1

Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change

Research in Southwestern Kansas

Lisa MB Harrington

John A. Harrington, Jr.Max Lu

Douglas G. Goodin

David E. KrommStephen E. White

Kansas State University

Prepared for presentation at the

Open Meeting of the Global Environmental Change Research CommunityMontreal, Canada, 16-18 October 2003

2

Global Change in Local Places (GCLP) (1996-1999)

Hypothesis:SCALE MATTERS

(Kates & Wilbanks)

The Global Change in Local Places project (GCLP) was initiated by the Association of American Geographers, and funded by NASA. Funding for the Kansas site also was provided by the National Institute of Global Environmental Change (NIGEC), a Department of Energy program.

Results of the project are reported in:

Association of American Geographers Global Change and Local Places Research Team. 2003. Global Change and Local Places: Estimating, Understanding, and Reducing Greenhouse Gases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

See also:

Kates, R.W., and R.D. Torrie. 1998. Global change in local places. Environment 40(2):5,39-41.

Wilbanks, T.J., and R.W. Kates. 1999. Global change in local places: how scale matters. Climatic Change 43(3):601-628.

3

GCLP Study Areas:

4, approximating 1 square degree lat.Approx. 10 000 km2

Local expertiseKansas (KSU)Ohio (U of Toledo)North Carolina (Appalachian State)Pennsylvania (Penn State)

6 counties~ 14 000 km2

1990~ 93 000 pop.> 900 000 cattle pop.

Four study areas were developed for GCLP, based in part on strong local expertise in areas with very differing characteristics, including urban, Appalachian, and agricultural plains locations.

This report focuses on the work done in southwestern Kansas for both GCLP and a follow-up project. The Kansas area is sparsely settled, overall, with three regional service centers: Dodge City, Garden City, and Liberal. The six Kansas counties are situated above the Ogallala-High Plains aquifer system, and agriculture in the area has been reliant on groundwater to a large degree over the past three to four decades. The service centers also are closely tied to agriculture.

4

GCLP

1. Determine radiative forcing potential (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions) & sources

EPA data sets & additional data/estimates

2. Identify driving forcesexpert informantsreview of trends & decision-making forces

3. Investigate mitigative & adaptive potentialquestionnaires, interviews; analog research

Research work for GCLP was developed around three major tasks approached over three years. These tasks required a variety of data sources and research approaches.

5

GCLP: Sources of Radiative Potential

Goodin et al. 1998

Greenhouse gases considered included methane, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide. Estimates were made using a modified EPA protocol; modification from state level to work with local data was necessary. Industrial emissions estimates were obtained from self-reported AIRS (aerometric info retrieval system) data reported to EPA. Transportation calculations were made using EPA Mobil5a emissions model. Backcasting from 1990 was used to obtain estimates of earlier years’ emissions.

The potential effects of Land Use/Land Cover Change on climate change also were considered, but there was insufficient information available to make conclusions about possible LU/LCC effects on greenhouse gas emissions. It also was not possible to identify a significant effect of LU/LCC on radiative forcing.

See:

Goodin, D.G., J.A. Harrington, Jr., G.I. Holden, Jr., and B.D. Witcher. 1998. Local greenhouse gas emissions in southwestern Kansas. Great Plains Research 8:231-253.

Harrington, J.A., Jr., D. Goodin, and B. Witcher. 1999. Variations in greenhouse gas emissions across western Kansas. Preprints, Tenth Global Change Symposium, American Meteorological Society, Dallas, TX, p. 458-461.

6

Interviews & questionnaires for insights about perceptions & attitudes, which are linked to potentials for action

NaturalSector: Electric gas Feedlot Transport HouseholdN Mailed 12 67 55 48 702N Deliverable 12 65 55 42 584Usableresponse 50% 36% 44% 26% 34%rate (n=6) (n=23) (n=24) (n=11) (n=199)

InterviewsKey informants

• General impressionsClimate Change Questionnaires

Other studies: O’Connor et al. 1999;Krosnick et al. 1998; Kempton 1991, 1997; Berk & Schulman 1995; Bostrom et al. 1994; Read et al. 1994

Linked to the second and third tasks of the project, background interviews were conducted with key informants, including individuals involved with local government and/or development, agriculture, water management, and power provision.

