Review Us Global Change Research Program Strategic Plan

A Review of the
U.S. Global Change

Research Programs
Draft Strategic Plan

A Review of the U.S. Global Change Research Program's Strategic Plan
A Review of the
U.S. Global Change Research Programs
Draft Strategic Plan
Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research Program
Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate

Division on Earth and Life Studies
Board on Environmental Change and Society

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu
Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of
the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National
Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The
members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences
and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under
contract number DG133R08CQ0062, Task Order #8. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions, or
recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the sponsor or any of its sub agencies.
International Standard Book Number -13: 978-0-309-25237-9

International Standard Book Number -10: 0-309-25237-7
Copies of this report are available from the program office:

Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate
500 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 334-3512
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth
Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the
Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of

distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the
furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority
of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it
to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is
president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the
National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is
autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National
Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National
Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs,
encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr.
Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to
secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy
matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to
the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal
government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and
education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to
associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academys purposes of
furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with
general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating
agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in
providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering
communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of
Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively,
of the National Research Council.
www.national-academies.org


COMMITTEE TO ADVISE
THE U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM
WARREN M. WASHINGTON (Chair), National Center for Atmospheric Research,

Boulder, Colorado
KAI N. LEE, (Vice Chair), The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Los Altos,
California
MARK R. ABBOTT, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
DOUG ARENT, National Energy Renewable Laboratory, Golden, Colorado
SUSAN K. AVERY, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Woods Hole, Massachusetts
ROBERT E. DICKINSON, University of Texas, Austin
THOMAS DIETZ, Michigan State University, East Lansing
HENRY D. JACOBY, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
MARIA CARMEN LEMOS, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
IAN ROY NOBLE, Global Adaption Institute, Vienna, Virginia
CAMILLE PARMESAN, University of Texas, Austin, Texas
KAREN C. SETO, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
KATHLEEN J. TIERNEY, University of Colorado, Boulder
CHARLES J. VOROSMARTY, City University of New York, New York
JOHN M. WALLACE, University of Washington, Seattle
GARY W. YOHE, Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut
Ex-officio liaisons:
ANTHONY JANETOS, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, University of Maryland,
College Park
RICHARD H.MOSS, Joint Global Change Research Institute, University of Maryland,
College Park
NRC Staff:
LAURIE GELLER, Study Director

PAUL C. STERN, Study Director
DAN MUTH, Postdoctoral Fellow
RICARDO PAYNE, Senior Program Assistant
v


Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse
perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRCs
Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and
critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as
possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and
responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain
confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following
individuals for their participation in their review of this report:
Robert H. Corell, Global Environment and Technology Foundation, Arlington VA

Baruch Fischhoff, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
Isaac Held, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Princeton, NJ
Thomas J. Wilbanks, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
Steven C. Wofsy, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
Richard N. Wright, National Institute of Standards and Technology (Ret),
Montgomery Village, MD
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and
suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions nor did they see the final draft of the
report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert Frosch (Harvard
University) and Susan Hansen (Clark University), appointed by the National Research Council,
who were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was
carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were
carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the
authoring committee and the institution.
vi

Institutional oversight for this project was provided by:
BOARD ON ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES AND CLIMATE
ANTONIO J. BUSALACCHI, JR. (Chair), University of Maryland, College Park

GERALD A. MEEHL (Vice Chair), National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder,
Colorado
RICHARD CARBONE, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
KIRSTIN DOW, University of South Carolina, Columbia
GREG S. FORBES, The Weather Channel, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia
LISA GODDARD, Columbia University, New York, New York
ISAAC HELD, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Princeton, New Jersey
ANTHONY JANETOS, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, University of Maryland,
College Park
HAROON S. KHESHGI, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company, Annandale, New Jersey
MICHAEL D. KING, University of Colorado, Laboratory for Atmospheric & Space Physics,
Boulder, Colorado
JOHN E. KUTZBACH, University of Wisconsin, Madison
ARTHUR LEE, Chevron Corporation, San Ramon, California
ROBERT J. LEMPERT, The RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California
ROGER B. LUKAS, University of Hawaii, Honolulu
SUMANT NIGAM, Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center, College Park, Maryland
RAYMOND T. PIERREHUMBERT, University of Chicago, Illinois
KIMBERLY PRATHER, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California
RICH RICHELS, Electric Power Research Institute, Inc., Washington, DC
DAVID A. ROBINSON, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, New Jersey
KIRK R. SMITH, University of California, Berkeley
JOHN T. SNOW, University of Oklahoma, Norman
CLAUDIA TEBALDI, Climate Central, Princeton, New Jersey
XUBIN ZENG, University of Arizona, Tucson
NRC Staff
CHRIS ELFRING, Director

EDWARD DUNLEA, Senior Program Officer
LAURIE GELLER, Senior Program Officer
MAGGIE WALSER, Program Officer
KATIE WELLER, Associate Program Officer
LAUREN BROWN, Research Associate
DAN MUTH, Postdoctoral Fellow
RITA GASKINS, Administrative Coordinator
ROB GREENWAY, Program Associate
SHELLY FREELAND, Senior Program Assistant
RICARDO PAYNE, Senior Program Assistant
AMANDA PURCELL, Senior Program Assistant
ELIZABETH FINKLEMAN, Program Assistant
GRAIG MANSFIELD, Financial Associate
APRIL MELVIN, Christine Mirazayan Science and Technology Fellow
vii

Institutional oversight for this project was provided by:
BOARD ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE AND SOCIETY

(formerly the Committee on Human Dimensions of Global Change)
RICHARD H.MOSS (Chair), Joint Global Change Research Institute, Univ. of Maryland, College Park
ARUN AGRAWAL, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
ANTHONY BEBBINGTON, Clark University, Worsester, Massachusetts
WILLIAM CHANDLER, Transition Energy, Annapolis, Maryland
RUTH DEFRIES, Columbia University, New York, New York
KRISTIE L. EBI, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group II, Technical Support
Unit, Carnegie Institution, Stanford, California
MARIA CARMEN LEMOS, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
DENNIS OJIMA, Colorado State University, Fort Collins
STEPHEN POLASKY, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
J. TIMMONS ROBERTS, Center for Environmental Studies, Brown Univ., Providence, Rhode Island
JAMES L. SWEENEY, Stanford University, California
GARY W. YOHE, Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut
NRC Staff
MEREDITH A. LANE, Board Director

PAUL C. STERN, Senior Scholar
ALICIA JARAMILLO-UNDERWOOD, Senior Program Assistant
viii

Contents
SUMMARY....1
1. INTRODUCTION .3
2. CONVEYING THE IMPORTANCE AND VALUE OF

GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH ..6
3. GLOBAL CHANGE VERSUS CLIMATE CHANGE 8
4. COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC TOPICS WITHIN PROGRAM GOALS 1-4..12

Observations, Modeling, and Data Management, 12
Social Sciences Research, 18
Ecological Sciences Research, 23
Mitigation and Adaptation , 25
Decision Support, 30
Communication, Education, Workforce Development, 36
Key Messages Regarding Expansion of the Program, 38
5. PROCESS, STRUCTURE, AND IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES....41
REFERENCES ....44
APPENDICES
A: Statement of Task...49
B: Committee Member Biosketches ...51
C: Comments from members of the Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate
and Committee on Human Dimensions of Global Change....57
ix


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since its creation over two decades ago, the U.S. Global Change Research Program
(USGCRP) has played an important role in coordinating the efforts of agencies and departments
across the federal government that carry out a wide array of observational and research efforts
related to global change, and especially climate change. Such efforts have led to major advances in
our understanding of the changing global environment and the countless ways in which human
society affects and is affected by such changes. In its new 10-year Strategic Plan, the USGCRP
proposes to broaden the Programs scope in several directions. It is envisioned that with such an
evolution, the Program can both continue to advance basic scientific understanding of global
change and can actively support societys efforts to mitigate, adapt, and otherwise respond to those
changes.
Building on its long tradition as an independent advisor to the USGCRP, the National
Research Council (NRC) appointed a committee to carry out a review of the draft Strategic Plan
(as part of its broader, ongoing role in providing whole-program advice to the USGCRP). In this
review, the Committee offers an array of suggestions for improving the Plan, ranging from
relatively small edits to large questions about the Programs scope, goals, and capacity to meet
those goals. The key high-level messages of this review include:
x The Strategic Plan should offer a more coherent summary of past important
accomplishments, including an assessment of successes that were possible only because of
USGCRP actions and more explicit discussion about the potential value of future research.
x The proposed broadening of the Program's scope from climate change only to climate
change and climate-related global changes is an important step in the right direction.
The Program's legislative mandate is to address all of global change, whether or not related
to climate. The Committee concurs that this broader scope is appropriate, but realizes that
such an expansion may be constrained by budget realities and by the practical challenge of
maintaining clear boundaries for an expanded program. We encourage sustained efforts to
expand the scope of the Program over time, along with efforts to better define and
prioritize what specific topics are included within the bounds of global change research. As
the Program moves in this direction, a high priority is to assure that observing systems are
designed to monitor a broad array of global changes, given that valuable information is
being lost every year that such efforts are delayed.
x The proposed broadening of the Program to better integrate the social and ecological
sciences, to inform decisions about mitigation and adaptation, and to emphasize decision
support more generally is welcome and in fact essential for meeting the legislative
mandate for a program aimed at understanding and responding to global change.
Although this broader scope is needed, implementing it presents a grand challenge that
should be met with more than just incremental solutions.
x An effective global change research enterprise requires an integrated observational system

that connects observations of the physical environment with a wide variety of social and
ecological observations. Such a system is a crucial foundation for identifying and tracking
1

global changes; for evaluating the drivers, vulnerabilities, and responses to such changes;
and for identifying opportunities to increase the resilience of both human and natural
systems. The Plan needs to describe a clear vision and specific objectives for adding and
integrating new types of observations, along with a commitment to some concrete steps
towards realizing this vision. The Plan also needs to present an appropriate governance
structure and dedicated mechanisms to sustain existing long-term observational systems.
x The USGCRP and its member agencies and programs are lacking in capacity to achieve the
proposed broadening of the Program, perhaps most seriously with regard to integrating the
social and ecological sciences within research and observational programs, and developing
the scientific base and organizational capacity for decision support related to mitigation
and adaptation choices. Member agencies and programs have insufficient expertise in
these domains and lack clear mandates to develop the needed science.
x In the Committees judgment, it would be a mistake to postpone phasing in the newer

elements of the Program (as is implied in the implementation section of the Strategic Plan).
Rather, we suggest that the Program identify some initial steps it will take in the proposed
broadening of scope including steps to develop critical science capacity that is currently
lacking and to improve linkages between the production of knowledge and its use. The
Programs implementation plan should assign responsibilities and resources to specific
entities to lead those efforts.
x The proposed broadening of the Program in the areas of education, communication, and
workforce development needs more careful thinking, regarding which of these activities
belong within the Program, which are best organized by entities outside the Program, and
how the former will link to the latter.
x The Strategic Plan and/or the Implementation Plan to follow should establish clear
processes for setting priorities and phasing in and out elements of the Program, especially
in relation to the planned broadening of its scope. The USGCRP should employ iterative
processes for periodically evaluating and updating the Program and its priorities, including
processes for consultation with decision makers inside and outside the federal government,
regarding the scientific knowledge about global change that would provide the greatest
value for them.
x The USGCRP needs an overall governance structure with the responsibility and resources
needed to broaden the Program in the directions outlined in the Plan, including an ability to
compel reallocation of funds to serve the Programs overarching priorities. Without such a
governance structure, the likely evolution of the Program will be business as usual: a
compilation of program elements that derive from each member agencys individual
priorities.
2

1
Introduction
The U.S. government supports a large, diverse suite of activities that can be broadly
characterized as global change research. Such research offers a wide array of benefits to the
nation, in terms of protecting public health and safety, enhancing economic strength and
competitiveness, and protecting the natural systems upon which life depends. The U.S. Global
Change Research Program (USGCRP), which coordinates the efforts of numerous agencies and
departments across the federal government, was officially established in 1990 through the U.S.
Global Change Research Act (GCRA). In the subsequent years, the scope, structure, and
priorities of the Program have evolved (for example, it was referred to as the Climate Change
Science Program (CCSP) for the years 2002-2008), but throughout, the Program has played an
important role in shaping and coordinating our nations global change research enterprise. This
research enterprise, in turn, has played a crucial role in advancing understanding of our changing
global environment and the countless ways in which human society affects and is affected by such
changes. Given the nations current fiscal challenges, it is ever more important that our global
change research enterprise advances as a strategically-driven, coordinated whole, rather than a
collection of ad hoc, unconnected efforts at different federal agencies. Thus the need for a strong
USGCRP is greater than ever.
The National Research Council (NRC) has served as a key advisor to USGCRP planning
efforts since the Programs formation. Box 1 lists the previous NRC reports that have offered
whole program advice to the USGCRP and CCSP (not including the numerous studies carried
out during this time that focused on specific federal agency programs and activities).
BOX 1
Previous NRC Whole-Program Advice to the USGCRP / CCSP
x Research Strategies for the U.S. Global Change Research Program (1990)
x Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade (1999)
x Planning Climate and Global Change Research: A Review of the Draft CCSP Strategic Plan
(2003)
x Implementing Climate & Global Change Research: A Review of the Final CCSP Strategic Plan
(2004)
x Thinking Strategically: The Appropriate Use of Metrics for the CCSP (2005)
x Evaluating Progress of the CCSP: Methods and Preliminary Results (2007)
x Analysis of Global Change Assessments: Lessons Learned (2007b)
x Restructuring Federal Climate Research to Meet the Challenges of Climate Change (2009)
3

Studies that were not specifically designed as guidance to the USGCRP but that have become
important references:
x Informing Decisions in a Changing Climate (2009)
x Americas Climate Choices (ACC): Synthesis Report (2011)
x ACC: Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change (2010)
x ACC: Advancing the Science of Climate Change (2010)
x ACC: Informing an Effective Response to Climate Change (2010)
x ACC: Limiting the Magnitude of Future Climate Change (2010)
In mid-2011, a new NRC Committee to Advise the USGCRP was formed and charged to
provide a centralized source of ongoing whole-program advice to the USGCRP. The first major
task of this committee was to provide a review of the USGCRP draft Strategic Plan 2012-2021
(referred to herein as the Plan), which was made available for public comment on September 30,
2011. The Committees Statement of Task is shown in Appendix A. The Task Statement
questions are addressed in the sections that follow, to varying degrees. Some aspects of the
Committees charge proved to be challenging, because the Plan does not provide enough
implementation details to allow us to fairly assess some of the questions asked.
This review was completed in a very short time (roughly eight weeks, concurrent with the
public comment period for the Plan), which allowed the Committee to only touch upon numerous
complex issues. Rather than providing section-by-section comments and line-by-line editing
suggestions, the Committee felt it would be more valuable to focus instead on high-level concerns.
As part of its review, the Committee asked members of the NRC Board on Atmospheric
Sciences and Climate (BASC) and its Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change
(CHDGC), both of which have had long-standing advisory roles with respect to the USGCRP, to
examine the draft Plan and offer their input to the Committee orally or in writing1. We have
drawn on this input in writing the review, and some comments (in particular, detailed editing
suggestions) are presented in Appendix C. These members comments should be viewed as
supplemental to the main committees review. We felt it was best to convey these additional
comments in their entirety, even though in some cases they overlap with points raised by the main
committee.
The draft Plan proposes a significant broadening of the Programs scope from the form it
took as the CCSP. As described in more detail later in this report, the Plan envisions a USGCRP
that addresses not only climate change but also other climate-related (and human-caused) global
changes. It also envisions a Program that would include a more broadly integrated system of
observations; more fully integrate the social sciences; undertake scientific analyses related to
mitigating and adapting to global changes; and pay greater attention to decision support,
1
We thank, in particular, Anthony Janetos and Richard Moss, who served as liaisons with BASC and the
CHDGC, respectively.
4

education, communication, and workforce development. All of these forms of broadening of the
Program are entirely consistent with, and arguably are necessary for, achieving the purpose of the
Program as set forth in the Global Change Research Act of 1990: to be a comprehensive and
integrated United States research program which will assist the Nation and the world to
understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global
change.
The Committee thus feels that the USGCRPs goals are generally evolving in the right
direction. This Plan reflects the substantial effort that the USGCRP leadership made to seek out
and incorporate the views of the broader scientific community and the many stakeholder groups
that this community seeks to serve. However, while the stated goals are appropriate, the Plan does
not always acknowledge the true challenges involved in meeting those goals or offer clear
strategies for how to those challenges can actually be addressed. And in an era of increasingly
constrained budget resources, those questions of how will become paramount.
As discussed later in this review, issues of key importance to the Committee are the need
to identify initial steps the Program will take to actually achieve the proposed broadening of its
scope, to develop critical science capacity that is now lacking, and to link the production of
knowledge to its use; and the need to establish an overall governance structure that will allow the
Program to move in the planned new directions.
The Committee offers its support to the USGCRP for its important planning efforts, and
we hope that the suggestions raised in the following sections will further strengthen those efforts.
5

2
Conveying the Importance and Value of Global Change Research
The Strategic Plan discusses the value of global change research in many places in the
document e.g., in the description of individual goals and objectives, in textboxes, and elsewhere
in the body of the text but there is no single place within the document that attempts to lay out
the case for why this research is so important to society. We suggest it would make the Strategic
Plan more compelling to provide a focused description of the many accomplishments to which
USGCRP research has contributed. Some examples may include:
x improving the accuracy and lead times of seasonal climate forecasts,

x quantifying the residence times of ozone depleting and greenhouse gases,
x establishing that clouds and aerosols are the largest sources of uncertainty in modeling the
response of the climate system to increasing greenhouse gases, and developing more
realistic descriptions of their roles at the process level,
x developing coupled Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Models that have successfully
simulated the global temperature record for the 20th century,
x demonstrating that changes in global mean temperatures over the past two centuries
cannot be explained without anthropogenic greenhouse gas forcing,
x establishing measurement methods and carrying out the first measurements of global
tropical deforestation,
x conducting the first experimental field tests of plant and entire ecosystem responses to
enhanced concentrations of atmospheric CO2,
x carrying out national assessments of climate change and its impacts,
x developing emissions scenarios and climate projections for the 21st century, for use in
international climate model intercomparison studies and in the IPCC assessment reports.
Numerous additional examples of the successes of global change research can be found in
previous NRC reports (e.g., ACC Advancing the Science) and in the USGCRPs own Our
Changing Planet series. In general, the Plan could better articulate the fact that global change
research has advanced our understanding of many processes that control the Earth system and the
role that human activities have played in altering those processes. It could likewise describe how
the Program has developed practical knowledge related to the interactions between natural and
human induced changes in coastal environments, the hydrological cycle and water resources,
agriculture, urban environments, public health, and land use.
By clearly highlighting such accomplishments, and indicating what accomplishments
could only have been achieved by having a USGCRP structure in place, the Program can illustrate
how it is helping the nation address issues of critical interest to a wide variety of stakeholders in
both the public and private sectors. The Plans current discussion of such matters is too scattered
and vague to make a strong impression. This dilution is particularly problematic in regards to
research areas that are relatively new or are being given greater emphasis in the new Plan (e.g.,
integrated modeling, incorporation of the social sciences, the scientific basis for adaptation and
mitigation).
6

The Plan says that the decisions being made today about systems affected by global change
are worth billions of dollars. This is both a drastic underestimate and an imprecise argument for
establishing the importance of foundational research in adaptation and mitigation. The countless
decisions that are being made related to infrastructure, natural resource use, water management,
agriculture, zoning, and development of our nations energy system could easily account for
trillions, rather than billions, of dollars in investment in the coming decades. These decisions have
the potential to be made more effectively with better knowledge and foresight about future global
change, about ways to reduce the inherent vulnerabilities of these systems, and about the ways in
which adaptation or mitigation efforts could affect these systems. The Plan does not articulate
these sorts of arguments clearly or with sufficient documentation.
Key Message: The Strategic Plan should offer a more coherent summary of past important
accomplishments, including an assessment of successes that were possible only because of
USGCRP actions, and a more explicit discussion about the potential value of future research.
7

3
Global Change Versus Climate Change
The scope of the USGCRP has varied over time, particularly regarding whether it is only a
climate research program, or rather, is a program to study global change. The U.S. Global Change
Research Act (GCRA) of 19902, which established the program, mandates a broad definition:
"Global change" means 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. "Global change
research" means study, monitoring, assessment, prediction, and information management
activities to describe and understand
x the interactive physical, chemical, and biological processes that regulate the total
Earth system;
x the unique environment that the Earth provides for life;
x changes that are occurring in the Earth system; and
x the manner in which such system, environment, and changes are influenced by
human actions.
It must be acknowledged that the above definitions can be difficult to apply, in terms of
deciding what specific kinds of environmental changes qualify as global change issues. The first
NRC report on the topic, Toward an Understanding of Global Change, lists rapidly evolving
changes in the global environment [that] have captured the attention of scientists, policymakers,
and citizens around the world: the increase of atmospheric greenhouse gases such as carbon
dioxide, methane, and the chlorofluorocarbons; the expected consequent changes in global climate
and sea level; global depletion of stratospheric ozone and the observed Antarctic ozone hole;
widespread desertification in many parts of the developing world; massive tropical deforestation
and reduction in the diversity of plant and animal species; extensive damage to mid-latitude
forests; and acidification of lakes and soils in many regions (NRC, 1988). A later NRC analysis
attempted to identify what these sorts of changes have in common, pointing out that they can
include both systemic global changes in which actions initiated anywhere on Earth can have
effects anywhere else (e.g., atmospheric chemistry) and cumulative global changes in which the
accretion of localized changes in natural systems has worldwide effects (e.g., land productivity)
(NRC, 1992).
Although the concept of global change is not precisely defined at the edges, and remains a
matter of active debate, the GCRA clearly calls for a program that encompasses more than climate
change alone. In 2002, however, the name was changed to the U.S. Climate Change Science
Program, which implies a narrower scope. The new draft Strategic Plan for the program (once
again called the USGCRP) defines a scope that is broader than climate change science, although
not as expansive as the mandate given in the law. As stated in the Strategic Plan (L.242-248):
2
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/15C56A.txt
8

This 2012- 2021 Strategic Plan describes a program that builds from core USGCRP
capabilities in global climate observations, process understanding, and modeling to
strengthen and expand our fundamental scientific understanding of climate change and its
interactions with the other critical drivers of global change, such as land-use change,
alteration of key biogeochemical cycles, and biodiversity loss.
The Committee interprets this wording to mean that the Program will encompass climate
change and its links to other aspects of the Earth system that contribute to or are affected by
climate change, but will not encompass other global environmental changes (e.g., in land
productivity or in biogeochemical cycles) except as they link to climate change. If this reading is
indeed correct, then the Plans definition of global change is not fully consistent with the
definition in the Plans glossary (taken from the GCRA), which treats changes in land
productivity, ecological systems, etc. as integral to the program, even when they do not interact
with climate change. The Plans currently defined scope could perhaps be labeled as a climate
change and related global changes. Such a clarification would help set boundaries on what could
be a large and ambiguous universe of issues.
These distinctions are not clear throughout the Plan. The lack of clarity is especially
evident where the document refers to global change when it seems to mean only climate change.
Some examples of this problem, among many, include:
x The discussion under Objective 1.2 (Science for Mitigation and Adaptation) seems to be
about mitigation of and adaptation to climate change, even though the term global
change is used. There is no indication that the intent is to include mitigation or adaptation
in relation to, for example, land-cover changes, except perhaps as these changes result
from or affect climate change.
x Under Goal 3 (Sustained Assessments) the document states that the USGCRP is required
by the Global Change Research Act of 1990 to conduct a National Climate Assessment
(L.2417-2419). However, the language of the Act clearly requires a periodic assessment of
trends and effects of global change, not only of climate change.
x Box 3 on species' range shifts states that global change is driving the shifts of hardwood
trees up mountains, when in fact it is specifically rising temperature regimes that are
driving upward elevational shifts of most mountain species. Likewise, in Textbox 6, long-
term observed changes are stated to be due to "global change," when in fact all of the
examples listed are responses either to climatic changes or to increased atmospheric CO2
directly and not to the multitude of other global change factors.
On scientific grounds alone, a broadly-focused global change research program that fully
meets the mandate of the GCRA is more appropriate than a research program focused more
narrowly on climate change alone. For example, the global hydrological cycle is under stress, but
at present climate change is arguably not the most important stressor. Widespread land use
changes and pollution associated with population increases, urbanization, and industrialization, as
well as the drilling of wells, and the construction of dams, irrigation systems, and other water
projects may be more important. As another example human activity has dramatically altered
the planets nitrogen cycle, not through climate change but primarily through the transformation of
atmospheric nitrogen into fertilizers for agricultural use.
9

Similar arguments can be made for changes in biodiversity, soil thickness and fertility, and
other global changes (e.g., the decline of ocean fisheries, coastal dead zones, ocean
acidification). Climate change exacerbates these issues, but many of them would be creating
enormous problems even in the absence of climate change; and in some cases these other global
change issues can have more near-term (and perhaps more profound) impacts on human
populations than climate change. The global implications of these other global change phenomena
thus deserve study as part of a comprehensive global change research program.
At the same time, it should be recognized that the international research community is
moving towards a significantly more expansive framework that looks at global environmental
change in the context of global sustainability challenges that considers, for instance, the
inexorable interconnections among climate change, energy security, population growth, and
economic and social developments; and that seeks to understand the potential for, and the root
causes of, exceeding the boundaries for a sustainable planetary system. (See, for instance, the
Earth System Sustainability Initiative, the Belmont Forum, and the Planet Under Pressure
conference.3)
Some would argue that embracing this substantially expanded research agenda is an
appropriate, indeed an essential, next step for the Program in the decade ahead. Such an
expansion, however, would require an extensive rethinking of the USGCRP from the ground up,
would mean setting priorities among very different areas of science, and would further complicate
the existing challenge of setting manageable boundaries on the definition and scope of a global
change research program.
In light of these considerations, and of the real-world budget constraints facing the
Program, the Committee suggests that focusing the near-term USGCRP goals on "climate and
related changes seems like a step in the right direction. It may not be realistic to implement a
further broadening of the Program at this time, but the Strategic Plan should at least acknowledge
that the long term mission of the Program embraces global change broadly, as defined by the
GCRA. And we encourage the Program to devote serious consideration to better defining what
sorts of issues global change research will and will not encompass. Table 1 in the Strategic Plan
serves as a useful initial attempt in this regard, although it contains some items that are unclear or
questionable as part of a global change agenda.
In the Committees judgment, the plan for Objective 1.3 (Integrated Observations) is much
clearer in terms of the implied definition of global change. Many of the observations to be
supported under that Objective will enable improved analysis and modeling of a variety of
different types of global change (not only those associated with climate change), and thus will
inherently be contributing to understanding of global change in the broader (GCRA-defined) sense
of the term.
Many of the federal research activities that contribute to understanding the state of water
resources, soil fertility, ecosystems, and other globally changing environmental systems (not to
mention the many research activities that look at large-scale socio-economic changes) are
3 See further discussion at: http://www.icsu.org/earth-system-sustainability-initiative;

http://www.igfagcr.org/images/documents/belmont_challenge_white_paper.pdf;
http://www.planetunderpressure2012.net/conferencevision.asp
10

conducted outside the official purview of the USGCRP. Thus another option, in principle, is that
the government could simply declare these programs and their budgets to be part of the USGCRP.
Assuming that the government agencies conducting this research agreed to the relabeling, it would
at least create the perception that the USGCRP is more faithfully fulfilling its mandate, give the
federal agencies that conduct this research increased visibility, and broaden the constituency for
the Program. However, fully integrating these additional activities into USGCRP would require
additional staff time and funding, which may be infeasible given current budgetary constraints.
An informed analysis of this potential broadening strategy requires more time than this review
allows; but we do suggest that the matter deserves further discussion as the Program develops.
Finally, as discussed later in this review, the Plan not only proposes expanding its scope
from climate change science to climate and related global changes, but also proposes expanding
its scope to increased integration of the social and ecological sciences, increased attention to
decision support, and increased attention to matters of education and communication. We strongly
support these other areas of expansion, and emphasize that they are closely intertwined with the
questions about climate change versus global change. For instance, the CCSPs earlier focus only
on climate change, to the exclusion of other global changes, may have inherently constrained the
social sciences and decision support components of the Program because most real-world
decisions made by government leaders, businesses, individual citizens, etc. are seldom, if ever,
based on consideration of climate change in isolation.
Key Message: The proposed broadening of the Program's scope from climate change only to
climate change and climate-related global changes is an important step in the right direction.
The Program's legislative mandate is to address all of global change, whether or not related to
climate. The Committee concurs that this broader scope is appropriate, but realizes that such an
expansion may be constrained by budget realities and by the practical challenge of maintaining
clear boundaries for an expanded program. We encourage sustained efforts to expand the scope of
the Program over time, along with efforts to better define and prioritize what specific topics are
included within the bounds of global change research. As the Program moves in this direction, a
high priority is to assure that observing systems are designed to monitor a broad array of global
changes, given that valuable information is being lost every year that such efforts are delayed.
11

