Title : IAIOES09 REPORT ON THE IAI WORKSHOP ON THE COMPARATIVE STUDIES OF TEMPERATE TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS Type : IAI Newsletter NSF Org: GEO Date : August 8, 1995 File : iaioes09 THE INTER-AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH REPORT ON THE IAI WORKSHOP ON THE COMPARATIVE STUDIES OF TEMPERATE TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS July 26-29, 1994 Durham, NC, USA TABLE OF CONTENTS =09 =46OREWORD 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 I. BACKGROUND ON THE BREADBASKET 9 1. Ecosystems and Activities 9 2. Importance of Rainfall 9 3. North and South 10 II. THE NEED FOR RESEARCH 11 =09 1. Losses in Food Production 11 2. Grazing 13 3. Loss of Biodiversity 13 4. Atmospheric Gas Exchanges 14 III. ISSUES, PRIORITIES, AND METHODOLOGIES 17=09 1. Major Concerns 19=09 2. Non-Specific Issues 19 =09 3. Possible Approaches 19 4. Methodology 20 IV. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 22 =09 =09 V. PROPOSED ACTIVITIES 24 =09 1. Workshops 24 2. Exchange and Communication 24 3. Research Activities 24 4. Policy Considerations 25 VI. EXAMPLES 26 =09 =09 VII. REFERENCES 30 APPENDIX 1: IAI Initial Scientific Themes 32 APPENDIX 2: Acronyms 33 APPENDIX 3: Workshop Participants =09 35 =46OREWORD Special challenges faced the 26 scientists who met in a workshop at Durham, North Carolina, in the United States July 26- 29, 1994, to discuss the effects of global change on temperate terrestrial ecosystems. The area they were considering for a possible research agenda is large, extremely productive, and the problems confronting it must be approached through a number of scientific disciplines. Participating were soil scientists, meteorologists, wildlife specialists, social scientists, hydrologists, and statistical specialists. Despite their disparate viewpoints, they agreed on research objectives outlined in this report. The workshop was convened by the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI), created in May of 1992 to address the need for advanced study of regionally significant global change issues. The IAI is designed to evolve into a network of research facilities throughout the Americas which will augment research capabilities and promote education and training within the scientific fields most important to current and future global change research. At this writing, representatives of 16 nations have signed the agreement establishing the Institute, recognizing that no one nation can adequately study the complex environmental mechanisms on this planet that tend to be global in nature. The signatory nations agree that a greater understanding of these mechanisms may be achieved by the international pooling of information. The agreement notes the importance of an evolving scientific agenda that reflects an appropriate balance among the biogeographic areas of scientific importance. It also stresses the need to address in an integral fashion the physical, economic, and social issues relating to global change. Seven broadly defined research topics have been identified as priorities for special focus. To identify the most pressing scientific questions and socio-economic issues within those seven priority topics, a group of physical and social scientists met in Silver Spring, MD., in the U.S. on March 5-6, 1992. The resulting document, the Report of the Scientific Experts, provides the basis for a series of seven workshops on scientific program development, intended to advance the science agenda of IAI. =09 The workshop on temperate terrestrial ecosystems was the sixth held in the series. The previous five were: Oceanic, Coastal, and Estuarine Processes in Temperate Zones (Montevideo, Uruguay), High Latitude Processes (Buenos Aires, Argentina), Ocean/Atmosphere/Land Interactions in the Inter-Tropical Americas (Panam=E1 City, Panam=E1), Tropical Ecosystems and Biogeochemical Cycles (S=E3o Jos=E9 dos Campos, Brazil), and ENSO and Interannual Climate Variability (Lima, Per=FA). The final workshop in the series was held in Guadalajara, M=E9xico, on Impacts of Climate Change on Biodiversity. =09 This report details possible plans for scientific observational strategies, and suggests as well activities such as further workshops, exchange visits, and development of improved communication networks. It is only a proposed guide to action. The next step, as stated in the science plan, is to develop an implementation plan, a definite program for the topic. Participants in this workshop wish to emphasize the need for communication and cooperation between scientists in studying this subject, which requires, perhaps more than others, a multi- disciplinary approach. Most sincere thanks must be extended to all who helped in the preparation of this report. Special acknowledgment must be given to the members of the Steering Committee for this IAI theme. Those committee members were: Cynthia Rosenzweig from Columbia University, USA; Ant=F4nio Rocha Magalh=E3es from the Ministry of Planning, Brazil; Alejandro Castellanos from the University of Sonora, M=E9xico; Walter Baethgen from the International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC), Uruguay; and William Schlesinger from Duke University, USA, for their great contribution to the development of a science agenda on the IAI topic of Comparative Studies of Temperate Terrestrial Ecosystems. Gratitude must be expressed to all those who helped with the organization of this IAI workshop. Special acknowledgment must be extended to the local organizing committee for its excellent efforts in managing the complications of an international workshop and to the working group chairperson and co-chairperson who coordinated discussions and whose written reports and stimulating verbal contributions utlimately led to the drafting and completion of this report. The names of all participants, who made excellent contributions are listed in Appendix 3. Additionally I would like to acknowledge with much gratitude those individuals and institutions whose contributions allowed this workshop to occur. These include Dr. Robert Corell (National Science Foundation), Dr. Luis Bevilacqua (FAPERJ, Brazil), Dr. Michael Hall, James Buizer, Lisa Farrow and Claudia Nierenberg (NOAA/Office of Global Programs) for their constant enthusiasm and support during the development of this workshop. