Forecasting Ecological Implications of Landscape Change in Terrestrial, Aquatic, Estuarine, and Marine Ecosystems

LTER Network Research Initiative

Organizer – Stan Gregory

The question:

• How can we effectively study changing systems and trajectories? Most research focuses on static systems.

• How can we scientifically evaluate and communicate the implications of trajectories of landscape change---both past and future?

Justification:

• Global populations are increasing rapidly and resource demands and impacts are increasing.

• Regions differ in their projections of future population change. Some regions will face rapidly increasing human populations and others will experience decreased population densities. Regional, national, and global decision makers face enormous scientific challenges in projecting likely future change and evaluating its ecological and social consequences.

• Analysis of landscape change allows spatial aggregation to address questions at global scales.

• Most current studies of landscape change have been descriptive. More than 30 large regional analyses have been conducted to evaluate past and future landscape change. In spite of the importance of the analysis of future change, there have been no systematic comparisons of methods for developing future scenarios or trajectories for the same geographical focal area. We need to scientifically evaluate our approaches for projecting landscape change.

• Analysis of future landscape change in coupled human and natural systems is socially relevant and improves decision making and social discourse.

• Analysis of past and future landscape change requires scientists to couple human and natural systems.

• Analysis of future change provides 1) a better understanding of system drivers and 2) a more tangible indication of where we are going.

• Methods for visualization of projected landscape changes are needed to communicate effectively to the public, decision makers, resource managers, and scientists.

• Scientific assessments of the implications of landscape change require new methods and approaches for communicating the uncertainty in the analysis. This uncertainty is more than simple statistical uncertainty. Uncertainty in analysis of landscape change includes 1) statistical uncertainty, 2) extrapolation of recent observations to past or future systems, 3) uncertainty in human records or statements of future actions, 4) external factors that are not currently present within the geographic boundaries of the system, and 5) many others. Learning how to communicate uncertainty is a major challenge in ecosystem and social science.

• Feedbacks are related to climate change, including both influence of climate on landscape change and influence of landscape change on climate.

• Analysis of landscape patterns and trajectories of past and future change provides a critical context for LTER Network and future decisions on systems to be added to the network based on what the existing sites represent in terms of landscape change. Most LTER sites are either relatively pristine sites within a sea of human dominated landscape or and human dominated landscape within a larger, more pristine landscape. We have little information about the gradient of change characteristics represented by the LTER network of sites.

• Assessments of the implications of landscape change require incorporation of other methods of inquiry (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, experiential, collective discourse, likelihood of outcomes). These diverse methods of inquiry are rarely integrated in LTER or other NSF programs, but this thematic question offers an opportunity to integrate and evaluate these methods.

What we know:

• The LTER Program has large datasets on relevant ecological trends.

• Scientists both within and outside of LTER have tools for developing scenarios. There are four major approaches for developing scenarios of change but none have been systematically compared.
• Scientist developed
• Stakeholder developed
• Model developed
• Narrative/decision theater derived

• We understand and characterize formal governance systems relatively well.

• Most regions exhibit major contrasts in land use and change between uplands/lowlands, with greater human density and landscape modification in the lowlands. Are these common patterns or do some regions exhibit different patterns (e.g., coastal systems)?

What we don’t know:

• The LTER sites have less extensive datasets on relevant social data and trends (or at least these have not been effectively coupled).

• Some international sites may not have comparable census data.

• We do not understand how existing approaches differ for creating scenarios of change and evaluating implications of change. What are their similarities, differences, biases, strengths, weaknesses, and implications for different types of sites?

• We do not know as much about effectiveness of formal governance systems or informal governance

• Few studies have directly examined methods for changing scale in assessments of landscape change. What are the consequences of scaling in landscape change analysis and how do we communicate the uncertainty related to changing scale in such studies.

Approaches for moving ahead in planning:

• We need to frame the major thematic questions as series of evolving questions, each addressed by a sequence of workshops. The sequence of workshops would explore how tools for scenario creation and landscape assessment fit together.

• The first small workshop would select experts on change in natural and human systems. Participants referred to this as the Noah’s Ark Meeting to decide which teams of scientists would participate in the initial workshops.

• Two major sets of workshops would follow. One would explore approaches for creating scenarios of trajectories of landscape change (both past and future). A second set of workshops would explore tools for assessment of scenarios and trajectories.

• Both human systems ands natural (ecological/environmental) systems should be part of all workshops.

• A final synthesis workshop would explore 1) whether legacies are emergent and do we have the tools to assess them and 2) how do we analyze, articulate, and communicate uncertainty in trajectories and assessments?

Why is LTER well suited?

• LTER is a diverse network designed originally to represent diverse ecosystems---then human systems.

• Data density within the LTER network is high relative to many systems or groups.

• Framework for managing or sharing data and results is well developed and state of the art

• LTER was designed by the National Science Foundation to be a catalyst for applications of science.

• The LTER sites represent a large proportion of the nation’s congressional delegates.

• ILTER connections extend questions of the implications of landscape change to global scales.

• The interdisciplinary nature of LTER is critical for studies of the implications of landscape change.

• LTER is well situated to couple human and natural systems in an on-going program.

• The network of sites in LTER represents the diverse challenges we face in the interaction of human and natural systems.