4
Comments on Specific Topics within Program Goals 1 - 4
The discussion below does not track, one-for-one, all of the specific goals and objectives
listed in the Strategic Plan. Rather, we highlight particular aspects of the Programs goals that in
the Committees judgment most require attention, focusing primarily on the newer proposed
elements of the USGCRPs work. The final section of this chapter cuts across the other specific
topics discussed herein, and discusses how the Program will actually undertake the challenge of
expanding its scope.
OBSERVATIONS, MODELING, AND DATA MANAGEMENT
Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan addresses the issues of observations, modeling, and data
management. The Plans objectives in these realms are clearly stated and are all appropriately
recognized as important priorities of the USGCRP. There are, however, some issues that the
Committee believes do not receive sufficient emphasis in the Plan, discussed below.
Sustaining Satellite Observations. The Plan acknowledges that satellite remote sensing
observations are a core foundation of global change research that must be sustained in the coming
decades, but the Committee is concerned about the lack of clear strategies for doing so. The NRC
Decadal Survey (NRC, 2007c) recommended an ambitious set of remote sensing missions to be
undertaken by NASA, to provide a foundation for studying key global change questions. The
Decadal Survey also made recommendations for critical climate observations to be continued by
NOAA, and for transitioning some measurements from NASA to NOAA. As these goals have
been pursued over the past several years, the costs of some missions have grown, in some cases
dramatically; and some missions have been set back by launch failures (e.g., the loss of both the
Orbiting Carbon Observatory and the GLORY satellite in 2009). Meanwhile, the budgets for
these efforts have not been sustained at the expected level.
As a result of such developments, the Nation is currently at risk of having serious gaps in
observational capability, for both operational forecasting missions and for key climate records
(e.g., sea level observations). For instance, delays in advancing NOAAs Joint Polar Satellite
System have led to the possibility of a gap in some key observations that have been collected over
the past decade by the Earth Observing System satellites (which are well past their expected
operational lifespan). More details about these and other threats to the continuity and integrity of
remote sensing observing systems are discussed in a recent position paper of the World Climate
Research Program (Trenberth et al., 2011).
These realities are acknowledged to some degree in the Plan (L.1282-1288). The
suggested strategy for meeting this challenge is for agencies to continue working collaboratively
through USGCRP to leverage resources and set priorities. This emphasis on general
collaboration seems insufficient, given the magnitude of this challenge and its enormous
ramifications for the future of global change research. The USGCRP needs an appropriate
governance structure and clear mechanisms for assuring that long-term satellite-based observing
12

systems are developed and sustained in a manner suitable for meeting the Programs key science
objectives.
A related issue that should be more clearly acknowledged in the Plan is the fact that an
increasing array of global change observations are now coming from instruments being developed
and operated by other countries. This includes remote sensing observations as well as in situ
monitoring systems (e.g., the ARGO ocean profiling network, radiosonde networks to observe the
upper atmosphere). As a result, the USGCRPs efforts to foster international cooperation and data
sharing may, in the coming years, become as important as its efforts to foster the growth of U.S.-
led observations.
Social and Ecological Science Observations. The Committee applauds the USGCRPs
intent to broaden its scope beyond the physical sciences; but we do not see sufficient evidence that
the Program is prepared to take concrete steps in meeting its stated goals to better integrate social
and ecological sciences. In this regard, the Plan needs to broaden its discussion of observational
and data management systems.
In the social sciences realm, there is a need for observations and data related to human
activities that drive global environmental changes and that affect vulnerability and ability to
respond to global change. This may encompass a wide array of factors such as population growth
and distribution, economic development trends, technological innovation and adoption,
institutions governing natural resource use, disaster response capacity of governments and non-
governmental organizations, and changes in the built environment (e.g. location of infrastructure
and property in sensitive areas, infrastructure investments made for climate adaptation purposes).
In the ecological sciences realm there are a wide array of observational needs, which are well-
documented in earlier NRC reports (e.g., NRC, 2010a) and assessments (e.g., the Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment).
One specific concern to highlight in this regard is the need to make data on social
phenomena more interoperable with environmental data. For example, data on human
populations, land tenure, economic activities, disaster losses, pollutant emissions, and so forth are
often collected according to political jurisdictions or administrative geography. These data need to
be put into a common geographic framework with geocoded biophysical environmental data, in
order to allow the different types of datasets to be analyzed in an integrated fashion. There has
been progress in advancing this sort of data integration in some social domains (e.g., land cover
and population dynamics, see NRC, 1998), but this progress is uneven across types of social data,
information is sparse for some geographic areas and time periods, and data comparability is
sometimes in question across national boundaries. Moreover, issues of confidentiality and privacy
sometimes stand in the way of making data public (in cases where it might make the data
providers identifiable as individuals or firms). Such issues can be addressed, but until they are,
they impede analysis of social changes and their relationships to environmental change.
Social and ecological monitoring can also be improved by collecting new kinds of data or
using new data collection methods. This includes emerging opportunities to use non-traditional
data sources (discussed below) as well as citizen science research programs. For instance, in the
ecological sciences, citizen observer networks have revealed long-term, climate-driven trends in
plant phenologies e.g., from more than 50 years of data on lilac phenology from observer sites
13

across the United States (Schwartz and Reiter, 2000), from an 800 year long Japanese cherry
blossom database (Menzel and Dose, 2005), and from a 500 year long grape harvest database
(Menzel, 2005). The Strategic Plan does acknowledge the National Phenology Network (L.3165 -
3210), but it is not clear how the USGCRP intends to integrate these sorts of networks into its
broader observational systems.
There are many reasons why a strong initiative in data collection to support social and
ecological sciences should be given high priority; including, for instance:
x Every year that data collection is delayed, crucial observations are irreversibly lost, which
reduces the base for understanding important, ongoing changes.
x Designing and implementing data collection efforts provides the ideal testbed for working
out the complex relationships and shared understandings necessary to a truly integrated
earth systems science that draws upon the physical, social and ecological sciences.
x The cost of most social and ecological science data collection is modest compared to the
cost of many of the physical science observing systems being supported.
x Social and ecological science communities are poised to answer many questions that are
articulated in the Strategic Plan as critical, but are currently stymied by lack of data.
Some initial data collection initiatives in the social sciences could include, for instance, a
sequence of national surveys and parallel collection of intensive interviews on public concerns and
consumption behavior, or aggregation of case studies and local data sets (as has been pioneered,
for example, by the International Forestry Resources and Institutions network4). New ecological
monitoring initiatives may build on existing efforts at National Ecological Observatory Network
(NEON) and Long Term Ecological Research Network (LTER) sites. These existing efforts might
also provide a useful testbed for integrating social science observations with ongoing physical and
ecological science work.
Building an Integrated Observing System. Even if the Program goals were limited to
simply understanding and predicting the evolution of the physical Earth system, this alone
entails a major challenge for the USGCRP, in terms of the breadth of observations that are needed.
(For example, the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS, 2010) identifies fifty Essential
Climate Variables that require systematic observation.) By expanding the Programs purview to
also understanding coupled social-ecological systems and providing the scientific insights needed
to support decision making for risk management, adaptation, and mitigation, the USGCRP faces a
wide array of additional challenges for building and sustaining an integrated observational system.
The Plan effectively articulates these challenges and acknowledges the need to monitor
diverse factors (e.g., land use, agricultural productivity, economic activity, human population
characteristics, disease incidence, and hazard exposure). But the Plan is weak in describing a
concrete vision or offering clear guidance regarding the goals, structure, and mechanics of the
integrated observing system that is needed. For instance, the Plan does not offer clear strategies to
identify what specific observations are most needed, to integrate existing observations available
from sources outside of the USGCRP, to meet the unique technical challenges associated with this
observational mandate, or to ensure that the resulting data are available in useable form for
4
http://www.sitemaker.umich.edu/ifri/home
14

research and decision support needs. An observational system that integrates relevant social,
ecological, and physical data (and that can cope with the rapidly evolving needs and capabilities in
satellite and in situ observations) is an indispensable foundation for understanding and informing
societal responses to global change. We strongly underscore the need for the USGCRP to play a
leadership role in developing such a system.
One way the Program can help to meet this challenge is by supporting broad-based
planning efforts among the relevant research and user communities to identify top priorities for
data collection and data linkage, with special emphasis on social and ecological science observing
systems and their integration with existing/planned physical science systems. In addition, the
USGCRPs existing interagency working group structure might provide a valuable forum for
discussion about the integrated observing systems needed to support use-inspired research on
specific topics (e.g., vulnerability of food production and delivery systems, water resources,
health) and specific geographically-oriented concerns. Such cases studies may yield important
information about the specific cases in question, as well as general lessons learned that help
guide the broader process. Regardless of what specific engagement approaches are used, the
USGCRP needs to work with research and user communities to develop a clearer vision and the
Strategic Plan should describe how this will be done.
Emerging Data Sources. The nature of global change observations is changing rapidly.
Real-time data streams from thousands to millions of sensors on unconventional platforms are
now becoming available. Some of these data streams consist of traditional observational variables
(e.g., atmospheric pressure can be measured in automotive fuel injection systems; accelerometers
in smartphones can be used to detect seismic activity). Other types of data streams may offer
significant new opportunities for social science research, for instance through internet blogs, geo-
located photos, and surveys conducted in real time via smartphones (e.g., Lai et al., 2009;
Peytchev, 2010; Maisonneuve et al., 2010).
Transforming these unconventional data streams into useful scientific information is a
cutting-edge research challenge that could have significant impact on both natural and human
systems research in the coming decades. They will allow much finer-grain spatial and temporal
analysis of social and environmental change and thus reveal much that is invisible to periodic
surveys and remotely-sensed data. In some instance, these new data sources may be critical for
developing and validating higher resolution models, and for allowing more subtle analyses than
are possible with current methods. While on the one hand offering exciting new research
opportunities, these unconventional data sources can, on the other hand, pose new challenges
related to data quality and standardization.
The Plan does briefly allude to such developments in a paragraph on using advances in
information technology to harness public participation in research (L.1936 1942), but the
Committee suggests there should be a greater emphasis on developing new capabilities to
accommodate real-time data streams as part of USGCRPs portfolio of data management tools.
This could be done in part by leveraging ongoing research on new data-collection opportunities
taking place other disciplines outside of global change research.
15

Integrated Data Management. Objective 1.5 (Information Management and Sharing) does
a good job of discussing some important developments related to data management that have
taken place since the previous Strategic Plan (e.g., the rapidly expanding capabilities to collect,
store, and process data). The Committee agrees with the Plans emphasis on organizing
distributed databases and developing tools to improve access to, and interoperability among,
datasets of interest. This discussion, however, seems to call for only incremental improvements to
the data management developments already underway. A more imaginative, forward-looking
perspective would help ensure that USGCRP plays a leadership role in the coming decades. In
particular, the Plan should acknowledge and strive to help advance the profound new ideas and
opportunities that are emerging around the concept of data-intensive science (e.g., Hey et al.,
2009).
Large data collection activities may continue to be organized around collaborative teams,
but analysis of enormous data sets is now within reach of individual scientists. Individual users
now have data, storage, and computation capabilities that dwarf what used to be available only at
government and university centers. For example, ability to access and process one petabyte of
data is now within the range of university department or even an individual scientist; but
traditional database architectures often cannot be simply scaled up to accommodate such
enormous (and often unstructured) data sets. The USGCRP should acknowledge these new data
management challenges and work with other organizations engaged in developing state-of-the-art
architectures to enable data-intensive science. The Department of Energys Earth System Grid
(which is mentioned in the Plan) offers a prototype of the type of data access systems that are
increasingly needed.
Development and Application of Integrated Models. Objective 1.4 in the Strategic Plan
emphasizes increasing model resolution to obtain more realism in global change simulations.
While such advances will indeed be valuable to future research efforts, this does not represent the
full range of modeling advances that are needed. Some examples of other issues that need to be
considered:
x There is a need is to improve models representation of ecological and social processes,
which is a far more complex challenge than increasing resolution. For instance, many
social processes are driven by rule-based systems developed within a particular societal
context, as opposed to physical processes that are driven by conservation laws.
x Scenario-based modeling approaches will continue to be an important direction for global
change research. But the application of this approach in decision support efforts requires
careful explanation of the assumptions that underlie the scenarios used, and requires
quantitative estimates of uncertainties both in the environmental processes being modeled
and in the models themselves.
x As the USGCRPs modeling efforts are increasingly used to support important policy and
economic decisions, there needs to be a high level of confidence that scenario projections
are internally consistent and based upon credible assumptions. High resolution, multi-
dimensional, and coupled models are extraordinarily complex. Scientific confidence will
come in part from the ability of independent groups being able to reproduce the results of
16

these models. The USGCRP should develop approaches to ensure that the model
outcomes can be reproduced.
Issues Raised by Increasing Data and Model Resolution. As our technological

capabilities for collecting, storing, and processing enormous volumes of observational data have
rapidly advanced, there has emerged a widely-held strategic tenet of global change research
(suggested in the Plan at L.1585-1602) that the complexities of global change can be better
understood and better managed by finer resolution data and models.
This may be correct in a theoretical sense; and one can, in fact, point to many examples of
where increasing model resolution has yielded important new insights (e.g., more realistic
representation of storms and rainfall in mountainous regions, and of hurricane/cyclone statistics).
However, increases in resolution rapidly multiply the data needing to be managed and the
complications of modeling and analysis. And putting more resources into increasing resolution
may force tradeoffs in terms of support for other important Program goals. On what basis can the
USGCRP make decisions about where it is most worthwhile to increase the resolution of data
collection and modeling efforts?
The Committee suggests that one possible basis for making such decisions is to explicitly
consider the value of information to be gained by increasing observational/modeling resolution. Of
course, scientific research cannot be rigidly programmed to maximize return on investment
without undermining the creativity and productivity of the scientific enterprise. That said
however, it may still be possible to at least set a lower bound on the value of global change
research knowledge by asking: If a certain research advance could in fact provide the answer to
some given question, what difference would it make? For example, accurate estimates of sea level
rise or storm surge height can inform decisions by local governments, businesses, and property
owners about where to locate or to move human settlements and infrastructure in the coastal zone.
These decisions entail large economic choicesand the value of knowing whether sea level rise in
this century will be one meter or three could be enormous as a result. (This implies, of course, a
need for social science research to help understand how decisions are made in key sectors and how
more detailed information would affect those decisions.)
Explicit valuation of the knowledge being produced by USGCRP would help to clarify
when greater spatial and temporal resolution is worthwhile or exceptionally promising as ways to
make better decisions. When there is substantial benefit in terms of the effectiveness of the
choices being made, the additional costs can be well worthwhile. This value of information
approach will not provide simple answers about how to set priorities, but it can at least provide
important perspectives on how to do so. In some cases it will be possible to quantify the value of
information with some precision; but even in cases where it is only a general qualitative
characterization is possible, such analyses could be of considerable value in guiding USGCRP
investments.
17

SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH
The Strategic Plan directs the USGCRP to produce research that creates new scientific
knowledge about climate change and other critical drivers of global change and that
simultaneously makes that knowledge more readily usable in decision making (L.242-248). The
Plan calls for more effective integration of the social sciences, as well as more investments in
fundamental social science research that contributes to global change science. Recent NRC
studies, including the Americas Climate Choices reports (NRC, 2010a, b, c, d; NRC, 2011) and
reviews of the CCSP (NRC 2007, 2009b), have strongly argued that without strong contributions
from the social sciences, many salient USGCRP research questions cannot be adequately
addressed. These reports offer numerous examples of research questions across different problem-
inspired or sectoral areas (water, urbanization, agriculture, etc) that require integration of social,
ecological, and physical sciences.
The Committee re-emphasizes the same basic point here that research in the social
sciences and effective integration of social science knowledge are essential if the USGCRP is to
achieve the goals stated in the Strategic Plan. Box 2 offers an illustration (taken from an earlier
NRC report) of how scientific analysis that integrates physical, ecological, and social sciences is
necessary to understand and inform decision making about environmental hazards that can be
affected by global changes such as climate variability, climate change and sea level rise. (It also
illustrates that even the best science is not sufficient to ensure an effective response.)
BOX 2
Vulnerability of New Orleans to Hurricane Katrina
The Mississippi River, especially in and around New Orleans, has been intensively
engineered to control flooding and provide improved access for ships to the port of New Orleans.
These hydraulic works significantly reduce the rivers delivery of sediments to the delta between
the city and the Gulf of Mexico, and thus the land-building processes that would otherwise offset
the gradual subsidence and erosion of the delta. In addition, the construction of channels and
levees and other changes in the lower delta have affected vegetation, especially the health of
cypress swamps. Together, these changes in elevation and vegetation have weakened the capacity
of the lower delta to serve as a buffer to storm surges from the Gulf of Mexico.
Various assessments of the condition of the lower Mississippi Deltawhich together form
a quasi-integrated vulnerability studyrevealed that in the event of a direct hurricane strike, the
vegetation and land areas south of New Orleans were insufficient to protect the city from large
storm surges, and also that various hydraulic works would serve to funnel flood waters to parts of
the city (Costanza et al., 2006; Day et al., 2007). Despite this knowledge, little was done to reduce
the regions vulnerabilities prior to 2005. When Hurricane Katrina struck in late August of that
year, the human-induced changes in the regions hydrology, vegetation, and land-building
processes, together with the failure to maintain adequate protective structures around New
Orleans, resulted in extensive flooding of the city and surrounding area over the following week.
This, combined with a lack of institutional preparedness and other social factors, led to a well-
18

documented human disaster, especially for the poorest sections of the city (Costanza et al., 2006;
Day et al., 2007; Kates et al., 2006).
Source: NRC, 2010a.
While the Plan does recognize the importance of social science in achieving USGCRP
goals, the Committee is not convinced that, as written, the Plan will actually help foster significant
advances in this regard. In particular, it is almost entirely silent about how social science research
will be implemented, how it will be coordinated with research in the physical and ecological
sciences, and who will take lead responsibility for these efforts. Without clear targets, and
identified parties held accountable for meeting these targets, the Plan is likely to repeat its earlier
unsuccessful efforts to integrate the social sciences.
The Committees skepticism results from of a history of failures to make good use of
social science knowledge in global change research, both by the USGCRP and its member
agencies. Statements of good intentions have been made numerous times. The initial USGCRP
Strategic Plan identified human interactions as one of the Programs seven interdisciplinary
science elements, noting that Understanding the role of human dimensions in global
environmental change requires fundamental research on human social, economic, and institutional
behavior (USGCRP, 1989, p.72). NRC reviews of the Program since its inception have
repeatedly identified human dimensions or similarly named topics as needing development and
funding (NRC, 1988, 1992, 1999, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2010a). The 1992 NRC review found that
this research domain accounted for only three percent of the USGCRP budget and recommended
that it be ramped up to five percent over three years. An examination in 2007 found that, by that
time, expenditures for human dimensions research were less than two percent of the total budget
of the Climate Change Science Program. That review concluded that Progress in human
dimensions research has lagged progress in natural climate science.This disparity in progress
likely reflects the inability of the CCSP to support a consistent and cogent research agenda as
recommended in previous studies. (NRC, 2007).
The small and declining share of investment in social science in the USGCRP, despite the
continually expressed need and the far lower cost of social science research compared with
capital-intensive physical observing systems, reflects two important factors. First, the USGCRP
member agencies have limited capacity in the social sciences, resulting in limited understanding of
how to translate a core scientific question (how do humans drive and respond to global change?)
into a concrete research effort. This is a challenge that persists today. Second, the development of
the social science community focusing on environmental questions over the last three decades has
been slowed by limited and unreliable funding and by a lack of common data resources (relative to
the substantial investments in training and data resources that have been made in other areas of
global change science, and in other areas of social science).
The Strategic Plan needs to recognize the significant opportunities to be developed in the
social science research community, while strengthening the federal governments capacity to draw
upon that community as a full intellectual partner in global change research. In this context, the
Committee has identified several weaknesses in the Plans treatment of the social sciences; for
instance:
19

x The social sciences are not clearly defined in the Plan, and are referred to inconsistently
with a variety of terms (socio-economic sciences, social and behavioral sciences,
economics and social sciences, human dimensions, natural science and human
components). These terms have quite different implications for research specialties that
need to be engaged. While the Plan offers some discussion of the role of economists, there
is little sense of the wide range of other social sciences fields that need to be engaged, such
as anthropology, demography, geography, history, political science, psychology,
sociology, and urban and regional planning.
x Modeling, data, and observational systems are often described without regard to the social
sciences. For instance, Objective 1.3 (Integrated Observations) focuses almost entirely on
platforms to monitor biophysical systems.
x The discussion of geoengineering does not mention important social science questions
regarding public acceptance, governance and institutional challenges, and international
relations. As pointed out in most assessments of geoengineering research needs, such
questions will play a crucial role in determining whether geoengineering can be a feasible
tool for responding to climate change.
x The Plans discussion of observations (P.33-34) suggests a lack of maturity in social
science observing systems (L.1418). This comment suggests that the USGCRP is unaware
of the 40 years of consistent research data collection carried out in the General Social
Survey, the 60 year history of the American National Election Study, or the 50 year history
of the Inter-University Consortium on Political and Social Research (not to mention the
Census and the National Accounts statistics). There is likewise little mention of social
science data in the discussion of international cooperation, despite the long and successful
history of efforts like the World Fertility Survey, the International Social Survey Program,
and ongoing programs within various United Nations agencies, the International Energy
Agency, and the International Monetary Fund. These and other existing social science
data series (that are either fully or partly relevant to global change research) meet standard
scientific criteria such as reliable, accurate, and precise measurement that is relevant to
users needs; affordable costs of measurement, processing, and interpretation; and
sustainable institutional structure for observation and analysis.
x The Plan discusses social science research mainly in relation to impact, vulnerability and
adaptation. But there are many other aspects of global change research where social
sciences can advance understanding of important issues; e.g, consumption patterns for
food, water, energy and other basic resources; drivers and economics of climate change
(e.g. human modifications of the carbon cycle); costing of mitigation and adaptation;
public acceptance of mitigation options; and decision support (e.g. integrated assessments,
institutions and governance).
The Committee suggests that the Program could begin to change past practices (e.g., in
terms of organizational structure, budgeting, priority setting mechanisms), even in light of an
uncertain budgetary future, by strengthening the Plan in three key areas, discussed below.
20

(i) Identify the types of social science observations and data that are required for a research
program that supports global change decision making, and identify specific initial steps to
advance collection and integration of these data.
Developing and sustaining observational systems, and managing and disseminating

observational data are core activities of the USGCRP. To date, the Programs efforts have
focused largely on physical science data. In an earlier section of this review, we discuss the
numerous motivations for supporting social science and integrated social/physical research, and
we suggest initial steps the Program could take to foster such progress.
(ii) Commit to invest in specific areas of fundamental social science research related to global
change and integrated research across the physical, social and ecological sciences.
We suggest that the Strategic Plan identify and commit to funding research in at least one or
two substantive areas of social science research (or at least develop a process for doing so, as
suggested earlier). NRC, 2009b (Appendix D) suggested five priorities for fundamental research
that is crucial to understanding global change.
x Improving the understanding of environmentally significant consumption5.

x Improving fundamental understanding of risk-related judgment and decision making under
uncertainty.
x Improving the understanding of how social institutions affect resource use.
x Improving the understanding of socioeconomic change as context for climate change
impacts and responses.
x Valuation of climate consequences and policy responses.
The report further suggested five priorities for action-oriented human dimensions research,
which could engage the full range of social science disciplines:
x Understanding climate change vulnerabilities: Human development scenarios for
potentially affected regions, populations, and sectors.
x Understanding mitigation potential: Driving forces, capacities for change, and possible
limits of change.
x Understanding adaptation contexts, capacities for change, and possible limits of change.
x Understanding how mitigation and adaptation combine in determining human systems
risks, vulnerabilities, and response challenges associated with climate change.
x Understanding decision support needs for climate change responses and how to meet
them.
The Plans discussion of modeling (P.35-41) recognizes that the development of models that
integrate social and natural science will improve capacity to characterize uncertainty and will
provide decision makers with a better understanding of available options. (A good example of this
can be found in the DOE Integrated Assessment Research Program.) The Plan, however, does not
discuss strategies for actually advancing this sort of integration in specific mission or research
5
See Environmentally Significant Consumption: Research Directions (NRC, 1997)
21

areas. As mentioned above, we suggest that the Plan include a few examples that show how
integration across social, physical and ecological sciences can be achieved, and the benefits that
can result from such efforts. For example, it could cite NOAAs RISA program, which has
yielded an impressive body of research and practice focusing on understanding and meeting
stakeholders decision needs in areas such as water management, agriculture, and disaster
response.
(iii) Provide a clear plan for phasing in efforts toward accomplishing stated goals for
increasing the role of social sciences and for integrating across physical, social and ecological
sciences, including specific commitments for the next few years.
Of particular concern is the fact that the Plans Implementation section suggests that the
USGCRP will only consider phasing in newer priorities presumably including the expansion of
social sciences research at some unspecified point in the future when new resources make it
feasible. Given that there has not been significant progress in integrating the social sciences in the
20 year history of the USGCRP, it seems likely this point may not come in the next 10 years
either.
It is not clear from the Strategic Plan who will take the lead, and be held accountable for,
developing and implementing climate-related social science and integrated research. This reflects
a long-recognized problem that few of the USGCRP mission agencies have any strength in the
social sciences. While economics and to some degree sociology have a presence in the resource
agencies, this strength is typically not in the parts of the agency that deal with global change. The
one agency with considerable strength in the social sciences, NSF, continues to organize nearly all
of its social science research program around individual disciplines. There have been some
successful efforts at NSF to move past this (e.g., in the Decision-Making Under Uncertainty
Centers; the Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems Program; the now defunct Human
Dimensions program; and the Water, Climate and Sustainability initiative); but there is no
indication of a long-term plan to enhance and consolidate these kinds of initiatives within the
overall Program.
As initial steps, the Plan could propose establishing research programs in one or two priority
areas. We suggest a few possible strategies for developing initial efforts, despite the paucity of
social science expertise within the Program:
x The Program could support social science research focused on specific areas of concern
(e.g., water resources, energy, agriculture) through collaborations across agencies (for
instance, NSF and DOE) and within them (for instance, linking DOEs Office of Science
more effectively to programs in the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
that could benefit from improved analysis of valuation and decision support).
x The Program could establish joint grants competition between two agencies, emulating
past efforts to link the social science expertise in NSF to needs and interests of mission
agencies such as EPA. Typically in such efforts, the mission agency has provided a set of
priority research questions and the majority of funding, and NSF has run the grants
completion (especially the peer review process) with input from the mission agency.
22

x The Program could champion the incorporation of social sciences research into major
existing global change research efforts, such as the LTERs, NEON, and the DOI climate
centers.
The Plan has made a strong case for integrating the social sciences, but has not backed that
up by identifying specific priority activities or indicating specific agencies that would support
them. Unless the Plan acknowledges the current lack of ownership of social sciences by the
agencies and takes concrete steps to assign responsibility and resources to specific agencies in
specific priority areas, we cannot be optimistic that the USGCRP will succeed in providing the
kind of science the nation needs to support decision making in the face of global change.
ECOLOGICAL SCIENCES RESEARCH
As understanding of the roles of key ecosystems (e.g., rain forests, Arctic tundra) in
shaping Earth's climate system has emerged, it has become clear that biological systems both
affect and are affected by climate change. In order to respond effectively, it will be necessary to
have a better understanding of the interactions among biological systems, human uses of
ecosystems, and changes in climate. The USGCRP could help to address numerous gaps in
biological understanding (at levels ranging from individual species to populations to ecosystem
processes), which currently impede our ability to make sensible, effective decisions about how to
sustain and manage natural systems under a changing climate. Among the key needs are enhanced
observational systems (discussed earlier in this review); relevant organism, population, and
community-level ecological research; and representation of coupled social-ecological systems in
earth system models. These and additional issues discussed below are implicit in parts of the draft
Plan, but require more explicit recognition and integration into the research agenda.
Multi-level ecological research. Considering ecological research in its broadest sense, the
Strategic Plan is strong in recognizing and integrating essential research streams at the ecosystem
level that is, research pertaining to materials exchange (e.g., CO2) between biosphere and
atmosphere, and to ecosystem-level properties and processes (e.g., water storage and filtration,
carbon storage). However, there is little inclusion of organismal-level ecological research, which
relates to individual organisms, to populations of individuals, and to interacting communities of
multiple species.
The USGCRP research goals should include research designed to illuminate processes at the
population, species, and community levels that link to ecosystem functioning (e.g., carbon storage
or water filtration and storage), resilience and integrity.Some important ecosystem services, such
as crop pollination, can be understood only through population and community level ecological
studies. Ecosystem ecology is but one end of the spectrum of ecological disciplines and cannot,
on its own, address all of the important questions that fall under the USGCRP mission.
Studies of populations, species, and ecological communities are already being sponsored by
many of the USGCRP member agencies; but there is no coherent analysis of how such organism-
level studies can best contribute to an understanding of climate change (or global change more
generally). The Strategic Plan could suggest concrete steps to perform such analyses, with special
23

attention to ecosystems of concern to the United States (e.g., coastal oceans that harbor
commercially-harvested fish, croplands, forests, estuarine wetlands, temperate lakes and rivers,
wilderness).
Restoration Ecology. Maintaining ecosystem integrity in the face of climate change is likely
to require both the restoration of disturbed ecosystems, and the construction of ecosystems that are
resilient to climatic changes (Jackson et al, 2009; Connelly et al, 2009). The Plan does contain a
brief reference to the concept of restoration ecology (L.1094), but it would be helpful to see some
additional explanation of how the USGCRP can help develop this nascent branch of ecology into a
rigorous science. Restoration ecology, as the most recently emerged branch of ecology, has the
weakest scientific foundations (Dobson et al, 1997; Cabin, 2007; Giardina et al, 2007; Weiher,
2007).
Significant research opportunities include both the "green" carbon of terrestrial systems (e.g.,
restoration of native prairie from abandoned farmland) and the "blue" carbon of marine systems
(e.g., restoring native seagrass beds along denuded coastlines; or restoring areas of coral reef with
large carbon storage capacity). Restoration to native conditions in both green and blue
realms could contribute substantially towards increased carbon sequestration and play a role in
lowering atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide.
Likewise, many natural systems store more carbon per meter-squared than disturbed systems
such as agricultural lands (Fargione et al. 2008, Nelleman et al. 2009), and thus research on
restoration of degraded areas may offer an important approach to increasing carbon sequestration.
By developing a more pragmatically useful science of restoration ecology, the USGCRP could
also help pave the way for new, superior sources of biofuels that come from natural systems,
which lack the pitfalls of crop biofuels (NRC, 2008; Searchinger et al. 2008, Fargione et al. 2008).
Use of Ecological Knowledge in Assessments. A number of recent multi-disciplinary

assessments (e.g., Grifo and Rosenthal, 1997; Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005; Pongsiri
and Roman, 2007; Sala et al. 2009) illustrate how the knowledge base from organismal ecological
research can be effectively integrated into assessments that lead to more informed, effective
decision making. Assessments usually provide scenarios for estimating climate change impacts on
ecosystem-level processes; but it is important to also incorporate ecological dynamics at the
individual, population, and community levels in analyzing those scenarios. This has been a
difficult challenge in the past, and integrating organismal science into the modeling of ecosystems
has not been supported as part of global change research. USGCRP could help lead such efforts by
summarizing the current state of practice and laying out directions to pursue in the next decade.
Ecology as a communication tool. Awareness of global change is often communicated in

ecological termsfrom crop failure to dwindling populations of polar bears. As the nations
authoritative scientific voice on global change science, the USGCRP has an opportunity to
improve public understanding through strong support for research on the ecological impacts of
global change and through efforts to ensure that this research is communicated to entities
either within or outside of the Program that do outreach to the media, to the general public (e.g.,
in popular venues such as zoos and aquaria), and in formal educational programs.
24