Mailed questionnaire surveys also were conducted to gain information about both household and industrial viewpoints during 1998 and 1999. Households were randomly sampled, with stratification to ensure inclusion of small town and rural residents.

Administrative representatives in all identifiable industrial entities were included in sectoral surveys, based on the three types of activities that contributed most to greenhouse gas emissions. Questionnaires were mailed to 12 electric power providers, 67 natural gas companies, 55 feedlots of ≥ 1000 head capacity, 48 trucking companies. Total numbers of respondents were low, particularly in the electric industry, because total numbers of entities are few. (For example, there are only twelve electricity providers in the study area.)

Harrington, LMB. 2001. Attitudes toward climate change: Major emitters in southwestern Kansas. Climate Research 16(2): 113-122.

Harrington, L.M.B., and M. Lu. 2002. Beef feedlots in southwestern Kansas: Local change, perceptions, and the global change context. Global Environmental Change 12(4):273-282.

Others (e.g.):

Berk R.A., and D. Schulman. 1995. Public perceptions of global warming. Climatic Change 29:1-33.Bostrom, A., M.G. Morgan, B. Fischoff, and D. Read. 1994. What do people know about global climate change? 1. Mental models. Risk Analysis 14(6):959-970.Kempton, W. 1997. How the public views climate change. Environment 39(9):12-21.

Kempton, W. 1991. Lay perspectives on global climate change. Global Environmental Change 1(3):183-208.

Krosnick, J.A., and P.S. Visser. 1998. The impact of the fall 1997 debate about global warming on American public opinion. Report for Resources for the Future. Http://www.rff.org/misc_docs/osu_long.pdf.

Krosnick, J.A., P.S. Visser, and A.L. Holbrook. 1998. American opinion on global warming: The impact of the fall 1997 debate. Resources 133:5-9.

O’Connor, R.E., R.J. Bord, and A. Fisher. 1999. Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Analysis 19(3):461-471.

Read, D., A. Bostrom, M.G. Morgan, B. Fischoff, and T. Smuts. 1994. What do people know about global climate change? 2. Survey studies of educated lay people. Risk Analysis 14(6):971-982.

7

Would you say that it is mostly a proven fact that burning oil, coal, and natural gas for energy will cause global warming in the future, or that it is mostly an unproven theory?

Percentmostly mostly between unprovenunproven proven speculation don't

Sector theory fact & proven fact other know NRnatural gas 65.2 13 8.7 0 8.7 4.3electricity 66.7 16.7 16.7 0 0 0feedlot 58.3 4.2 29.2 0 8.3 0transport. 45.5 9.1 36.4 0 9.1 0household 28.6 21.1 30.7 0.5 18.1 1

Overall, would you say that the effects of global warming for southwestern Kansas would be:

Percentneither good don't

Sector (n) good bad nor bad know NRnatural gas (23) 4.3 17.4 39.1 34.8 4.3electricity (6) 33.3 16.7 16.7 33.3 0feedlot (24) 4.2 16.7 29.2 45.8 4.2transport. (11) 0 18.2 54.5 27.3 0household (199) 2.5 36.7 19.6 39.7 1.5

Overall, electricity and natural gas respondents appeared to differ most from the general household respondents.

8

Climate change is more tenuous than other concerns–less “proven,” not local, & may be associated with questionable motives

“To think I could affect creation is crazy.”

“...Not enough of time span or research years to be proven fact...”

“I’m afraid it appears you have been DUPED by the “United Nations” and all of their left wing environmental extremism!!!”

Personal responsibility & stewardship values were held by some respondents:

“…Despite the fact that I will no longer be here in another half-century, I am very cognizant of my personal stewardship to the environment. …”

“My needs are to live as simple and good as possible but also to live responsibly for the world.”

One researcher on the team has expressed the view that people here are very “present-oriented.” Adjustment occurs, but mostly for very near-term outcomes. Trust of external institutions is very low.

9

General findings from GCLP surveys & interviews related to climate change concerns:

Widely varying views among individuals

Differences between the general public & specific industrial representatives

Differences between this region & the nation as a whole (e.g., Krosnick et al. 1998)

Linking greenhouse gas emissions reductions to economic savings will aid acceptance

Economic savings are continuing as a concern in the region, and can be related to more general worries about economic security.