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the commitment, dedication and enthusiasm of my staff members, Raquel Gomes, Marcella Ohira and D=E9lia Levandoski, without whose support in preparing this publication would have been impossible to accomplish. Rub=E9n Lara Lara IAI Executive Scientist EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Perhaps none of the seven workshops better demonstrated the problems and promise of international cooperation, for this group faced differences not only in national priorities, but research priorities as well. Represented among the 26 participants were soil scientists, meteorologists, wildlife specialists, social scientists, hydrologists, and statistical specialists. Nevertheless, at the end of four days this disparate gathering agreed on a set of potential research objectives, and the role the IAI might take in accomplishing them. Participants agreed that human activities may be responsible for many of the potential impacts of climate change. =46ossil fuel use in industry and transportation, and changing land use have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere to extremely high levels, in proportions that historically have been accompanied by warmer climate. Other introduced chemicals endanger both crop production and human health. Increased ozone from automobile exhausts, for example, has reduced the annual soybean harvest in the USA by as much as 20 per cent. The break-up of soils causes increased erosion and the siltation of our streams, dirtied further by harmful chemicals exuded by an expanding population. Human growth also hastens losses in biodiversity, that rich mix of plant and animal species whose potential uses have barely been tapped. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The temperate regions of Northand South America are the major grain-producing areas for a significant portion of the world's population. The vast grasslands, forests, and deserts are also the traditional home to a rich diversity of wild plant and animal communities and of natural ecosystems. The temperate zones are also centers of managed and highly productive activities, encompassing a reange of natural resources critical to a nation's economy. Minor alterations to precipitation patterns due to climate change could have devastating effects here, particularly in desert areas. Therefore, large-scale and long-term research projects are needed to assess the effects of global change on these ecosystems. Furthermore, critical to the maintenance of a healthy yet productive environment in the temperate zones is the need to establish and maintain workable linkages between the natural and managed ecosystems. Therefore, the relationship between physical-biological systems and socioeconomic systems is a critical area for research, and the development of sustainable resource management is essential for creating public policy that is viable in the context of global change. ISSUES AND PRIORITIES The overall objective of a research agenda for temperate terrestrial ecosystems should be to conserve and improve the natural ecosystem integrity while retaining and improving human well-being. The agenda must be pursued in both North and South America, with the recognition that societies within the region may and will change, and that the goals of individual societies may vary. Costs of research must be measured against the relative benefits it may bring to the society, socially and economically. Two working groups were formed, one concentrating on research objectives and the other on possible IAI activities. The research group agreed on five themes, with subtopics worthy of investigation: Land Use and Conversion (1) How does land conversion affect the hydrologic cycle in terms of quantity and quality of major river basins? (2) How are greenhouse gas emissions affected? (3) How does the expansion of agriculture onto arid lands affect natural and socioeconomic systems? Human Interactions (1) How vulnerable are urban centers to global change (e.g. in terms of water availability, air quality, transportation, etc.) (2) What are the sensitivities of traditional and modern practices to global change? And what benefits can be incorporated into socioeconomic adaptation and mitigation responses? (3) What are the major socioeconomic consequences (e.g. human migration and redistribution of wealth and productivity) of global change on production systems, and what is the feedback of these processes to global change processes? Productive Systems (1) What are the potential biophysical impacts and adaptations of climate change on major agricultural systems, (e.g., highly produc- tive agriculture, sustainable agriculture, grasslands). (2) How will food security be affected by global change? (3) What are consequences of global change on the preservation of soil, water, air and biological resources? Atmosphere-Hydrosphere (1) How will increases in UV-B affect temperate ecosystems and human health? (2) How do the cumulative effects of atmospheric gases such as acid precipitation, O3, SO2, NOx , CO2, and other greenhouse gases and hazardous air pollutants affect temperate ecosystems? (3) How will global change affect the rate of contamination of ground and surface water and its potential effects on natural and productive systems and human health? (4) How will changes in climate extremes and variability affect temperate ecosystem functioning and responses? Natural Ecosystems (1) How will socioeconomic restructuring induced by global change affect landscape patterns and biodiversity? (2) What strategies are needed to conserve critical species and habitats in a changing environment? (3) How can natural ecosystems and genetic resources in tem- perate regions ameliorate the effects of global change (e.g., carbon storage)? RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE ROLE OF THE IAI In order to accomplish objectives suggested in the preceding research questions, a number of regional activities are recommended. To foster cooperation, IAI might act as facilitator of these activities: The second study group proposed that the following activities be instigated and guided by the Inter-American Institute: Workshops (a) Discussion groups on data requirements, standardization of methods, and definition of appropriate and useful indicators of change. (b) Interactions between researchers, policy makers, and those who would be affected by global change. (c) Identification of appropriate simulation models and their appropriate use; comparison of model structures and the need for local modifications. Data Exchange and Communication (a) Set up exchange visits, such as working/study visits, visiting scholar programs, and graduate courses. (b) Extend the communication network, encouraging emplacement of equipment where needed, facilitating use of Internet. (c) Determine what research has been done, is being done, who is doing it, whether or not it addresses IAI priorities. Research Activities (a) Support existing networks such as AMIGO, INTA, INIA, IFDC, EMBRAPA, and groups with past experience in regional collab- orative activities, such as EPA CC Project. (b) Facilitate development of new networks and enlargement of existing networks with research groups pursuing common objec- tives which are also IAI priorities. (c) Identify (within networks) expertise and infrastructure for ensuring efficient resource use (e.g., isotopes, CO2 effects, etc). (d) Apply comparative techniques such as transects that include natural and intensively managed systems, north and south, and similar but distant systems such as the Pampas and Great Plains. Policy Considerations (a) Link in a concrete manner the