Finally, as with many other areas discussed in this review, the ACC Advancing the Science
report (NRC, 2010a) offers numerous examples of specific research questions that could be
incorporated into the Plan. See in particular Chapters 9 (Ecosystems, Ecosystem Services, and
Biodiversity) and 10 (Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food Production).
MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION
The Strategic Plans discussion of mitigation and adaptation are discussed primarily under
Goal 1 (Objective 1.2 Science for Adaptation and Mitigation) and Goal 2 (Objectives 2.1
Informing Adaptation Decisions; and Objective 2.2 Informing Mitigation Decisions). The
identified goals are appropriate ones for the USGCRP; but the Committee does have concerns
about missing elements. In addition to the concerns discussed here, the concerns discussed in our
later section on decision support are directly relevant to mitigation and adaptation as well.
One general issue, noted earlier in this review, is that the Plan is ambiguous about whether
the USGCRP intends to advance mitigation and adaptation efforts just for climate change, or for
global change more broadly. While there are logical reasons to focus primarily on climate change
(since this is where most adaptation / mitigation efforts are currently developing), there are of
course also many other types of global change concerns that may require mitigation and adaptation
responses. To be effective in meeting stakeholder needs, USGCRP efforts may eventually need to
encompass this broader scope.
Defining the research agenda. Objective 2.1 (Inform Adaptation Decisions) is too vague
to provide much help in shaping priorities in an adaptation research program. The discussion in
general seems to be focused more on process needs to inform decision makers than on research
needs to advance fundamental understanding. While acknowledging that this is a relatively new
research area, we believe the Plan can go further than it does in defining specific research topics.
Some examples of important adaptation research topics that could be mentioned include:
x developing and validating indicators of sensitivity and adaptive capacity to
environmental changes (for particular places, sectors, population groups) for use in
decision making;
x research on decision-making methodology (see discussion below on research for
iterative decision making);
x examining how adaptation efforts at different levels (national, state, local) can be
coordinated and mutually supportive (i.e., what types of information flow and data
are needed?), how to facilitate social learning across levels, and how to learn from the
experience being gained from adaptation currently underway;
x defining the appropriate relationship between adaptation planning efforts and disaster
risk management efforts;
x providing evidence to support the idea (commonly stated) that unabated climate
change will overwhelm the capacity to adapt, even for the richest countries.
25

Objective 2.2 (Inform Mitigation Decisions) likewise seems vague and incomplete. There
is no mention, for instance, of the need for research on the effectiveness, costs, or technical,
economic, or social feasibility of many mitigation options that decision makers will be
considering; or research on the socio-economic, cultural, and behavioral factors that affect efforts
to reduce major greenhouse gas emission sources (understanding that is crucial for crafting
effective mitigation strategies).
The discussion of science for mitigation (under this objective and Objective 1.2) offers
some details on what is needed in terms of better models, projections, and other tools; but here
too the Plan offers only a vague sense of what research questions will be pursued to provide the
scientific basis for improving such tools. It is not clear, for instance, what new research and
metrics would allow us to better determine the value of mitigation efforts or inform tradeoffs
among mitigation options.
The Plan contains a few statements about technologies and energy systems (L.1101), but it
seems that the Program is intending to focus primarily on mitigation research related to forest and
soil carbon sequestration. While energy technology R&D is (as suggested in the Plan) more
appropriately housed within the Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP), there are many
technology-related research questions that would be appropriate, and indeed very important, to
include in the USGCRP agenda. This includes questions about the factors that determine how
new technologies are accepted and used (or not) in different societal contexts. For instance, the
lack of adoption by households and businesses of readily-available, cost-effective technologies is
an important research question, as it appears to be a low hanging fruit for mitigation. The Plans
references to the human actions that lead to greenhouse gas emission changes (L.1086-1087)
and the need to understand choices about energy usage and technological change that lead to
changes in emissions (L.1103-1104) do at least suggest the need for research that could inform
mitigation choices in the energy domain, but the Plan offers no specifics.
A related gap is the lack of acknowledgement that mitigation and adaptation will require
transformation of infrastructure and the built environment (e.g., homes and office buildings, and
facilities for energy production and distribution, industrial activities, transportation, waste
management, water supply and waste water treatment). The design of the built environment is
both a driver of global change (through impacts on resource consumption, land use and habitat
destruction, greenhouse gas emissions, air and water pollution, storm water runoff from
impervious surfaces, etc.) and is a source of vulnerability to extreme weather events affected by
global change (e.g., impacts from drought, flooding, storm surges, heat waves, storm winds).
Thus a research program on assessing and responding to global change should include the
research needed to support the development of standards and regulations that shape the built
environment. This requires extending the integrated research efforts discussed earlier (i.e., among
physical, ecological, and social scientists) to also include integrative research with engineers,
architects, builders, landscapers, urban planners, regulators and others (in both the private and
public sectors). Advancing such linkages will likely require that the USGCRP engage with
numerous Agency programs/divisions that conduct and support research related to the built
environment including, for instance, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the DOI Bureau of
Reclamation, the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the NIST Engineering
Laboratory, and the NSF Directorate of Engineering.
26

The CCTP will presumably continue to have purview over technological development
related to improving energy efficiency and conservation in the building sector, and developing
technologies and infrastructure for energy production, distribution, and carbon capture and storage
(CCTP, 2006). But the success of such efforts will hinge not only on technological advancements,
but also on public understanding and acceptance, and on the development of efficient, streamlined
regulatory practices. These sorts of research questions (grounded primarily in the social,
economic, political sciences) need to have a clear home in either the USGCRP, the CCTP, or
linked programs in both.
The ACC reports offer numerous additional examples of research questions for advancing
the science of adaptation and mitigation (see Box 3). While some prioritization among those
many research questions is likely necessary, it would be helpful for the Plan to include at least this
level of detail and to explain how the Program will begin developing the selected research areas.
BOX 3
Examples of Research Needs for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
Given the breadth of societal actors and economic sectors that are affected by mitigation and
adaptation efforts, there are, accordingly, a wide array of research questions that need to be
explored. The following are suggestions of key research needs from ACC Advancing the Science
of Climate Change (NRC, 2010a).
Examples of Research Needs Related to Limiting the Magnitude of Climate Change:

Advance the development, deployment, and adoption of energy and transportation technologies
that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Develop and evaluate strategies for promoting the use of less-emission-intensive modes of
transportation.
Characterize and quantify the contributions of urban areas to both local and global changes in
climate, and develop and test approaches for limiting these contributions.
Continue to support efforts to improve energy efficiency in all sectors and develop a better
understanding of the obstacles to improved efficiency.
Improve understanding of behavioral and sociological factors related to the adoption of new
technologies, policies, and practices.
Develop integrated approaches for evaluating energy services in a systems context that accounts
for a broad range of societal and environmental concerns, including climate change.
Develop and improve technologies, management strategies, and institutions to reduce net
greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, while maintaining or enhancing food production
potential.
Assess the potential of land, freshwater, and ocean ecosystems to increase net uptake of CO2
(and other greenhouse gases) and develop approaches that take advantage of this potential
without major adverse consequences.
Improve understanding of links between air quality and climate change and develop strategies
that can limit the magnitude of climate change while improving air quality.
27

Improve understanding of the potential efficacy and unintended consequences of solar radiation
management approaches and direct air capture of CO2, provided that this research does not
detract from other important research areas.
Establish and maintain monitoring systems capable of supporting evaluations of actions and
strategies taken to limit the magnitude of future climate change, including systems that can
verify compliance with international greenhouse gas emissions-reduction agreements.
Examples of Research Needs Related to Vulnerability and Adaptation:

Expand the ability to identify and assess vulnerable coastal regions and populations and to
develop and assess adaptation strategies, including barriers to their implementation.
Assess food security and vulnerability of food production and distribution systems to climate
change impacts, and develop adaptation approaches.
Develop and improve technologies, management strategies, and institutions to enhance
adaptation to climate change in agriculture and fisheries.
Develop vulnerability assessments and integrative management approaches and technologies to
respond effectively to changes in water resources.
Assess vulnerabilities of ecosystems and ecosystem services to climate change.
Assess current and projected health risks associated with climate change and develop effective,
efficient, and fair adaptation measures.
Assess the vulnerability of cities and other parts of the built environment to climate change, and
develop methods for adapting.
Advance understanding of how climate change will affect transportation systems and how to
reduce vulnerability to these impacts.
Develop improved vulnerability assessments for regions of importance in terms of military
operations and infrastructure.
International information. The Plan does contain considerable discussion about

international engagement in a general sense; but it does not acknowledge some of the areas where
such engagement is most needed in regards to science for climate change adaptation and
mitigation. Adaptation is often about learning how people already cope elsewhere, and that
elsewhere extends far beyond U.S. borders. A huge repository of relevant experience and
information can be found in the efforts of other countries and in international organizations. There
are important opportunities for the U.S. to both contribute and benefit through active international
engagement, as systematic analysis of the various forms of adaptation and mitigation being
adopted around the globe provides a valuable opportunity for learning what works in what context.
For example, relatively modest investments in the database of the International Forestry Resources
and Institutions network have yielded substantial scientific and practical insights (e.g., Phelps et
al, 2010; Persha et al, 2011).
The Plan needs to more clearly recognize that information about other countries climate
change response policies and actions, and their participation in international institutions and
agreements, is a necessary input to any projections of future global changes. It is also necessary to
track trends and projections for international commodity markets (especially for fossil fuels), and
consumption patterns, as this has important long-term effects on the trajectories of many global
changes. Some specific places in the Plan where this sort of international focus could be added
include Objective 1.1 (Earth System Understanding) at L.673-680, Objective 1.4 (Integrated
28

Modeling) at L.1647-1653, Objective 2.2 (Inform Mitigation Decisions) at L.2126-2166, and

Chapter IV (Coordinating with Other Nations) at L.3377-3385.
An integrated approach. The Committee suggests that the USGCRP take an integrated
approach to considering research needs of Impacts, Vulnerability, Adaptation, and Mitigation
holistically. The Plan does contain a few references to the interactions and tradeoffs between
mitigation and adaptation (e.g., L.1109), but identifying Objectives 2.1 and 2.2 separately may
obscure attention to the relationships between mitigation and adaptation that decision makers need
to consider. It should be recognized, for instance, that the value of adaptation efforts depends on
the magnitude and timing of mitigation efforts; and that both are components of reducing risk (risk
equals probability times consequence; mitigation reduces the probability of adverse effects and
adaptation reduces their consequences). It is particularly important to explore how mitigation
efforts may interact with adaptation efforts and vice-versa. (As just one example, promoting the
increased use of air conditioning as an adaptation strategy may increase energy use and thus
undermine mitigation efforts).
Prioritizing key vulnerabilities. We suggest that the Plan more directly confront the
question of how research into key vulnerabilities can be prioritized across the country, to more
efficiently spend scarce research resources of time, funding and talent. Given that every source of
concern cannot receive the same detailed level of attention, there is a need for triage
mechanisms that would allow the USGCRP to scan the country for significant changes in the
incidence of important global change impacts, and superimpose the geographic distribution of
those changes (likelihood) over the distribution of vulnerable sectors, locations and activities
(consequence), in order to locate places and contexts where detailed analyses of potential
adaptation strategies are most needed. An example of research that uses geographic analysis to
evaluate vulnerability is presented in Box 4.
BOX 4
Example of the Use of Geographic Analysis in Assessing Climate Change Risks
Strzepek et al. (2010) explores how one might evaluate the geographic variations in
climate-driven changes in drought frequency. Drought frequency projections vary widely across
climate models and climate sensitivity estimates, particularly over the longer term and in the
higher (IPCC) emission scenarios. The initial spatial and temporal distributions of drought
frequencies could, however, support the identification of local/regional hot spots by overlaying
significant changes in drought frequencies (and/or widening disagreement of those changes across
climate projections) over geographically explicit distributions of water sensitive sectors and
population centers.
The results from Strzepek, et al. suggest that lower greenhouse gas concentrations are
consistently associated with lower drought frequency across the country. Their results
demonstrate the potential value added of tracing geographically distributed measures of a physical
impact of climate change (and select downstream measures of socio-economic risk for key
vulnerabilities for which adaptation options might be explored) for alternative mitigation futures.
This opens a door for exploring the degree to which mitigation and adaptation can complement
29

one another and the degree to which current mitigation decisions lock us into the more severe
ends of the distributions of future risks.
Research to support iterative risk management. Given the enormous uncertainties that
cloud our understanding of the climate system and what will drive it into the future, responding to
the associated risks requires iterative decision-making. This concept is discussed in IPCC, 2007;
and a common theme of all the ACC reports is the need for iterative approaches and a national
commitment to monitoring and learning from emerging evidence (i.e., evidence about climate
change impacts, societal reactions to such impacts, and the effectiveness of response actions).
Iterative decision-making is required both for mitigation and for adaptation decisions. For
mitigation, it is necessary to monitor and respond to a wide array of factors such as socio-
economic developments, international participation in mitigation efforts, energy sector
developments, consumption patterns, and the efficacy of mitigation policies. For adaptation, it is
necessary to better understand the forces that determine how responses can adjust to changing
conditions (i.e., why in some cases adjustment can be quick and are nearly costless, while in other
cases adaptation is slow and costly).
But the iteration process itself needs to be explored and understood more fully. We do not
have a full understanding of what to monitor as we contemplate iterative decisions, or what
metrics of risk are most useful to decision-makers. Nor do we have internally consistent indictors
of risk for localities or methods to aggregate such indicators to national or international levels.
The USGCRP can both help to build iterative learning processes and explore the important
research questions embedded in such processes.
The Plan does an admirable job in noting that we must learn by doing. But it does not
clearly identify the need for systematic research to learn what is succeeding (or not) in terms of
communications, outreach, information sharing, and a variety of other efforts essential to iterative
risk management. While there is a long history of evaluation research to assess the merits of
social, educational, and health programs, such evaluations have been much less common for
environmental programs. Learning from experience requires institutionalizing a national learning
process in ways that have not been attempted before. It also requires a serious commitment of
resources. It would be appropriate, for instance, to suggest that that a fixed percent of the budget
for mitigation and adaptation efforts be devoted to monitoring, data management, and evaluation
research so that the lessons to be learned from these experiences are not lost.
DECISION SUPPORT
Decision support, which has been defined as organized efforts to produce, disseminate,
and facilitate the use of data and information in order to improve the quality and efficacy of
climate-related decisions (NRC, 2009) is a major objective in the USGCRP Strategic Plan. The
concept is discussed most explicitly in Goal 2 (Informing Decisions), but it also relates to Goal 3
(Sustained Assessments), and to Goal 4 (Communicate and Educate) which is discussed in the next
section of this review.
Informing Decisions in a Changing Climate (NRC, 2009b) suggested the following
principles of effective decision support: (1) begin with users needs; (2) give priority to process
30

over products; (3) link information producers and users; (4) build connections across disciplines
and organizations; (5) seek institutional stability; and (6) design processes for learning. The
report also recommends that the nation needs to establish a coordinated system of climate
services that involves multiple agencies and regional expertise, is responsive to user needs, has
rigorous scientific underpinnings (in climate research, vulnerability analysis, decision support, and
communication), performs operational activities (timely delivery of relevant information and
assessments), can be used for ongoing evaluation of climate change and climate decisions, and has
an easily accessible information portal that facilitates coordination of data among agencies and a
dialogue between information users and providers.
The USGCRP has an important role to play in informing decisions about global change. In
order to play this role effectively, we suggest a number of key areas that deserve attention:
x The Plan needs to demonstrate a clear, consistent understanding of what is needed for
effective decision support and make clear how it will develop the scientific underpinnings
required to provide the kinds of information that decision makers need. For example, the
discussion of informing mitigation decisions mentions that decision makers need to
understand the effects of policy options on greenhouse gas emissions, the costs of
reducing emissions, and the benefits of avoiding greenhouse gas emissions (L.2119-
2121). The Plan should indicate support for the lines of research that would provide a
necessary foundation for such information, but it includes only one sentence on advances
in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences of mitigation [L.1102-1105]. If the intent
is to rely on integrated assessment modeling, the Plan needs to more clearly articulate the
research efforts that would help advance these models.
x The discussion under Goal 2 defines a broad, ambitious set of roles that includes decision
support processes (engagements between scientists and decision makers), provision of
decision support products, research coordination, and provision of decision support
services to federal agencies and departments (L.1966-1979). These different roles (in
particular, the need for both processes and products) need to be more consistently
addressed in the subsequent discussions. For instance, the Plan defines climate services as
the development and timely provision of information products (L.2173), ignoring the
distinction between process and product and the need for communication processes to
ensure that products are useful and usable.
x The Plan needs to establish a clear division of responsibility between the Program and
other entities regarding decision support service provision. The Plan does not demonstrate
that the USGCRP is ready or able to make effective links to the many boundary
organizations6 inside and outside the federal government that can connect climate change
6
Guston (2001) described boundary organizations as units that link the different social worlds of science
and decision-making, which involve the participation of actors from both sides of the boundary, as well as
professionals who serve a mediating role; [boundary organizations] exist at the frontier of the two relatively
different social worlds of politics and science, but they have distinct lines of accountability to each. Also
see Clark et al (2010).
31

research to user constituencies. Such linkages are mentioned several times in the Plan, but
never with sufficient detail to suggest that the Program is ready to meet the challenge.
As concluded in an ACC study (NRC, 2010d) there is an urgent need to improve the
coordination of climate information, decisions, assessment, and programs across federal agencies
to ensure an effective response to climate change across the nation. This report suggested that an
expanded USGCRP might contribute to this effort, but that leadership at a higher level would be
needed to achieve effective federal coordination. The Strategic Plan should be more specific about
the roles the Program will play in meeting this challenge and about how it will coordinate with
decision support efforts among the federal agencies and with other boundary organizations.
The Plan likewise should set a consistent boundary between research activities and non-
research activities. A set of general guidelines for setting such boundaries can be derived from a
series of recent NRC reports (NRC, 2009, 2009b, 2010a), which distinguish research (which
develops knowledge) from services (which make the knowledge useful for decision making).
Some key elements of the Plan, such as advancing mitigation and adaptation, involve both science
and services. Decision support likewise involves both. Science, services, and the connections of
the two are all critically important, but they need not all be performed by the same organizations.
As a general guideline, the Committee suggests that that the primary role of the USGCRP
with respect to decision support should be research for decision support and research on decision
support (see Box 5 for examples). Research for decision support provides knowledge about
choices (e.g., about possible options for meeting mitigation or adaptation goals and the feasibility,
benefits, and costs associated with each option); while research on decision support uses
knowledge from the decision sciences (e.g., Kahneman et al., 1982; Raiffa, 1968) to help to make
choices more systematic and well-considered.
BOX 5
Recommendations on Research for and Research on Decision Support
The following are recommendations from the report Informing Decisions in a Changing Climate
(NRC, 2009a) that may prove helpful to the USGCRP.
The research for decision support should have five substantive foci:
x understanding climate change vulnerabilities: human development scenarios for potentially
affected regions, populations, and sectors;
x understanding the potential for mitigation, including anthropogenic driving forces,
capacities for change, possible limits of change, and consequences of mitigation options;
x understanding adaptation contexts and capacities, including possible limits of change and
consequences of various adaptive responses;
x understanding how mitigation and adaptation interact with each other and with climatic
and ecological changes in determining human system risks, vulnerabilities, and response
challenges associated with climate change; and
32

x understanding and taking advantage of emerging opportunities associated with climate

variability and change.
The research on decision support should have five substantive foci:

x understanding information needs;
x characterizing and understanding climate risk and uncertainty;
x understanding and improving processes related to decision support; including decision
support processes and networks and methods for structuring decisions;
x developing and disseminating decision support products; and
x assessing decision support experiments.
In contrast, operational-level decision support should be the responsibility of boundary

organizations throughout the public and private sectors that serve constituencies affected by global
change. These services should be provided by the organizations best positioned for the role.
These sometimes lie within the USGCRP. For example, NOAA could appropriately provide
climate-related decision support to its constituencies in the coastal management community,
USDA to farmers and foresters, and DOI to managers of public lands. In many cases, however,
the most appropriate service providers are not part of the USGCRP. The general principle is that
decision support should come from scientifically informed organizations that are easily linked to
target audiences.
The USGCRP should provide mechanisms to link research to the appropriate boundary
organizations. Box 6 suggests some criteria that the USGCRP could use in working with
boundary organizations, to identify the contexts in which decision support efforts will be most
feasible and effective.
BOX 6
Criteria for Assessing the Value of Decision Support
Goal 2 of the Strategic Plan indicates that USGCRP will have responsibility for guiding its
member agencies to produce scientific knowledge that is credible, while working with users of
that knowledge to assure that it is also salient and legitimate. What makes knowledge salient in a
decision making context is that it be relevant and timely. Such salience is often in tension with
scientific credibility, earned by careful testing, peer review, and publication in the open literature.
The challenge is to reconcile these tensions in a way that honors the values of both users and
researchers. We present below some examples of factors that the USGCRP should consider in
managing the difficult balancing act of setting priorities for decision support. These lists are
drawn from other contexts (e.g., global assessment processes, foundation grant-making processes)
that are not entirely analogous to the USGCRP, but nonetheless seem quite relevant (Packard
Foundation, 2010; Clark et al, 2006, 2010).
Whether a decision situation is ripe:

x Are there openings for rethinking, in which decision makers are seeking new information?
33

x Can new information be provided in time for the decision-making window?

x Are there good prospects that new information will be influential?
Whether the boundary between science and use can be spanned:

x Do stakeholders agree that the questions to be investigated are important, even when they
disagree on desirable answers?
x Is there a boundary object, like an assessment, on which users and researchers can collaborate?
x Are actors who can influence success engaged by scientists or those working at the boundary?
Whether the actors have appropriate capabilities:

x Do researchers have the capacity to conduct the inquiry? If the questions to be answered
require an interdisciplinary approach, is the research team capable of integrating knowledge
across disciplines?
x Do those conducting the research have the interest and capacity to work with stakeholders?
x Are early adopters of the knowledge identified? Are they able to use it and communicate their
experiences to other decision makers and stakeholders?
Whether the conditions for joint production of knowledge by users and researchers exist:
x Do potential users believe that the information process took account of concerns and insights
of relevant stakeholders and was procedurally fair (Legitimate)?
x Do potential users believe that the scientific knowledge is relevant to their decision-making
and timely in its availability (Salient)?
x Do potential users believe that the information has taken into account issues of data reliability,
appropriate methods and validity of inferential claims, consideration of alternative hypotheses
(Credible)?
Whether behavioral changes can be observed when knowledge is used:

x Are there changes in behavior and policies of relevant actors?
x Are there changes in actor goals, interests, beliefs, strategies and resources?
x Is there increased willingness and capacity to learn?
Expansion of the Program to help support decisions by conducting research, linking

research to action, and providing decision support services to certain constituencies is highly
appropriate. Such an expansion, however, does raise feasibility concerns, in terms of competition
for scarce resources and the capacity of USGCRP agencies. The Program will need to increase
scientific expertise that is scarce in member agencies (particularly in the social sciences), and to
provide resources for improving links between producers and users of the science. As noted in
NRC (2009), for many of the agencies that need to be involved, decision support research or
services are not part of their current missions, and they lack offices and personnel with the
responsibilities and expertise to manage the research.
Assessment as Decision Support. The Plans discussion of the National Climate

Assessment (Goal 3) is admirably clear and consistent. It recognizes that the assessment needs to
be a process and also to generate products, and it articulates a way to do both, while maintaining
34

the process over time. It also articulates a strategy for using the assessment process to inform
research that will, in turn, feed into future assessment products.
One issue that may merit further explanation in the Plan is that (as noted earlier), the
GCRA does actually mandate a global change assessment, not one restricted to climate change.
We recognize that expanding the bounds of the National Climate Assessment may not be feasible
within current budgetary constraints or given the current scientific scope of the program, which
does not encompass all of global change. But we encourage the USGCRP to explore the
possibility of expanding the scope of its assessment efforts over time, and in the interim, to use the
assessment process to expand understanding of how climate change affects and interacts with
other aspects of global environmental change.
The Plan states that Assessments support achievement of all the other goals of the
USGCRP Strategic Plan (L.2554). This should frame a discussion of how the assessment process
can engage users and set priorities within USGCRP. The Plan mentions a wide range of audiences
(L.2428-2515) but does not create clear expectations of how the USGCRP will work with them.
The assessment process is called ongoing (L.2472) but the ongoing participation of users is not
described. At a minimum, the Plan should articulate how it will link its ongoing assessment
activities to its decision support tasks.
The discussion of Goal 3 could be strengthened by recognizing that subsections 3.1-3.4 are
each organized around different aspects of jointly producing useful knowledge. Section 3.1
(Integrating Science) emphasizes scientific credibility in the content of assessments. Section 3.2
(Ongoing Capacity) describes efforts to engage stakeholders and to improve transparency, in order
to build the legitimacy of the assessments. Section 3.3 (Inform Responses) is about providing
knowledge that is salient to a diverse range of users. Section 3.4 (Evaluate progress) highlights
the role of assessment as a means for social learning (i.e., reviews of the state of understanding
naturally lead to an appreciation of knowledge gaps and limitations, which is useful both for
planning future research.) By framing the discussions of Sections 3.1-3.4 in this way, the Plan
would make clear that the assessment process entails balancing different, sometimes conflicting
aims in the production of knowledge that is useful in decision making.
Goal 3 does not spell out how demand for assessments would be identified, beyond noting
the legal mandate for a National Climate Assessment. Processes like the IPCC and Millennium
Ecosystem Assessment are grounded in an authorizing environment; that is, they respond to an
official request to convene representatives of the relevant scientific communities to provide a
report on the current state of knowledge. The importance of having a clear authorizing
environment that identifies primary users of the assessment outcomes was noted in the NRC report
Analysis of Global Change Assessments (NRC, 2007b). If the USGCRP is working within a
framework of use-inspired research, it is essential to identify key users at the outset (beyond just
the American public in a generic sense), because those users need to be partners in defining the
scope of the assessment. This joint production mechanism is what gives the knowledge produced
the chance to be salient, legitimate, and scientifically credible.
35

