Clarifying the role of the resist–accept–direct framework in supporting resource management planning processes
No abstract available.
Geology topics
Publications and source records attributed to Robin O'Malley.
No abstract available.
Natural resource managers worldwide face a growing challenge: Intensifying global change increasingly propels ecosystems toward irreversible ecological transformations. This nonstationarity challenges traditional conservation goals and human well-being. It also confounds a longstanding management paradigm that assumes a future that reflects the past. As once-familiar ecological conditions disappear, managers need a new approach to guide decision-making. The resist–accept–direct (RAD) framework, designed for and by managers, identifies the options managers have for responding and helps them make informed, purposeful, and strategic choices in this context. Moving beyond the diversity and complexity of myriad emerging frameworks, RAD is a simple, flexible, decision-making tool that encompasses the entire decision space for stewarding transforming ecosystems. Through shared application of a common approach, the RAD framework can help the wider natural resource management and research community build the robust, shared habits of mind necessary for a new, twenty-first-century natural resource management paradigm.
An assumption of stationarity—i.e. “the idea that natural systems fluctuate within an unchanging envelope of variability” (Milly et al. 2008)—underlies traditional conservation and natural resource management, as evidenced by widespread reliance on ecological baselines to guide protection, restoration, and other management. Although ecological change certainly occurred under the relatively stable conditions of the recent past, the nature of change under intensifying global change is different; it is unidirectional, and rapidly pushing beyond the bounds of historical variability. In the past, a manager could plausibly work to reverse or mitigate many stressors or their impacts to approximate pre-disturbance ecological conditions, but now accelerated warming, changing disturbance regimes, and extreme events associated with climate change reduce that potential. Indeed, even ‘holding the line’ in the face of inexorable human-caused change is ever more difficult and costly. Thus, the convention of using baseline conditions to define goals for today’s resource management is increasingly untenable, presenting practical and philosophical challenges for managers. As formerly familiar ecological conditions continue to change, bringing novelty, surprise, and uncertainty, natural resource managers require a new, shared approach to make conservation decisions. How, for example, should a manager respond to projections of loss of the Joshua tree from much of its current range, or to the emergence of new and different vegetation communities after a large fire event? The RAD (Resist-Accept-Direct) decision framework has emerged over the past decade as a simple tool that captures the entire decision space for responding to ecosystems facing the potential for rapid, irreversible ecological change. It assists managers in making informed, purposeful choices about how to respond to the trajectory of change, and moreover, provides a straightforward approach to support resource managers in collaborating at larger scales across jurisdictions, which today is more urgent than ever.
Federal investments by U.S. agencies to enhance climate resilience at regional scales grew over the past decade (2010s). To maximize efficiency and effectiveness in serving multiple sectors and scales, it has become critical to leverage existing agency-specific research, infrastructure, and capacity while avoiding redundancy. We discuss lessons learned from a multi-institutional “regional climate response collaborative” that comprises three different federally-supported climate service entities in the Rocky Mountain west and northern plains region. These lessons include leveraging different strengths of each partner, creating deliberate mechanisms to increase cross-entity communication and joint ownership of projects, and placing a common priority on stakeholder-relevant research and outcomes. We share the conditions that fostered successful collaboration, which can be transferred elsewhere, and suggest mechanisms for overcoming potential barriers. Synergies are essential for producing actionable research that informs climate-related decisions for stakeholders and ultimately enhances climate resilience at regional scales.
Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a nonregulatory Federal science agency with national scope and responsibilities, is uniquely positioned to serve the Nation’s needs in understanding and responding to global change, including changes in climate, water availability, sea level, land use and land cover, ecosystems, and global biogeochemical cycles. Global change is among the most challenging and formidable issues confronting our Nation and society. Scientists agree that global environmental changes during this century will have far-reaching societal implications (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2009). In the face of these challenges, the Nation can benefit greatly by using natural science information in decisionmaking. Since the passage of the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990, the USGS has made substantial scientific contributions to understanding the interactive living and nonliving components of the Earth system. USGS natural science activities have led to fundamental advances in observing and understanding climate and land-cover change and the effects these changes have on ecosystems, natural-resource availability, and societal sustainability. Most of these major advances were pursued in partnership with other organizations within and outside the Department of the Interior. The inherent value of partnerships with other U.S. Global Change Research Program agencies and natural-resource managers is emphasized in all aspects of the planning and implementation of this Science Strategy for the coming decade. Over the next 10 years, the USGS will make substantial contributions to understanding how Earth systems interact, respond to, and cause global change. The USGS will work with science partners, decisionmakers, and resource managers at local to international levels (including Native American tribes) to improve understanding of past and present change; develop relevant forecasts; and identify those lands, resources, and communities most vulnerable to global change processes. Science will play an essential role in helping communities and land and resource managers understand local to global implications, anticipate effects, prepare for changes, and reduce the risks associated with decisionmaking in a changing environment. USGS partners and stakeholders will benefit from the data, predictive models, and decision-support products and services resulting from the implementation of this strategy. This Science Strategy recognizes core USGS strengths that are applied to key societal problems. It establishes seven goals for USGS global change science and strategic actions that may be implemented in the short term (1–5 years) and the longer term (5–10 years) to improve our understanding of the following areas of inquiry: Rates, causes, and impacts of past global changes; The global carbon cycle; Biogeochemical cycles and their coupled interactions; Land-use and land-cover change rates, causes, and consequences; Droughts, floods, and water availability under changing land-use and climatic conditions; Coastal response to sea-level rise, climatic change, and human development; and Biological responses to global change. In addition to the seven thematic goals, we address the central role of monitoring in accordance with the USGS Science Strategy recommendation that global change research should rely on existing “…decades of observational data and long-term records to interpret consequences of climate variability and change to the Nation’s biological populations, ecosystems, and land and water resources” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, p. 19). We also briefly describe specific needs and opportunities for coordinating USGS global change science among USGS Mission Areas and address the need for a comprehensive and sustained communications strategy.