human components with the ecosystem. (b) Consider how transferable are specific management or policy procedures between North and South America, or to specific countries. =09 I. BACKGROUND ON THE BREADBASKET The temperate regions of North and South America are the major grain-producing areas for a significant portion of the world's population. Most of the world's beef and mutton from which millions of people derive protein are also produced on temperate rangelands. In addition to human productivity, the natural grasslands, forests and deserts are the traditional home to a rich diversity of wild plant and animal communities. Overall, the region encompasses the following range of natural ecosystems: (1) Grasslands (2) Arid lands (Deserts) (3) Forests (4) Ranching (5) Aquatics (6) Riparian (7) Wetlands (8) Estuaries The temperate zones are also centers of managed and highly productive activities, encompassing a range of natural resources critical to a nation's economy. Those activities include: (1) Agriculture (2) Fishing (3) Forestry (4) Mariculture (5) Ranching (6) Water management=09 Rainfall and its drainage are extremely important in the temperate zones. Minor alterations to precipitation patterns due to climate change could have devastating effects, particularly in desert areas and drylands of South America which support large human populations. These areas include the deserts of the southwestern United States, northern Mexico and the band of temperate to tropical South American drylands--Monte, Chaco, Cerrado, Caatinga--where water needs are met by utilizing rain run-off or fossil water and much of it goes into agricultural production. Changes in land and water use brought about by the demands of an increasing human population threaten to tip the tentative balance of these systems. =09 Temperate zones of North and South America have some similarities of land forms, climate, and ocean circulation. These similarities have inspired detailed research comparing adaptations and ecological convergence between the two continents, although global change will affect them in different ways. The rate of climate change is expected to be faster in North America than South America as a result of different ocean- to-land ratios in the two hemispheres. On the other hand, the rate of land use change may be faster in South America, where populations are increasing more rapidly and the dependence on natural resources and primary production may be stronger, in addition to the existence of larger ecosystems that can be converted to agriculture, mainly in the cerrados in South America, which does not happen in North America. Critical to the maintenance of a healthy yet productive environment in the temperate zones is the need to establish and maintain workable linkages between the natural and managed ecosystems. Therefore, the relationship between physical- biological systems and socio economic systems is a critical area for research, and the development of sustainable resource management is essential for creating public policy that is viable in the context of global change. =09 II. THE NEED FOR RESEARCH For centuries, natural growth fed communities of animals that had achieved a workable balance. The tropical rain forests hosted a greater variety of species, but in the temperate zones were found the largest numbers of megafauna. Just two centuries ago, the mass of the American bison exceeded the weight of the world's entire human population. In arid lands, plant and animal species adapted to high temperatures and lack of moisture. In areas of generous rainfall, the living mat of vegetation allowed rainwater to seep slowly through the soil providing clear and relatively pure drainage to the sea. As the vegetation died, it recycled its fibers and nutrients into soil that grew deep, loose, and rich, feeding even more life above ground. The rich, fertile resources and agreeable climate of the temperate zones eventually brought an explosion of human population, along with the changes in land and water use that now threaten the productivity of the region. Anticipated climate changes will impact upon the massive food production on which much of the world now depends. Changes in global climate, as predicted by the GCM's could have profound implications for world agricultural and livestock production (Bergthorsson, 1985; Oram, 1985; Parry and Carter, 1985; Rosenzweig, 1985; Arthur and Abizadeh, 1988; Rosenberg, 1988; Adams, 1989; Smith and Tirpak, 1989; Adams et al., 1990; Schimel et al., 1990; Hunt et al., 1991; and Baker et al., 1993). Losses in Food Production=09 From mid-century through 1981, food productivity increased worldwide because more and more land was being successfully planted to grain crops. But grainlands reached a peak in 1981 and have been declining since then (Figure 1), as land became degraded or was converted to non-agricultural use. Yields have increased, but the amount of cropland per person has declined steadily from 1950 through 1993, and the decline is expected to continue well into the next century (Figure 2) as population continues to grow. Fig. 1. World Grainlands Fig. 2. Grainlands per person (USDA) (U.S. Bureau of Census) For a time, farmers could outpace population growth by adding fertilizer to increase yields, but those increases can no longer be sustained. Where grain yields are already high, the use of additional fertilizer has little effect. At the same time, some countries in financial straits have stopped giving fertilizer subsidies to their farmers. As a result, fertilizer use, which climbed steadily until 1989, has dropped steadily since then (Figure 3). Supplies of water, so essential to crop pro- duction, also has become more uncertain. Irrigation once seemed the hope of dryland farming, but silt filling reservoirs and waterways poses costly problems and a tenth of all irrigated areas are suffering from salinity, which reduces yields. Another 30 per cent is Fig. 3. World Fertilizer Use, 1950-1993 moderately affected by (FAO, IFA) salinization. In the long term, areas that make up for inadequate rainfall by tapping fossil water deep underground will exhaust that source as well. Fig. 4 shows areas in the United States where groundwater decline causes concern. =46ig. 4 (U.S. Natural Resources Inventory) Grazing While grazing by wildlife has always been an important part of natural systems, humans have substantially changed the frequency, intensity, and extent of grazing. When wildlife overgrazed an area, it moved on to greener pastures, or moved because of seasonal migration. Limited by land ownership, humans concentrate herbivores in relatively small areas, resulting in widespread changes in soils, plant composition, and plant growth. With overgrazing, grasslands, savannas, and woodlands are changed into communities dominated by unpalatable species, ephemeral species with erratic productivity, and/or sparsely vegetated, more compacted ground. A reduction of plant cover results in higher runoff, more erosion, less