COMMUNICATION, EDUCATION, AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
Goal 4 of the Plan discusses the need for research on communication and education to
expand knowledge and inform public decision making, for evaluation of educational efforts, for
identifying best practices, for reaching diverse audiences, and for engaging stakeholders. These
are all generally appropriate as goals for the Program, but in the Committees judgment, much of
this content (e.g., research assessing the effectiveness of communication efforts; understanding
best practices in communication and education) is more logically discussed under Goal 2
(Informing Decisions). Perhaps communication and education were separated into a distinct Goal
in order to elevate their importance as elements of the Program. But the Committee suggests that
it makes sense to place the objective to Strengthen Communication and Education Research
under Goal 2, and to have Goal 4 focus just on the actual practice of communication and
education.
A more substantive concern is that the Plan does not clearly define a division of labor
between the USGCRP and other entities, both within and outside of the federal government, that
also engage in communication and education about global change. It difficult to determine which
of the proposed activities are considered core elements of the USGCRP, as opposed to activities
that may be accomplished largely outside the USGCRP framework; and likewise is difficult to
determine how USGCRP efforts will be coordinated with externally-driven activities.
For all of the different activities discussed in this section, it would be helpful to see a
clearer identification of the specific roles planned for the Program (e.g., Will USGCRP agencies
take on specific activities? Will other activities be performed jointly or entirely by entities outside
the Program?). We suggest the same general guideline for education and communication as we
suggested earlier for decision support efforts they should be the responsibilities of boundary
organizations that are best positioned for the role, which in many cases may be organizations that
are not part of the USGCRP.
The Plan should clearly state that a primary role for the USGCRP is to build a sound
scientific foundation for global change communication and education. And it should make clear
that public communication and education efforts need to be evidence-based, two-way processes
aimed at improving the capacity of target audiences to make informed choices, not at simply
delivering information or persuading these audiences to accept government positions. These ideas
are further discussed in past NRC work on environmental communication and science education
(NRC, 1989, 1996, 2007e, 2008b, 2011b).
Some of the communication and education activities proposed in the Plan seem appropriate
and feasible as parts of the Program. These include for instance, research on the effectiveness of
global change communication and support for communities of practice. But the Plan also
appears to promise that the Program will do things that it may not be appropriately organized or
realistically able to do; for instance, improving educational materials and resources (L.3113)
and developing programs and forms of engagement to facilitate communication and education
among citizens, stakeholders, partners, and the participating agencies (L.3145-3146).
The stated intention to coordinate an effort to raise environmental literacy and develop a
future workforce that actively integrates global change and environmental considerations into
future activities (L.3244-3246) could engage the Program in everything from sponsoring museum
exhibits to changing the K-12 science curriculum. Objectives in this domain should be defined
36

more clearly, and should identify a division of labor between activities conducted within the
Program and possible collaborations with other federal agencies, with organizations in state and
local government, and with the education community. There should be a much more focused
description of the specific roles to be played by the USGCRP itself.
In the education domain, the Program might appropriately co-sponsor (in collaboration
with other federal education and science agencies) research on public understanding of climate
change and on teaching strategies for improving such understanding. In the communication
domain, it might support research to improve decision support products or communication
processes, or training for researchers on how to explain climate change information and
uncertainties to various audiences, as was recommended in the ACC studies (NRC, 2010d).
The writing in this section of the Plan is overly vague in important places. For example,
USGCRP will employ appropriate methods and processes for engaging with and seeking
feedback and input from partners, participating agencies, and constituents (L.3156-3157). Such
language is not sufficiently specific to know how to evaluate or implement the Plan. Also, the
Plan does not distinguish between different categories of education audiences (including, for
instance: (i) climate change scientists, (ii) stakeholders who make real-world mitigation and
adaptation decisions and thus need some familiarity with the science, and (iii) the general public.
Educating the next generation of global change researchers is materially different from educating
the general public or engaging stakeholders, but this distinction is not made clear in the Plan.
Finally, this section also makes promises that are neither supported elsewhere in the Plan
nor adequately justified. For example, the Plan states that A major goal for USGCRP is to
understand the connections among the environmentalknowledge, opinions, attitudes, and
behaviors of its diverse audiences (L.3000-3001). But there is no indication that the Program
will support research on global change knowledge, attitudes, and behavior, and no argument is
presented that supporting such research would help with communication about global change.
The Committee commends the USGCRP for highlighting this important area of research, but
suggests that the rationale for it be stated more directly, and that a clear strategy for supporting
research in this area be articulated (for instance, see Marquart-Pyatt et al, 2011).
The overall goal of Objective 4.4 (Cultivate Workforce) is to cultivate a capable, diverse
workforce that is knowledgeable about climate and global change. The Plan speaks to three
elements of workforce: new scientists and future leaders, federal employees and contractors, and a
next-generation workforce (which would appear to include training for workers in the green jobs
or alternative energy sector). The needs for these different kinds of workers are quite different, and
the roles that the Program would play in cultivating these different parts of the national workforce
are not clearly specified. (Further, these are not mutually exclusive categories, since many climate
change scientists are federal employees).
This section of the Plan includes some elements that seem appropriate and feasible, and
others that do not. The USGCRP has a major role to play in development of the scientific work
force needed to further its goals, including a workforce of social scientists and interdisciplinary
researchers. This section of the Plan appropriately targets workforce development efforts at the
undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral levels to develop a next generation of scientists in the
range of research fields related to climate and related global changes.
37

The Committee questions, however, the feasibility of the ambitious goal to coordinate an
effort to raise environmental literacy and develop a future workforce that actively integrates global
change and environmental considerations into future activities. Doing this would go considerably
beyond the original intent of the GCRA and the capabilities of the Program. In particular,
engagement in job training for green jobs, which is implied by some of the language, would go
beyond what we judge to be the proper purview of the USGCRP.
The same is true for the professional development of educators in the STEM fields
(Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) and the social sciences. While NSF
support of professional development for educators is appropriate for that agency, such efforts are
not (to our knowledge) an element of the USGCRP. We do, however, think it appropriate for the
USGCRP to engage with NSF and other science education agencies in helping to develop
curriculum and provide scientific content for educators who will be teaching about global change.
Likewise, we do support strong programs to foster global change research in elementary schools,
high schools, colleges and universities and among the general public (i.e., citizen science). Such
efforts are a reasonable extension of USGCRP research, and are also essential to recruit the next
generation of global change scientists.
KEY MESSAGES REGARDING THE BROADENING OF THE PROGRAM
The Plan makes strong cases for increasing the integration of social and ecological
sciences and for expanding research to support mitigation and adaptation decisions and the
enhancement of climate services. The Committee agrees that broadening in these ways would
help the Program better fulfill its mission under the GCRA. The increased emphasis on informing
decisions is particularly important and long overdue. Broadening the Program in the areas of
education, communication, and workforce development is also appropriate, to the extent that these
efforts follow the suggestions made earlier, for linking to activities outside of the USGCRP.
In addition to the proposed broadening of the Program into relatively new areas, the Plan
also calls for expanding existing program elements to deal with growing needs in physical climate
science; for instance, to keep up with the rapid expansion of physical climate data, to expand
modeling efforts, and to intensify observational activities that allow for development of climate
models with finer spatial and temporal resolution.
An obvious challenge is how to broaden the Programs scope in the planned ways and also
expand efforts in traditional areas, all within a declining budget. The Plan suggests, in its section
on implementation, that it will use a phased approach (L.3463) that will ensure continuing
strength at the scientific foundations of USGCRP (observations, modeling, and process research)
and develop flexible plans for phasing in new activities and priorities over the decade (L.3471-
3473). This would seem to indicate that the ongoing strengths of the Program in physical climate
science will get first priority and that new elements could be put on indefinite hold.
A second challenge concerns the limited capacity of the USGCRP agencies to broaden the
Program into new areas related to decision support and integration of ecological and social
sciences. Necessary scientific expertise (outside of economics) is scarce within the USGCRP
member agencies and programs. Ideally, the USGCRP agencies should expand direct hiring of
scientists with the needed expertise; but to the extent that hiring constraints make this approach
38

impossible, we encourage the Program to explore alternative ways of accessing that capacity for
instance, through engagement of the broader research community in universities and other
laboratories, using a variety of grants and contracts. Unless the capacity issue is specifically
addressed in this Plan, the USGCRP will likely fail to achieve the promised broadening of its
scope.
In the Committees judgment, the implied strategy of putting all the new elements of the
Plan on hold until the funding situation improves is a mistake. The Strategic Plan itself makes
compelling arguments for broadening the Program now to strengthen science for decision support,
to more broadly integrate all the sciences of global change for earth system understanding, to
develop science to inform climate change mitigation and adaptation decisions, and so forth. Unless
the Program begins to invest in these new elements now, it runs the risk of supporting only
research that (while of high scientific merit) may not deserve highest priority in terms of meeting
the nations needs for responding to global change. Moreover, without progress now, the Program
will lack capacity to develop these areas later, if and when the funding situation improves. As
suggested earlier, many of the initial investments that would help the Program broaden its scope
are relatively low in cost and need not be postponed. Scientific priority setting should focus on
the value of the information likely to be produced, more than on maintaining the momentum of
past efforts.
The Committee believes that the Plan should explicitly acknowledge the challenges of
phasing in new elements of the Program. The Program could face these challenges by: (1)
establishing an appropriate interagency governance structure that has the authority, responsibility,
and resources needed to implement the broader Program; and (2) identifying a set of specific,
relatively low-cost initial efforts that lay the groundwork for a broader Program and improving the
capacity of the participating agencies to undertake the planned work. Such an approach would, we
believe, be feasible within the current budgetary context, and it would turn the planned broadening
of the Program from what may seem like dubious promises into a credible Strategic Plan.
Key Messages:
The proposed broadening of the Program to better integrate the social and ecological sciences, to
inform decisions about mitigation and adaptation, and to emphasize decision support more
generally is welcome and in fact essential for meeting the legislative mandate for a program
aimed at understanding and responding to global change. Although this broader scope is needed,
implementing it presents a grand challenge that should be met with more than just incremental
solutions.
An effective global change research enterprise requires an integrated observational system that
connects observations of the physical environment with a wide variety of social and ecological
observations. Such a system is a crucial foundation for identifying and tracking global changes;
for evaluating the drivers, vulnerabilities, and responses to such changes; and for identifying
opportunities to increase the resilience of both human and natural systems. The Plan needs to
describe a clear vision and specific objectives for adding and integrating new types of
observations, along with a commitment to some concrete steps towards realizing this vision.
39

The Plan also needs to present an appropriate governance structure and dedicated mechanisms to
sustain existing long-term observational systems.
The USGCRP and its member agencies and programs are lacking in capacity to achieve the
proposed broadening of the Program, perhaps most seriously with regard to integrating the social
and ecological sciences within research and observational programs, and to developing the
scientific base and organizational capacity for decision support related to mitigation and
adaptation choices. Member agencies and programs have insufficient expertise in these domains
and lack clear mandates to develop the needed science.
In the Committees judgment, it would be a mistake to postpone phasing in the newer elements of
the Program (as is implied in the implementation section of the Strategic Plan). Rather, we suggest
that the Program identify some specific initial steps it will take in the proposed broadening of
scope, including steps to develop critical science capacity that is currently lacking and to improve
linkages between the production of knowledge and its use. The Programs implementation plan
should assign responsibilities and resources to specific entities to lead those efforts.
The proposed broadening of the Program in the areas of education, communication, and workforce
development needs more careful thinking, regarding which of these activities belong within the
Program, which are best organized by entities outside the Program, and how the former will link
to the latter.
40

5
Process, Structure, and Implementation Issues
Although the last section of the Plan is labeled implementation, it offers much less detail
than previous Strategic Plans, which provided a clearer picture of how implementation would be
developed through program management and review including explicit discussion of what
groups were making decisions, how the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of
Science and Technology Policy would collaborate in providing leadership, the role of interagency
programmatic working groups in prioritizing specific areas of research, and the role of the NRC
and other external bodies in providing external review and validation of the program. The current
Plan lacks transparency about such issues. The intent to move to a more integrated approach
across the sciences and to better link science producers and users makes it particularly important
to provide some insight into how decisions and coordination related to particular research areas
will be handled. (For instance, will the current configuration of USGCRP Interagency Working
Groups be discontinued? Will a different configuration of Working Groups be formed?)
The Committee understands that some of these details will be provided in a forthcoming
Implementation Plan. At present, however, we have only the draft Strategic Plan to comment on.
We suggest that the final Strategic Plan or the subsequent Implementation Plan should more fully
address the key implementation issues described below.
Governance structure. The Plan calls for a fundamental reorientation of the Program in
ways that will require new forms of interagency collaboration and the subordination of some
agency priorities to overarching, program-wide goals and national needs. The draft Plan needs to
suggest a governance structure that can make the proposed changes reality. This includes a need
to spell out the commitments of member agencies to carry out the parts of the Plan (both singly
and jointly with other agencies), and a need to discuss processes for priority setting (discussed
below) and criteria for phasing in various efforts over time.
To be effective, this governance structure needs to be a committed partnership among the
participating departments and agencies of the USGCRP, the relevant Administration offices
(including, at a minimum the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Science and
Technology Policy, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Domestic Policy Council), the
Global Change Research Sub-Committee representatives, and the USGCRP Office leadership. It
is not clear that this sort of broad-based partnership currently exists.
On a related note, it would be useful for the Plan to mention something about mechanisms
for interaction with Congress. This may include, for instance, describing how USGCRP
committees, working groups, staff, etc. will help meet Congressional requests for briefings and
updates on the Program; and discussing how the Program will seek opportunities for hearings,
staff briefings, and other means to keep the Congress as fully informed as possible (as appropriate
with respect to Administration policies).
Defining an appropriate, effective governance structure for the USGCRP is, of course, a
complex challenge. The Committee itself does not necessarily have the expertise to offer specific
41

recommendations in this regard (especially in the context of this very quick review process), but
we do suggest that this matter be given explicit consideration by an independent expert group.
Setting priorities. The Plan states commitments to many important new research
directions for instance, to improve understanding of how natural and social conditions interact to
affect resilience and vulnerability; to develop methods for valuing ecosystem goods and services;
to improve characterization of uncertainty in ways that enable decision makers to evaluate options.
In fact, the Plan states directly that the USGCRP will pursue some important endeavor at least 177
times, not counting numerous additional commitments for action stated in textboxes throughout
the document. Yet the Plan gives no clear indication of an approach to prioritizing these
numerous commitments in a manner that will move beyond business-as-usual.
The Plan needs to identify what criteria and management structure will enable the Program
to prioritize across existing and new research. The three criteria listed at L.3547 -3551 are too
general to provide enough guidance to prioritize. (For instance, would such criteria help in
choosing between an existing project on aerosol-cloud interactions versus a new activity that
integrates social and natural science to support improved management of air quality and its
linkages to global change?)
More specific criteria for prioritization, such as those discussed in ACC Advancing the
Science report (NRC, 2010a; P.156-158) would be a step in the right direction. We particularly
note that reports emphasis on criteria related to the value of science for informing decision
making. Consideration of decision makers needs might lead the Program to consider thematic
approaches to defining research goals (i.e., science to address choices about providing clean water,
sustaining marine ecosystems, providing better public health warnings, etc.).
Evaluation and updating. The Plan appropriately notes the value of using an adaptive
management approach to evaluate progress and update the Plan based on input from those using
research to inform decisions. However, it needs to be clearer about the specific questions the
Program will address and expected outcomes and milestones against which it could be evaluated
in the near-term (3-5 years). It should include specific mechanisms for periodic review and
updating of the Plan in light of changes in international circumstances, technological
developments, and budget appropriations, and in light of what is learned about what has and has
not worked well within the Programs operations. The Plan would also be strengthened by
identifying steps to make the Program more resilient to the expected funding turbulence ahead.
Ideally, there should also be consideration of plans for assessing the USGCRP itself not of the
science the Program produces, but of what has and has not worked well within the Programs
operations (including consideration of the governance questions mentioned above). This sort of
assessment, which has not been done in the Programs 20 year history, could help the USGCRP to
establish priorities and implementation strategies.
42

Key Messages:
The Strategic Plan and/or the Implementation Plan to follow should establish clear processes for
setting priorities and phasing in and out elements of the Program, especially in relation to the
planned broadening of its scope. The Program should employ iterative processes for periodically
evaluating and updating the Program and its priorities, including processes for consultation with
decision makers inside and outside the federal government, regarding the scientific knowledge
about global change that would provide the greatest value for them.
The USGCRP needs an overall governance structure with responsibility and resources to broaden
the Program in the directions outlined in the Plan, including the ability to compel reallocation of
funds to serve the Programs overarching and long-term priorities. Without such a governance
structure, the likely evolution of the Program will be business as usual: a compilation of program
elements that derive from each member agencys individual priorities.
43

REFERENCES
Cabin, R.J. (2007) Science-Driven Restoration: A Square Grid on a Round Earth? Restoration Ecology
15(1):17
Clark, W.C., R.B. Mitchell, and D.W. Cash 2006. Evaluating the Influence of Global Environmental
Assessments. Chap. 1 of Global Environmental Assessments: Information and Influence, eds. R.B.
Mitchell, W.C. Clark, D.W. Cash & N.M. Dickson, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Clark, W.C., T.P. Tomich, M. van Noordwijk, D.Guston, D.Catacutan, N. M. Dickson, E. McNie. 2011.
Boundary work in research programs for sustainable development: Natural resource management at
the CGIAR, Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, doi/10.1073/pnas.0900231108.
Connelly T, P. Sharp, D. Ausiello, M. Bronner-Fraser, I. Burke, J. Burris, J. Eisen, A. Janetos, R. Karp, P.

Kim, D. Lauffenburger, M. Lidstrom, W. Lim, M. McFall-Ngai, E. Meyerowitz, K Yamamoto.
(2009). The New Biology of the 21st Century: Ensuring the United States Leads the Coming Biology
Revolution, National Research Council, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Costanza, R., W.J. Mitsch, and J.W. Day. 2006. A new vision for New Orleans and the Mississippi delta:
Applying ecological economics and ecological engineering. Frontiers in Ecology and the
Environment 4(9):465-472.
Day, J. W., D. F. Boesch, E. J. Clairain, G. P. Kemp, S. B. Laska, W. J. Mitsch, K. Orth, H. Mashriqui, D.

J. Reed, L. Shabman, C. A. Simenstad, B. J. Streever, R. R. Twilley, C. C. Watson, J. T. Wells, and
D. F. Whigham. 2007. Restoration of the Mississippi Delta: Lessons from Hurricanes Katrina and
Rita. Science 315(5819):1679-1684.
Dobson, A.P., Bradshaw, A.D., A. J. M. Baker. 1997. Hopes for the Future: Restoration Ecology and
Conservation Biology. Science 277: 515.
Fargione J., J. Hill, D.Tilman, S. Polasky, P. Hawthorne 2008. Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt.
Science 319 1235
GCOS, 2010. Global Climate Observing System. Implementation Plan for the Global Observing System
for Climate in Support of the UNFCCC (2010 Update). [Available at:
http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/gcos/Publications/gcos-92_GIP.pdf]
Giardina,C.P., Litton, C.M., J.M. Thaxton, S. Cordell, L.J. Hadway, and D.R. Sandquist. 2007. Science
Driven Restoration: A Candle in a Demon Haunted WorldResponse to Cabin. Restoration Ecology
15(2):171176
Grifo, F. and J. Rosenthal (eds.). 1997. Biodiversity and Human Health. Island Press, Washington, DC, 379
pages.
Guston, David H. 2001. Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduction.
Science, Technology, & Human Values, 26:399-408 (Special Issue: Boundary Organizations in
Environmental Policy and Science).
44

Hey, T., S. Tansley, K. Tolle (eds). The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery. 2009.
Microsoft Research. Redmond, Washington.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2007 Synthesis Report, Cambridge
University Press.
Jackson, S.T. and Hobbs, R.J. 2009. Ecological Restoration in the Light of Ecological History. Science
325: 567.
Kahneman, D., P. Slovic, and A.Tversky .1982. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kates, R. W., C. E. Colten, S. Laska, and S. P. Leatherman. 2006. Reconstruction of New Orleans after
Hurricane Katrina: A research perspective. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
103(40):14653-14660.
Lai, J.W., L.Vanno, M.W. Link, , J.Pearson, H.Makowska, K.Benezra, and M.Green. 2009. Life360:
Usability of Mobile Devices for Time Use Surveys American Assoc for Public Opinion Research
14-17.
Maisonneuve, N., M. Stevens, B. Ochab. 2010.. Participatory noise pollution monitoring using mobile
phones. Information Polity. Volume 15, Number 1-2.
Marquart-Pyatt, S. T, R.. Shwom, T. Dietz, R.Dunlap, S. Kaplowitz, A. McCright, and S. Zahran. 2011.
Understanding Public Opinion on Climate Change: A Call for Research. Environment 53:38-42.
Menzel, A. 2005. A 500 year pheno-climatological view on the 2003 heatwave in Europe assessed by
grape harvest dates. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, Vol. 14, No. 1, 75-77.
Menzel A., and Dose V. 2005. Analysis of long-term time-series of beginning of flowering by Bayesian
function estimation. Meteorol. Z. 14:42934
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being (2005), Volume 1: Current
State and Trends. ed. R Hassan, R Scholes, N Ash. Washington, DC: Island Press
Nelleman, C, Corcoran, E, Duarte CM, Valdes L, DeYoung C, Fonseca, L, Grimsditch, G (Eds) (2009).
Blue Carbon: a Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme, GRID-
Arendal, www.grida.no
NRC, 1988. Toward and Understanding of Global Change. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press
NRC, 1989. Improving Risk Communication. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC, 1992. Global Environmental Change: Understanding the Human Dimensions. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press.
NRC, 1994. Science Priorities for the Human Dimensions of Global Change. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press.
45

NRC, 1996. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, D.C.:
NRC, 1997. Environmentally Significant Consumption: New Research Directions. Washington, D.C.:
NRC, 1998. People and Pixels: Linking Remote Sensing and Social Science. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press.
NRC, 1999. Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade. Washington, D.C.:
NRC, 1999b. Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next
Decade. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC, 2005. Decision Making for the Environment: Social and Behavioral Science Research Priorities.
Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
NRC, 2007. Evaluating Progress of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program: Methods and Preliminary
Results Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC, 2007b. Analysis of Global Change Assessments: Lessons Learned. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy Press.
NRC, 2007c. Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and
Beyond. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC, 2007d. Putting people on the Map: Protecting Confidentiality with Linked Social-Spatial Data.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC, 2007e. Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy Press
NRC, 2008. Transitioning to Sustainability Through Research and Development on Ecosystem Services
and Biofuels: Workshop Summary. Koshel, P and Mcallister, K., (Rapporteurs). National Research
Council
NRC, 2008b. Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making . Washington,
D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC, 2009a. Informing Decisions in a Changing Climate. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press
NRC, 2009b. Restructuring Federal Climate Research to Meet the Challenges of Climate Change.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
NRC, 2010a. America's Climate Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change. Washington, D.C.:
National Academies Press.
NRC, 2010b. America's Climate Choices: Limiting the Magnitude of Climate Change. Washington, D.C.:
46

NRC, 2010c. America's Climate Choices: Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. Washington, D.C.:
National Academies Press.
NRC, 2010d. America's Climate Choices: Informing an Effective Response to Climate Change.
Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
NRC, 2011. America's Climate Choices (Final Synthesis Report). Washington, D.C.: National Academies
Press
NRC, 2011b. A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core
Ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press
Packard Foundation 2010. Science Strategy: Linking Knowledge with Action. Available,
http://www.packard.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/ScienceStrategy-Linking-Knowledge-with-
Action1.pdf, visited 11/11.
Persha, L, A.Agrawal, and A.Chhatre. 2011. "Social and Ecological Synergy: Local Rulemaking, Forest
Livelihoods, and Biodiversity Conservation."Science. Vol. 331, no. 6024, pp. 1606-1608.
Peytchev.A. 2010. Experiments in Mobile Web Survey Design Similarities to Other Modes and Unique
Considerations. Social Science Computer Review. vol. 28, no. 3, 319-335.
Phelps, J., E. L. Webb, and A.Agrawal. 2010. "Does REDD+ Threaten to Recentralize Forest
Governance?." Science. Vol. 328. no. 5976, pp. 312 - 313. DOI: 10.1126/science.1187774.
Pongsiri, M.J. and J. Roman. 2007. Examining the links between biodiversity and human health: an
interdisciplinary research initiative of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EcoHealth
Raiffa, H. 1968. Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices Under Uncertainty. Addison-Wesley,
Reading,MA.
Sala, O, L Myerson & C Parmesan (Editors). 2009. SCOPE Assessment: Biodiversity, Global Change and
Human Health: from Ecosystem Services to Spread of Disease (Island Press).
Schwartz, M.D.; B.E. Reiter. 2000. Changes in North American Spring. International Journal of
Climatology 20(8):929-932
Searchinger, T., R. Heimlich, R. A. Houghton, F. Dong, A. Elobeid, J. Fabiosa, S. Tokgoz, D. Hayes, and
T.-H. Yu. 2008. Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through
Emissions from Land-use change. Science. 319, 1238.
Strzepek, K., Yohe, G., Neumann, J., and Boehlert, B., 2010. Characterizing Changes in Drought Risk for
the United States from Climate Change, Environmental Research Letters 5 044012.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/4/044012.
Trenberth, K. E. , A. Belward, O. Brown, E. Haberman, T. R. Karl, S. Running, B. Ryan, M. Tanner, B.