Also see:

Harrington, LMB. 2001. Attitudes toward climate change: Major emitters in southwestern Kansas. Climate Research 16(2): 113-122.

Krosnick, J.A., P.S. Visser, and A.L. Holbrook. 1998. American opinion on global warming: The impact of the fall 1997 debate. Resources 133:5-9.

Also see the GCLP book (noted on slide 2)

10

GCLP Analog Study (Kromm, White)

Response to groundwater depletion as an indicator of potential adaptations to climate change

Conclusions:

Once convinced that global warming is occurring & has consequences, adjustments will be made, as in the past

Willingness to mitigate global warming at the local level may be a different issue

• "Mitigation may be possible if it proves to have local economic benefit, is technically possible, and politically feasible"

David Kromm and Stephen White led efforts to consider groundwater depletion responses as an analog to climate change and potential responses.

11

GCLP evolution to HEROHuman-Environmental Regional Observatories (2000-2004)

How does changing land use affect the vulnerabilities of people & places in the face of climate variation & change?

S Arizona/N Mexico (U. of Arizona)

SW Kansas (KSU)Central Pennsylvania (Penn State)Massachusetts (Clark U.)

With completion of the Global Change in Local Places project, a number of team members felt that continuation of research about environmental change and its effects in different places can be beneficial. In particular, research that is long term (as in the LTER—Long Term Ecological Research—system), but that focuses on human-environmental interactions is needed, and there is a needed to develop research approaches that can work across differing regions.

Geographers at The Pennsylvania State University, Kansas State University, Clark University, and the University of Arizona obtained funding from the National Science Foundation for a five year project following GCLP, the Human-Environment Regional Observatories project. To focus the research, an overarching research question was developed, as shown above.

Continuing research teams were located at Penn State and Kansas State; Clark and Arizona represent additions.

12

High Plains-Ogallala (HP-O) HERO

19 counties41 120 km2

2000 estimate:156 000 people > 2¼ million cattle

For Kansas, the GCLP area was expanded from six counties to nine teen. The most significant effect of the addition was that greater variability of groundwater resources is now included. The additional counties all are quite rural.

13

Hydroclimatic Vulnerability Assessment

Collaboration with other HERO sites on drought vulnerabilityWorking toward a hydroclimatic/drought vulnerability protocol

Development of a local narrative• Determining local issues related to:s Exposure to drought (frequent – 1890s, 1930s,

1950s)s Sensitivity (yes: agriculture-based economy)s Adaptive capacity (varies – depending on

access to resources, individual wealth, economic diversification)

Current efforts focus on assessing vulnerability to drought and hydroclimaticvariability.

The MINK (Missouri-Iowa-Nebraska-Kansas) modeling study, which used 1930s weather data and information about modern agricultural technology to consider a scenario for future response to global climate variation, is useful.

For the Kansas HERO, we can say that there is sensitivity due to the agriculture-based economy. However, the MINK study suggests that modern higher technology agriculture is less vulnerable to drought than, say, during the Dustbowl period. For a large part of the region, groundwater has served to mitigate the effects of drought, but the capacity to use groundwater for this is decreasing. In the short term (several more decades), there are locations that will continue to have groundwater that is economically available for agriculture; in other locations, this availability already is virtually gone, if it ever existed. Recent drought indicated fairly high vulnerability in the region, specifically related to wheat and dryland sorghum. Much of the area does not have sufficient access to ir rigation to mitigate drought effects.

Reference:

Easterling, William E., P.R. Crosson, N.I. Rosenberg, M.S. McKenney, L.A. Katz, and K.M. Lemon. 1993. Agricultural impacts of and responses to climate change in the Missouri-Iowa-Nebraska-Kansas (MINK) region. Climatic Change 24:23-61.

