The State of Adaptation in the United States: An Overview

Over the past two decades the adaptation landscape has changed dramatically. From its early days as a vague theoretical concept, which was often viewed as a threat to advocating for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, it has developed into a widely, albeit not universally, recognized governmental mandate to reduce societal vulnerability to climate change. While it is important to appreciate the progress that we are making on this issue, it is impossible to ignore the urgent need to do more. Smart investment can be made by reflecting on what is already underway in order to determine where to build on existing efforts and where to innovate new approaches to fill the gaps in the path forward. In this report we provide illustrative examples of the variety of work on climate change adaptation that is underway in the United States. This is by no means an exhaustive survey of the field; however it does provide insight into the dominant focus of work to date, the resultant gaps, and the opportunities available for advancing this essential aspect of sustainability. We focus on four areas of activity -- agriculture, natural resources, human communities, and policy. The general trends relevant to these sectors can be applied more broadly to other sectors and countries. Adaptation can be thought of as a cycle of activities that ultimately -- if successful -- reduces vulnerability to climate change. This process starts with identifying the impacts of climate change to determine the types of problems climate change might pose. This includes all of the research on the causes and the global, regional, and local manifestations of climate change, often referred to as impacts assessments

Rainfall, temperature, and Classic Maya conflict: A comparison of hypotheses using Bayesian time-series analysis

Studies published over the last decade have reached contrasting conclusions regarding the impact of climate change on conflict among the Classic Maya (ca. 250-900 CE). Some researchers have argued that rainfall declines exacerbated conflict in this civilisation. However, other researchers have found that the relevant climate variable was increasing summer temperatures and not decreasing rainfall. The goal of the study reported here was to test between these two hypotheses. To do so, we collated annually-resolved conflict and climate data, and then subjected them to a recently developed Bayesian method for analysing count-based times-series. The results indicated that increasing summer temperature exacerbated conflict while annual rainfall variation had no effect. This finding not only has important implications for our understanding of conflict in the Maya region during the Classic Period. It also contributes to the ongoing discussion about the likely impact of contemporary climate change on conflict levels. Specifically, when our finding is placed alongside the results of other studies that have examined temperature and conflict over the long term, it is clear that the impact of climate change on conflict is context dependent

National Climate Indicators System Report

The National Climate Assessment (NCA), a component of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), is designed to produce periodic scientific assessments of the vulnerability of important sectors in the U.S. to climate change and variability, and to report on response strategies for responding to and coping with change. An important feature of the NCA is to develop climate-relevant information for use by a wide variety of stakeholders in the public and private sectors and in the scientific community. The development of a national system of indicators is an essential feature of such information, and provides a foundation for assessing change on an ongoing basis

Risk Quadruplet: Integrating Assessments of Threat, Vulnerability, Consequence, and Perception for Homeland Security and Homeland Defense

Risk for homeland security and homeland defense is often considered to be a function of threat, vulnerability, and consequence. But what is that function? And are we defining and measuring these terms consistently? Threat, vulnerability, and consequence assessments are conducted, often separately, and data from one assessment could be drastically different from that of another due to inconsistent definitions of terms and measurements, differing data collection methods, or varying data sources. It has also long been a challenge to integrate these three disparate assessments to establish an overall picture of risk to a given asset. Further, many agencies conduct these assessments and there is little to no sharing of data, methodologies, or results vertically (between federal, state, and local decision-makers) or horizontally (across the many different sectors), which results in duplication of efforts and conflicting risk assessment results. Obviously, risk is a function of our perceptions and those perceptions can influence our understanding of threat, vulnerability, and consequence. Some assessments rely on perceptions (elicited from subject matter experts) in order to qualify or quantify threat, vulnerability, and consequence. Others exclude perception altogether, relying on objective data, if available. Rather than fault the subjectivity of our perceptions, or muddle objective assessments with personal opinions, it makes sense to embrace our perceptions, but segregate them as a unique component of risk. A risk quadruplet is proposed to systematically collect and integrate assessments of threat, vulnerability, consequence, and perception, such that each dimension can be explored uniquely, and such that all four components can be aggregated into an overall risk assessment in a consistent, transparent, traceable, and reproducible manner. The risk quadruplet draws from the fields of homeland security, homeland defense, systems engineering, and even psychology to develop a model of risk that integrates all four assessments using multicriteria decision analysis. The model has undergone preliminary validation and has proven to be a viable solution for ranking assets based on the four proposed components of risk

Strategic Water

After the final phase of drawdown of U.S. troops in Iraq, it is important to do what we can to help maintain a level of stability and to look ahead to emerging security threats. Strategic Water: Iraq and Security Planning in the Euphrates-Tigris Basin by Frederick Lorenz and Edward J. Erickson makes an important contribution to this effort by taking a close look at a serious problem that is often neglected—the decline in freshwater availability and its impact on regional securit