Wielicki. 2011. Challenges of a sustained climate observing system. Plenary paper for the WCRP
Open Science Conference, Denver, CO. available at: http://www.wcrp-
climate.org/conference2011/documents/Trenberth.pdf
47

USGCRP, 1989. Our Changing Planet: The FY 1990 Research Plan. A Report by the Committee on Earth
Sciences.
Weiher, E. 2007. On the Status of Restoration Science: Obstacles and Opportunities. Restoration Ecology
15(2):340343
48

Statement of Task for the

NRC Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research Program
An expert committee will provide ongoing and focused advice to the US Global Change Research
Program (USGCRP). The committee will be broadly constituted to bring expertise in all the areas
addressed by the multi-agency, multi-dimensional USGCRP and will be supported by expertise
housed in many units across the National Research Council. The committee will, over time,
organize ongoing discussions, take on specific tasks, and issue reports.
In its role as a single entry source of contact to the National Research Council and source of
strategic discussion with appropriate experts, the Committee to Advise the US Global Change
Research Program will:
1. Provide ongoing, integrated advice to the USGCRP on broad, program-wide issues when
requested. This will begin with a review of the 2011 USGCRP Strategic Plan (see below) and
is expected to include other tasks such as a review of the national climate assessment and/or an
evaluation of USGCRP progress toward its Strategic Plan objectives.
2. Provide a forum for informal interaction between the USGCRP and the relevant scientific
communities.
3. Provide a forum for exchange of experience and insights for integrating across science
communities and improving linkages between officials of the Program and the science
communities.
4. Improve the internal coordination across existing and future NRC entities related to global
change (including coordination across NAS, NAE, and IOM).
5. Help identify issues of importance for the global change research community. This implies a
proactive role that goes beyond simply responding to requests from the USGCRP.
6. Interact with and help USGCRP with its international activities, such as shaping the future of
relevant international global environmental change programs.
7. In addition to producing NRC reports as tasked, the committee may help develop other work
requests and ensure that they are conducted by the appropriate NRC units in a collaborative
fashion.
Statement of Task for the Review of the Draft USGCRP Strategic Plan
The committee will conduct an independent review of the U.S. Global Change Research Program's
draft strategic plan (concurrent with public review). The review will address the following
questions about the draft plan:
1. Is the plan responsive to the nation's needs for information on climate change and global
change, their potential implications, and the potential effects of different response options?
2. Are the plans goals clear and appropriate?
3. Is there an appropriate balance between short-term and longer-term goals, among
49

substantive research areas, and between research and non-research activities, such as
observations, modeling, and communication?
4. Are there adequate mechanisms for coordinating and integrating issues that involve
multiple disciplines and multiple agencies?
5. Does the plan adequately describe the relationships between the Program and its agency
participants, and between the Program and the public, the private sector, academia,
state/local governments, and international communities?
6. Does the written document describing the program effectively communicate with both
stakeholders and the scientific community?
7. Are there any content areas missing from the plan that should be present if the Program is
to achieve its overall vision and mission?
50

Committee Member Biographical Sketches
Warren M. Washington (NAE, Chair) is a Senior Scientist at the National Center for
Atmospheric Research (NCAR). He has published more than 150 papers in professional journals
and co-authored a book entitled, An Introduction to Three-Dimensional Climate Modeling. He
has served on the National Science Board (chair, 2002-2006), the NOAA Science Advisory Board,
President's National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere, several panels of the
National Research Council, the Secretary of Energy's Advisory Board, among others. Washington
areas of research are in the development and use of climate models for climate change studies. He
has also served as President of American Meteorological Society and a member of the AAAS
Board of Directors. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering, American
Philosophical Society, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. He has received many
awards, including the Le Verrier Medal of the Societe Meteorologique de France, the National
Weather Service Modernization Award, and the AMS Dr. Charles Anderson Award. He has
honorary degrees from the Oregon State University and Bates College. In 2010 he was awarded
the National Medal of Science by President Obama.
Kai N. Lee (Vice Chair) leads the Science subprogram in Conservation & Science at The David
and Lucile Packard Foundation. The science subprogram provides support for science that informs
decision making in the near term, advancing the strategies guiding the conservation activities of
the Foundation. He also provides program support and liaison for the Monterey Bay Aquarium
Research Institute, the Center for Ocean Solutions, and the Aldo Leopold Leadership Program. He
taught at Williams College from 1991 - 2007 and is the Rosenburg Professor of Environmental
Studies, emeritus. He directed the Center for Environmental Studies at Williams from 19911998
and 20012002, and taught from 1973 - 1991 at the University of Washington in Seattle. He is the
author of Compass and Gyroscope (1993) and coauthor of Our Common Journey (NRC, 1999).
He is a National Associate of the National Research Council. He was a member of the National
Academies Roundtable on Science and Technology and served as vice-chair of the National
Academies panel that wrote Informing Decisions in a Changing Climate (2009). Earlier, he had
been a White House Fellow and represented the state of Washington as a member of the
Northwest Power Planning Council. He was appointed in 2009 to the Science Advisory Board of
the EPA. He holds a Ph.D. in Physics from Princeton University and an A.B., Magna Cum Laude
in Physics, from Columbia University.
Mark R. Abbott is dean of the College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences at Oregon State
University, Corvallis. His research focuses on the interaction of biological and physical processes
in the upper ocean, remote sensing of ocean color and sea surface temperature, phytoplankton
fluorescence, and length and time scales of phytoplankton variability. He deployed the first array
of bio-optical moorings in the Southern Ocean as part of the United States Joint Global Ocean
Flux Study (JGOFS). Dr. Abbott chairs the U.S. JGOFS Science Steering Committee and was a
member of the MODIS and SeaWiFS science teams. He is currently a member of the board of
trustees for the Consortium for Ocean Leadership and a member of the National Science Board.
Dr. Abbott has also served as the chair of the SSBs Committee on Earth Studies. Other prior NRC
51

service includes the Committee on Indicators for Understanding Global Climate Change, the
Committee on the Role and Scope of Mission-Enabling Activities in NASAs Space and Earth
Sciences Missions, and the Panel on Land-Use Change, Ecosystem Dynamics, and Biodiversity
for the 2007 decadal survey on Earth science and applications from space. Dr. Abbott is currently
a member of the NRCs Committee on an Assessment of NASA's Earth Science Program, which
is carrying out a mid-decade assessment of the implementation of the Earth science and
applications from space decadal survey. He is also a member of the board of trustees for the
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.
Doug Arent is Executive Director of the Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis at the
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). He specializes in strategic planning and financial
analysis competencies; clean energy technologies and energy and water issues; and international
and governmental policies. In addition to his NREL responsibilities, Arent is Sr. Visiting Fellow at
the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Arent was recently appointed as a Coordinating
Lead Author for the 5th Assessment Report of IPCC. He is a member of Policy Subcommittee of
the National Petroleum Council Study on Prudent Development of North America Natural Gas
and Oil Resources, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences Steering Committee on
Social Science and the Alternative Energy Future. Arent served from 2008 to 2010 on the National
Academy of Sciences Panel on Limiting the Magnitude of Future Climate Change. Arent is, a
Member of the Keystone Energy Board and is on the Advisory Board of E+Co, a public purpose
investment company that supports sustainable development across the globe. He served on the
Executive Council of the U.S. Association of Energy Economists from 2008-2010. Prior to
coming to his current position, Arent was Director of the Strategic Energy Analysis Center at
NREL from 2006-1010. Prior to joining NREL, he was a management consultant to clean energy
companies, providing strategy, development and market counsel. Dr. Arent has a Ph.D. from
Princeton University, and an MBA from Regis University.
Susan K. Avery took office as President and Director of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute
in 2008. She holds a Master's in Physics and a Doctorate in Atmospheric Science from the
University of Illinois. Avery was on the faculty of the University of Colorado at Boulder from
1982 - 2008, most recently holding the academic rank of Professor of Electrical and Computer
Engineering. Her research interests include studies of atmospheric circulation and precipitation,
climate variability and water resources, and the development of new radar techniques and
instruments for remote sensing. She also has a keen interest in scientific literacy and the role of
science in public policy. She is the author or co-author of more than 80 peer-reviewed articles. A
Fellow of CIRES since 1982, Avery became its Director in 1994. In that role, she facilitated new
interdisciplinary research efforts spanning the geosciences and including the social and biological
sciences. She spearheaded a reorganization of the institute and helped establish a thriving K-12
outreach program and a Center for Science and Technology Policy Research. She also worked
with NOAA and the Climate Change Science Program to help formulate a national strategic
science plan for climate research. Recently she served on two NRC panels: One produced a
decadal plan for earth science and applications from space, and the other provided strategic
guidance for the atmospheric sciences at the National Science Foundation. Avery is a Fellow of
the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the American Association for the
Advancement of Science, and of the American Meteorological Society, for which she also served
52

as President. She is a past chair of the board of trustees of the University Corporation for
Atmospheric Research.
Robert E. Dickinson (NAS,NAE) is a respected leader in dynamic meteorology, physical

climatology and climate modeling for the last four decades. He first delineated the way planetary
scale Rossby waves interact with the mean flow--a process central to understanding the general
circulation of the atmosphere. He has also established the major role of foliage in climate
dynamics and made major contributions to other problems. His areas of interest include the
dynamics of atmospheric planetary waves, stratospheric dynamics, models of global structure and
dynamics of terrestrial and planetary thermosphere, NLTE infrared radiative transfer in planetary
mesopheres, global climate modeling and processes, the role of land processes in climate systems,
the modeling role of vegetation in regional evapotranspiration, and the role of tropical forests in
climate systems. His recent research has focused on climate variability and change, aerosols, the
hydrological cycle and droughts, land surface processes, the terrestrial carbon cycle, and the
application of remote sensing data to modeling of land surface processes. He is an elected member
of both the US National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering, an
honorary member of the European Geophysical Society and the European Geo-sciences Union and
a Foreign member of Chinese Academy of Sciences. He has been a member of numerous scientific
advisory organizations, including the National Research Council. He holds a M.S. (1962) and
Ph.D. (1966) in Meteorology from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Thomas Dietz is Assistant Vice President for Environmental Research, Professor of Sociology,
Environmental Science and Policy, and Animal Studies at Michigan State University. His current
research examines the human driving forces of environmental change, environmental values and
the interplay between science and democracy in environmental issues. Dietz is also an active
participant in the Ecological and Cultural Change Studies Group at MSU. He is a Fellow of the
American Association for the Advancement of Science, and has been awarded the Sustainability
Science Award of the Ecological Society of America, the Distinguished Contribution Award of
the American Sociological Association Section on Environment, Technology and Society, and the
Outstanding Publication Award, also from the American Sociological Association Section on
Environment, Technology and Society. He has served on numerous National Academies panels
and committees and chaired the Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change and the
Panel on Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making. He holds a
Bachelor of General Studies degree from Kent State and a PhD in Ecology from the University of
California at Davis.
Henry D. Jacoby is Professor of Management in the M.I.T. Sloan School of Management and
former Co-Director of the M.I.T. Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change,
which is focused on the integration of the natural and social sciences and policy analysis in
application to the threat of global climate change. He oversees the design and application of the
social science component of the Joint Programs Integrated Global System Model a
comprehensive research tool for analyzing potential anthropogenic climate change and its social
and environmental consequences and he is a leader of M.I.T. research and analysis of national
climate policies and the structure of the international climate regime. An undergraduate
mechanical engineer at the University of Texas at Austin, Professor Jacoby holds a Ph.D. in
Economics from Harvard University where he also served on the faculties of the Department of
53

Economics and the Kennedy School of Government. He has been Director of the Harvard
Environmental Systems Program, Director of the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental
Policy Research, Associate Director of the MIT Energy Laboratory, and Chair of the MIT Faculty.
He has made extensive contributions to the study of economics, policy and management in the
areas of energy, natural resources and environment, writing widely on these topics including seven
books. He currently serves on the Scientific Committee of the International Geosphere-Biosphere
Program.
Maria Carmen Lemos is Professor of Natural Resources and Environment at the University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor and Senior Policy Scholar at the Udall Center for the Study of Public Policy
at the University of Arizona. She has MSc and PhD degrees in Political Science from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT. During 2006-2007 she was a James Martin 21st
Century School Fellow at the Environmental Change Institute at Oxford University. Her research
focuses on environmental public policymaking in Latin America and the U.S., especially related to
the human dimensions of climate change, the co-production of science and policy, and the role of
technoscientific knowledge and environmental governance in building adaptive capacity to climate
variability and change response. She is a co-founder of Icarus (Initiative on Climate Adaptation
Research and Understanding through the Social Sciences), which seeks foster collaboration and
exchange between scholars focusing on vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. She is a
lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and a contributor to the US
Climate Change Science Program Synthesis Reports. She has served in number of NRC/NAS
committees including Restructuring Federal Climate Research to Meet the Challenges of Climate
Change, America Climate Choice Science Panel and the Human Dimensions of Environmental
Change Committee.
Ian Roy Noble has spent 10 years with lead responsibility for the World Bank's activities in
adaptation to climate change. He has also worked with the Carbon Finance Unit on emissions
reductions through reduced deforestation and forest degradation. Before coming to the Bank in
2002 he was Professor of Global Change Research at the Australian National University. He has
had senior roles in the IPCC process and in international cooperative research on climate change
as part of the IGBP (International Geosphere Biosphere Program) including chairing the Global
Change and Terrestrial Ecosystems for some years. An ecologist by training, he holds a PhD
from the University of Adelaide, and his research interests cover animal behavior, vegetation and
biodiversity management, ecosystem modeling, expert systems and the science-policy interface.
In 1999 he was elected as Fellow of the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and
Engineering.
Camille Parmesan's early research focused on multiple aspects of population biology, including
the ecology, evolution and behaviors of insect/plant interactions. For the past several years, the
focus of her work has been on current impacts of climate change in the 20th century on wildlife.
Her work on butterfly range shifts has been highlighted in many scientific and popular press
reports, such as in Science, Science News, New York Times, London Times, National Public
Radio, and the recent BBC film series "State of the Planet" with David Attenborough.The
intensification of global warming as an international issue led her into the interface of policy and
science. Parmesan has given seminars in DC for the White House, government agencies, and
NGOs (e.g., IUCN and WWF). As a lead author, she was involved in multiple aspects of the Third
54

Assessment Report of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, United Nations).
Parmesan received her B.S. degree from the University of Texas at Austin in 1984 and received a
Ph.D. in Biological Sciences from UT Austin in 1995.
Karen C. Seto is an Associate Professor of the Urban Environment, in the School of Forestry and
Environmental Studies, Yale University. She studies the human transformation of land and the
links between urbanization, global change, and sustainability. Her research focuses on
characterizing urban land-use dynamics, understanding the process of urbanization, examining the
environmental consequences of land-use change and urban expansion, and forecasting urban
growth. Professor Setos geographic expertise is Asia, especially China and India. Professor Seto
is Co-Chair of the Urbanization and Global Environmental Change Project of the International
Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change, and a Coordinating Lead
Author for Working Group III of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. She also serves on the U.S.
Carbon Cycle Science Steering Group and the NRC Geographical Sciences Committee. She is the
Executive Producer of 10,000 Shovels: Rapid Urban Growth in China, a documentary film that
integrates satellite imagery, historical photographs, and contemporary film footage to highlight the
urban changes occurring in China. Professor Seto is an Aldo Leopold Leadership Fellow and
recipient of a NASA New Investigator Program Award, a NSF Career Award, and a National
Geographic Research Grant. She has a Ph.D. in Geography from Boston University.
Kathleen J. Tierney is a Professor of Sociology and Director of the Natural Hazards Research
and Applications Information Center at the University of Colorado. The Hazards Center is housed
in the Institute of Behavioral Science, where Prof. Tierney holds a joint appointment. Dr. Tierney's
research focuses on the social dimensions of hazards and disasters, including natural,
technological, and human-induced extreme events. With collaborators Michael Lindell and Ronald
Perry, she recently published Facing the Unexpected: Disaster Preparedness and Response in the
United States (Joseph Henry Press, 2001). This influential compilation presents a wealth of
information derived from theory and research on disasters over the past 25 years. Among Dr.
Tierney's current and recent research projects are studies on the organizational response to the
September 11, 2001 World Trade Center disaster, risk perception and risk communication, the use
of new technologies in disaster management, and the impacts of disasters on businesses.
Charles J. Vorosmarty is a Professor of Civil Engineering, a Distinguished Scientist with the

NOAA-Cooperative Remote Sensing Science and Technology Center and Director of The City
University of New Yorks Environmental Crossroads Initiative at The City College of New York.
His research focuses on the development of computer models and geospatial data sets used in
synthesis studies of the interactions among the water cycle, climate, biogeochemistry and
anthropogenic activities. His studies are built around local, regional and continental to global-
scale modeling of water balance, discharge, constituent fluxes in river systems and the analysis
of the impacts of large-scale water engineering on the terrestrial water cycle. He is a founding
member of the Global Water System Project that represents the input of more than two hundred
international scientists under the International Council for Sciences Global Environmental
Change Programs. He is spearheading efforts to develop global-scale indicators of water stress,
to develop and apply databases of reservoir construction worldwide and to analyze coastal
zone risks associated with water diversion. He recently won one of two national awards
through the National Science Foundation to execute studies on hydrologic synthesis.
Dr. Vorosmarty also is on several national and international advisory panels, including the U.S.
55

Arctic Research Commission, the NASA Earth Science Subcommittee, the National Research Council
Committee on Hydrologic Science, the National Science Foundations Arctic System Science
Program Committee and the Arctic HYDRA International Polar Year Planning Team. He also was on
a National Research Council panel that reviewed NASAs polar geophysical data sets, the decadal
study on earth observations, and is Co-Chair of the National Science Foundations Arctic CHAMP
hydrology initiative. He has assembled regional and continental-scale hydro-meteorological data
compendia, including the largest single collection, Arctic-RIMS (covering northern Eurasia and North
America).
John M. Wallace (NAS) has directed his research at improving our understanding of global
climate and its year-to-year and decade-to-decade variations, making use of observational data. He
has contributed to the identification and understanding of a number of atmospheric phenomena,
including the vertically propagating planetary waves that drive the quasi-biennial oscillation in
zonal winds in the equatorial stratosphere, the 4-5-day period easterly waves that modulate daily
rainfall over the tropical oceans, and the dominant spatial patterns in month-to-month and year-to-
year climate variability, including the one through which the El Nio phenomenon in the tropical
Pacific influences climate over North America. He has contributed to documenting the existence
of El Nino- like variability on a decade to decade time scale (the so called 'Pacific Decadal
Oscillation'). He earned a B.S. in Naval Architecture (1962) from the Webb Institute of Naval
Architecture. He then went on to earn a Ph.D. in meteorology from the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology in 1966.
Gary W. Yohe is the Huffington Foundation Professor of Economics and Environmental Studies
at Wesleyan University; he has been on the faculty at Wesleyan for more than 30 years. He
received his PhD in Economics from Yale University in 1975. Most of his recent work has
focused on bringing risk-management perspectives to the mitigation and adaptation/impacts sides
of the climate issue. Involved with the IPCC since the mid 1990s, he served as a Lead Author for
four different chapters in the Third Assessment Report and as Convening Lead Author for the
Fourth Assessment Report. In the Fourth Assessment, he also worked with the Core Writing Team
to prepare the overall Synthesis Report. He is now serving as a Lead Author in one chapter and a
Convening Lead Author in another for the Fifth Assessment Report. Dr. Yohe is a member of the
New York City Panel on Climate Change and the NRC Standing Committee on the Human
Dimensions of Global Change. He also served on the NRCs Americas Climate Choices
Adaptation Panel, the NRC Panel on Addressing the Challenges of Climate Change through the
Behavioral and Social Sciences, and the NRC Committee on Stabilization Targets for
Atmospheric Greenhouse Gas Concentrations. He is co-editor of Climatic Change and a Vice-
Chair of the National Climate Assessment Development and Advisory Committee.
56

C
The Committee asked individual members of the NRC Board on Atmospheric Sciences and
Climate (BASC) and the Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change (CHDGC) to
examine the draft Plan and offer input to the Committee orally or in writing. What follows is a
collection of their comments. The viewpoints compiled below should not be construed as the
consensus views of BASC/CHDGC, the Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research
Program, or the National Research Council.
Comments from Individual BASC members
Overarching Concerns
1) Observations: A major concern revolves around the treatment of observations within the
document and includes the following talking points:
a. Thereisaseriousconceptualomissioninthedocumentregardingthepurposeof
climateobservations.Thekeypointthatiscurrentlynotcoveredisthat
observationsareessentialforresearchthatexpandsourknowledgeofprocesses
andmechanismsintheclimatesystem.
b. Thedocumentcurrentlyseemstodowngradetheuseofobservationssuchthat
theyareonlyofuseforcomparisontomodels.
c. Observations are in fact needed to directly learn about the climate system. Only
then can it be modeled with any acuity.
d. Given that both space-based and in situ measurement programs are in dire
circumstances at the moment, and indeed are on completely unsustainable
trajectories going forward, there is an urgent need to address how these programs
might be maintained and sustained.
e. By not confronting this fundamental dilemma, the USGCRP has left a serious
omission in the document. The Strategic Plan could be dramatically improved by
providing the framework to support these crucial observation systems into the
foreseeable future.
2) USGCRP Assessment: As written, the document appears to be setting up an entirely new

program. Given that the USGCRP already has a good track record spanning multiple
decades, it is thought that the Strategic Plan could be improved by providing an assessment
to help justify the current expenditures. To our knowledge, the last time this was done was
in 1995. This could include:
a. A work up of the major research findings and the subsequent policy and decision-
making influence that the USGCRP and its constituent agencies have been
responsible for over the past 20 years.
57

b. A frank and full assessment of not only accomplishments, but remaining

challenges.
c. An integration of the lessons learned, and how the past experience of the program
provides a strong backbone for the USGCRP going forward.
3) Disciplinary Expertise: Fostering an interdisciplinary program addresses an important

need, but the importance of disciplinary expertise is being unrealistically minimized.
Some specific concerns include:
a. Though clearly the need exists for more interchange at the cross roads of various
disciplines, a community made up solely of generalists will never develop new
parameterizations that are necessary for skillful Earth Systems models.
b. Focusing solely on breadth in disciplinary training leads us to well integrated, but
ultimately faulty attempts to fully understand the Earth System.
c. A logical improvement might be for the USGCRP to provide a postdoctoral
program to help train a new generation of young researchers from science,
technology, and social science to carry out the disciplinary integration which is a
stated goal.
General Comments
1) Sustained Assessments, while admirably conceived, might take more in human and
financial resources than are necessary. Rather than full length Synthesis and Assessment
Products (SAPs), perhaps a short report every three or four years is more practical with a
full report every third period. This keeps the sustained assessment cycle, but limits the
large report to a scale that is more appropriate for that kind of in-depth review.
2) There seems to be an assumption that every geographic area is equally important in the
USGCRP Strategic Plan. As 90% of the population lives in urban areas that represent less
than 3% of the land area, perhaps an acknowledgement of targeted systems (urban,
agricultural, etc.) should be included in all four goals.
3) The document is highly repetitive, and as result, probably ~30% too long. There are many
instances of repetition and overlap across sections. This is probably the result of the
multiple authorships of various chapters, but the entire document could use a single editing
in this regard.
4) There are a number of factual and semantical errors in this document. Some will be listed
below, but a rigorous proof read is in order.
5) The section on implementation seems much too brief and reads like a placeholder for a
chapter that has yet to be written.
6) How are the boundaries between research and operational activities to be discerned from
this plan?
58

7) By having four goals with equal weight, a reader could interpret that they are equal with
regards to urgency, importance, and fraction of the allocated budget. Is there a subtle way
to prioritize these without minimizing the importance of the other goals?
8) There are repeated references to high frequency and extreme events, but the word weather
is not used at all.
9) Given the current political climate in D.C., it might be useful to substitute climate
services with climate information everywhere in the document. There is a lot of
confusion about what climate services are or should be, but climate information is more
straightforward and carries none of the current negative connotations.
10) The phrase use-inspired research implies there is useless research that should be cut in
favor of use-inspired research. Is any scientist going to say he/she is doing useless
research? Program managers shouldnt be funding useless research in the first place.
Edits
1) The document starts out by outlining four specific goals, each with a set of concise
objectives, summarized in Box 1. On P. 12 the goals are stated in the text. Then the next
two sections (Unifying ideas and Cross-linking activities) appear out of nowhere, are
vague, disjointed, dont fit in the flow of the presentation. All the items listed in these two
sections are discussed in a more relevant fashion under the various objectives later.
Recommend deleting these sections in their entirety (i.e. from P. 12, line 384 through the
end of P. 15).
2) Table 1 this seems to be an integration of research that falls under both objectives 1.1
and 1.2. This table should be split into two to mesh better with the two objectives. That is,
Table 1 should have all the boxes except the one in the middle at right, and Table 2 should
be just the box from the middle right of Table 1. Splitting into 2 tables to correspond to
the two objectives makes the presentation more clear.
3) Text Box 3, Line 545 The paragraph refers to Text Box 2 rather than 3.
4) Line 586 change understanding of key of aspects to understanding of key
aspects
5) Line 639 change integrating of the social to integrating the social
6) Lines 685-686 A paleoclimate expert like John Kutzbach should be consulted, but it
seems counter-intuitive that the glacial-interglacial cycle could transition over periods as
short as a decade. This is not much time to build or melt a massive land ice sheet.
7) Box 4, Line 713 There is nothing close to sufficient evidence that Currently, ocean
acidification is affecting the growth and lifespan of carbonate shell-forming organisms
such as many plankton, mollusks, crustaceans, and urchins. Studies in laboratories in
isolation suggest that OA will affect these organisms, but these studies do not deal with
natural oceanic systems. The effects observed have been summarized in Kroeker et al.
2010.
59

8) Box 5, Line 767 We know from scientific measurements that sea level has been rising
steadily over the past few decades (see Figure B5.2.). This rise is due primarily to
expansion of the ocean as it warms and melting of land ice (glaciers and ice sheets), with
each of these factors making a roughly equal contribution to the current rate of sea level
rise. The current estimate of the relative contribution of warming to the global sea-level
rise rate shown in B5.2 is about 30%, not 50%. The 50% estimate was biased high due to
XBT fall errors (Wijffels et al. 2008). The 30% estimate is based on Levitus et al 2009,
Ishii and Kimoto 2009, and Church et al 2011.
9) Line 1354 Delete entirely. It is incorrect to state that decadal prediction depends
entirely on data assimilation. There are many more factors, like model fidelity,
systematic errors, and so on.
10) Text Box 6
a. Line 1392 the Antarctic ozone hole is starting to recover is probably correct,
though this year was the 9th largest on record. It is not expected to return to 1978
levels until 2070, so recovery is expected to be slow with interannual variation.
b. Line 1393 change then decreased following the 1987 Montreal Protocol to
then decreased following the 1987 Montreal Protocol and additional amendments
agreed upon between 1990 and 1999.
11) Box 9, Line 1314 the credit is wrong. It should be and Aqua and its Advanced
Microwave Scanning Radiometer for EOS. Although the background of figure B9.2 is
MODIS, the sea ice observations are from Nimbus 7/SMMR (left) and Aqua/AMSR-E
(right).
12) Text Box 7, Line 1582 decadal climate predictability. This box doesnt address two
additional issues related to decadal climate variability:
a. The characteristics of this variability may interact with changes brought about by
underlying global change.
b. Decadal variability may at times act to either amplify, or damp, the underlying
anthropogenically forced climate changes. This point has implications for our
ability to estimate accurately the underlying global changes during particular
decades and introduces uncertainly that needs to be resolved.
60

Comments from Individual CHDGC Members
Objective 2.3 Enhancing climate services
This section defines climate services as the provision of information products (line 2173),
which is an overly narrow formulation (see NRC, 2009 [Informing Decisions] for a more comprehensive
discussion of climate-related decision support). A key to decision support is the role of climate
communication networks, and an appropriate Objective 2.3 for the Program might be called Enhancing
Climate Communication Networks.
Climate information is being generated and communicated to research, resource managers, decision
makers, and the public through various organizations and various forms. Climate information needs to be
translated and delivered in ways which the end-user community has defined as most suitable for their use.
However, in delivering these products care must be exercised in maintaining the integrity of the climate
information and insuring that the best available information and technologies are used in providing this
information to the user communities. The delivery system and development of the translational expertise
need to be jointly evolved to insure user satisfaction and product integrity.
To meet the legislative mandate of Program, it will need to engage with agencies that are not now
part of the program, and particularly with centers of social science expertise in government. These can be
found in the Departments of Housing and Urban Development, Education, Homeland Security, Treasury,
Labor, etc.
Earth System Understanding
The Plan proposes to include efforts to advance fundamental understanding of the human
components of the Earth system. Including the human components in Earth system science presents
something of a grand challenge to the Program that requires more than incremental changes. For
example, the need for process research, observations, modeling, and assessment applies to socio-economic
and social-ecological systems, as well as the physical systems that have been the core of the Program in the
pastand to the total Earth system of which all of these are components.
Instead of the thorough rethinking of the Program that seems likely for meeting the challenge, the
Plan indicates incremental changes and in some cases does not specify even these in detail. There is a
general reference to the significant role that human activities play in global climate change (lines 623-
624), but no further detail. In this area, the Plan might additionally reference the need to understand the
social-ecological interactions related to consumption choices, governance and institutional structures, and
valuation of natural resources that intersect with earth system dynamics and change. It needs to recognize
the need for fundamental research by the social science community and for integrating social, biological,
and physical sciences in advancing Earth system science and global change research. These needs exist
across scales, and such research is essential to understanding the nature and determination of critical
thresholds and cascading interacting processes.
61

The Plan also needs to recognize the need for research support for further study of valuation of
ecosystem services relative to societal factors, attention to "slow variables" associated with social-
ecological systems (e.g., education, social networks, and ecosystem supporting services). Integrating
adaptation and mitigation research will also be needed during the period when the social-ecological system
will be changing due to global changes in the physical Earth system. A concerted research effort in the
coming decade will be necessary to frame institutional and educational responses for coming century
regarding such evolving changes as Arctic Ocean opening, sea level rise, increasing environmental
migration, invasive species expansions, ocean acidification, loss of biodiversity on land and the oceans,
changes in international trade and cultural values, etc.
Complexity
Social system dynamics are mentioned here, but there is no elaboration. Recent events associated with
the global recession, "Arab spring", and La Nia-drought connections in SW United States provide apt
examples of the global teleconnections operating of social-ecological systems across the world today.
Compared with the 20th Century, the 21st Century presents a much more interconnected Earth system
sometimes called the anthropocene era. The research enterprise needs to reflect this transition of Earth
system dynamics and thresholds. The ability to transition without global collapse is dependent on how our
integrative research approach guides the adaptation and mitigation decision landscape and public
awareness.
CCTP
The connections and integration of the CCTP and the USGCRP research and implementation strategies
deserves careful attention in the Plan. It may require a task force under a Presidential Executive Order to
develop an appropriate strategy.
Carbon Cycle
Box 8 contains no reference to the 2011 Carbon Cycle Science Plan.
Integrated Modeling
It would be useful to further clarify the goals of more sophisticated Earth system, models and to distinguish
what is meant by an Earth system model from integrated assessment models and other model types. The
usage in some places suggests models more of type used in current GCM's rather than integrated
assessment models or other Earth system models that more explicitly incorporate the social aspects of the
earth system dynamic. Research at the interface between sub-components of the Earth system as well as
improved process representation of the subcomponents, will need particular attention to advance the
integrated system modeling. The use of simplified "toy models" can provide a framework to develop an
integrated modeling system more rapidly than building more complex versions of fully resolved models.
62

DRAFT September 30, 2011 for Public Comment
1 UNITED STATES GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM

