The response of soil organic matter (OM) decomposition to increasing temperature is a critical aspect of ecosystem responses to global change. The impacts of climate warming on decomposition dynamics have not been resolved due to apparently contradictory results from field and lab experiments, most of which has focused on labile carbon with short turnover times. But the majority of total soil carbon stocks are comprised of organic carbon with turnover times of decades to centuries. Understanding the response of these carbon pools to climate change is essential for forecasting longer-term changes in soil carbon storage. Herein, we briefly synthesize information from recent studies that have been conducted using a wide variety of approaches. In our effort to understand research to-date, we derive a new conceptual model that explicitly identifies the processes controlling soil OM availability for decomposition and allows a more explicit description of the factors regulating OM decomposition under different circumstances. It explicitly defines resistance of soil OM to decomposition as being due either to its chemical conformation (quality) or its physico-chemical protection from decomposition. The former is embodied in the depolymerization process, the latter by adsorption/desorption and aggregate turnover. We hypothesize a strong role for variation in temperature sensitivity as a function of reaction rates for both. We conclude that important advances in understanding the temperature response of the processes that control substrate availability, depolymerization, microbial efficiency, and enzyme production will be needed to predict the fate of soil carbon stocks in a warmer world.

Adaptive governance must work "on the ground," that is, it must operate through structures and procedures that the people it governs perceive to be legitimate and fair, as well as incorporating processes and substantive goals that are effective in allowing social-ecological systems (SESs) to adapt to climate change and other impacts. To address the continuing and accelerating alterations that climate change is bringing to SESs, adaptive governance generally will require more flexibility than prior governance institutions have often allowed. However, to function as good governance, adaptive governance must pay real attention to the problem of how to balance this increased need for flexibility with continuing governance stability so that it can foster adaptation to change without being perceived or experienced as perpetually destabilizing, disruptive, and unfair. Flexibility and stability serve different purposes in governance, and a variety of tools exist to strike different balances between them while still preserving the governance institution's legitimacy among the people governed. After reviewing those purposes and the implications of climate change for environmental governance, we examine psychological insights into the structuring of adaptive governance and the variety of legal tools available to incorporate those insights into adaptive governance regimes. Because the substantive goals of governance systems will differ among specific systems, we do not purport to comment on what the normative or substantive goals of law should be. Instead, we conclude that attention to process and procedure (including participation), as well as increased use of substantive standards (instead of rules), may allow an increased level of substantive flexibility to operate with legitimacy and fairness, providing the requisite levels of psychological, social, and economic stability needed for communities to adapt successfully to the Anthropocene.

Management of natural resources for the production of ecosystem services, which are vital for human well-being, is necessary even when there is uncertainty regarding system response to management action. This uncertainty is the result of incomplete controllability, complex internal feedbacks, and non-linearity that often interferes with desired management outcomes, and insufficient understanding of nature and people. Adaptive management was developed to reduce such uncertainty. We present a framework for the application of adaptive management for ecosystem services that explicitly accounts for cross-scale tradeoffs in the production of ecosystem services. Our framework focuses on identifying key spatiotemporal scales (plot, patch, ecosystem, landscape, and region) that encompass dominant structures and processes in the system, and includes within- and cross-scale dynamics, ecosystem service tradeoffs, and management controllability within and across scales. Resilience theory recognizes that a limited set of ecological processes in a given system regulate ecosystem services, yet our understanding of these processes is poorly understood. If management actions erode or remove these processes, the system may shift into an alternative state unlikely to support the production of desired services. Adaptive management provides a process to assess the underlying within and cross-scale tradeoffs associated with production of ecosystem services while proceeding with management designed to meet the demands of a growing human population.

Freshwater ecosystems are important for global biodiversity and provide essential ecosystem services. There is consensus in the scientific literature that freshwater ecosystems are vulnerable to the impacts of environmental change, which may trigger irreversible regime shifts upon which biodiversity and ecosystem services may be lost. There are profound uncertainties regarding the management and assessment of the vulnerability of freshwater ecosystems to environmental change. Quantitative approaches are needed to reduce this uncertainty. We describe available statistical and modeling approaches along with case studies that demonstrate how resilience theory can be applied to aid decision-making in natural resources management. We highlight especially how long-term monitoring efforts combined with ecological theory can provide a novel nexus between ecological impact assessment and management, and the quantification of systemic vulnerability and thus the resilience of ecosystems to environmental change.

ABSTRACT. In this article we summarize histories of nonlinear, complex interactions among societal, legal, and ecosystem dynamics in six North American water basins, as they respond to changing climate. These case studies were chosen to explore the conditions for emergence of adaptive governance in heavily regulated and developed social-ecological systems nested within a hierarchical governmental system. We summarize resilience assessments conducted in each system to provide a synthesis and reference by the other articles in this special feature. We also present a general framework used to evaluate the interactions between society and ecosystem regimes and the governance regimes chosen to mediate those interactions. The case studies show different ways that adaptive governance may be triggered, facilitated, or constrained by ecological and/or legal processes. The resilience assessments indicate that complex interactions among the governance and ecosystem components of these systems can produce different trajectories, which include patterns of (a) development and stabilization, (b) cycles of crisis and recovery, which includes lurches in adaptation and learning, and (3) periods of innovation, novelty, and transformation. Exploration of cross scale (Panarchy) interactions among levels and sectors of government and society illustrate that they may constrain development trajectories, but may also provide stability during crisis or innovation at smaller scales; create crises, but may also facilitate recovery; and constrain system transformation, but may also provide windows of opportunity in which transformation, and the resources to accomplish it, may occur. The framework is the starting point for our exploration of how law might play a role in enhancing the capacity of social-ecological systems to adapt to climate change.