A Climate Chronology

The most challenging of all endeavors in human history will likely be that of understanding the impact of our industrial and technological enterprises on the planet’s climate and ecosystems, and responding effectively to the threats posed by that impact. I began writing this chronology while developing a climate policy course at the University of Maine. It has grown substantially during the ensuing nine years, and continues to grow. By juxtaposing developments in climate science, U.S. policy, and international policy over the previous two centuries, I hope to give the reader new insights into where we have been, where we are now, and where we may be headed in this formidable endeavor. I welcome comments, and suggested additions to this evolving work. It will be updated every January

Hampton Roads Sea Level Rise Preparedness and Resilience Intergovernmental Pilot Project. Phase 2 Report: Recommendations, Accomplishments and Lessons Learned

Executive Summary After two years, the Hampton Roads Sea level Rise and Resilience Intergovernmental Planning Pilot Project (Intergovernmental Pilot Project or IPP), convened at Old Dominion University, has come to a successful close. Although the conclusion of the project is different than originally imagined by the drafters of the IPP Charter, the process in and of itself brought hundreds of stakeholders together, built lasting and ongoing relationships, and produced many workable recommendations for the region that can be accomplished by a variety of partnerships. The key deliverables include a whole of government mitigation and adaptation planning process and an integrated regional recommendation, both which can serve as a template for other regions. Additionally the IPP demonstrated a new role for an urban campus to act as a community convener, matching focused research and curriculum development with public service across the university and the region. Initiated in June 2014, the IPP was an effort to use the knowledge, skills and expertise of all regional stakeholders to create a framework or template for intergovernmental strategic planning that could be used outside the region; and, to implement that integrated strategy in Hampton Roads, Virginia, creating an effective and efficient method for planning holistically for sea level rise and recurrent flooding. This “Whole of Government and Community” effort would not have been successful without the hundreds of stakeholders and volunteer leaders from across all levels of government, academia, and the community who participated out of a sense of duty to their community and commitment to the collaboration. Knowing water knows no jurisdictional bounds, a high level of intergovernmental collaboration is necessary to develop integrated regional solutions and implement effective sea level rise preparedness and resilience strategies. Additionally, the wider community in Hampton Roads recognizes that they too will be affected by not only sea level rise itself, but also the adaptation strategies implemented in preparation. Executive Summary Phase 2 Report: Recommendations, Accomplishments and Lessons Learned Executive Summary 11 Phase 1 of the project, from June 2014 through June 2015, saw the drafting and signing of a Charter, the recruitment of a steering committee, a host of events, and the development of working group and advisory committees comprised of subject matter experts. Phase 2, from June 2015 through June 2016, included heavy discussion with regard to ongoing strategies for intergovernmental collaboration as well as research, a number of case studies carried out by committees and working groups, and the careful development of recommendations for the region. The IPP concludes successfully with a series of recommendations from each working group and committee as well as a final resolution drafted by the Legal Working Group and containing the consensus views of steering committee members. Though the recommendations vary in specificity and subject area, a few themes are clear. In order to move forward regionally, local stakeholders need to maintain, institutionalize and build relationships with each other in order to facilitate effective collaboration and information sharing. Institutionalizing these relationships and partnerships is key, as people shift positions throughout their careers. Additionally, while more data is needed, the methods by which that data is integrated and shared are equally important. Further, some form of the Whole of Government and Community approach that focuses on the watershed as opposed to jurisdictional boundaries is essential to accomplishing the recommendations set forth in this report. The IPP has been a success because of the dedicated volunteers committed to a resilient Hampton Roads. During the last two years, this project advanced regional adaptation through the evaluation and recommendation of a future governance structure, the development of working group and committee recommendations, building public awareness, building awareness of the need for federal agency involvement locally and building relationships among numerous organizations involved in the Pilot Project. All of this work, which in pieces may be specific only to a unique circumstance or area, when taken as a whole, brings foundational change. It builds on previous work accomplished by other leaders in the Hampton Roads region and should be leveraged in the future to accelerate regional adaptation

U.S Naval Strategy in the 1990\u27s

The decade of the 1990s represents a distinctive period in American naval strategic thinking. Bounded on one side by the end of the Cold War in 1989-91 and on the other by the beginning of the era of the global war on terrorism after 11 September 2001, these were years in which the U.S. Navy of the 1990s found itself faced with a dramatically altered strategic situation. For the first time in at least four decades, the U.S. Navy had neither a peer nor a superior naval adversary; further, no credible naval adversary could be discerned in the foreseeable future.https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers/1026/thumbnail.jp