2 STRATEGIC PLAN 20122021
3
4 TABLE OF CONTENTS
5
6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................3
7
8 I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................7
9
10 II. VISION AND MISSION .....................................................................................................10
11
12 USGCRP Vision and Mission ............................................................................................10
13 Framework for the New USGCRP ....................................................................................12
14 Unifying Ideas......................................................................................................................12
15 Cross-Linking Activities .....................................................................................................13
16
17 III. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................16
18
19 Goal 1: Advance Science ....................................................................................................16
20
21 Objective 1.1: Earth System Understanding .............................................................17
22 Objective 1.2: Science for Adaptation and Mitigation .............................................23
23 Objective 1.3: Integrated Observations.....................................................................30
24 Objective 1.4: Integrated Modeling ..........................................................................35
25 Objective 1.5: Information Management and Sharing ..............................................41
26
27 Goal 2: Inform Decisions ....................................................................................................45
28
29 Objective 2.1: Inform Adaptation Decisions ............................................................46
30 Objective 2.2: Inform Mitigation Decisions .............................................................48
31 Objective 2.3: Enhancing Climate Services..............................................................49
32 Objective 2.4: Enhancing International Partnerships................................................53
33
34 Goal 3: Sustained Assessments ..........................................................................................55
35
36 Objective 3.1: Scientific Integration .........................................................................59
37 Objective 3.2: Ongoing Capacity ..............................................................................62
38 Objective 3.3: Inform Responses ..............................................................................63
39 Objective 3.4: Evaluate Progress ..............................................................................65
40
41 Goal 4: Communicate and Educate...................................................................................67
42
43 Objective 4.1: Strengthen Communication and Education Research .......................68
44 Objective 4.2: Reach Diverse Audiences..................................................................69
45 Objective 4.3: Increase Engagement.........................................................................71
46 Objective 4.4: Cultivate Workforce ..........................................................................73
47
Draft document for public comment only--Professional editing will follow public comment period 1
48 IV. COORDINATING WITH OTHER NATIONS AND INTERNATIONAL

49 ORGANIZATIONS ..................................................................................................................75
50
51 V. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY ..................................................................................79
52
53 Guidelines for Implementation of the Strategic Plan ......................................................79
54
55 APPENDIX I. PROGRAM ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION BY
56 AGENCY/DEPARTMENT......................................................................................................83
57
58 APPENDIX II. GLOSSARY OF TERMS ............................................................................. 93
59 UNITED STATES GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM

60 STRATEGIC PLAN 20122021
61
62 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
63
64
65 Earths environment is changing rapidly. Increases in world population and
66 industrialization are altering the atmosphere, ocean, land use, ecosystems and the distribution of
67 species over the planet. Scientific research, including monitoring and modeling of the
68 multifaceted Earth system, provides information for governments, businesses, and communities
69 to understand these changes and to respond to potential risks brought about by global change,
70 such as more severe heat waves, storms, floods, fires, crop failures, and water shortages.
71
72 Created by Congress in 1990, the United States Global Change Research Program
73 (USGCRP) coordinates federal research aimed at understanding, assessing, and responding to
74 global change. During the Programs first two decades, member agencies and partners in
75 industry, academia, and state, local, and foreign governments have created and maintained a mix
76 of atmospheric, oceanic, land, and space-based observing systems, gained new theoretical
77 understanding of Earth system processes, developed predictive models, promoted advances in
78 data management and sharing, and developed an expert scientific workforce.
79
80 This Strategic Plan for 20122021 builds on these accomplishments. In particular,
81 USGCRP supports four strategic goals:
82
83 Goal 1. Advance Science: Advance scientific knowledge of the integrated natural and human
84 components of the Earth system.
85
86 Goal 2. Inform Decisions: Provide the scientific basis to inform and enable timely decisions on
87 adaptation and mitigation.
88
89 Goal 3. Sustained Assessments: Build sustained assessment capacity that improves the Nations
90 ability to understand, anticipate, and respond to global change impacts and vulnerabilities.
91
92 Goal 4. Communicate and Educate: Advance communications and education to broaden public
93 understanding of global change and empower the workforce of the future.
94
95 These four goals and objectives (see Box 1) recognize that effective response to global
96 change begins with scientific research of the highest quality.
97
98 Improving fundamental scientific knowledge is at the core of USGCRP activities. To
99 build upon program successes and to address critical gaps in research, coordinated programs in
100 observations, modeling, and research on fundamental processes will be directed at advances in
101 understanding individual Earth system components and the integrated human and Earth system.
102 The latter increasingly requires work spanning the science disciplines, including better
103 integration of social sciences, and access to advanced computer technologies.
104
105 The goals acknowledge that global change research is not a purely academic endeavor.
106 To be useful, scientists must understand the needs of decision makers at all levels in the public
107 and private sectors and clearly and effectively make research results relevant to those decision
108 makers. For example, farmers depend upon information to adjust and manage crops as planting
109 seasons, growing zones, and pest and weed ranges change. Health care providers must prepare
110 for more severe heat waves and outbreaks of diseases previously unknown in their regions.
111 Insurers must account for shifting weather extremes in assessing future financial risk.
112 Inhabitants of coastal cities need to understand the implications of sea level rise, while many
113 regions of the country address changes in the availability of freshwater and increasing energy
114 demands.
115
116 The goals recognize that global change is an international concern affecting many aspects
117 of societies, livelihoods, and the environment. Across the Nation and around the world, people
118 are making decisions to effectively minimize (mitigate) and prepare for (adapt to) global change.
119 The global nature of todays economy, and the speed with which challenges faced in one part of
120 the world can affect others, reinforces the need for a global response based upon the best
121 available science. Vital resources, such as water and food supplies, cross regional and national
122 boundaries, and the effects of global change can disrupt social, economic, and political systems.
123 Understanding global change and our options to minimize and manage the risks of such change
124 is important for U.S. national security and for maintaining regional and global stability, and for
125 long-term economic vitality.
126
127 Providing decision makers with timely and relevant information requires assessing their
128 needs. USGCRP, as part of its mandate to perform regular assessments, will implement a long-
129 term, consistent, and ongoing process for evaluation of global change risks and opportunities,
130 and for informing decision makers across diverse regions and sectors. USGCRP will work to
131 establish a sustained assessment capacity focused on evaluating the current state of scientific
132 knowledge relative to impacts and trends, and on informing the Nations activities in adaptation
133 and mitigation.
134
135 The final goal acknowledges that meaningful engagement with the public is essential. By
136 integrating communication, education, and engagement into core activities over the next decade,
137 USGCRP and its member agencies will serve as an important gateway to credible and
138 authoritative global change information. USGCRP will build capacity to inform citizens of
139 global change science and data through a user-friendly global change information system.
140 USGCRP education efforts will also support the development of a workforce capable of using
141 global change information and addressing global change issues. The Program will place
142 particular emphasis on education that bridges physical, biological, social sciences, and
143 engineering, and the support of educators professional development in USGCRP-related STEM
144 (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) areas.
145
146 This Strategic Plan fulfills Congresss mandate in the Global Change Research Act to
147 develop a program to understand, assess, predict, and respond to global change. It reflects
148 recommendations from multiple reports of the National Academies, from dozens of listening
149 sessions with stakeholders around the country, and from collaborative planning among the
150 USGCRP member agencies. Altogether, the USGCRP envisioned through this Strategic Plan, by
151 connecting fundamental human and Earth system research with the translation and dissemination
152 of credible and authoritative information, harnesses the work of Federal agencies into a
153 coordinated effort for the future benefit of the Nation.
154
155 Box 1. USGCRP Strategic Goals and Objectives.

Goal 1. Advance Science: Advance scientific knowledge of the integrated natural and human components of the
Earth system.
Objective 1.1. Earth System Understanding: Advance fundamental understanding of the physical, chemical,
biological, and human components of the Earth system, and the interactions among and between them, to
improve knowledge of the causes and consequences of global change.
Objective 1.2. Science for Adaptation and Mitigation: Advance understanding of the vulnerability and
resilience of integrated human-natural systems and enhance the usability of scientific knowledge in supporting
responses to global change.
Objective 1.3. Integrated Observations: Advance capabilities to observe the physical, chemical, biological,
and human components of the Earth system over multiple spatial and temporal scales to gain fundamental
scientific understanding and monitor important variations and trends.
Objective 1.4. Integrated Modeling: Improve and develop advanced models that integrate across the
physical, chemical, biological, and human components of the Earth system, including the feedbacks among
and between them, to represent more comprehensively and predict more realistically global change processes.
Objective 1.5. Information Management and Sharing: Advance the capability to collect, store, access,
visualize, and share data and information about the integrated Earth system, the vulnerabilities of integrated
human-natural systems to global change, and the responses to these vulnerabilities.
Goal 2. Inform Decisions: Provide the scientific basis to inform and enable timely decisions on adaptation and
mitigation.
Objective 2.1. Inform Adaptation Decisions: Improve the deployment and accessibility of science to inform
adaptation decisions.
Objective 2.2. Inform Mitigation Decisions: Improve the deployment and accessibility of science to inform
decisions on mitigation and the mitigation-adaptation interface.
Objective 2.3. Enhancing Climate Services: Develop the tools and scientific basis to support an integrated
system of climate services, supported by sustained, relevant, and timely data and information to support
decision making.
Objective 2.4. Enhancing International Partnerships: Provide leadership in international partnerships to
enhance the scientific basis for decision making.
Goal 3. Sustained Assessments: Build sustained assessment capacity that improves the nation's ability to
understand, anticipate, and respond to global change impacts and vulnerabilities.
Objective 3.1. Scientific Integration: Integrate emerging scientific understanding of the integrated Earth
system into assessments and identify critical gaps and limitations in scientific understanding.
Objective 3.2. Ongoing Capacity: Strengthen and evolve ongoing capacity to conduct assessments with
accessible, transparent, and consistent processes and broad participation of stakeholders across regions and
sectors.
Objective 3.3. Inform Responses: Inform responses to global change with accurate, authoritative, and timely
information that is accessible to multiple audiences in multiple formats.
Objective 3.4. Evaluate Progress: Ensure ongoing evaluation of assessment processes and products, and
incorporate the findings into an adaptive response for systemic improvement.
Goal 4. Communicate and Educate: Advance communications and education to broaden public understanding
of global change, and empower the workforce of the future.
Objective 4.1. Strengthen Communicate and Education Research: Strengthen global change
communication and education research to enhance practices.
Objective 4.2. Reach Diverse Audiences: Enhance existing and employ emerging tools and resources to
inform and educate effectively, providing for information flow in multiple directions.
Objective 4.3. Increase Engagement: Establish effective and sustained engagement to enable a responsive
and wholly integrated Program.
Objective 4.4. Cultivate Workforce: Cultivate a capable, diverse workforce that is knowledgeable about global
change.
156 I. INTRODUCTION
157
158 The United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) advances the collective
159 efforts of 13 U.S. government agencies that collaboratively help the Nation better understand
160 global change and its impacts.
161
162 Every day, governments, organizations, and
Text Box 1. From the Global Change
163 individuals make long-term decisions worth billions Research Act of 1990.
164 of dollars that affect many lives. The outcomes of
165 these decisions depend to a large degree on how well Global change means changes in the
global environment (including alterations in
166 these people and groups understand the changes climate, land productivity, oceans or other
167 taking place in the Earth system, and how well they water resources, atmospheric chemistry,
168 can use this knowledge to plan effectively to achieve and ecological systems) that may alter the
capacity of the Earth to sustain life
169 societal benefits. For example, farmers need to adjust 'Global change research' means study,
170 crop management as planting seasons, growing monitoring, assessment, prediction, and
171 zones, and pest and weed ranges change. The defense information management activities to
describe and understand: A. the
172 and intelligence communities need to assess the interactive physical, chemical, and
173 implications of long-term climate change on national biological processes that regulate the total
174 security and the threats that natural hazards pose to Earth system; B. the unique environment
that the Earth provides for life; C. changes
175 military bases. Health care providers must prepare that are occurring in the Earth system; and
176 for more severe heat waves and outbreaks of diseases D. the manner in which such system,
177 previously unknown in their regions. Insurers must environment, and changes are influenced
by human actions.
178 account for shifting weather extremes in assessing
179 future financial risk. Inhabitants of coastal cities need This 20122021 Strategic Plan describes
180 to understand the implications of sea level rise. Many a program that builds from core USGCRP
capabilities in global climate observation,
181 regions of the country need information about process understanding, and modeling to
182 changing freshwater availability and energy demand. strengthen and expand our fundamental
183 scientific understanding of climate change
and its interactions with the other critical
184 The current rate of global change far exceeds drivers of global change, such as land-use
185 anything we have observed and documented in change, alteration of key biogeochemical
186 human history. Society needs new scientific cycles, and biodiversity loss.
187 knowledge of how these unprecedented changes,
188 including accelerating emissions of greenhouse gases, land-use and land cover change,
189 disruption of natural biological and chemical cycles, and associated changes in climate, ocean
190 chemistry, and the distribution of species over the planet, might put individuals and communities
191 at risk. Failure to anticipate and manage these risks threatens our Nations prosperity and
192 security. On the other hand, effective and timely responses to global change can create new
193 opportunities for economic growth while increasing societys resilience to change.
194
195 At the same time as these changes are occurring, there is an increasing demand for
196 Earths resources, including food, fiber, energy, and water. These needs mean greater pressure on
197 the services that natural systems provide and upon which people depend, such as freshwater
198 supply, natural waste recycling, flood control, pollination, and recreation, all of which are
199 stressed today and will be further stressed in the future because of global change. Resource
200 management needs science that can be used to devise environmentally sustainable solutions to
201 these pressures that also promote economic growth and job creation.
202
203 The global nature of todays economy, and the speed with which challenges faced in one
204 part of the world can affect others, reinforces the need for a coordinated response to global
205 change. At the same time, not all countries, communities, and institutions will be equally
206 affected, nor will all be equally ready or able to adapt. Nor will every consequence of global
207 change be detrimental to everyone. To support the many different types of responses to global
208 change needed nationally, regionally, and locally, society requires better understanding of
209 differences in vulnerability among people and places, information about global change and its
210 impacts that is relevant at regional and local scales, and accurate assessments of both risks and
211 opportunities.
212
213 Created by Congress in 1990, and sustained
214 through multiple administrations, the U.S. Global
215 Change Research Program (USGCRP; Figure 1) has
216 been shaped by more than two decades of Federal
217 investment in global change science. During this
218 time, the Federal government and its partners in
219 industry, academia, and state, local, and foreign
220 governments have created and maintained a mix of
221 atmospheric, oceanic, land, and space-based
222 observing systems, gained new theoretical
223 understanding of Earth system processes, developed
224 predictive models, promoted advances in data
225 management and sharing, and developed an expert
226 scientific workforce. These activities have played a
227 critical role in improving scientific understanding of
228 the richness of interconnections and feedbacks in the Earth system, the significant role that
229 human activities play in global climate change, and the current and potential future rate,
230 magnitude, and impacts of this change. Federal research coordinated through USGCRP is the
231 cornerstone of our current understanding of these issues.1
232
233 Now, however, society is placing increasing demands on the scientific community for
234 timely information about global change that can be used directly in planning, management, and
235 policymaking, even with a lack of complete certainty about the future long-term impacts of
236 global change and the consequences of actions taken in response. Drawing on the foundation
237 built over the last 20 years, USGCRP is in an unparalleled position to efficiently and
238 authoritatively deliver the fundamental knowledge about the changing Earth system that decision
239 makers need for the future.
240
241 This 20122021 Strategic Plan describes a program that builds from core USGCRP
242 capabilities in global climate observation, process understanding, and modeling to strengthen and
243 expand our fundamental scientific understanding of climate change and its interactions with the
244 other critical drivers of global change, such as land-use change, alteration of key biogeochemical
245 cycles, and biodiversity loss. It describes a program that, while creating this new scientific
246 knowledge simultaneously focuses on making this knowledge more readily usable in decision
247 making. It describes a program that builds on member agencies strengths in scientific
248 measurement and modeling, while incorporating learning about decision making under
249 uncertainty and improved methods for iterative, risk-based planning. This plan emphasizes
250 greater coordination across the breadth of USGCRP activities, such as more effective
251 collaboration between researchers in the natural and social sciences, increased interagency
252 cooperation to sustain ongoing assessments of global change impacts, and robust dialogues with
253 diverse audiences to enhance communication of scientific knowledge beyond USGCRP.
254
255 The Federal governments role, not just in scientific research, but also in protecting lives,
256 property, and livelihoods, is critical to the development of a program that creates the necessary
257 links between researchers and decision makers to effectively manage global change risks. This
258 new Strategic Plan emphasizes expanding the reach of USGCRP science over the next decade,
259 both leveraging and supporting the full and varied capabilities and missions of its Federal agency
260 members, including building partnerships with agencies, or parts of agencies, that have not been
261 directly involved in USGCRP in the past.
262
263 In what follows, Chapter II provides an overview of the new vision and mission of the
264 Program. Chapter III discusses in detail the goals and objectives that will guide the Programs
265 activities over the next decade. Chapter IV discusses coordination with other nations and
266 international organization. Chapter V outlines key aspects of a strategy for moving forward with
267 implementation of the Plan.
268
269 II. VISION AND MISSION

270
271 USGCRP Vision and Mission
272
273 Vision: "A nation, globally engaged and guided by science, meeting the challenges of
274 climate and global change."
275
276 Mission: "To build a knowledge base that informs human responses to climate and global
277 change through coordinated and integrated federal programs of research, education,
278 communication and decision support."
279
280
281 The Programs vision and mission reflect the challenges of global change and the
282 strengths of the Program and its member agencies. To fulfill its mission and help the Nation
283 achieve the vision, USGCRP is taking an end-to-end approach to global change (see Text .
284 Box 2).
285 Text Box 2: Understanding End-
286 Much of the Programs traditional strengths and to-End.
287 accomplishments are in monitoring and understanding global
288 change and its likely future impacts, which will remain a Solving these problems requires
research on the end-to-end climate
289 priority. Knowledge from these areas is directly relevant to change problem, from
290 societys needs. USGCRP and its member agencies will use understanding causes and
291 these investments and build on the Programs initial efforts in processes to supporting actions
needed to cope with the impending
292 decision support to expand the reach of USGCRP science. societal problems of climate
293 The Program will improve its ability to assess, understand, changeAddressing these issues
294 and integrate stakeholder science needs into its planning, and requires the integration of
disciplinary and multidisciplinary
295 to provide global change assessments and information in research, natural and social
296 ways that are more useful for decision making. These science, basic research and
297 directions reflect the Programs emphasis on developing practical applications.
298 information that is useable and useful. This approach - National Research Council (2009):
299 requires enhanced coordination and integration among the Restructuring Federal Climate
300 agencies and will build on the strong partnerships already in Research to Meet the Challenges of
Climate Change.
301 place. The Program will also strengthen relationships
302 beyond its current membership, to better understand and
303 respond to the science needs of the agencies and their stakeholders, and to increase the use of
304 USGCRP science in the countrys response to global change.
305
306 USGCRP will continue to uphold principles of intellectual rigor, transparency, and
307 traceability. In the goals and objectives of this Plan, the Program outlines some large challenges
308 and difficult scientific questions. In addressing them, the Program will mobilize the best
309 scientific skills of the country. It will use merit review in implementing its priorities and peer
310 review to ensure the quality and accuracy of its products.
311
Figure 2: USGCRP Governance Structure.

USGCRP goals and priorities,
developed here, reflect the Programs
emphasis on working at the interface
between global change and climate change.
They also reflect the needs of the wider
Federal government and help inform its
directions in responding to global change.
The Subcommittee on Global Change
Research, which oversees USGCRP, is part
of the National Science and Technology
Council (Figure 2), and provides
coordination with other parts of that
structure.
312
313 USGCRP member agencies and
314 their grantees will implement the mission.
315 Their investments in activities such as
316 observations and monitoring, information
317 services, research and modeling, assessment, and communication and outreach totaled about $2B
318 in FY 2010. Results from prior USGCRP programs and activities are highlighted throughout this
319 Plan, in call-out boxes and text boxes. Outcomes from these activities are also summarized on a
320 regular basis in the Programs annual report to Congress, Our Changing Planet, along with the
321 investments made by member agencies. USGCRP priorities also nucleate cooperative efforts by
322 state and local governments, the academic community, and industry.
323
324 Cooperative activities are coordinated through the Subcommittee on Global Change
325 Research, a National Coordination Office, and interagency working groups. These Program
326 functions bring agencies together to plan and co-develop coordinated activities, implement joint
327 activities, and identify and fill gaps. They allow officials to communicate with each other on
328 emerging directions within their agencies, on their stakeholder needs, and on best practices
329 learned from agency activities. Together, these functions allow the agencies to work in a more
330 effective manner. The Program will draw from and leverage agency strengths in achieving the
331 collective USGCRP Strategic Plan goals and objectives.
332
333 USGCRP's stakeholders are critical to its success as a program. The Program and its
334 member agencies interact with a wide variety of groups around the worldfrom international,
335 national, state, tribal, and local governments, to businesses, nonprofit organizations, the scientific
336 community, and the public. Each contributes to USGCRP's ability to carry out its
337 mission. Through multidirectional dialogue with the agencies, stakeholders communicate their
338 information needs to the Program, helping to shape Program directions and priorities and
339 collectively advance the understanding of global change. In turn, USGCRP strengthens its
340 ability to better communicate global change information to stakeholders to advance their ability
341 to make informed decisions about the changes they face.
342
343
344
345 Framework for the New USGCRP

346
347 The USGCRP Strategic Plan identifies four main goals that frame the Programs vision
348 and help carry out its mission:
349
350 Goal 1. Advance Science: Advance scientific knowledge of the integrated natural and
351 human components of the Earth system. This goal identifies the research, including integrated
352 observations and modeling, that is necessary to better understand the behavior and interaction of
353 human and Earth systems and their response to global change. The Program will increasingly
354 emphasize integrated physical, biological, and social science research, and developing reliable
355 knowledge of the causes and consequences of global change at regional and global scales.
356 USGCRPs strong research tradition provides the foundation for the entire Program.
357
358 Goal 2. Inform Decisions: Provide the scientific basis to inform and enable timely decisions
359 on adaptation and mitigation. USGCRP member and cooperating agencies will emphasize
360 translating research (from Goal 1) into formats and results that are policy relevant, useable, and
361 accessible to decision makers. The Program and its member agencies are also expanding their
362 ability to provide global change information, tools, and services the public and private sectors
363 need to make decisions.
364
365 Goal 3. Sustained Assessments: Build sustained assessment capacity that improves the
366 nations ability to understand, anticipate, and respond to global change impacts and
367 vulnerabilities. USGCRP will conduct and participate in national and international assessments
368 to evaluate current and likely future scenarios of global change and their impacts, as well as how
369 effectively science is being used to support the countrys response to change. It will also build a
370 standing capacity to conduct national assessments and support those at regional levels. Together,
371 Goals 2 and 3 will evaluate progress in responding to change and identify science and
372 stakeholder needs for further progress. The Program will use this regular assessment to inform
373 its priorities.
374
375 Goal 4. Communicate and Educate: Advance communications and education to broaden
376 public understanding of global change, and empower the workforce of the future. As a
377 trusted provider of accurate information on global change, USGCRP will use its research results
378 to communicate with and educate stakeholders in ways that are relevant to their lives and needs.
379 The Program and its member agencies will adopt, develop, and share best practices in
380 communication that enhance stakeholder engagement. Educational efforts will support
381 development of a scientific and general workforce able to use global change knowledge in their
382 lives and careers. They will also help build global change literacy among the general public.
383
384 Unifying Ideas
385
386 The four USGCRP goals and objectives provide a framework for an integrated program.
387 For example, the need to understand Earth and human systems and their connections underlies
388 all four goals. Other ideas that connect the plans goals and objectives include:
389
390 Nesting Global and Regional Scales. A unifying idea of this Strategic Plan is to acquire and use
391 scientific knowledge about global change to make planning, management, and policy decisions
392 at national, regional, and local scales. Improvements in global models, and in robust downscaling
393 from global to regional scale models, are necessary for this step. The Program will coordinate
394 research in regions where the effects of global change will be most acutely felt, for example,
395 agricultural, urban, and coastal areas. Furthermore, the Program will develop additional capacity
396 for modeling Earths climate system on seasonal, annual, and decadal scales relevant for regional
397 planning. Models will address extremes, thresholds, and tipping points, in addition to gradual
398 changes in the mean.
399
400 Developing Science for Adaptation and Mitigation. USGCRP conducts research and related
401 activities that help manage risks and inform decisions on adaptation to, and mitigation of, global
402 change. USGCRP will address critical science gaps in support of adaptation, improve the
403 accessibility of existing science for decision makers, and advance understanding of the process
404 of adaptation itself. In cooperation with other parts of the Federal government, USGCRP
405 contributes to the countrys larger sustainability framework.
406
407 Incorporating Social and Behavioral Sciences. This Plan highlights the importance of
408 integrating the natural, social, and behavioral sciences, which is critical to understanding how
409 humans drive and respond to global change. For example, contributions from social and
410 behavioral sciences are essential to managing risks, understanding decisions, and formulating
411 policy options in the face of imperfect information. Harnessing the benefit of such integration
412 will require attention to the observational and information management needs in the
413 environmental social sciences. Such attention would focus on opportunities where USGCRP can
414 add value to existing capabilities and, looking longer term, to where new social and behavioral
415 data would need to be collected. This Plan also notes the workforce challenges and opportunities
416 in better incorporating social scientists into the Program.
417
418 Supporting Responses to Global Change via Iterative Risk Management. USGCRP has an
419 important role to play in iterative risk management, which refers to an adaptive process of
420 identifying risks and response options to global change, advancing a portfolio of actions that
421 emphasize risk reduction across a range of likely future conditions, and revising responses to
422 reflect new knowledge. In particular, USGCRP will support research and development to provide
423 the knowledge needed to improve response options. As options are selected and implemented,
424 the Program will assess progress being made through the countrys response efforts and the
425 science needed to support further progress. Global change reflects the complex interactions of
426 multiple stresses on the Earth system, including climate change; the scientific expertise
427 mobilized by USGRCP will develop the knowledge necessary to prepare and evaluate responses
428 to change, and to evaluate their consequences, both intended and unintended.
429
430 Cross-Linking Activities
431
432 In addition to ideas that link the goals and objectives of this Plan, there are activities that
433 simultaneously benefit multiple goals. The topics below are discussed under specific objectives
434 in Chapter III, but here we briefly highlight their connectivity across goals.
435
436 Enhance Information Management and Sharing. Creating and sharing knowledge, data, and
437 projections of likely future conditions is essential to researchers, resource managers, decision
438 makers, educators, and the general public. The Program will leverage information tools, services,
439 and portals from its member agencies to develop a global change information system, a one-
440 stop shop for accessing global change data and information (see Text Box 8). Through its
441 members, the Program will also develop a virtual environment for collaboration between
442 researchers and educators providing enhanced capabilities in areas such as data assimilation,
443 community models, and visualization.
444
445 Enable a High Capability for Integrated Observations and Modeling. Integrative modeling
446 and observations are essential approaches for USGCRP. Observations test and improve the
447 ability of models to represent reality. Models integrate knowledge and identify gaps in
448 observations and insight. Together, they provide the scaffolding needed to develop scenarios of
449 likely future conditions and characterize their uncertainties, understand changes over time, and
450 investigate the likely consequences of action (and inaction) in responding to global change.
451 Over the next decade, USGCRP member agencies will work to sustain essential observations, fill
452 critical observational gaps in key regions and disciplines (including biological and societal) and
453 improve data quality where necessary to improve model predictability and reduce uncertainties.
454 USGCRP will also improve the capacity to rigorously model global change on regional scales,
455 reduce model uncertainties, and integrate the social, ecological, and physical aspects of global
456 change.
457
458 Box 2. Department of Defense and the Use of Climate Change Science.
459
460 USGCRP-produced material was cited in the 2010
461 Quadrennial Defense Review as a primary source of
462 information on expected climate change that would
463 affect the Department of Defense by shaping its
464 operating environment, roles, and missions and
465 requiring it to consider taking early action to prepare
466 effective responses to these challenges in the near
467 term and in the future. In addition, assessments
468 conducted by the intelligence community indicate that
469 climate change could have significant geopolitical
470 impacts around the world by contributing to poverty,
471 environmental degradation, and the further
472 weakening of fragile governments. Although climate
473 change alone does not cause conflict, it may act as
474 an accelerant of instability or conflict and place a
475 burden to respond on civilian institutions and
476 militaries around the world. The intelligence
477 community also judged that more than 30 U.S. Figure B2-1. To increase coordination for a more coherent
478 military installations were already facing elevated and coordinated picture of the Arctic, the Navy and USCG
479 levels of risk from rising sea levels. Finally, extreme
participate in Arctic Domain Awareness flights that take
place every two weeks from mid-spring to mid-fall. The
480 weather events may lead to increased demands for flights collect scientific information on CO2 and methane in
481 defense support to civil authorities for humanitarian the atmosphere, as well as monitor maritime traffic in the
482 assistance or disaster response both within the U.S. Arctic maritime environment. (Photo taken 23 Sept,
483 United States and overseas. 2010 from loading ramp of a USCG C-130 over the Beaufort
484 Sea. Credit CDR B. McBride)
485
486
487
488 Increase Proactive Engagement and Partnerships. To maximize the benefit of USGCRP, the
489 Program will strengthen its partnerships across multiple levels of government, including
490 engaging a broader cross section within USGCRP agencies and with agencies currently outside
491 of USGCRP where division and agency missions directly depend on Program activities.
492 USGCRP will also build appropriate relationships with private foundations, nongovernmental
493 organizations, and business sectors to inform USGCRP planning, and extend the reach and utility
494 of its research and services. The Program will establish a framework that successfully engenders
495 effective multi-way dialogue with policy- and decision makers in both public and private sectors.
496
497 Leverage International Leadership. In the Global Change Research Act, Congress recognized
498 the importance of international cooperation to global change research and mandated a role for
499 USGCRP. The Program engages in international cooperation because it enhances and
500 complements the strengths, interests, and needs of USGCRP and its partner agencies. The
501 challenges and opportunities that USGCRP faces are global in scope and are larger than what the
502 United States can achieve on its own. International engagement is important in all fields of
503 science, but it is indispensable for the science of USGCRP. Global observing systems are
504 essential to global change research and require international partnerships. Field-based
505 campaigns often require international partnership. USGCRP works with sister interagency
506 entities such as the U.S. Group on Earth Observations and the Interagency Working Group on
507 Digital Data which help set the standards and coordination of earth observation data in a long-
508 term, durable, and usable fashion. U.S. and international efforts together provide the information
509 and capabilities needed by scientists and institutions in developing countries as they respond to
510 global change. More detailed information about coordinating USGCRP global change research
511 activities with other nations and international organizations is provided at the end of Chapter IV.
512
513 Support the Workforce for the Future. The military, various business sectors, and all levels of
514 government are increasingly making decisions that take global change into account. In addition,
515 the Nation is developing new strategies for adapting to change or limiting its magnitude and
516 effects. These directions create opportunities for developing new skilled jobs in America, for
517 enhancing workforce diversity, and for increasing literacy about global change. Research to
518 support adaptation strategies, its translation for decision makers, and assessment of its
519 effectiveness are all areas requiring specialized skills and a trained workforce. USGCRP
520 agencies will use their relationships with academia to help promote the interdisciplinary
521 education at undergraduate and graduate levels needed for a professional and technical
522 workforce in areas directly related to global change, and for a general workforce that needs to
523 use such knowledge in areas such as insurance, agriculture, health care, and water management.
524
525 The next chapter provides a detailed look at the four goals and their objectives. It outlines
526 key areas of research and new capabilities for over the next decade to support the countrys
527 response to global change. Chapter IV discusses USGCRP coordination with other nations and
528 international organizations. Chapter V outlines guidelines the Program will use in implementing
529 these priorities over the next ten years.
530
531 III. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