Declining rates of soil respiration are reliably observed during long-term laboratory incubations. However, the cause of this decline is uncertain. We explored different controls on soil respiration to elucidate the drivers of respiration rate declines during long-term soil incubations. Following a long-term (707 day) incubation (30°C) of soils from two sites (a cultivated and a forested plot at Kellogg Biological Station, Hickory Corners, MI USA), soils were significantly depleted of both soil carbon and microbial biomass. To test the ability of these carbon-and biomass-depleted ("incubationdepleted") soils to respire labile organic matter, we exposed soils to a second, 42 day incubation (30°C) with and without an addition of plant residues. We controlled for soil carbon and microbial biomass depletion by incubating field fresh ("fresh") soils with and without an amendment of wheat and corn residues. Although respiration was consistently higher in the fresh versus incubation-depleted soil (2 and 1.2 times higher in the fresh cultivated and fresh forested soil, respectively), the ability to respire substrate did not differ between the fresh and incubation-depleted soils. Further, at the completion of the 42 day incubation, levels of microbial biomass in the incubation-depleted soils remained unchanged, while levels of microbial biomass in the field-fresh soil declined to levels similar to that of the incubation-depleted soils. Extra-cellular enzyme pools in the incubation-depleted soils were sometimes slightly reduced and did not respond to addition of labile substrate and did not limit soil respiration. Our results support the idea that available soil organic matter, rather than a lack microbial biomass and extracellular enzymes, limits soil respiration over the course of long-term incubations. That decomposition of both wheat and corn straw residues did not change after major changes in the soil biomass during extended incubation supports the omission of biomass values from biogeochemical models.

Afforestation is often viewed as the purposeful planting of trees in historically nonforested grasslands, but an unintended consequence is woody encroachment, which should be considered part of the afforestation process. In North America's temperate grassland biome, Eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana L.) is a native species used in tree plantings that aggressively invades in the absence of controlling processes. Cedar is a well‐studied woody encroacher, but little is known about the degree to which cedar windbreaks, which are advocated for in agroforestry programs, are contributing to woody encroachment, what factors are associated with cedar spread from windbreaks, nor where encroachment from windbreaks is occurring in contemporary social–ecological landscapes. We used remotely sensed imagery to identify the presence and pattern of woody encroachment from windbreaks in the Nebraska Sandhills. We used multimodel inference to compare three classes of models representing three hypotheses about factors that could influence cedar spread: (a) windbreak models based on windbreak structure and design elements; (b) abiotic models focused on local environmental conditions; and (c) landscape models characterizing coupled human‐natural features within the broader matrix. Woody encroachment was evident for 23% of sampled windbreaks in the Nebraska Sandhills. Of our candidate models, our inclusive landscape model carried 92% of the model weight. This model indicated that encroachment from windbreaks was more likely near roadways and less likely near farmsteads, other cedar plantings, and waterbodies, highlighting strong social ties to the distribution of woody encroachment from tree plantings across contemporary landscapes. Our model findings indicate where additional investments into cedar control can be prioritized to prevent cedar spread from windbreaks. This approach can serve as a model in other temperate regions to identify where woody encroachment resulting from temperate agroforestry programs is emerging.

ABSTRACT. Several frameworks have been developed to assess the resilience of social-ecological systems, but most require substantial data inputs, time, and technical expertise. Stakeholders and practitioners often lack the resources for such intensive efforts. Furthermore, most end with problem framing and fail to explicitly address trade-offs and uncertainty. To remedy this gap, we developed a rapid survey assessment that compares the relative resilience of social-ecological systems with respect to a number of resilience properties. This approach generates large amounts of information relative to stakeholder inputs. We targeted four stakeholder categories: government (policy, regulation, management), end users (farmers, ranchers, landowners, industry), agency/public science (research, university, extension), and NGOs (environmental, citizen, social justice) in four North American watersheds, to assess social-ecological resilience through surveys. Conceptually, social-ecological systems are comprised of components ranging from strictly human to strictly ecological, but that relate directly or indirectly to one another. They have soft boundaries and several important dimensions or axes that together describe the nature of social-ecological interactions, e.g., variability, diversity, modularity, slow variables, feedbacks, capital, innovation, redundancy, and ecosystem services. There is no absolute measure of resilience, so our design takes advantage of cross-watershed comparisons and therefore focuses on relative resilience. Our approach quantifies and compares the relative resilience across watershed systems and potential trade-offs among different aspects of the social-ecological system, e.g., between social, economic, and ecological contributions. This approach permits explicit assessment of several types of uncertainty (e.g., self-assigned uncertainty for stakeholders; uncertainty across respondents, watersheds, and subsystems), and subjectivity in perceptions of resilience among key actors and decision makers and provides an efficient way to develop the mental models that inform our stakeholders and stakeholder categories.