Policy strategies to address sustainability of Alaskan boreal forests in response to a directionally changing climate

Abstract

Human activities are altering many factors that determine the fundamental properties of ecological and social systems. Is sustainability a realistic goal in a world in which many key process controls are directionally changing? To address this issue, we integrate several disparate sources of theory to address sustainability in directionally changing social-ecological systems, apply this framework to climate-warming impacts in Interior Alaska, and describe a suite of policy strategies that emerge from these analyses. Climate warming in Interior Alaska has profoundly affected factors that influence landscape processes (climate regulation and disturbance spread) and natural hazards, but has only indirectly influenced ecosystem goods such as food, water, and wood that receive most management attention. Warming has reduced cultural services provided by ecosystems, leading to some of the few institutional responses that directly address the causes of climate warming, e.g., indigenous initiatives to the Arctic Council. Four broad policy strategies emerge: (i) enhancing human adaptability through learning and innovation in the context of changes occurring at multiple scales; (ii) increasing resilience by strengthening negative (stabilizing) feedbacks that buffer the system from change and increasing options for adaptation through biological, cultural, and economic diversity; (iii) reducing vulnerability by strengthening institutions that link the high-latitude impacts of climate warming to their low-latitude causes; and (iv) facilitating transformation to new, potentially more beneficial states by taking advantage of opportunities created by crisis. Each strategy provides societal benefits, and we suggest that all of them be pursued simultaneously.adaptability ͉ Alaska ͉ climate change ͉ resilience ͉ vulnerability T he world is undergoing rapid change in many of the factors that control the properties of ecosystems. In the last 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than during any comparable period of human history, with even more rapid and extensive changes projected for the next half century and beyond (1, 2). For example, human activities have substantially altered climate, the hydrologic cycle, biodiversity, land cover, the use of biological productivity, and the cycling of nitrogen at global scales (3). People have always profoundly influenced their environment (4). However, the recent increase in the magnitude and extent of these impacts raises serious challenges to sustaining earth's life support systems, the services that ecosystems provide to society (5). These ecosystem services contribute fundamentally to human well-being, i.e., the basic material needs for a good life, freedom and choice, good social relations, and personal security (6).Given the importance and difficulty of fostering sustainability in a world with an uncertain future, many approaches are being explored (7-10). In this article, we integrate several of these approaches. We argue that, by understanding the linka...

Understanding protected area resilience: a multi‐scale, social‐ecological approach

“…Within this broader framework, a nested framework (adapted from Chapin et al 2006) offers a protocol to structure interacting, cross-scale social-ecological components, processes, institutions, and feedbacks. The workbooks use the adaptive cycle and panarchy models (Kenward et al 2001, Gunderson and and the adaptive governance and social-network literatures to facilitate an understanding of system dynamics and interactions, assess governance, and offer insights about potential actions.…”

Research core and framework of sustainability science

“…In forestry research, societal aspects have been frequently addressed. Chapin et al (2006) reviewed human-environment interactions affecting Alaskan boreal forests and suggested four broad policy strategies: fostering human adaptability, enhancing resilience, reducing vulnerability, and enhancing transformability. The ownership of forests, including public protected areas, private forests, and community forests, is a critical issue under active discussion.…”

Arctic biodiversity: increasing richness accompanies shrinking refugia for a cold‐associated tundra fauna

“…As a consequence, the Arctic tundra biome is of conservation concern because non-migratory species associated with this relatively young and depauperate biome are adapted to cold environments that have prevailed at high latitudes through much of the Quaternary (2.6 Myr; Abbott andBrochmann 2003, Callaghan et al 2004). Historical biogeographic studies revealed that Arctic species persisted in refugial areas through previous climatic warm phases (e.g., Fedorov and Stenseth 2002, Abbott and Brochmann 2003, Brunhoff et al 2003, Hewitt 2004, Hope et al 2013a), but continued persistence under current climate trends may depend on our ability to locate and accommodate refugial regions for Arctic biodiversity in an increasingly anthropic landscape (Chapin et al 2006, Kuemmerle et al 2014, Raynolds et al 2014). …”