Welcome to the inaugural edition of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) and the Department of the Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers (CSCs) annual report. In 2008, Congress created the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The center was formed to respond to the demands of natural resource managers for rigorous scientific information and effective tools for assessing and responding to climate change. Located at the USGS National Headquarters in Reston, Va., the NCCWSC has invested more than $70 million in cutting-edge climate change research and, in response to Secretarial Order No. 3289,established and is managing eight regional Department of Interior (DOI) Climate Science Centers (CSCs). The mission of the NCCWSC is to provide natural resource managers with the tools and information they need to develop and execute management strategies that address the impacts of climate and other ongoing global changes on fish and wildlife and their habitats. The DOI CSCs are joint Federal-university partnerships that focus their scientific work on regional priorities identified by DOI Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) as well as Federal, State, Tribal, and other resource managers. The CSCs provide access to a wide range of scientific capabilities through their network of university partners along with the USGS and other Federal agency scientists. The focus of the NCCWSC on multiregion and national priorities complements the regionally focused agendas of the CSCs.
Our Nation's lands, waters, and ecosystems and the living and cultural resources they contain face myriad challenges from invasive species, the effects of changing land and water use, habitat fragmentation and degradation, and other influences. These challenges are compounded by increasing influences from a changing climate—higher temperatures, increasing droughts, floods, and wildfires, and overall increasing variability in weather and climate. The Department of the Interior (DOI) has established eight regional Climate Science Centers (CSC) (fig. 1) that will provide scientific information and tools to natural and cultural resource managers as they plan for conserving these resources in a changing world. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) is managing the CSCs on behalf of the DOI.
This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Global Change Science Strategy expands on the Climate Variability and Change science component of the USGS 2007 Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges: USGS Science in the Coming Decade” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007). Here we embrace the broad definition of global change provided in the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–606,104 Stat. 3096–3104)—“Changes in the global environment (including alterations in climate, land productivity, oceans or other water resources, atmospheric chemistry, and ecological systems) that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life”—with a focus on climate and land-use change. There are three major characteristics of this science strategy. First, it addresses the science required to broadly inform global change policy, while emphasizing the needs of natural-resource managers and reflecting the role of the USGS as the science provider for the Department of the Interior and other resource-management agencies. Second, the strategy identifies core competencies, noting 10 critical capabilities and strengths the USGS uses to overcome key problem areas. We highlight those areas in which the USGS is a science leader, recognizing the strong partnerships and effective collaboration that are essential to address complex global environmental challenges. Third, it uses a query-based approach listing key research questions that need to be addressed to create an agenda for hypothesis-driven global change science organized under six strategic goals. Overall, the strategy starts from where we are, provides a vision for where we want to go, and then describes high-priority strategic actions, including outcomes, products, and partnerships that can get us there. Global change science is a well-defined research field with strong linkages to the ecosystems, water, energy and minerals, natural hazards, and environmental health components of the USGS Science Strategy (2007). When science strategies that cover these other components are developed, coordinated implementation will be necessary to achieve Bureau-level synergies and optimize capabilities and expertise. In October 2010, USGS realigned its management and budget structure to implement its 2007 Science Strategy. The new organizational structure, in which “Global Change” is one of seven key mission areas, lends itself to the advancement of the established six strategic goals. USGS global change science is formally represented by the “Climate and Land-Use Change” Mission Area in the FY 2012 budget (USGS, 2011). This plan was developed by the USGS Global Change Science Strategy Planning Team (SSPT) appointed by the USGS Director on March 4, 2010 and charged with developing a Global Change Science Strategy for the coming decade (McNutt, 2010). USGS managers and science staff are the main audience for this science strategy. This document is also intended to serve as the foundation for consistent USGS collaboration and communication with partners and stakeholders.