14

HP-O HERO concerns:

agricultural land-use changehuman adjustment to climate changelocal vulnerabilityhuman impacts on regional sustainability

Vulnerability and adaptation may be approached in several ways (Easterling 1996, Tol et al. 1998)

Literature reviewScenariosAnalogs (spatial & temporal)Modeling

Land use changes in the region primarily has been between agricultural uses, with shifts in crops related to pricing and the costs of pumping water from greater depths (due to water table declines related to past groundwater use). In some areas, irrigation has been stopped. For a number of farmers, enrollment of land in the current land banking system, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) has been another way to reduce economic vulnerability.

References:

Easterling, William E. 1996. Adapting North American agriculture to climate change in review. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 80: 1-53.

Tol, Richard S.J., Samuel Fankhauser, and Joel B. Smith. 1998. The scope for adaptation to climate change: What can we learn from the impact literature? Global Environmental Change 8(2):109-123.

15

It is likely that human-environment interactions in the HP-O HERO area have been/will be affected by at least 5 major sets of variables:

1) climate variability, including interannual iterations & longer term fluctuations

2) agricultural & other policy changes3) socio-economic & demographic factors4) resource availability, especially water resources5) local thinking, external influences, & decision making

These factors would affect interactions in all types of agricultural regions, thus relating to both vulnerability & adaptability, andshould be components of HP-O HERO research

Agricultural and other policy changes that affect water are a particular concern.

16

Historical responses & the use of analogs:

important in assessing vulnerability & adaptation potential

can guide development of scenarios & models

analogy use for study of impacts of climate on society was proposed in 1979 at the first World Climate Conference (Glantz & Ausubel 1988)

take advantage of historical lessonsrecognize similarities between environmental issues & their potential human impacts

Reference:

Glantz, Michael H., and Jesse H. Ausubel. 1988. Impact assessment by analogy: Comparing the impacts of the Ogallala Aquifer depletionand CO2-induced climate change. Pp. 113-142 in M.H. Glantz, ed. Societal Responses to Regional Climatic Change. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

17

For the study area, past adaptations to variable, low precipitation levels & high potential evapotranspiration rates include

Irrigation—use of groundwater to overcome precipitation limitsDryland agriculture (crops & rangeland), where irrigation water is not available

Given the combination of past changes, adaptations, and expected climatic changes, the following approaches can be useful in developing both qualitative and quantitative data:

18

1. High Plains historical analogs for guidance

a. differing responses to drought in the 1930s & 1950s

b. Potentially, more recent droughts (e.g., late 1980s, early 2000s)

c. LU/LCC associated with land banking programs (e.g., CRP)

d. Recent LU/LCC with Ogallala groundwater depletion in parts of study area

PDSI for Southwest Kansas1895 - 2001

-6.00

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

1895

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

Pal

mer

Dro

ug

ht S

ever

ity

Ind

ex

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

18

95

19

00

19

05

19

10

19

15

19

20

19

25

19

30

19

35

19

40

19

45

19

50

19

55

19

60

19

65

19

70

19

75

19

80

19

85

19

90

19

95

20

00

SP

I (σ

)

AZ KS PA MA

SPI Graph: A. Comrie, University of Arizona (Sombrhero)

Graph indications 1930s & 1950s droughts. By some measures, 1950s drought was ‘worse’ than 1930s drought. However, wind was less of a problem, and some better adaptations may have been in place.

SPI = standardized precipitation index—Comrie graph: Drought history for four climate divisions of the four HEROs, using 5-year (60-month) SPI.

Glantz & Ausubel (1988) (see slide 16) proposed use of Ogallala depletion effects as an analog for climate change under increased CO2. See also the GCLP book (slide 2).

The MINK (Missouri-Iowa -Nebraska-Kansas) modeling study was based on the 1930s drought as an historical analog (Easterling et al. 1993). The MINK research used 1930s weather data, EPIC modeling, and information about likely agricultural technology advances to consider likely agricultural responses to climate change.

Such studies may be useful in developing specific HERO analog studies, but HERO analogs will need to consider other factors, including changes to critical water resources (e.g., availability of Ogallala water).

Reference:

Easterling, W.E., P.R. Crosson, N.I. Rosenberg, M.S. McKenney, L.A. Katz, and K.M. Lemon. 1993. Agricultural Impacts of and Responses to Climate Change in the Missouri-Iowa -Nebraska-Kansas (Mink) Region. Climatic Change 24:23-61.