infiltration, resulting in an overall drier climate with higher summer and lower winter soil temperatures (Balling, 1988). The altered landcover also changes the surface albedo due to the decline in vegetation and on soil organic matter, thereby disrupting the energy and water balance. Loss of Biodiversity The advance of human populations has impacted on indigenous species by changing grasslands and forests into croplands, grazing, pastures and cities. The spotty remnants of natural vegetation become islands of habitat, offering species little chance of migratory movement, or opportunity to inter mingle and enrich the gene pool. The rapid and dramatic change in their circumstances causes some species to be lost forever. Extinctions have occurred many times, but the current losses are occurring at a rate unmatched since the decline of the dinosaurs some 65 million years ago. Like every species, ours is intimately dependent on many others for its well-being. Just how dependent, we have not yet determined, for despite deriving almost countless benefits from other species in terms of medicines, food availability, etc., we have catalogued only a very small proportion of the total number that coexist on this planet with us. The most obscure may hold great value. When a fifth of the U.S. corn crop was eliminated by a corn blight in 1970, cross-breeding with wild progenitors found in Mexico allowed a blight-resistant hybrid to be developed. Some analysts believe the greatest threat to human welfare comes from the potential loss of the genetic variety found among our pitifully few food crops and their wild relatives. The current decline in biological diversity may be most evident in tropical rain forests, but nowhere can it be taken lightly. Natural communities with fewer species are probably losing even greater proportions of their varied life forms. A number of ecosystems in the temperate zones have been all but eliminated, such as the tall-grass prairies and the old-growth hardwood forests of North America. Damage to wetlands has been severe in industrial nations. Canada contains one-fourth of the world's wetlands and while its losses have been lower than in some countries, its Atlantic salt marshes, prairie wetlands, and Pacific estuarine marshes have all been reduced to a third of their original extent. Atmospheric Gas Exchanges The gas most commonly suspected of dramatically affecting the atmosphere is carbon dioxide. In the past 150 years humanity has burned enough fossil fuels to increase the amount of heat-trapping CO2 in the air by 25 per cent (Rosenberg, 1988; Watson et al., 1990). The U.N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that the continuing emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are likely to raise the planet's average temperature roughly 0.3 degrees Celsius per decade, or l.5 to 4.5 degrees over the next century. This is in comparison with past climate change which has never exceeded 1=B0 per 1,000 years. A 3-degree warming would raise the earth's temperature to its highest level, which has not happened in such an elevated rate in the past 100,000 years, while a 4-degree change would make Earth warmer than it has been for 40 million years. But CO2 is not the only gas threatening changes that are little understood. Man made chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), once widely used as refrigerants and spray propellants, have triggered a depletion of atmospheric ozone, the protective gauze that encircles the stratosphere of this planet and filters out much of the harmful ultraviolet rays from the sun. Although their use has been greatly curbed by international agreement, the CFCs still in the atmosphere will continue to damage the ozone for some time. The effects of increased UV-B on certain forms of plant and animal life, as well as human health, have yet to be fully determined. Meanwhile, increased tropospheric (surface) ozone, primarily from vehicle exhausts, not only has reduced the annual soybean harvest in the USA by as much as 20 per cent, but is also a serious public health hazard. =09 =09 Land conversions for human use can affect other gas exchanges between ecosystems and the atmosphere. Biomass burning has probably already altered tropospheric ozone concentrations in the tropics (Crutzen and Andreae, 1990). On the other hand, adding vegetation through crop production in normally dry areas can have negative effects as well. Arid lands are significant sources of ammonia to the atmosphere due to the prevalence of alkaline soils, which promote the production of ammonia gas. Ammonia is significant, as its atmospheric transport and deposition are an important vector for nutrient transport. It is also the only atmospheric gas capable of neutralizing acids derived from nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide, so it has a large effect on pH and pH-dependent reactions in the atmosphere. In addition, N2O is also as important as ammonia in agricultural activities in temperate systems. Soils are a small but globally significant sink, or depository for methane, one of the greenhouse gases. But methane consumption may be inhibited by high nitrogen availability brought on by human fertilization of the soils (Steudler et al., 1989). The temperate zones are also a source of methane, primarily due to the production of methane in the guts of termites and domestic cattle, although the balance between soils as a sink and herbivores as a source is not known. Temperate zone coniferous forests and grasslands contain organic-rich soils, known to be the largest terrestrial sinks for carbon. Slight temperature increases will set off a huge oxidation or burning of this carbon by the microbial population. =09 III. ISSUES, PRIORITIES, AND METHODOLOGIES The overall objective of a research agenda for temperate terrestrial ecosystems should be to conserve and improve the natural ecosystem integrity while retaining and improving human well-being. The agenda must be pursued in both North and South America, with the recognition that societies within the region may and will change, and that the goals of individual societies may vary. Costs of research must be measured against the relative benefits it may bring to the society, socially and economically. How do natural ecosystems respond to climatic change? Because there is a vast area over which climatic variation can be assessed, it is possible to design experiments that can determine how populations presently respond to climatic differences. Baseline studies would also establish the points of comparison for future research that would continue into the period over which climatic changes may become evident. In South America especially, baseline studies of ecosystem structure and function are lacking in all large-scale terrestrial habitats. How do agricultural systems respond to climatic change? Large-scale agricultural systems generally require considerable human intervention to produce efficient yields. Such intervention may include application