Transcript Climate Impact & Adaptation Issues

Some Concepts for Assessing Impact and
Adaptation Responses of Fish and
Fisheries to Climate Change
Kim Hyatt and Mark Johannes
Fisheries and Oceans Canada and C-CIARN Fisheries, Pacific Biological
Station, Nanaimo, B.C.
ICES Symposium, Bergen, Norway 11-14 May 2004:
The Influence of Climate Change on North Atlantic Fish Stocks
Outline for this talk
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Brief perspective on climate change from the IPCC.
Identify scope of natural and human systems
responses to CVC events and implications for
research in fisheries and aquatic science.
Provide a snapshot of fisheries and aquatic science
CVC research in Canada (1958-2003) i.e. what have
we been doing and where are we at now ?
Examine where Canada’s FAS climate change
research efforts appear to be headed ?
Provide suggestions for some new directions.
Conclusions
The IPCC has made a persuasive case given various GCM’s that global
climate in the 21 st century will be warmer i.e. 1-3 degress warmer by
2050 even with Kyoto reductions of GHG’s so impact & adaptation
responses of natural resource and human systems to climate change are
inevitable.
What are the “big picture” implications for fisheries and aquatic
science research by groups such as ICES or CDFO ?
Source: Climate change 2001:
the scientific basis. Summary
for policy makers. Contribution
of Working Group I to the Third
Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC)
J. T. Houghton, Y. Ding, D.J.
Griggs, M. Noguer, P. J. van
der Linden and D. Xiaosu (Eds.)
Cambridge University Press,
UK. 2001. Figure 5: p. 14.
A Question of Scope: Climate impact & adaptation issues are
imbedded within each of several domains that define the human
ecosystem and that warrant scientific enquiry ( impact and adaptation issues
may be considered 1st at the abiotic level involving interactions between the global
atmosphere, hydrosphere and geosphere)
Abiotic I&A issues propagate through the biosphere where populations of organisms and
ecosystems respond in complex ways to climate change. I&A studies involving both short
and long term, or even evolutionary scale considerations, are a well developed element of
Canadian fisheries science focused on biological systems (e.g. large volume of work on Atlantic
groundfish such as cod, Pacific salmon, Great Lakes fishes etc…)
Moving from the “natural” to the “cultural” side of the ledger, a diversity of socioeconomic systems have
developed with a focus on “fisheries” resource extraction. I&A issues multiply rapidly at the interface
between natural and cultural systems. Fisheries and aquatic science research on impact and adaptation
issues from a socioeconomic or “human systems” perspective lag far behind those in the natural-abiotic
and natural-biotic domains as amply demonstrated by the majority of talks at the current ICES
symposium.
Human populations modify their surroundings by creating what Redman (1999) refers to as the “built
environment”. The built environment consists of the sum of both “hard” and “soft” infrastructure
elements. Fishing fleets, aquaculture facilities, processing plants and hatcheries are examples of “hard”
cultural assets belonging to the built environment. Government institutions, laws, policies, information
systems are examples of “soft” cultural assets belonging to the built environment.
List of What a “Balanced” Impact & Adaptation Science Must Cover
• Multiple domains (abiotic, biotic, natural,
cultural) exhibiting complex boundaries and
interactions.
• A much wider range of subject matter than
single disciplines or institutions (e.g. CDFO
or ICES) normally deal with.
• Events at a range of spatial (local, regional,
global) and temporal (prehistoric, historic,
current, future) scales.
• Consideration of effects on both “hard” (e.g.
fishing fleets, processing plants, hatcheries,
dams) and “soft” (e.g. institutions, treaties,
laws, policies, mgt processes, information
systems) infrastructure as part of the “built
environment”
How are we doing ? A snapshot of the state of “fisheries”
impact & adaptation science in Canada
C-CIARN Fisheries ( www.fishclimate.ca ) has compiled a bibliographic
database on CVC issues for fish, fisheries & aquatic resources in Canada
from a wide range of sources (Johannes & Hyatt 2004).
Climate Change I&A Database
• 12,410 International records
• 1,604 Canadian records (by author & site)
Climate impact and adaptation references have been compiled by
searching on key words, paper titles, citation sources and climate phrases.
e.g. climate impacts : changes to, assessments of, prediction of, effects of and
climate adaptation : evolution of, adaptation to, fisheries, flood or drought –
management, managing, conservation planning, sustainable resource planning
International FAS Records (12,410)
• 12,144 on impacts (98 %)
Canadian FAS Records (1,604)
• 1460 on impacts (> 90 %)
• 266 on adaptation (2 %)
• 144 on adaptation (< 10 %)
Impacts - Aquatic
Resources 30%
Impacts - Abiotic
13%
Impacts - Aquatic
Wildlife 7%
Adaptation Fisheries 3%
Adaptation - Fish
Species 2%
Adaptation Aquatic
Resources 3%
Adaptation Evolutionary Fish
6%
Impacts - Fish
Species 27%
Impacts Fisheries 15%
250
Adaptation
Impacts
#'s of Records
200
150
100
50
0
1960 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002
•
Cdn research on fisheries CVC issues increased rapidly after the mid-80’s
•
Virtually all of this increase involved CVC impact studies (1460 references)
•
Adaptation to climate change is not a major subject for study by fisheries
scientists (only 144 references mostly after 1999)
Most Canadian CVC research is focused on “physics
& phytoplankton” (i.e. 54 % of studies deal with physics & biophysics of
atmosphere-and-ocean climate systems & especially links between GCM’s & the
biophysics of carbon sources and sinks; 35 % biological ; 11 % paleobiology).