EPIC = erosion productivity impact calculator

19

2. Vulnerability related to social & economic conditions

Selected vulnerability levels for SW Kansas (as shown by Cutter et al. 2003)

single sector economic reliance: generally highrace & gender: mixed–low, medium & highethnicity: mediumoccupation: mixed–low, medium & highpersonal wealth & poverty: generally mediumage structure: mixture–low, medium & high

Reliance on agriculture, without economic diversification, leads to relatively high vulnerabilities. The relatively high proportion of the population that is Hispanic (and ,to a lesser extent, Asian), and the aging population, especially in counties away from the three service centers, also can lead to assessments of relatively high social vulnerability.

Reference:

Cutter, S.L., B.J. Boruff, and W.L. Shirley. 2003. Social vulnerability to Environmental Hazards. Social Science Quarterly 84(2):242-261.

20

3. Tracking on-going changes in groundwater management policyAquifer subunits within Groundwater Management Districts (GMDs)

Based on hydrologic and water use parametersGoal: better delineate spatial variation in depletion, targeting most vulnerable areas for more intense managementPossible result: greater state (as opposed to local) controlprocess is likely to be important to the pattern of shifts from irrigated to dryland agriculture

FY2005 Draft Water Plan represents a move toward identifying Priority Ground Water Decline Areas (based on GIS analysis). Water use conservation plans will be required of water right holders in Priority Areas. This also will guide allocation of cost-sharing funds.

Local resistance to changes are becoming more apparent, and are being expressed institutionally and through increased activism (e.g. petitioning of the state legislature).

21

Nathan Kettle, 2003

LU/LCC or LUCC research:

Kettle (2003) has studied one county in the Kansas HERO, in an effort to consider resource depletion effects on conversion from irrigated to dryland agriculture. Wichita County has been undergoing fairly dramatic changes related to groundwater depletion. Shifts (back to) dryland agriculture are an adaptation to this, but drought effects will likely be a greater problem in the future, without use of supplemental water.

Anderson Level I classification of Gray Co. for 1985 and 2001 (+ 1992)

Effort to track changes related to the Conservation Reserve Program

Analysis of LUCC and associated wind erosion potential in Seward Co.

Related publications:

Kettle, N. 2003. Groundwater depletion and agricultural land use change in Wichita County, Kansas (thesis, Kansas State University)

Kroemer, R. 2002. Assessing Aquifer Vulnerability in Phelps County, Nebraska, and Finney County, Kansas, Using DRASTIC and LPI Indices (thesis, Kansas State University)

Leathers, N., and L.M.B. Harrington. 2000. Effectiveness of conservation reserves: ‘Slippage’ in Southwestern Kansas. The Professional Geographer 52(1):83-93.

22

4. Literature reviewse.g., sociological studies provide an example for vulnerability assessment. Sublette, Kansas, was considered quite vulnerable in 1941. With current availability/use of ground water, the situation is quite different [in the short-to-medium term]

Hazards research is valuable.

Research done in other fields should inform the environmental change research being done now (primarily by geographers). One example of this is the repeat consideration of small towns by sociologists. Sublette is in the Kansas HERO.

Hazards research also is proving valuable as we consider issues related to vulnerability and resiliency.

See:

Luloff, A.E., and R.S. Krannich, eds. 2003. Persistence and Change in Rural Communities: A 50-Year Follow-Up to Six Classic Studies. New York: CABI Publishing.

Chap 3: Sublette, Kansas: Persistence and Change in Haskell County, by L. Bloomquist, D. Williams, and J.C. Bridger.

Bell, E.H. 1942. Culture of a Contemporary Rural Community: Sublette, Kansas. Rural Life Studies 2. Washington DC: USDA, Bureau of Agricultural Economics.

23

Conclusions:Global change research, in a local context, has been approached through multiple methods for southwestern Kansas and GCLP/HERO project areas

Analysis of EPA AIRS data & supplemental detailed local informationRemote sensing—imagery analysis for LU/LCCKey informant interviewsHousehold and industrial surveysAnalogsPolicy trackingLiterature reviews, especially research with similar foci (e.g.,vulnerability/ hazards)

Multiple methods will continue to be essential for considerationof human-environment relations and global/local change