532
533 Goal 1: Advance Science
534
535 Advance scientific knowledge of the integrated natural and human components of the
536 Earth system.
537
538 Scientific knowledge of the integrated Earth system is the foundation for responding
539 effectively to global change. In the next decade, USGCRP and its member agencies will
540 advance fundamental, use-inspired research (see Text Box 3) that contributes to improved
541 understanding and effective decision making. To serve society in meeting present and future
542 challenges, this research program will be built on two principles: improving fundamental
543 scientific understanding of the integrated natural and human components of the Earth system,
544 and focusing on the essential science needs for increasing ecological and societal resilience to
545 global change and reducing vulnerability through well-informed responses.
Text Box 3: Fundamental, Use-Inspired Research. Integration is the key to

achieving this goal. This chapter defines
Climate change research should focus on fundamental, use-
inspired research. This report recognizes the need for
a research program for USGCRP that
scientific research to both improve understanding of climate acknowledges the complexity and end-
changes and assist in decision making related to climate to-end nature of the global change
change. In categorizing these types of scientific research, we
found that terms such as pure, basic, applied, and
challenge (see Text Box 2). It will thus
curiosity driven have different definitions across be integrative in multiple senses: across
communities, are as likely to cause confusion as to advance the components of the Earth system
consensus, and are of limited value in discussing climate
change. More compelling, however, is the categorization
(including people), across observations
offered by Stokes (1997), who argues that two questions and modeling, across space and time,
should be asked of a research topic: Does it contribute to across scientific disciplines, across
fundamental understanding? Can it be expected to be
useful? Research that can answer yes to both of these
domestic and international partnerships,
questions, or fundamental, use-inspired research, warrants and across the capabilities of science and
special priority in the realm of climate change research. the needs of stakeholders.
National Research Council (2010): Americas Climate
Choices: Advancing the Science of Climate Change USGCRP will accomplish Goal 1
through pursuit of five objectives:
546 Objective 1.1 (Earth System Understanding): Advance fundamental understanding of the
547 physical, chemical, biological, and human components of the Earth system, and the interactions
548 among and between them, to improve knowledge of the causes and consequences of global
549 change.
550
551 Objective 1.2 (Science for Adaptation and Mitigation): Advance understanding of the
552 vulnerability and resilience of integrated human-natural systems and enhance the usability of
553 scientific knowledge in supporting responses to global change.
554
555 Objective 1.3 (Integrated Observations): Advance capabilities to observe the physical,
556 chemical, biological, and human components of the Earth system over multiple spatial and
557 temporal scales to gain fundamental scientific understanding and monitor important variations
558 and trends.
559
560 Objective 1.4 (Integrated Modeling): Improve and develop advanced models that integrate
561 across the physical, chemical, biological, and human components of the Earth system, including
562 the feedbacks among and between them, to represent more comprehensively and predict more
563 realistically global change processes.
564
565 Objective 1.5 (Information Management and Sharing): Advance the capability to collect,
566 store, access, visualize, and share data and information about the integrated Earth system, the
567 vulnerabilities of integrated human-natural systems to global change, and the responses to these
568 vulnerabilities.
569
570 Although each of these five objectives are defined distinctly and discussed separately in
571 this chapter, they describe one integrated body of knowledge and practice. The deeper
572 understanding that is the aim of Objectives 1.1 and 1.2 will only be achieved by integrating
573 observations of all essential Earth system components and processes (Objective 1.3). Such
574 integration is essential for developing theories and explanations of the causes and consequences
575 of global change, for monitoring the effectiveness of responses, and then capturing and testing
576 these theoretical advances in integrated modeling systems (Objective 1.4). Success in these first
577 four objectives will build on future advances in information management and data sharing
578 (Objective 1.5).
579
580 Objective 1.1: Earth System Understanding
581
582 Advance fundamental understanding of the physical, chemical, biological, and human
583 components of the Earth system, and the interactions among and between them, to improve
584 knowledge of the causes and consequences of global change
585
586 USGCRP research has been foundational for our understanding of key of aspects global
587 change. Over the past two decades, advances in knowledge of individual components of the
588 Earth system and their interactions and feedbacks have led to a growing appreciation for the
589 complexity and interconnectedness of these components, the significant role that human
590 activities play in global climate change, the importance of land-use and land cover change as
591 both a driver of and co-stressor with climate change, and the current and potential future rate,
592 magnitude, and impacts of further change. Building on this history of success, the Program faces
593 the challenge of developing the knowledge base required to help society respond to global
594 change.
595
596 The cornerstone of this knowledge base is the research that will be conducted under the
597 auspices of USGCRP to continue deepening our understanding of individual natural and human
598 Earth system components and processes, and address the many critical research gaps that remain
599 there, while simultaneously promoting greater scientific progress in the following areas:
600
601 The interactions and degree of interconnectedness among and between these natural and
602 human Earth system components and processes and the interplay between climate change
603 and other dimensions of global change;
604 The coupling of different spatial and temporal scales;
605 The complex behaviors that emerge from these component and scale interactions.
606
607 There is a workforce dimension to the exploration of these integrated research questions
608 that will be an important part of the Programs effort over the next decade. As discussed
609 elsewhere in this Plan, the Program, through its integrative activities, will foster the development
610 of researchers comfortable working across disciplines and scales and dealing with Earth system
611 complexity so as to deliver the fundamental and use-inspired science base to support well-
612 informed responses to global change.
613
614 Interconnected Components and Processes
615
616 The seemingly disparate elements of Earth system science (see Table 1) are in reality all
617 connected across multiple dimensions and via multiple pathways. Similarly, global change has
618 multiple linked and nested dimensions, including land-use and land-cover change; modification
619 of the carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous, and sulfur cycles; pollution, loss of biodiversity and
620 ecosystem functions and services; alteration of hydrologic systems; and human population
621 dynamics, including growth, migration, and demographic shifts. To advance scientific
622 understanding of the changing Earth system, USGCRP and its member agencies should consider
623 all of these elements and their interdependencies.
624
625 As we move into the next phase of global change research, some of the most important
626 and challenging areas of study will be located at the dynamic interfaces between components and
627 processesthe ways in which one part of the Earth system influences the others. There are
628 critical scientific issues that USGCRP and its member agencies cannot address comprehensively
629 without adopting this systems perspective, such as the interaction between climate change and
630 the other major drivers of global change described above, the impacts of global change on all
631 aspects of biology (molecular and cellular, genetics and genomics, organismal and
632 developmental, and population, community, and ecosystem ecology), and how human behavior
633 at multiple scales, including responses to global change, feeds back to influence the rate and
634 nature of the change. USGCRP will coordinate disciplinary and interdisciplinary research
635 activities to foster integrated research into the links between climate change and land-use change,
636 ecosystem processes, the water cycle, and key biogeochemical cycles, as well as the dynamical
637 interactions among atmosphere, ocean, land, ice, and biosphere.
638
639 In the next decade, USGCRP will confront the challenge of integrating of the social and
640 behavioral sciences with the physical, chemical, and biological sciences, in large part by
641 fostering enhanced collaboration between natural and social scientists. Meeting this challenge
642 will be difficult given the limited engagement of the social sciences in global change research to
643 date, but it is a crucial step for achieving a deeper understanding of the vulnerabilities and
644 responses to global change. Population dynamics, natural resource consumption, and economic
645 development underlie the human drivers of change, while mitigation and adaptation activities
646 will interact with the Earth system in complex ways.
Table 1. Major components of global change in the Earth system (intended to be illustrative rather than
comprehensive). Equally crucial are the interactions among components.
Climate variability and change: Alteration of ecosystem structure and processes and
Natural climate variability, including multiple land-use change:
space and time scales, deep-time events. Urban systems and the built environment.
Aerosols and their radiative effects on the climate Development and urban encroachment.
system. Sustainability of agricultural ecosystems.
Cloud and aerosol processes and cloud-aerosol Fisheries dynamics and management strategies.
interactions. Tradeoffs between energy and food security.
Climate change impacts on ocean-atmosphere Ecosystem sensitivity and resiliency.
modes of variability. Genomic resources of terrestrial and aquatic
Ocean dynamics and sea-level rise, including ecosystems.
regional variability. Biodiversity, ecosystem resilience, and impacts of
Climate-change effects on the hydrologic cycle, biological extinctions on ecosystem functions and
especially extreme events (storms, droughts, services.
floods). Economic value of ecosystem goods and services.
Changes in temperature extremes. Conservation priorities for species and ecosystems.
Cryospheric dynamics: ice sheets, sea ice, Species abundance, range change, and invasive
permafrost. species.
Feedbacks and abrupt change.
Demographic and socioeconomic trends in human Human outcomes and actions in response to global
society that drive global change: change:
How human cognitions, structures, and actions Vulnerability (exposure, sensitivity, adaptive capacity)
interact with global change over spatial, temporal, of human and natural systems.
and organizational scales. Management options that effectively reduce
Population growth and migration. greenhouse gas emissions and/or climate-change
Technological change. impacts.
Human consumption and production patterns. Human health and vulnerable populations.
Socio-political changes. Decision making under uncertainty.
Public understanding of global change, risk Compensatory reactions to mitigation and adaptation.
perception, and communication of risk. Assessment of mitigation and adaptation options.
Alteration of biogeochemical cycles: Alteration of hydrologic systems:

Ocean acidification. Groundwater resources, depletion, and pollution
Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous cycles; Water supply, quality, and security.
sources and sinks. Infrastructure changes (irrigation, water extraction,
Trace element cycles (e.g., iron, mercury, interbasin transfer, stormwater management, flood
cadmium). control).
Changing atmospheric composition. Changing recurrence probabilities for extreme
Nutrient imbalances, biogeochemical cycle events.
interactions, and limitation. Coastal wetlands.
Global resource extraction.
647 Integrated natural and social science is also central to achieving the other goals of the
648 Program. The cognitive and social basis for decision making governs societal responses to global
649 change, and these actions occur within, and are constrained by, institutions, social networks, and
650 economic and political contexts. These institutions, social networks, and contexts, in turn,
651 interact with public understanding of science and risk perception and communication.
652 Simultaneously, advances in technology have the power to transform public engagement with
653 science and harness public participation in research. All of these issues will emerge as crucial for
654 USGCRP over the next 10 years and necessitate a coordinated response from the Program and its
655 member agencies. The Program will meet this challenge in part by seeking innovative
656 approaches for fostering enhanced collaboration between natural and social scientists.
Box 3. Species Ranges Shift in Response to Global Change.
When the outside temperature gets too cold or too hot,

humans can add or shed clothing, insulate their houses,
and change thermostat settings. Other species do not
have those options. Many plant and animal species have
shifted their habitats poleward and upward in elevation in
response to recent climate changes. A major concern
with such changes in geographic range is that species
may no longer be located with the resources essential to
flourish and to provide an ecosystem service. For
example, particular species of birds and butterflies
needed for agricultural pollination in a particular region
might no longer be around. In addition, as the ranges of
species that carry human diseases change, disease risks
to humans may shift and increase as well.
As global change drives changes in species ranges,

entire ecosystems will not remain intact. Each species
will shift according to its sensitivity to climate change, its
mobility, its lifespan, and the availability of essential
resources. It will also depend on whether its migratory
pathways are blocked by development and habitat
fragmentation. In general, many existing ecosystems will
be broken up and new ones formed, with uncertain
Figure B3-1: Global change is also resulting in consequences.
major changes in the types of forests that will be
most prevalent in different regions of the United USGCRP research is addressing the need for improved
States. Some common forests types are expected understanding of the rates and consequences of shifts in
to expand, such as oak-hickory, while others, like species ranges through new, more comprehensive on-
maple-beech-birch, are expected to contract, or the-ground observations. By bringing together multiple
eventually even disappear from the United States data sources of species occurrence (collected by
altogether, like spruce-fir. A number of industries, scientists, local and national governments, and citizen
such as the maple sugar and tourism sectors in the scientists), and incorporating this data into models of
Northeast, would be strongly impacted by these ecosystem and climate functioning, we can help predict
shifts. important shifts for agriculture and forestry, assist in the
strengthening of protected areas, and more ably respond
to outbreaks of invasive alien species.
657 Multiple Spatial and Temporal Scales

658
659 While global change can mean change at the scale of the entire Earth system, it can also
660 mean the collection of local changes happening in many places around the world. In aggregate,
661 these local changes can have global consequences. However, on the local level, the impacts of
662 long-term global change will often be indirect, felt through complex interactions with extreme
663 events as well as through the natural modes of interannual and interdecadal climatological
664 variability (see Text Box 4).
665
666 USGCRP and its member agencies, in collaboration with its international partners, will
667 foster greater scientific progress on fundamental science questions related to the effects of Earth
668 system processes and behaviors at one scale on those at another, the potential for processes in
669 one place to affect other regions around the world, and the implications of these scale
670 interactions for our understanding of, and responses to, global change.
671
Addressing this challenge calls for a focus

on finer spatial and temporal resolution to link,
Text Box 4: Natural Climate Variations and
Long-Term Climate Change. for example, climate system processes with the
dynamics of ecosystems and human communities.
Earths climate varies naturally on time scales of a It will also take integrating the aggregate effects
year, to a decade or more, as a result of complex
interactions between the atmosphere and the of small-scale, short-term processes and
ocean. The best-known example is the El Nio- behaviors (both human and natural) into our
Southern Oscillation, which causes significant understanding of the global system. And it will
year-to-year variations in temperature and rainfall
in many different regions around the world, notably entail a focus, not just on long-term averages, but
the western United States. Other similar on the effects of global change on extremes and
phenomena, such as the Pacific Decadal patterns of variability which have important
Oscillation, the Northern and Southern Annular
Modes, the North Atlantic Oscillation, and the impacts on society.
Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, have similarly
important regional impacts on agriculture, fisheries, Complexity and Emergent Behavior
transportation, and energy supply and demand.
For example, the exceptionally cold temperatures
and heavy snowfall in the U.S. Northeast during Understanding global change is difficult
winter 20092010 (while, across the continent, the because the Earth system is complex, with
winter Olympics in Vancouver was simultaneously behavior that emerges as a result of many
experiencing a snow shortage) were in part due to
a strong North Atlantic Oscillation. Understanding interactions on multiple scales among the
how these natural oscillations control year-to-year atmosphere, ocean, ice sheets, the land surface,
and decade-to-decade variations in regional and all life on the planet. People add to this
climate worldwide, and how they may change in
the future as a result of climate change, is complexity because they are a part of the Earth
important for informing adaptation planning in system, yet play a unique role in it. They not only
agriculture, water resources, disaster influence, and are influenced by, Earth system
management, and many other sectors.
changes, but they can consciously choose how to
respond to these changes while considering and
observing the implications of their response.
672
673 The multiplicity of interconnections among different Earth system components, and
674 among processes occurring at different scales, can lead to changes that are difficult to observe,
675 measure, monitor, or model as they are starting to occur. Thus, anticipating these changes and
676 responding effectively are more challenging. Some system-wide changes can appear relatively
677 slowly, on pace with changes in interacting components, such as land-use change associated with
678 population growth. Some, however, can emerge abruptly, without prior warning. Such behavior
679 results when conditions exceed a critical threshold in environmental stabilitya tipping point
680 thereby leading to a major alteration of the system in a short period of time.
681
682 There is clear evidence that Earths climate is capable of very rapid change, with
683 cascading effects through natural systems documented in the records of ancient ice cores, tree
684 rings, and lake and ocean sediments.2 Over the past hundreds of thousands of years, Earth has
685 repeatedly flipped between deep periods of glaciation and relatively ice-free states, with
686 transitions sometimes occurring over periods as short as a decade. Even over the last 10,000
687 years of ice sheet stability, severe droughts and other regional climate events have occurred
688 frequently, driven by oscillations in the atmosphere-ocean system, some characterized by abrupt
689 onset and sustained duration, and often with deleterious effects on human settlements and
690 civilizations.
691
692 What makes the global changes happening in the 21st century uniquely significant are
693 both their rapidity and potential magnitude on a planet now populated by billions of people.
694 Research on the properties of complex systems suggests that large, abrupt change in the Earth
695 system will become increasingly likely with increasing disturbance. We may approach new and
696 as yet unidentified tipping points in Earths biological systems, in the biogeochemical cycles that
697 help regulate the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, in ocean circulation
698 patterns, and in ice sheet stability. Such changes could occur so rapidly that they would
699 challenge the ability of human and natural systems to adapt.3 Our current scientific
700 understanding must be improved significantly before these risks can be meaningfully assessed so
701 as to support decision making about appropriate responses, as will be discussed below under
702 Objective 1.2.
703
704 In response to this need, USGCRP will place a high priority on research into the rates,
705 processes, mechanisms, and consequences of a changing Earth and the complex, nonlinear
706 climate, ecological, and social system dynamics leading to abrupt changes, thresholds, and
707 tipping points. Understanding of past changes gained from studying the paleoclimatic record, and
708 integration of paleoclimate proxies with Earth system modeling efforts, will play an important
709 role in this research. Simultaneously, the Program will foster advances in understanding of
710 potential unintended consequences of actions taken in response to change, such as adaptation and
711 mitigation efforts. A focus on these issues will be essential for managing the risks of global
712 change and developing well-informed responses.
713
Box 4. Ocean Acidification.
Food from the ocean is the primary source of protein for more than a billion people worldwide. Many jobs and
economies in the United States and around the world depend on sustaining healthy fisheries. This task, already
difficult in a world with a rapidly growing population, is made more complicated because of changes to the ocean
resulting from fossil fuel combustion and the release of large additional amounts of carbon dioxide into the
atmosphere. The ocean absorbs a large fraction of this excess carbon dioxide, gradually increasing the acidity of its
waters. If carbon dioxide emissions continue to grow at the present rate, it is estimated that by the end of this
century, the oceans surface waters will be about 150% more acidic than they were at the beginning of the Industrial
Revolution in the mid-1800s. The magnitude of ocean acidification was recognized only recently, and its
consequences are poorly known. Scientists estimate that this ocean acidity level would be the highest in more than
20 million years.
This increased acidity is affecting marine species to varying degrees. Currently, ocean acidification is affecting the
growth and lifespan of carbonate shell-forming organisms such as many plankton, mollusks, crustaceans, and
urchins. In addition, ocean acidification can affect these organisms in other ways, including shifting species
distributions, reducing biodiversity, and increasing susceptibility to other stressors. Because these organisms form
the base of the oceans food web, these changes may negatively impact fisheries worldwide.
USGCRP and its member agencies are developing

and deploying new ways to monitor ocean
acidification, using both space-based and in-place
approaches. They are also supporting new research
programs to understand the effects of ocean
acidification -for example, on key organisms in the
marine food web and the ecosystems they support,
its effect on coral reefs, and the extent to which
species can acclimate and adapt to ocean
acidification.
Figure B4.1. The coccolithophore Calcidiscus leptoporus grown under pCO2 levels representing present (380
ppm, left) and future (780 ppm, right) conditions. Photo credit: Ulf Riebesell, IFM-GEOMAR.
714 Objective 1.2: Science for Adaptation and Mitigation

715
716 Advance understanding of the vulnerability and resilience of integrated human-natural systems
717 and enhance the usability of scientific knowledge in supporting responses to global change
718
719 The strategy for advancing USGCRP science in the next decade has a dual aim. The first,
720 as discussed under Objective 1.1, is to achieve a deeper, more fundamental understanding of the
721 integrated Earth systemits physical, chemical, biological, and human components and the
722 richness of behaviors that result from their interaction. The second, discussed in this objective, is
723 to advance use-inspired science to assess vulnerabilities to global change, understand the societal
724 and ecological characteristics that confer resilience in the face of these changes, and, in
725 responding to change, make progress toward sustainability. In this context, use-inspired refers
726 to science that is driven by a need to improve fundamental understanding in areas important to
727 people and society. The knowledge and insights emerging from this use-inspired research should
728 then be applied toward the evaluation of options to reduce the risks of global change. To
729 accomplish this objective, the Program will leverage and support the varied capabilities and
730 missions of its Federal agency members, as well as engage more deeply with other communities
731 well versed in vulnerability and risk management, leveraging expertise from disaster
732 management, public health, and national defense.
733
734 This objective, of advancing the science essential to understand and manage the risks of
735 global change, is embedded within the broader concept of sustainability, which considers how to
736 meet societys current needs without compromising those of future generations and the Earths
737 essential life support systems. USGCRP research relates to sustainability in two specific ways:
738 first, because of the significant overlap between the knowledge base and practices of sustainable
739 environmental and natural resource management and the knowledge base and practices expected
740 to be useful for adaptation and mitigation; second, because of the potential for sustainability co-
741 benefits of well-chosen adaptation and mitigation strategies.
742
743 The concept of vulnerability, referring to the degree to which a system is susceptible to,
744 and unable to cope with, adverse impacts of global change, along with its sub-concepts of
745 exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity, provides a major thread linking science, society, and
746 decision making about responses to global change.4 It helps focus scientific research around key
747 societal concerns and provides a framework for identifying the sectors, regions, resources, and
748 populations that are most at risk from the impacts of global change. As such, it helps provide the
749 foundation for strategically prioritizing basic research foci to address these concerns and respond
750 to these risks.
751
752 Systematically identifying and characterizing the most urgent vulnerabilities and the
753 biggest risks we face from global change, so as to respond effectively and sustainably, is a grand
754 societal challenge. Scientific discovery and societal concern have complementary roles: science
755 identifies emerging problems (e.g., the ozone hole or human-caused climate change), analyzes
756 the feasibility of response options and proposes new options, and monitors to track progress;
757 society communicates its requirements and the values that guide where and how urgently to
758 respond and the preferred set of responses; both evolve together in a collaborative dialogue.
759
760 In the next decade, USGCRP and its member agencies will embody this multiway
761 dialogue, in part by providing the scientific foundation for integrated vulnerability assessments
762 in the areas of greatest societal need. These activities will harness emerging understanding of
763 global change, as guided by the strategic priorities of the decision makers and stakeholders the
764 Program will engage with through new decision support and public outreach efforts.
765
766
767
768 Box 5. Sea Level Rise and Coastal Vulnerability.
769
770 Sea level rise directly affects the millions of people worldwide
771 that live in coastal regions. In addition to flooding homes, sea
772 level rise can increase coastal erosion, degrade wetlands, and
773 make surface and ground waters salty and unusable as
774 drinking water. We know from scientific measurements that
775 sea level has been rising steadily over the past few decades
776 (see Figure B5.2.). This rise is due primarily to expansion of
777 the ocean as it warms and melting of land ice (glaciers and ice
778 sheets), with each of these factors making a roughly equal
779 contribution to the current rate of sea level rise. As global
780 temperatures continue to increase, scientists expect that
781 melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheetswhich hold
782 an additional 64 meters (210 feet) of sea levelwill
783 accelerate, becoming the largest contributor to sea level rise. Figure B5.1. Low bay sides of barrier islands are
784 vulnerable to even a modest storm surge. Rising
785 Protecting vulnerable coastal communities from sea level rise sea levels are projected to increase the
786 in the years ahead calls for a better understanding of the frequency and severity of damaging storm surges
787 processes that influence sea level. This information can then and flooding. Ship Bottom, New Jersey. Photo
788 be used to improve models that project the rates and patterns credit: Jim Titus.
789 of sea level rise under a range of global change scenarios. The
790 measured rate of global sea level rise over the past 20
791 years has been higher than that simulated by the models
792 used in the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
793 Change assessment, primarily because the current
794 generation of models are unable to fully capture the
795 processes that determine the melting of the Greenland and
796 Antarctic ice sheets.
797
798 Over the next decade, USGCRP and its member agencies
799 will help advance the models scientists and planners use to
800 project future sea level rise and coordinate research efforts
801 to improve scientific understanding of natural fluctuations in
802 sea level and the mechanisms and rates by which ice
803 sheets melt. The Program will also focus on linking
804 improved scientific understanding and modeling capability
805 with a greater understanding of additional influential factors,
806 including the social, economic, and ecosystem dynamics of Figure B5.2: Global mean sea level time series:
807 coastal areas to better support decision making about Documentation of this global change trend has
808 adapting to the consequences of rising sea levels. been possible through a sustained commitment
809 within USGCRP to maintaining strong satellite
observing systems and through robust
810 partnerships among USGCRP member agencies
811 and international partners.
812 (http://sealevel.colorado.edu/content/2011rel2-
813 global-mean-sea-level-time-series-seasonal-
814 signals-removed).
815
816
817
818 Understanding Vulnerability to Global Change