of pesticides, herbicides, nutrients, water, etc. The timing of harvest, the potential yield, possible crop pests, the number of crops that may be harvested are affected by climatic parameters. Ecological studies of agro- ecosystems should be established parallel with the studies of the natural ecosystems discussed above. Such parallel studies might detect influences of climatic change on natural systems before these changes are manifested on agricultural systems, and vice versa. Measurements of climatic factors such as the location and intensity of the low level jet, high altitude jets, sunlight intensity, precipitation changes, the frequency and intensity of severe storms, cloud reflectivity, soil temperature and moisture, humidity, albedo, and other climatological measurements should be taken in areas where biological research is being carried out. The implications are vast. Higher albedos and lowered transpirations rates, associated with land degradation, reduce rainfall. Large-scale irrigation can also affect micrometeorological factors, although the effects on local or regional weather patterns are poorly understood. Can the presence of irrigation modify local convective activity to a measurable degree? Similar questions arise with respect to desertification. How do changes in ratios of transpiration to evaporation affect climate? New measurement and remote sensing techniques are becoming available that should facilitate regional analyses, e.g., high-resolution radiometry. Do different organisms respond to climatic changes in different ways and to different degrees? Will insect pollinators, for example, become adversely affected by small changes in climate that may not affect the plant populations directly? Will soil fungi or bacteria be affected by increasing UV radiation and will this influence the plant communities in some way that is as yet unpredictable? Will vertebrate and invertebrate primary consumers, for example, respond to any nutrient deficiency in plants that could be engendered by climatic effects on the availability of greenhouse gases, on plant growth rates, or on the growing season? Do drier habitats (e.g. deserts and semi-deserts) respond to climatic changes more rapidly than grasslands? If so, then a set of long-term research sites established in drier areas could provide the first biological indications of climatic change. Since climates could become wetter or drier, comparative research sites in both natural and agricultural systems could provide a multiple base from which climatic change could be detected. Are climatic effects manifested the same way in both the Northern and Southern hemispheres? Replicated experiments in both areas could provide information on the global extent of these changes. What are the social costs of climate perturbations in the drylands and grasslands of the Americas, given the number of people supported by these areas? Shifts in agricultural zones could result in societal disruption for nations dependent on the agricultural productivity of their grasslands and drylands. Periodic droughts in the Caatinga, an extensive dry scrubland in northeast Brazil, have led to repeated migrations of the human population into urban centers, sometimes tripling their populations. The Trans-Amazon highway was built in part to respond to extreme poverty caused by this overcrowding. The resulting conversion of previously undisturbed rainforest may have further climatic implications. Major Concerns 1. What are the global change forcing functions important to the region (e.g. demographic distribution, land use and conversion, climate change)? 2. Where is each stressor expected to have greater impact? 3. What are the anticipated environmental consequences? Are they reversible? What are the levels of certainty? 4. What are the socioeconomic consequences? 5. What activities might exacerbate or ameliorate the situation? 6. Are there any surprises? Non-Specific Issues Non-specific issues that should be addressed with additional research include the following areas: =09 (1) Sources and amounts of greenhouse gases produced. (2) Monitoring of global change, establishing a historic and paleo baseline. (3) Effects of environmental stresses on economic systems (e.g. agriculture, fisheries) and human welfare. (4) Effects of human population increase and distribution on land use patterns, ecological processes, and global change. (5) Measures that can and should be taken to offset the effects of global change on the production of goods. (6) Identification of critical nodes which will ensure sufficient connectivity to conserve faunal and floral populations. Possible Approaches Due to the high probability that climatic change will be most readily evident in areas of hydric limitation, the following sites would be appropriate for long-term, replicated research. =09 (1) The southern Great Plains, especially the mid-grass prairie (e.g. Oklahoma), where water availability for crops is at the lower levels of acceptability. Climatic change would be readily apparent. Both natural grasslands and extensive agricultural systems are here. (2) The Sonoran Desert of southern Arizona or the Chihuahuan desert of southern New Mexico, both with Mexico counterparts (these deserts do not end at the border), where climatic extremes maintain a xeric-adapted biota and where human population density is dependent on either rainfall or fossil water. (3) The Cerrado savannah of Brazil near Bras=EDlia, one of the most important agricultural and ranching areas of Brazil, with a highly predictable six-month dry season. Changes should be very apparent. (4) The Caatinga scrublands of northeastern Brazil near Fortaleza (mentioned above). (5) The dry Chaco of northwestern Argentina in Salta or Tucum=E1n provinces, where dry thorn forests are being converted to soybean plantations, irrigated by rainfall or runoff. (6) The Argentine pampas (grasslands) in Buenos Aires Province, the most agriculturally rich area in South America and the equivalent of the southern Great Plains in North America. (7) The Monte Desert near Mendoza Argentina, where extensive agriculture is carried out through irrigation of runoff from Andean ice packs and reservoirs of stored rain water. Methodology The following considerations might be made in the process of applying research: 1.What are the baselines? Expand and coordinate activities to monitor the state and evolution of key environmental and socio-economic parameters. 2. How healthy are current systems? Define indicators for characterization. For example: --socioeconomic indicators (food availability and security); --vulnerability indicators; --soil organic matter dynamics; --Relative net primary production; --Biogeochemical balances (inputs and outputs of carbon, nitrogen, etc); and --Water quality and availability. 3. Conduct coordinated field and lab experiments to identify and understand processes relevant to land use changes., considering the following areas of study: --Erosion, wind and water. --Mineralization. --Carbon and nutrient recycling. --Indicators defined above. --Species composition and relative abundance. and --Biochemical studies of native plant species (as in the case of alternative land use). 