Ecosystem Evaluation, Climate Change and Water Resources Planning |
| |
| Authors: | Eugene Z Stakhiv David C Major |
| |
| Institution: | (1) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Institute for Water Resources, 7701 Telegraph Road, Alexandria, VA, 22315-3868;(2) Sarah Lawrence College, 1 Mead Way, Bronxville, NY, 10708-5999 |
| |
| Abstract: | This paper considers ecosystem evaluation under conditions of climate change in the context both of the U.S. Water Resources Council's Principles and Guidelines (P&G) and the more general Federal regulations governing environmental evaluation. Federal water agencies have responsibilities for protecting aquatic ecosystems through their regulatory programs and operations and planning missions. The primary concern of water resources and aquatic ecosystems planning in the United States is on the riparian or floodplain corridors of river systems. In the context of climate change, planning for these systems focusses on adaptation options both for current climate variability and for that engendered by potential climate change.Ecosystems appear to be highly vulnerable to climate change, as described in IPCC reports. Aquatic ecosystems are likely to be doubly affected, first by thermally induced changes of global warming and second by changes in the hydrologic regime. Perhaps as much as any of the issues dealt with in this issue, the evaluation of ecosystems is linked to fundamental questions of criteria as well as to the details of the Federal environmental planning system. That system is a densely woven, interlocking system of environmental protection legislation, criteria and regulations that includes a self-contained evaluation system driven by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) procedural guidelines (United States Council on Environmental Quality, 1978) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) requirements. The Corps of Engineers must use both the P&G and the NEPA/EIS system in discharging its responsibilities.If U.S. Federal agencies are to take the lead in formulating and evaluating adaptation options, there needs to be a reexamination of existing evaluation approaches. Among the elements of the P&G that may require rethinking in view of the prospects of global climate change are those relating to risk and uncertainty, nonstationarity, interest rates, and multiple objectives. Within the government planning process, efforts must be made to resolve inconsistencies and constraints in order to permit the optimal evaluation of water-based ecosystems under global climate change. The interrelationships of the two systems are described in this paper, and alternative ways of viewing the planning process are discussed. Strategic planning and management at the watershed level provides an effective approach to many of the issues. Current NEPA/EIS impact analysis does not provide a suitable framework for environmental impact analysis under climate uncertainty, and site-specific water resources evaluation relating to climate change appears difficult at current levels of knowledge about climate change. The IPCC Technical Guidelines, however, provide a useful beginning for assessing the impacts of future climate states. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
