Climate change and the Puget Sound: Building the legal framework for adaptation

Abstract

Regardless of the efforts governments may take to mitigate the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions and other human activities on climate change, the need for society to adapt to climate change is unavoidable. Adapting to the myriad impacts of climate change will require actions at all levels of government. This article focuses on the anticipated impacts of climate change on the Puget Sound region in the northwestern United States as an example of the range of problems climate change will present and of the solutions available to governments and others interested in avoiding or minimizing the adverse impacts of climate change. As a guide for policy-makers, the article offers general principles for formulating climate change adaptation policies, suggestions for changes in decision-making processes that make them more suitable for addressing the unpredictable impacts of climate change, and strategies for adapting to three specific categories of climate change effects: impacts on the hydrologic cycle, sea-level rise, and altered meteorological conditions. The strategies and recommendations analysed in the article can provide a model for climate change adaptation policies, both in the Puget Sound region and more broadly, that are both environmentally protective and socially equitable.

Improving the quality of Alaska Native Village climate change planning

“…This article explores how ANVs are planning for climate change and consider the fit between the resulting plans and expressed community concerns (namely, subsistence). In contrast to literature hailing the benefits of climate change adaptation planning (Bajracharya et al, 2011;Berke et al, 2014;Berke and Lyles, 2013;Crane and Landis, 2010;Head, 2014;Hirokawa and Rosenbloom, 2013;Huang et al, 2011;Pearce et al, 2012;Schmidt, 2009), it was discovered that the current process of planning is not particularly useful to ANVs, and the result is an overly long document that can garner funding for projects that may or may not help with climate change adaptation.…”

Climate Risk Management in Cultural Heritage for Inclusive Adaptation Actions in Nigeria

“…The co-production of actions for climate adaptation between local communities and experts helps in leveraging the specialised knowledge of the experts in understanding the science of climate change and assessing the risks and vulnerability, while local community members provide the local knowledge needed to develop inclusive adaptation actions. Collaboration between local community and experts provides valuable insights for policymakers and government organisations in developing evidence-based policies to address the impacts of present and future changes in climate on cultural heritage [36,37].…”

The relationship between adaptive management of social-ecological systems and law: a systematic review

“…Originally coined by Milly et al (2008), stationarity has been described as a failure of some legal frameworks to recognize the dynamics of social-ecological systems, which are constantly facing change rather than remaining stable (Thrower 2006, Craig 2010b, Spies et al 2010, Benson and Garmestani 2011, Godden and Kung 2011, Huang et al 2011, Ruhl 2011, Benson 2012, Garmestani and Benson 2013, Arnold 2014, He 2014, Humby 2014, McCormack and McDonald 2014, McDonald and Styles 2014, Curran and Masche 2016, Novellie et al 2016. Since the 1970s, many environmental laws have been influenced and shaped by the "equilibrium paradigm," a belief that, without human disturbance, ecosystems can eventually reach or maintain a natural stability (Thrower 2006, Benson and Garmestani 2011, Benson 2012, Craig and Ruhl 2014.…”

“…Legal frameworks tend to incorporate preservation and restoration approaches (Craig 2010b, Schramm and Fishman 2010, Spies et al 2010, Huang et al 2011, Benson 2012, McDonald and Styles 2014. Both approaches assume that ecosystems have a desirable and achievable "state of being," which remains historically constant (Craig 2010b).…”

“…Both approaches assume that ecosystems have a desirable and achievable "state of being," which remains historically constant (Craig 2010b). This perspective is incompatible with the adaptive capacity needed to address relevant environmental management issues, such as climate change (Craig 2010b, Spies et al 2010, Huang et al 2011, Ruhl 2011, McCormack and McDonald 2014. By not acknowledging the complexity and unpredictability of social-ecological systems, legal frameworks based on stationarity can be too rigid for adaptive management (Craig 2010b, Benson and Garmestani 2011, Godden and Kung 2011, McCormack and McDonald 2014, Novellie et al 2016.…”