4. Conduct comparative studies (transects and/or similar systems in distant locations) on the effects of climate change on the following: --Indicators defined above; --Physiology and growth in different systems and response to =09 hanging climate; --Direct effects of CO2 on plant growth; and --Trace gas exchange. 5. Calibrate, validate, and improve simulation models (e.g. Spurr, Century, IBJNAT, etc. --Define data requirement; --Standardize methodology across regions; --Improve models' performance at regional scale; and --Apply models to predict production risks, carrying capacity, etc. Data should be assembled which thereafter can be used by economists and policy makers to predict possible future scenarios. 6. Assess resource management implications considering monitoring, experiments, and simulation results., e.g. nutrients, water, social, economic, etc. IV. RESEARCH QUESTIONS In proposing a research agenda for the study of temperate terrestrial ecosystems, the workshop participants provided the following specific examples of critical areas and questions of concern. The list is not exclusive: 1. Land Use/Conversion (a) How does land conversion affect the hydrologic cycle in terms of quantity and quality of major river basins? (b) How does land use and conversion affect greenhouse gas emissions (e.g. methane, CO2)? (c) How does the expansion of agriculture onto arid lands affect natural and socioeconomic systems? 2. Human Interactions (a) How vulnerable are urban centers to global change (e.g. in terms of water availability, energy, air quality, food supplies, transportation, natural disasters)? (b) What are the sensitivities of traditional and modern practices to global change? What benefits can be incorporated into social and economic adaptation and mitigation responses? (c) What are the major socioeconomic consequences of global change on production systems and the feedback of those consequences to global change processes (examples might include human migration or redistribution of wealth)? 3. Productive Systems (a) What are the potential biophysical impacts and adaptations of climate change on the productivity of major agricultural ecosystems, (e.g. highly productive agriculture, sustainable agriculture, and grasslands)? (b) How will food security be affected by global change? (c) What are consequences of global change on the preservation of soil, water, air, and biological resources? 4. Atmosphere and Hydrosphere (a) How will increases in UVB affect ecosystems and human health? (b) How do the cumulative effects of atmospheric gases (acid rain, O3, SO2, CO2, air pollutants) affect temperate ecosystems? (c) How will global change affect the rate of ground and surface water contamination and what then might be the effects on natural and productive systems and human health? (d) How will changes in climate extremes and variability affect temperate ecosystem functioning and responses? 5. Natural Ecosystems (a) How will social and economic restructuring induced by global change affect landscape patterns and biodiversity in temperate ecosystems? (b) What strategies are needed to conserve critical species and habitats in a changing environment? (c) How can natural ecosystems and genetic resources ameliorate the effects of global change (e.g. carbon storage)? (d) What is the level or scale of biodiversity that we should realistically try to conserve? Which are the critical nodes that should be protected in order to conserve floral and faunal populations (protected areas)? =09 V. PROPOSED ACTIVITIES In order to accomplish objectives suggested in the preceding research questions, a number of regional activities are recommended. To foster cooperation, IAI might act as facilitator of these activities: Workshops * Establish data requirements, standardization of methods, and define appropriate and useful indicators of change. * Promote interactions between researchers, stake-holders, and policy makers. * Discuss modeling in the following contexts: --identification of appropriate simulation models; --identification of appropriate use of models in different systems; --comparison of model structures and the need for local modifications. Exchange and Communication * Facilitate exchange visits of the following types: --working/study visits; --visiting scholar; --graduate courses. * Extend the communication network. * Identify what has been done, is being done, who is doing it; determine whether past/present work addresses IAI priorities. Research Activities * Support existing networks (e.g. AMIGO, INTA, INIA, EMBRAPA, IFDC) and groups of past experience in regional collaborative activities (e.g. EPA climate change project). * Promote the development of long-term sites for global change studies. (e.g. facilitate development of new networks and enlargement of existing ones with research groups pursuing common objectives which are also IAI priorities). * Identify (within networks) expertise and infrastructure for ensuring efficient resource use (e.g. isotopes, CO2 effects, etc). * Apply comparative techniques, using transects that compare natural areas and intensively managed areas, and North and South. * Compare similar systems in distant locations, such as the Great Plains. * Conduct studies on a broad geographic scale that includes and compares the following paradigms: --inter-hemispheric; --intra-hemispheric; --ecoregion; --basin; --watershed; and --within watershed. Policy Considerations * Link in a concrete manner the human component with the ecosystem. * Consider how transferable are specific management or policy procedures between North and South America, or to specific countries. VI. EXAMPLES Following are suggested frameworks for three IAI case studies: An Agricultural Adaptation 1. Background Information (Where are we now?) Existing assessments of potential adaptation by agriculture to (global) environmental change have stemmed from physical assessments of the expected impacts of altered environmental conditions (e.g. climatic change, land degradation,...) on selected agricultural properties (e.g. crop yields, soil quality,...). These studies have provided a foundation and there has been considerable speculation about how farmers and agricultural institutions might adapt to altered conditions such as the use of irrigation to overcome enhanced moisture deficits and/or the switch to varieties tolerant to a wider set of climatic conditions. 