand the broadest potential characterization of future conditions. We discuss tradeoffs associated with different climate future approaches and highlight suitable applications.
January 2020
·
95 Reads
·
19 Citations
Parks Stewardship Forum
The US National Park Service has embraced participatory scenario planning as core process for conducting climate change adaptation. Here, we describe how NPS uses scenario planning, use of climate futures, and a range of approaches from "scenario lite" through an intensive, deep-dive scenario driven adaptation process.
... While useful, the broad spatial scale of traditional CCVA approaches can weaken their utility for planning management of wildlife habitats in the face of climate change. Most approaches focus on geographic-scale range shifts or identifying which species are most vulnerable to climate change (LEDee et al., 2021;Miller et al., 2022), but most management actions occur at the "site-scale" (<1 km) where changes in habitats and biotic interactions are expected to be the dominant climate effects (Pacifici et al., 2015;Rowland et al., 2011). Recommendations based on geographic-scale CCVA approaches may omit important spatial variation in effects at this scale (Mantyka-Pringle et al., 2014;Reece et al., 2018). ...
February 2022
... Traditionally, these simulations have been combined by treating each climate model as equally plausible (e.g. Lawrence et al., 2021), a practice known as "model democracy." This approach assumes all 55 models are equally capable of simulating past and future climates Knutti, 2010). ...
August 2021
Climatic Change
... -112.140143) in the South Rim District. We worked with climate uncertainty by considering a range of plausible climate futures [33,34] represented by 28 projections. These 28 projections consisted of two simulations each of 14 downscaled CMIP5 global climate models, in which one simulation used a moderate greenhouse gas emissions pathway that assumes lower future emissions rates due to technological advancements and policy change (Representative Concentration Pathway [RCP] 4.5) and the other used a high emissions pathway (RCP 8.5) [35]. ...
January 2020
Parks Stewardship Forum