Maintaining a certain amount of agricultural land and promoting its agricultural land utilization efficiency is essential in a country. Many innovative strategies for adapting to climate change have been implemented in developed countries. To achieve the goal of climate change adaptation for agricultural land, a vulnerability assessment of farmland is indispensable. Based on the research framework of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, this study applied the structure of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptation to build criteria and conduct an evaluation of a designated area in Southern Taiwan. We identified the key factors of the vulnerability of farmland, through mapping with spatial analysis, and by using geographic information system tools. The main purpose of the application of a vulnerability assessment is not to explicitly describe the status of agricultural land to climate change, but to help local government and farmers to identify the critical area, and to discuss the appropriated adaptive policies. According to the results of the vulnerability assessment of agricultural land, the entire study region can be divided into three patterns: Pattern 1, located in the western coastal zone, filled with various attributes of high vulnerability; Pattern 2, distributed on the central plain region in the east, with complete blocks of agricultural land and low vulnerability; and Pattern 3, located in the central plain region to the west, a region in which areas with various vulnerability levels. The following three types of adaptation strategies for climate change for farmland were established: (1) the enhancement of agricultural production, (2) the maintenance of agricultural production, and (3) the conservation of the agricultural environment. The current results can serve as valuable guidelines for governments to implement feasible local adaptation strategies in the future.
Climate change and population growth are increasing the frequency of flooding and drought, resulting in conflict over water resources. Social impact assessments (SIA) of the allocation and management of water resources provide a way of reducing and resolving such conflicts. This article first explores the nature of SIA for water environments through an inductive analysis of the cases mentioned in more than 30 papers. Next, it identifies important advantages of SIA over integrated water resources management (IWRM) practices and indicates that while IWRM solves water-related issues to improve social well-being, it cannot entirely grasp the overall social impact of planned interventions. Following this, it analyzes the water environment governance structures in Taiwan, using questionnaire responses from water environment management professionals to discuss challenges of effectively implementing water environment SIA. The questionnaire covers 26 detailed tasks of SIA advocated by Vanclay et al. This research is the first to have evaluated the difficulty of the tasks. The survey results can be used as a reference for the implementation of SIA in other regions. The results show that (1) the water environment SIA is indeed necessary; (2) Taiwan’s water environment professionals need to improve from their current lack of understanding of SIA; (3) it is difficult to implement the water environment SIA; (4) it is necessary for SIA to clarify and integrate the authorities and responsibilities of relevant government departments; (5) the professionals believe the myth of quantification of SIA; and (6) water environment SIA must be integrated with the existing IWRM. Finally, we emphasize the need to integrate SIA and IWRM in a mutually complementary way, and illuminate the need for an integrated SIA framework for water environment management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.