2. A Framework to Advance Research It is now widely recognized that there are several other questions that need to be addressed before issues regarding agricultural adaptation to environmental change can be addressed in a more comprehensive manner. These include: * Is the change or impact perceived by the farmer or agency? * What indicators are used to perceive the change? * How vulnerable is the farm or agency to the environmental change (rate, magnitude, frequency) and/or impact? * What options for adaptation are available (actual vs. perceived)? * To what extent are these options sensitive to crop breeding programs, agro-technology transfer, extension programs...? * What is the capacity of the farm to respond and how is this capacity affected by farm credit, life cycle stage, etc.? 3. Roles for the IAI (a) Consolidate and assess existing impact assessments for the Americas, identify regions and/or crops not yet considered, provide guidelines for interpreting this information (e.g.varying assumptions, data inputs, models, etc. (b) Provide an assessment of other properties needing investigation (nutrient cycling, etc.). (c) Organize an evaluation of previous impact models with the intention of identifying a common pan-American impact assessment methodology. (d) Questions identified in #2 have been addressed in part but there is no accepted methodology. IAI could convene a workshop to review these methods and develop a set of guidelines to ensure a consistent set of methods are applied to case studies. (e) Identify systems involving intensive to extensive management, those involving small farms and industrialized farms, and regions within the Americas to be used as case studies. (f) Ensure the flow of information between the physical and human dimensions of the adaptation field, and the communication of the findings to decision makers. Pasture-Based Systems 1. Background Information Transects are helpful in comparative studies of pasture-based systems and some of these already exist for arid and semi-arid areas. Existing programs include INTA, INIA, EMBRAPA, and the IFDC network. 2. A Framework to Advance Research Define and characterize the baseline information. Indicators include soil organic matter, nutrient balances, and net primary production. Create simulation models that develop climate change scenarios and allow the evaluation of impacts on crop yields, nutrients, ecosystem balances, income, and the direct effects of increased CO2. Other parameters: * Define indicators which help to perceive impacts. * Identify vulnerable regions or systems. * Define the range of adaptive options, taking into consideration possible technical barriers. * Assess capacity to adopt options (e.g. credit). 3. Roles for the IAI Propose adaptive strategies, with possible changes in land use or soil and crop management. Hydrologic Cycles 1. Background Information How does land conversion affect the hydrologic cycle in the temperate zone? Individual studies exist but not in all areas. The question remains, how much can be generalized across regions and how applicable are specific extant models to other areas and scales. Cooperative studies will facilitate land use and socio-economic impacts in each area. The following are examples of existing networks and projects now underway: (a) GCIP/MAGS/LAMBADA (future Brazilian experiment)/SALSA (proposed US-Mexico experiment); (b) NRBS; and (c) Long Term Ecologic Research Network (LTERN), NSF. 2. A Framework for Research Baseline data is needed on local and regional scales. Baseline data monitoring includes satellite imagery, paleo records, and stream flow. Model validation and assessment of model parameters is necessary across scales and region. A particular need exists for information in Mexico and South America. Training is needed in RS/GIS/ modeling and field interfaces. Also needed is translation of physical-biological science to social and economic sciences and vice-versa. =09 3. Roles for the IAI Since watersheds cross political boundaries there is a need for a regional facilitator of solutions. Standardization, validation, and assessment of model parameters needs to be done regionally. In addition, the IAI should serve as a strong agent to facilitate the coordination and establishment of long- term ecologic research sites in Mexico and the southern hemisphere for comparative studies with existing long-term study sites in the USA and Canada. =09 VII. REFERENCES Adams, R. M., 1989: Global climate change and agriculture: An economic perspective. Amer. J. Agric.Econ. 71,1272-1279. Adams, R. M., Rosenzweig, C., Peart, R.M., McCarl, E. A., Glyer, J. D., Curry, R. B., Jones, J. W., Boote, K. J., and Allen, L. H., 1990: Global climate change in U.S. Agriculture. Nature, 345,219-224. Arthur, L. M., and Abizadeh, F., 1988: Potential effects of climate change on agriculture in the praire region of Canada. Western J. Agrirc. Econ. 13,216-224. Balling, R. C., 1988: The climatic impact of a Sonoran vegetation discontinuity, Climatic Change, 13,99-109. Baker, B. B., Hanson, J. D., Bourdon, R. M., and Eckert, J. B., 1993: The potential effects of climate change on ecosystem processes and cattle production on U.S. rangelands, Climatic Change, 25,97-117. Bergthorsson, P., 1985: Sensitivity of Icelandic agriculture to climatic variations, Climatic Change, 7,11-127. Crutzen, P. J., and Andreae, M. O., 1990: Biomass burning in the tropics: Impact on atmospheric chemistry and biogeochemical cycles, Science, 250, 1669-1678. Hunt, H. W., Trlica, M. J., Redente, E. F., Moore, J. C., Detling, J. K., Kittel, T. G. F., Walter, D. E., Fowler, M. C., KLein, D. A., and Elliot, E. T., 1991: Simulation model for the effects of climate change on temperate grassland ecosystems, Ecol. Mod. 53, 205-246. Oram, P. A., 1985: Sensitivity of agricultural production to climatic change, Climatic Change, 7, 129-152. Parry, M. L., and Carter, T. R., 1985: The effect of climate variations on agricultural risk, Climatic Change, 7, 95-110. Rosenberg, N. J., 1988: Global climate change holds problems and uncertainties for agriculture, In: Tutwiler, M. A. (ed.), U.S. Agriculture in a global setting: An agenda for the future, National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C., pp. 203-218. Rosenzweig, C., 1985: Potential CO2 induced climate effects on Northern American wheat producing regions, Climatic Change, 7, 367-389. Schimel, D. S., Parton, W. J., Kittel, T. G. F., Ojima, D. S., and Cole, C. = V., 1990: Grassland biogeochemistry: Links to atmospheric processes. Climatic Change, 17, 13-25. Smith, J.B. and Tirpak, D. (eds), 1989: The potential effects of global climate change on the United States, Report to Congress, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Policy, Planning and Evaluation (PM-221), Washington, D.C., 413 pp. Steudler, P. A., Bowden, R. D., Melillo, J. M., and Aber, J. D., 1989: Influence of nitrogen fertilization on methane uptake in temperate forest soils. Nature, 341, 314-316. Watson, R. T., Rodhe, H., Oeschger, H., and Siegenthaler, U., 1990: Greenhouse gases and aerosols. In: Houghton, J. T., Jenkins, G. J., and Ephraums, J. J., (eds.), Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 1-40. APPENDIX 1 IAI INITIAL SCIENTIFIC THEMES * The Comparative Studies of Temperate Terrestrial Ecosystems; * High Latitude Processes; * Ocean-Land-Atmosphere Interactions in the Intertropical Americas; * Tropical Ecosystems and