Zooplankton
13%
Bass, Walleye,
Trout, Charr
10%
Marine Mammals
8%
Waterfowl
4%
Capelin, Hake,
Halibut, Herring,
Sablefish,
Sardine
4%
Shellfish
2%
Salmon
12%
Northern Cod
10%
Polar Bears
2%
Phytoplankton
35%
Conclusion: FAS research may be focused too
narrowly to deal principally with the science of
atmosphere & ocean climate systems while
ignoring the need to develop climate science for
large interacting natural resource & human
systems.
Where do we appear to be going with
development of CVC Science in Canada ?
Draft Climate Change Science Plan
Monitoring
GHG Sinks
Atmosphere
Farms
Oceans
Forests
Cryosphere
Wetlands
Hydrosphere
Land
Processes
Modeling
Scenarios
Atmosphere Atmosphere
Oceans
Ocean
Scenarios
Oceans
Water-andEnergy
Research
Models
Cryosphere
Land
Coupled
Production
Global
Impacts
Sectors (i.e. all
natural resources)
All Socio-economic
systems
Regional
More “physics and phytoplankton” i.e. a cont’d emphasis on
the physics & biophysics of atmosphere & ocean climate
systems (i.e. 5 of 6 FCCSP thematic streams focus on this)
Short shrift to
sectoral impacts
& ? adaptation ?
Suggestions for a more balanced approach to
“Fisheries” CVC Science in Canada (C-CIARN Fisheries
NAC, May 1, 2004)
Climate Change Science
Atmosphere & Ocean
Climate Systems
Natural Resource and
Human Systems
Monitoring
Monitoring
GHG Sinks
I & A Processes
Processes
I & A Models
Models
I & A Scenarios
Scenarios
Built Env’t Issues
I & A Policies
Shift in emphasis required if we’re to develop “fisheries” climate science to
effectively explore impact and adaptation outcomes for “large interactive
natural resource and human systems” !
Impact Scenario (“top-down”) versus Vulnerability (“bottomup”) approaches are divergent methods for climate change
impact & adaptation assessments in fisheries.
Climate Scenario Approach
(typified by ICES presentations)
Vulnerability Approach (O’Brien
et al 2004, CICERO paper)
Climate Science impact models
Incorporate results into
Management Strategies
Invoke climate scenarios
Estimate future vulnerability &
Identify adaptation strategies
(warming, circulation etc)
Estimate climate impacts on fish &
fisheries
Estimate climate impacts on fish &
fisheries
Assess vulnerability
(experiences, coping ability, capacity to adapt)
Provide Advice and Plan for
Stakeholder Response
Engage stakeholders
(Those affected by CVC e.g. fishermen)
Event Frequency
Vulnerability assessments require identification of the effective coping
range for a given natural resource or human system beyond which
dramatic and occasionally irreversible changes in system state occur.
System
Coping
Range
Ocean Temperature or River Discharge
Hierarchy of Coping Ranges & Scale
(a) Global Hydrosphere
(b) Global Fish Populations
(c) Atlantic Groundfish
(d) North Atlantic Cod
(e) Western Rim Cod
Event Frequency
(f) Gulf St Lawrence Cod
Coping
Range
Ocean Temperature
Other Needs ? Develop Integrated Assessment Models of Impact &
Adaptation Responses to Climate Change Events to Reflect Interactions
Among “ Physics, Phytoplankton, Fish, Fisheries & Society”
CVC Event
e.g. drought
Adaptive
Response I. e.g.
behavioral,
physiological,
ecological, etc…
3
4
IAR Model I – Resources, 1-5
IAR Model II – Managers, 6-9
IAR Model III – Stakeholders, 10-13
1
5
Impact I. General biophysical
impact e.g. on region or
watershed
6
13
I. NATURAL
RESOURCE
Impact I. Focused
biophysical impact
e.g. on the fishhabitat complex
• “fisheries” CVC issues are
conditioned by complex interactions
among biological resources
(salmon), resource “regulators” (e.g.
management boards) & stakeholders
(e.g. capture and culture fisheries).
Exploration of interactions requires
development of coupled models and
an iterative approach.
9
Impact II. Focused
socioeconomic
impacts e.g. by natural
resource mgrs.
2
8
II. RESOURCE
MANAGERS
Adaptive
Responses II & III
e.g. behavioral,
cultural, social,
economic, legal
7
Impact III.
Focused on
stakeholders of
specific
resources and
“built
environment”
III. STAKEHOLDERS assets
12
10
11
Summary and Conclusions
 Climate change will accelerate dramatically over the next 50 years even with Kyoto levels of
mitigation for greenhouse gases so climate impact and adaptation issues will proliferate for all
natural resource sectors including fisheries.
 FAS research on impact and especially adaptation issues from a “human systems” perspective
lags far behind work on climate impacts on biophysical systems.
 Adaptation responses of fish and especially fisheries to climate change do not appear to be
major subjects for study to date by fisheries science, but it should be.
 Human populations rely on mosaics of natural and built environment assets that will interact in
response to climate change and fisheries systems such as fleets-factories-fish are no exception.
 Climate impact and adaptation issues in fisheries are complex and will require interdisciplinary
work at levels that will challenge the capacity of existing national and international institutions.
 We need a more balanced approach to fisheries and oceans (not just oceans) climate science
focused on (a) atmospheric and ocean climate systems and (b) large, interactive, natural
resource and human systems.
 We need to adopt new methodological paradigms (i.e. vulnerability assessment and risk
management, integrated assessment response models) and working partnerships with social
sciences to get beyond “physics and phytoplankton” to include fish, fisheries managers and other
fisheries-dependent stakeholders as routine subjects for the attention of Fisheries CVC Science.