Biogeochemical Cycles; * ENSO and Interannual Climate Variability; * The Comparative Studies of Temperate Terrestrial Ecosystems; * The Study of the Impacts of Climate Change on Biodiversity. APPENDIX 2 ACRONYMS IAI Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture =46AO Food and Agriculture Organization=09 IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change=09 UV-B Ultra-violet B GCM General Circulation Model AMIGO Americas Interhemisphere Geo-biosphere Organization INTA Instituto Nacional de Tecnolog=EDa Agr=EDcola INIA Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agr=EDcolas EMBRAPA Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisas Agr=EDcolas IFDC International Fertilizer Development Center EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency LAMBADA Large Scale Atmospheric Moisture Balance of Amazona Using Data Assimilation LTER Long Term Ecological Research (NSF) NSF National Science Foundation RS/GIS Remote Sensing/Geographical Information System NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA/OGP NOAA/Office of Global Programs APPENDIX 3 WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS Mario N. N=FA=F1ez Secretar=EDa de Ciencia y Tecnolog=EDa Depart. de Meteorolog=EDa Un. de Buenos Aires Pabell=F3n II, Piso 2 Ciudad Universitar=EDa Buenos Aires 1428 ARGENTINA Tel. (54 1) 788 3572 =46ax (54 1) 788 3572 mnunez@cima.edu.ar =09 Graciela Odilia Magrin Instituto de Clima y Agua, CIRN-INTA 1712 Castelar Buenos Aires ARGENTINA Tel. (54 1) 621 0125 =46ax (54 1) 841 3032 mit@castelar.gov.ar =09 Gustavo Maia Gomes =46ederal University of Pernambuco Rua Neusta Pierre, 134 Jardim Atl=E2ntico Olinda, Pernambuco 53140-0908 BRAZIL Tel. (55 81) 268 5274 =46ax (55 81) 227 4017 =09 Mike Brklacich Carleton University, Dept. of Geography=09 1125 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, Ontario Canada, KIS 5B6 CANADA=09 Tel. (613) 788 2600 ext. 7553 =46ax (613) 788 4301 mbrklac@ces.carleton.ca Donald MacIver Atmospheric Environment Service Environment Canada 4905 Dufferin St. Downsview, Ontario M3H 5T4 CANADA Tel. (416) 739 4391 =46ax (416) 739 4297 =09 Henry Janzen Agricultural Canada Agricultural Canada Jail Road, Lethbridge Alberta T1J4B1 CANADA Tel. (403) 327 4561 ext. 315 =46ax (403) 382 3156 janzen@abrsle.agr.ca =09 Rick Lawford Hydrometeorological Processes Division National Hydrology Research Institute 11 Innovation Boulevard Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 3H5=09 CANADA Tel. (306) 975 5775 =46ax (306) 975 5143=09 =46ernando Santib=E1=F1ez Universidad de Chile =46ac. de Ciencias Agropecuarias y Forestales Santa Rosa 11315 La Pintana, Santiago CHILE Tel. (562) 541 7703 ext. 226 =46ax (562) 541 7055 =09 Doris Soto Universidad Austral de Chile =46acultad de Pesquer=EDas y Oceanograf=EDa Campus Pelluco Casilla 1327 Puerto Montt CHILE Tel. (56 65) 257 085 =46ax (56 65) 255 583 dsoto@valdivia.uca.uach.cl Steve Bullock CICESE=09 Carretera Tijuana-Ensenada Km. 107 Ensenada, Baja California MEXICO Tel. ( 52 617) 450 50 ext. 2820 =46ax (52 617) 451 56 sbullock@cicese.mx=09 Roberto S=E1nchez El Colegio de la Frontera Environmental Studies Department Abelardo Rodr=EDguez #21, Zona del Rio Tijuana, B.C. MEXICO Tel. (52 66) 300 412 =46ax (52 66) 300 411 rsanchez@bestso.sdsd.edu Alejandro E. Castellanos C.I.C.T.U.S. Universidad de Sonora Rosales Y Ni=F1os H=E9roes S/N Hermosillo, Sonora 83000 MEXICO Tel.-(52 621) 375 77 =46ax (52 621) 232 71 Eric Mellink CICESE Carretera Tijuana-Ensenada Km 107 Ensenada, Baja-California Apdo Postal 2732 Ensenada, Baja-California MEXICO Tel. (617) 450 50 =46ax (617) 451 54 emellink@cicese.mx =09 Walter Baethgen=09 International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC)=09 Research and Development Division=09 J. Barrios Amorin 870 P. 3=09 Montevideo 11200=09 URUGUAY=09 Tel. (598 2) 423 357 =46ax. (598 2) 423 360 ifdc.uruguay@cgnet.com =09 Alejandro Mor=F3n Instituto Nacional de Investigaci=F3n Agropecuaria INIA Estanzuela, La Estanzuela Colonia CC 39173 URUGUAY Tel. (59 85) 222 005 =46ax (59 85) 224 062 amoron@iniale.org.uy Armando Rabufetti=09 INIA - Montevideo Comisi=F3n Nacional sobre Cambio Global Edificio Plaza Independencia, Oficina 34 Plaza Independencia, 776=09 Montevideo, CP 11200 URUGUAY=09 Tel. (59 82) 923 633 =09 James Buizer NOAA/Office of Global Programs 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1225 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA Tel. (301) 427 2089 =46ax (301) 427 2082 buizer@ogp.noaa.gov Rub=E9n Lara Lara IAI Office of the Executive Scientist 1100 Wayne Ave., Suite 1201 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA Tel. (301) 589 5747 =46ax (301) 589 5711 lara@ogp.noaa.gov Marcella Ohira IAI Office of the Executive Scientist 1100 Wayne Ave., Suite 1201 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA Tel. (301) 589 5747 =46ax (301) 589 5711 ohira@ogp.noaa.gov =09 Diana Liverman Pennsylvania State University Dept. of Geography 302 Walker Building University Park PA 16802 USA Tel. (814) 863 7004 =46ax (814) 863 8018 =09 Cynthia Rosenzweig NASA/GISS=09 2880 Broadway New York, NY 10025 USA Tel. (212) 678 5591 =46ax (212) 678 5638 cccer@nasagiss.nasa.gov =09 Noel Grove 2114 St. Louis Rd. Middleburg, VA 22117 USA Tel. (703) 687 5052 =46ax (703) 687 5052 =09 Donald Plucknett Agricultural Research & Development International 7127 Little River Turnpike Suite 205A Annandale, VA 22003 USA Tel. (703) 354 5423 =46ax (703) 941 1936 =09 Barry Baker Ecosystem Research International, Consulting 305 W.Magnolia St. 261 720 Peterson Street =46ort Collins - Colorado 80521 USA Tel. (303) 493 4004 =46ax (303) 490 34006 barry@heavy.gpsr.colostate.edu =09 Alfredo Huete University of Arizona 429 Shantz Bldg., # 38 Tucson, Arizona 85721 USA Tel. (602) 621 3228 =46ax (602) 621 1647 swshuete@ccii.arizona.edu William H. Schlesinger Duke University Department of Botany Durham, NC 27708 USA Tel. (919) 660 7406 =46ax (919) 660 7425 schlesin@acpub.duke.edu =09 Gay Bradshaw USDA Forest Service =46orest Sciences Lab. 3200 Jefferson Wasy Corvallys, OR 97331 USA Tel. (503) 750 7306 =46ax (503) 750 7329 bradshaw@fsl.orst.edu =09 Deborah Lawrence Duke University Department of Botany P.O. Box 90339 Durham, NC 27708-0339 USA Tel. (919) 684 3715 =46ax (919) 684 5412 dclawren@acpub.duke.edu =09 Maura Mack Udall Center University of Arizona for Studies in Public Policy 803/811 E. First Avenue Tucson, Arizona 85719 USA Tel. (602) 621 9234 =09 --========================_12413160==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ------------------------------------------------------ Dr. Paul E. Filmer |voice +1 (703) 306-1515 Program Director | & Secretariat |fax1 +1 (703) 306-0091 Inter American Institute for |fax2 +1 (703) 306-0372 Global Change Research |fax3 +1 (301) 869-0873 National Science Foundation | 4201 Wilson Boulevard |INTERNET:pfilmer@nsf.gov Arlington, VA 22230, USA | | "Nunca dije tal cosa" - Borges ------------------------------------------------------ --========================_12413160==_--