819
820 USGCRP and its member agencies will create a knowledge base and evaluation
821 capability for identifying critical global change vulnerabilities across a continuum of scales: from
822 global, long-term threats to the stability of the whole Earth system to regional, near-term threats
823 to particular ecosystems, human communities and populations, and socioeconomic sectors.
824 Understanding the magnitude and rate of change, the entities impacted, and how their responses
825 to change feed back into the Earth system, are vital research requisites that span this continuum.
826
827 The interdependence of Earth system components and processes, as described above
828 under Objective 1.1, dictates that such evaluation and assessment will be most effective when
829 they focus on the larger system within which a particular ecosystem, human community, or
830 socioeconomic sector is embedded, rather than on a single system in isolation. In this context,
831 assessment of coupled human-environment systems, such as urban and agricultural systems, will
832 be a major focus in the next decade. For example, water supply systems use large amounts of
833 energy (e.g., for treatment and delivery), while, simultaneously, energy systems use large
834 amounts of water (e.g., for hydropower and cooling). Both are expected to be under pressure
835 from increasing demand in the future. At the same time, both will be affected by global change,
836 including a changing climate. Changes in energy policy and production undertaken to mitigate
837 human-caused climate change may have significant consequences for water availability and
838 quality. Therefore, understanding of coupled human-environment systems, such as urban,
839 agricultural, and coastal systems, as well as exploration of the interconnections and competition
840 among water resources, food, energy, land-use change, and biodiversity under a changing
841 climate, will be a major focus for USGCRP in the next decade.
842
843 Another key research theme for USGCRP will be the identification of differences in
844 vulnerability across space and time. For example, global change impacts are, and will continue to
845 be, distributed unevenly across nations, communities, households, and individuals, creating
846 differing levels of vulnerability, with important implications for adaptation and mitigation.
847 Similarly, as with human systems, the impacts of global change on natural systems are
848 distributed unevenly across species, habitats, and ecosystems, with certain systems (e.g., coral
849 reefs, wetlands, and high-latitude and high-altitude habitats) being particularly vulnerable.
850 USGCRP and its member agencies will foster advances in research on the ecological dimensions
851 of global change, as well as the interactions of this change with societal impacts. A key element
852 of this focus will be the exploration of the implications of global change for biodiversity, as
853 biodiversity is a crucial foundation for societal necessities such as food, fiber, and
854 pharmaceuticals, as well as services such as clean air, freshwater, and waste disposal.
855
856 Managing the Risks of Global Change
857
858 The ultimate purpose of identifying and characterizing vulnerabilities is to develop and
859 assess options to reduce and manage risk. Building from basic scientific understanding of global
860 change and the associated vulnerabilities to key societal areas, it is possible to identify a research
861 agenda for the two major and interlinked categories of global change responses: adaptation and
862 mitigation. In the next decade, USGCRP and its member agencies will advance the development
863 of actionable knowledge to support decision making about effective adaptation and mitigation
864 responses.
865
866
867 Box 6. Food Security, Energy Security, and Climate Change.
868
869 Food, energy, and water are closely interconnected and their production
870 both influences and is influenced by global change. Changing climatic
871 conditions, including more frequent storms and droughts, stress food
872 production systems. Moreover, as more energy is being used to produce
873 food, more of our agricultural production is being used to produce energy
874 in the form of biofuels. While enhancing energy security and climate
875 mitigation, biofuels from corn and soybeans compete directly with food
876 crops. USDA predicts that in 2011, more corn will go to ethanol than to
877 5
animal feed for the first time ever . The large-scale increase in biofuel
878 feedstocks can also compete with forests, natural grasslands, and private
879 conservation lands with implications for the many ecosystem services they
880 provide and for net greenhouse gas emissions. These systems and others
881 that produce biofuels ought to be balanced against the energy savings and
882 potential greenhouse gas reductions of biofuels, as well as against the food
883 demands of a growing population.
884
885 Greenhouse gas emissions are only one part of the complex interactions
886 between food, energy, and climate. As climate changes challenge our
887 ability to grow crops for food and energy, more irrigation and water
888 management will be warranted. As precipitation patterns shift, available
889 water for irrigating crops will decrease at the same time as there is greater
890 demand for both growing and processing biofuel crops; more irrigation
891 uses more energy, which results in more greenhouse gas emissions. Figure B6.1 (top) Industrial
892 Greater water demands for food and energy production also competes with Biorefinery in York County,
893 changing demands for this precious resource for domestic and industrial Nebraska. Photo credit: DOE.
894 applications due to economic development and changing demographics. (bottom) Crop irrigation. Photo
895 The effects of changing land use patterns on local weather patterns and credit: USDA ARS.
896 net emissions of greenhouse gases further complicates increased water
897 demands. The link among food, energy, water, and climate change is one key example of the increasingly complex
898 web within which physical, biological, economic, and social systems are embedded in our rapidly developing and
899 globalizing world.
900
901 Society needs to manage tradeoffs among food, energy, and water demands in a changing climate while
902 minimizing risks and unintended consequences of related decisions. To do so, the country needs a deeper
903 understanding of the ways in which use and production of these critical resources are interdependent and how
904 these interdependencies are affected by global change. Decisions that need to be made by farmers and land
905 managers as well as national and international policy makers will benefit greatly from a synthesis of inputs from
906 economists, social scientists, natural scientists and modelers. Decision making will also call for improved
907 understanding of decision processes behind resource management and the potential role of improved scientific
908 information in that process. USGCRP can address decision-making needs through the coordination of social and
909 natural sciences research across its member agencies. One example is interdisciplinary research into the
910 environmental footprints of existing and proposed biofuels that can inform smarter decision making about fuel
911 choices. Aided by USGCRP support of integrated observational systems, researchers and decision makers will be
912 able to simultaneously track food, energy, and water production and use, as well as climatic shifts and variability.
913 Increasingly complex data input will provide the foundation for informed decision making that strives to maximize
914 the benefits and minimize the regrets of the choices we make about our food, energy, and water resources in the
915 face of global change.
916
917 In this context, the Program will foster new research on methods for assessing the
918 adaptive capacity of ecosystems, places, human communities, and socioeconomic sectors in the
919 face of change, with an emphasis on local-to-regional scales and particularly in the context of the
920 interaction of climate change with the many other important global change stressors. Social and
921 economic factors (e.g., economic status, age, gender, and health) can significantly affect peoples
922 exposure to global change impacts, how sensitively they respond, and their capacity for
923 adaptation. Understanding these factors is also fundamental for addressing the equity issues
924 associated with national and international mitigation policies. USGCRP and its member agencies
925 will facilitate advances in social, behavioral, and economic sciences to improve understanding of
926 this differential adaptive capacity and to learn about the characteristics of resilient populations
927 and communities. In addition, USGCRP and its member agencies will foster research to develop
928 metrics, indicators, and frameworks to enable the transfer of knowledge about effective
929 adaptation responses across sectors and regions.
930
931 Similarly, ecosystems that are degraded by overharvesting, habitat destruction, pollution,
932 and other stressors may have less resilience in the face of global climate change and thus
933 necessitate more aggressive conservation efforts. The desired level of societal adaptation will
934 depend, in part, on the impacts of aggregate global change on biodiversity and ecosystem
935 services, such as clean water, flood protection, and food production. However, in many cases,
936 ecologists require significantly improved understanding of the detailed processes that lead from
937 individual species to ecosystem functioning as a prerequisite for helping environmental and
938 natural resource managers design and implement effective strategies for preserving and
939 promoting natural ecological resilience to global change. The Program will therefore coordinate
940 research to understand the resilience and adaptive capacity of ecosystems, with corresponding
941 implications for people and societal choices about global change responses.
942
943 USGCRP and its member agencies will also enhance existing research, and foster new
944 research, to support development of effective greenhouse gas mitigation strategies. This research
945 will be aimed at improving understanding of carbon storage in the Earth system, the human
946 actions that lead to greenhouse gas emissions changes, and the risks of extreme consequences of
947 greenhouse gas-induced global climate and carbon cycle change.
948
949 For example, the Program will promote new forest, soil, agricultural, and ecosystem
950 research that is fundamental to understanding carbon stocks, sequestration, and natural
951 greenhouse gas fluxes. This research will include improving mechanistic understanding of how
952 species interactions lead to healthy, functioning ecosystems, in recognition of the crucial role of
953 restoration ecology in enhancing mitigation that is just becoming clear from new observational
954 and technological advances. Other priorities include new research on ocean chemistry and
955 circulation and their influence on oceanic uptake of carbon dioxide, as well as progress in
956 understanding the role of radiatively active gaseous and aerosol species with shorter atmospheric
957 lifetimes compared to most of the major greenhouse gases, because management and production
958 of these species have the potential to complement or confound mitigation responses.
959
960 Making progress in the natural sciences needed to support mitigation efforts requires the
961 Program to foster advances in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences. These advances will
962 improve understanding of human actions, including choices about energy usage and
963 technological change that lead to changes in emissions, and hence atmospheric composition, as
964 well as the costs and benefits of addressing those changes. Improving understanding of the many
965 interactions between climate and energy (such as the interaction between renewable energy
966 technologies and production, water usage, and climate-related impacts on water availability,
967 among many other examples) will be a particularly important element of this research and a key
968 dimension of exploring the interactions and tradeoff between mitigation and adaptation. In
969 coordinating this research, USGCRP will leverage its partnership with the interagency Climate
970 Change Technology Program (CCTP). The purpose of CCTP is to accelerate development,
971 reduce the cost, and promote the deployment of new and advanced technologies and best
972 practices that could avoid, reduce, capture, or store greenhouse gas emissions. USGCRP will
973 need to be informed by CCTP as new technologies are developed and implemented that affect
974 future emissions trajectories. Similarly, USGCRP will need to inform CCTP regarding the
975 potential global change impacts of the implementation of these new technologies.
976
977 Furthermore, USGCRP and its member agencies will promote new research on
978 catastrophic consequences of rapid global change, such as extreme global warming, collapse of
979 major ice sheets, massive biodiversity losses, global natural resource collapse, or the loss of
980 major infrastructure such as dams, seawalls, and transportation systems. To inform adaptation
981 and mitigation efforts requires improved understanding of the potential for crossing thresholds
982 and tipping points in physical, ecological, and social systems. . Improved understanding in these
983 areas will also be crucial for informing research into assessing the feasibility, effectiveness, and
984 unintended consequences of strategies for deliberate, large-scale manipulations of Earths
985 environment, including solar radiation management and post-emission carbon management, to
986 offset the harmful consequences of greenhouse gas-induced climate change (often referred to as
987 geoengineering).
988
989 Across all categories of global change response strategies, advances in methods for
990 estimating the damages associated with regional and sectoral impacts are required for informed
991 analyses of the benefits of adaptation and mitigation efforts. The development of a new
992 generation of environmental management tools and approaches will be a key frontier in
993 supporting progress toward responding effectively to global change. Because of the long time
994 horizons, varied levels of scientific uncertainties regarding how human-caused change will
995 impact human and natural systems, and highly distributed impacts across systems and sectors
996 (including those difficult to value economically), global change poses unique challenges for the
997 foundational tools and approaches of environmental management, such as risk assessment and
998 cost-benefit analysis. USGCRP and its member agencies will place a high priority on exploring
999 new frameworks for assessing risks and benefits that account for these challenges and allow
1000 policy makers to make decisions based on a comprehensive understanding of the impacts, co-
1001 benefits, and potential unintended consequences of adaptation and mitigation options.
1002
1003 Similarly, another broad challenge for USGCRP in supporting global change responses
1004 and risk management in the coming decade is to help define best practices for transferring new
1005 scientific knowledge into actionable information that can be used for adaptation and mitigation
1006 decision making. As will be discussed in greater detail elsewhere in the Plan, a large literature
1007 about how decisions are made, and how innovations and new concepts are diffused, makes clear
1008 that scientific knowledge is only one part of a much broader process. Information may be
1009 scientifically relevant without being decision relevant.
1010
1011 To maximize relevance for adaptation and mitigation decision making, USGCRP and its
1012 member agencies will foster science that is coherent and meaningful within specific decision
1013 contexts, integrates across all relevant disciplines, and engages as participants all relevant
1014 stakeholders. Research that incorporates these considerations will be particularly important in the
1015 following areas:
1016
1017 Developing models and tools to assess the environmental, social, and economic outcomes
1018 of alternative adaptation and mitigation options;
1019 Developing scenarios of possible changes and impacts and identification of the social and
1020 ecological thresholds that help define limits to adaptation and the options for mitigation;
1021 Developing improved methods for identifying, projecting, and managing for extremes
1022 and low-probability, high-impact events;
1023 Characterizing and managing uncertainties that will remain large for the many decisions
1024 necessary to respond to human-driven global change, particularly at the local scale (as
1025 they are for most of the important policy decisions faced by society).
1026
1027
1028 Box 7. Science for Water Resource Decision Making and Management.
1029
1030 With the likelihood of drier, warmer seasons and increased droughts in the future as a result of climate
1031 change, society is faced with the challenge of continuing to supply fresh, clean water to growing
1032 populations. The ability to supply water is a particular concern in the U.S. Southwest, where the population
1033 has nearly doubled over the past 30 years. Eight USGCRP member agencies are part of a Federal
1034 consortium that supports the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS). NIDIS operates a
1035 Drought Early Warning System for the Upper Colorado River Basin and Four Corners Tribal Lands.
1036 Created via the NIDIS Act of 2006 in response to the need for long-term drought planning and a call from
1037 the Western Governors Association, NIDIS provides the best available information to enable users to
1038 determine risks associated with drought and provides supporting data and tools to inform drought mitigation.
1039 Programs such as NIDIS are crucial input to decision makers who manage scarce natural resources,
1040 particularly in the face of the large uncertainties about the pace and magnitude of future climate change.
1041
1042 USGRCP provides scientific underpinnings for NIDIS, including new observing and modeling capabilities
1043 and products. The Strategic Plan emphasizes the role of USGCRP in better understanding the interactions
1044 between changes in climate and changing patterns in regional precipitation, runoff, and drought. In addition,
1045 USGCRP agencies will help improve drought predictions over seasons, and even years ahead of time, by
1046 developing and using new modeling capabilities and better observations. These capabilities will improve
1047 information systems like NIDIS, which will in turn lead to better adaptation approaches for infrastructure
1048 planning, ensuring food and water supplies, and fostering stewardship of natural and managed ecosystems.
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
Figure B7.1. The eastern end of Lake Mead, August 1985 (left). In August 2010 (right), Lake Mead
1061 reached its lowest level since 1956, strained by persistent drought and increasing human demand. Lake
1062 Mead is the largest reservoir in the United States. Photo credit: NASA.
1063
1064
1065 The Program will embed these and related considerations in its research design and
1066 delivery of global change assessments and services to inform decision making about responding
1067 to global change. In addition, as the number and scope of adaptation and mitigation decisions
1068 grows over time, the Program will seize the opportunity to sponsor vital social sciences research
1069 into evaluating the uptake of USGCRP research into these decisions and its effectiveness in
1070 informing good outcomes.
1071
1072
1073 Objective 1.3: Integrated Observations

1074
1075 Advance capabilities to observe the physical, chemical, biological, and human components of the
1076 Earth system over multiple spatial and temporal scales to gain fundamental scientific
1077 understanding and monitor important variations and trends
1078
1079 All of the research proposed for USGCRP in the next decade depends on a
1080 comprehensive, coordinated, continuous, and sustained set of physical, chemical, biological, and
1081 societal observations of global change and its impacts.
1082
1083 Observing global change in the Earth system is an inherently integrative activity.
1084 Effective observation of the Earth system and its changes requires remotely sensed and in situ (in
1085 place) observations from all domainsatmosphere, ocean, cryosphere, landthat are then
1086 transformed into products and information through analysis and integration in both time and
1087 space. For most measurements, no single approach can provide all the needed observations of a
1088 given quantity, requiring coordination across platforms and instruments. In addition, such
1089 observations should integrate over time and space: they should be sustained in a well-calibrated
1090 state for decades (over multiple generations of observing systems) to separate long-term trends
1091 from short-term variability, and cover key geographic regions to account for variability across
1092 scales.
1093
1094 The National Climate Program Act of 1978, the Clean Air Amendments Act of 1990, and
1095 the Global Change Research Act of 1990 collectively established systematic and process-
1096 oriented observations of Earths atmosphere, land, ocean, freshwater, and ecosystems. The
1097 current observational portfolio upon which USGCRP relies includes satellite, airborne, ground-
1098 based, and ocean-based missions, platforms, and networks that provide measurements of the
1099 Earth system variables important for monitoring global change. Revealing the characteristics and
1100 behaviors of Earths component systems and establishing the existence of significant global
1101 changes is an outstanding success of the USGCRP. This success has been possible through
1102 collaboration and coordination among USGCRP agencies to harness their unique capabilities for
1103 in situ and remote-sensing observation and monitoring and to sustain these efforts (see Text Box
1104 6). The Program will continue to explore and develop opportunities for partnerships that
1105 maximize the effectiveness and value of observing and monitoring systems to scientists,
1106 managers, and policy makers.
1107
1108 To achieve its goals in the next decade, USGCRP and its member agencies will build on
1109 these observational capabilities and achievements to:
1110
1111 Sustain and strengthen the capacity to observe long-term changes in the global Earth
1112 system and improve fundamental understanding of the complex causes and consequences
1113 of global change;
1114 Assess the vulnerability of ecosystems and human systems to global change and inform
1115 national adaptation and mitigation efforts;
1116 Integrate observations and modeling to advance both scientific understanding and
1117 decision support.
1118
1119 In addition, USGCRP agencies have an important role to play in improving observational
1120 data access, sharing, harmonization, and credibility, as will be discussed in greater detail below
1121 under Objective 1.5.
1122
1123 Sustaining and Integrating Earth System Observational Capacity
1124
1125 As discussed above under Objective 1.1, the complexity of the global integrated Earth
1126 system is due, in large part, to the interconnections between its components and processes.
1127 Similarly, it is due to interactions across an extremely broad range of space and time scales.
1128 Understanding this complexity requires simultaneous recording of diverse observations,
1129 maintained over long time periods. USGCRP and its international partners have made
1130 remarkable progress in this area. In the next decade, USGCRP will sustain and further strengthen
1131 satellite and in-situ Earth system observations to document long-term Earth system changes, as
1132 well as advance the integration of observational networks and systems to improve understanding
1133 of the linkages across components, processes, and scales that create the complex behaviors of
1134 global change.
1135
1136 Continued investments in current networks are essential for this capacity and for
1137 achieving the necessary understanding of the Earth system and global change. These networks
1138 measure the Earths radiation budget, temperature, concentration of greenhouse gases, leaf area
1139 index, land cover, albedo, precipitation, winds, and sea level. Sustaining, enhancing, prioritizing,
1140 and extending these observations over the long term will be important for tracking and assessing
1141 decadal-scale changes. Some observation systems are at risk because they require substantial
1142 investments that cannot be made incrementally. In addition, there are a number of measurements
1143 for which there are significant geographic or temporal gaps, such as ground-based snow cover
1144 measurements, especially in mountainous areas, and terrestrial observations of ice caps, ice
1145 sheets, glaciers, and permafrost. Budget constraints and aging equipment, with their combined
1146 deleterious effect on data quality, reinforce the need for the agencies to continue working
1147 collaboratively through USGCRP to leverage resources and set priorities.
1148
1149 For many of these observations, integration of in-situ and satellite measurements is
1150 crucial for calibration, validation, broader spatial coverage, and greater temporal resolution. One
1151 example for which these synergies are particularly important is greenhouse gases. Although we
1152 know that greenhouse gas concentrations are increasing in the atmosphere as a whole, we cannot
1153 yet reliably measure from space rapid fluctuations in their concentrations near the Earths
1154 surface, leaving important gaps in our knowledge of the exchange of greenhouse gases among
1155 and between the atmosphere, the ocean, and terrestrial biosphere.
1156
1157 USGCRP will coordinate the many opportunities for leveraging existing platforms and
1158 resources to maintain the observational knowledge base and address these types of gaps. For
1159 example, there are a number of measurements for which better calibration of operational sensors,
1160 or the mounting of new sensors on existing platforms, can reduce the reliance on separate
1161 research sensors. These are important ways of enhancing data accuracy in high priority areas in
1162 the near term. In addition, there are many examples in which small initial investments can lead to
1163 major gains and lower life-cycle costs.
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168 Box 8. The Carbon Cycle.
1169
1170 The primary cause of climate change is increasing greenhouse
1171 gases in the atmosphere, mainly carbon dioxide and methane.
1172 This increase is due to disruption of the carbon cycle whereby
1173 carbon is continually cycled throughout the Earth system. The
1174 ocean absorbs carbon dioxide, and land, freshwater, and marine
1175 biosphere take it up in their growth. This carbon is transformed
1176 and stored, and eventually released back to the atmosphere.
1177 The balance of this cycle is now being upset by fossil fuel use
1178 and land use change such as deforestation, both of which
1179 release previously stored carbon in the form of greenhouse
1180 gases such as carbon dioxide and methane. Rising atmosphere
1181 and ocean temperatures may lead to additional rapid inputs of
1182 carbon dioxide and methane, through thawing permafrost and
1183 release of methane from the seafloor. The ocean and biosphere
1184 take up some of this extra carbon, but most will remain in the
1185 atmosphere unless we find ways to remove and store it. Thus,
1186 the carbon cycle is central to three major global change issues:
1187 (1) impacts of climate on the carbon cycle that could accelerate
1188 increases in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations
1189 (independent of human emissions), (2) actions society will
1190 undertake that will affect amounts of greenhouse gases in the
1191 atmosphere, and (3) direct effects of carbon dioxide increases
1192 (independent of climate change), such as ocean acidification
1193 (see Box 4).
1194
1195 Understanding the many interacting elements of the carbon cycle
Figure B8.1. Two major emissions
1196 is critical to decision making about policy and management
sources: fossil fuel burning and land use
1197 strategies to control emissions from cars and power plants,
change. (top) A coal-fired power plant in
1198 reverse deforestation, and capture and store carbon that would
Germany. Photo credit: Bruno & Lgia
1199 otherwise build up in the atmosphere. In the next decade,
Rodrigues. (bottom) A cleared forest in
1200 USGCRP will foster the comprehensive research needed to gain
Brazil. Photo credit: Compton Tucker.
1201 this understanding of the changing carbon cycle. It will do so by
1202 coordinating measurements, models, and analysis of the principal interacting land, atmosphere, ocean, and human
1203 carbon cycle processes, building on existing national and international efforts such as the North American Carbon
1204 Program, the Ocean Carbon and Biogeochemistry Program, and the Global Carbon, as well as assessment
1205 products such as the First State of the Carbon Cycle Report. One of the key challenges USGCRP will tackle in the
1206 next decade is to more fully incorporate and integrate social science and economics with ongoing Earth system
1207 observations and modeling. The overall carbon cycle effort, engaging researchers and policy makers from Federal
1208 agencies, universities, and numerous international partners, will provide one of the most critical pieces of the
1209 knowledge base needed for informed decision making and action in the face of global change.
1210
1211
1212 Furthermore, progress on global change science and response suffers from a lack of
1213 adequate time-series observations of variables never before measured, particularly for key
1214 ecological and socioeconomic variables. USGCRP will provide global leadership for developing
1215 these new observational capabilities, in addition to the global leadership it will provide for
1216 sustaining ongoing time series and addressing important coverage gaps.
1217
1218 USGCRP will coordinate with international programs to leverage investments and work
1219 toward a comprehensive international global climate observing system, as well as maintain
1220 effective partnerships with the other U.S. Federal interagency programs with responsibility for
1221 coordinating related aspects of science, technology, and the environment (see Text Box 5).
1222 Similarly, USGCRP will coordinate with complementary efforts of U.S. state government
1223 agencies, such as state weather station and soil moisture networks participating in the National
1224 Integrated Drought Information System, engage nongovernmental organizations and the private
1225 sector in the design, deployment, and use of Text Box 5: U.S. Group on Earth Observations
1226 observations, and promote declassification of (USGEO http://usgeo.gov/
1227 Earth observations for integration into the
1228 national civilian database. In 2005, USGEO was established under the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policys
1229 Committee on Environment and Natural
1230 Integrated Observations to Assess Resources. USGEO is a sister subcommittee to
1231 Vulnerabilities and Monitor Effectiveness of USGCRP and coordinates Federal management of
1232 Responses to Global Change Earth observation and facilitates open and
improved access for all of the programs of the U.S.
1233 government. It is chaired by representatives from
1234 This Plan highlights the importance of the Smithsonian Institution and the National
1235 biological and social sciences research for Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
1236 understanding global change causes, Through USGEO, the United States further
1237 vulnerabilities, impacts, and responses. As supports cooperative, international efforts to build
1238 with research on the physical climate system, the Global Earth Observation System of Systems
(GEOSS). GEOSS is being developed through the
1239 this research depends on the availability of intergovernmental Group on Earth Observations
1240 high-quality, long-term, and readily accessible (GEO), a partnership of 80 countries, the European
1241 observations of biological and human systems. Commission, and nearly 60 international
organizations.
1242
1243 For example, census data, along with data on economic productivity and consumption,
1244 health and disease patterns, insurance coverage, crop yields, hazards exposure, and public
1245 perceptions and preferences are relevant for developing an improved understanding of risk,
1246 vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity. Continuous, sustained, research-quality
1247 measurements of land use and land cover, resource extraction, energy consumption, and
1248 pollutant emissions are crucial to improve understanding of human pressures on the
1249 environment. Similarly, observations of species ranges, migration, and interactions, biological
1250 productivity, ocean color, biomass, biodiversity, and ecosystem function are necessary to assess
1251 ecological vulnerability and resilience to impacts. As with observations of the physical climate
1252 system, long time series with broad spatial coverage are required to monitor changes and trends.
1253
1254 All of the above are important inputs to improved decision making about effective and
1255 sustainable responses to global change. However, informing mitigation and adaptation decisions
1256 will demand the integration and availability of these data on an ongoing basis. It will also entail
1257 that these measurements be matched to the scales of interest (for researchers and decision
1258 makers) and made available in ways that facilitate whole-system analyses of societal and
1259 environmental interactions. In the same way that economic decisions are based upon a broad and
1260 carefully developed set of indicators (e.g., gross domestic product, unemployment), global
1261 change-related decisions should be informed by a broadly recognized set of indicators that track
1262 changing environmental conditions, vulnerability, and adaptive capacity at local to international
1263 scales. Simultaneous, integrated monitoring of Earth system components will be necessary to
1264 track changes in agricultural productivity, energy production and use, water availability and
1265 quality, coastal hazards, biodiversity, and human health.
1266
1267 In addition, as discussed above under Objective 1.2, development of such metrics and
1268 indicators will be essential to help transfer learning about vulnerabilities and response strategies
1269 across sectors and regions. The potential exists for increased use of remote sensing (validated
1270 against in situ measurements) to develop indicators of change simultaneously over large areas;
1271 this activity is a priority of the National Climate Assessment, as discussed below under Objective
1272 3.3. Improvements in this area have the potential to transform monitoring of the variations in
1273 space and change over time of integrated human-natural systems.
1274
1275 Achieving the integration vital to accomplish these USGCRP objectives will be
1276 challenging because of mismatches in the characteristic spatial and temporal scales of key
1277 processes and widely differing levels of maturity of physical, biological, and sociological
1278 observational networks. Furthermore, issues related to open availability and peer-review heritage
1279 for these disparate sets of observations make it more difficult to integrate them for specific
1280 applications. Meeting these challenges, however, will be essential for supporting assessment of
1281 vulnerability and informing decision making about responses.
1282
1283
1284 Box 9. Impacts of Declining Arctic Sea Ice.
1285
1286 Summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean has been declining rapidly over
1287 the past several decades, with consequences for climate, coastal
1288 communities, and marine ecosystems. Ice loss means that highly
1289 reflective ice cover is replaced with open water, which absorbs more
1290 heat, causing temperatures in this region to rise faster than anywhere
1291 else on the planet. This increased heating causes additional ice melt,
1292 perpetuating the cycle of sea ice decline. Another consequence of
1293 reduced sea ice coverage is that an important barrier to storm surge
1294 has been removed, making coastal Arctic communities and marine
1295 life more vulnerable to the increasingly stormy climate and increasing
1296 coastal erosion. Later formation of sea ice in the fall and earlier
1297 melting in spring also limits the use of sea ice as a travel route or as
1298 a platform for subsistence hunting. Changes in sea ice extent disrupt
1299 marine food webs, affecting fisheries and threatening the economic Figure B9.1. Arctic char fishing.
1300 base and viability of coastal communities. At the same time, ice retreat Photo credit: Angsar Walk.
1301 increases shipping opportunities and could open up more regions to oil
1302 and gas exploration.
1303
1304 To address the causes and consequences of reduced sea ice cover in the Arctic, USGCRP agencies will work
1305 together over the next decade to develop more accurate sea ice forecasts that permit local governments and
1306 managers to prepare, enhancing the long-term security of residents and local economies. Just as vital, USGCRP
1307 scientists will work to identify best practices for building community and ecosystem resilience to the impacts of
1308 declining sea ice and help decision makers respond proactively to future changes.
Summer 1979
Summer 2010
NASA Nimbus 7
NASA Aqua
1310
1311
1312
1313
1314
Figure B9.2. Summer sea ice extent in 1979 (left) and 2010 (right) as revealed by NASA satellites
1315 Nimbus 7 and its Scanning Multichannel Microwave Radiometer and Aqua and its Moderate
1316 Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer.
1317
1318
1319
1320
1321
1322 Integration of Observations and Modeling

1323
1324 Modeling depends on high-quality observations. Integrated models of the Earth system
1325 have to be continuously updated with integrated suites of the latest observations to better
1326 understand their limitationsthe fundamental science they may miss, or misrepresent. As model
1327 resolution and model complexity increase, new and improved observations of the Earth system
1328 should be considered for model evaluation, along with new metrics that provide meaningful
1329 measures of confidence in models and their outputs for both scientific and decision support
1330 applications.
1331
1332 In addition to sustained observation systems, USGCRP will continue to place a high
1333 priority on limited-duration observational campaigns to improve process representation in the
1334 next generation of integrated Earth system models. In addition, USGCRP and its member
1335 agencies will seek to ensure sufficient observational focus to improve understanding and
1336 modeling of fast-changing environments, such as the Arctic, mountainous areas, and coasts, as
1337 well as provide focused observations for model-based assessments of short-duration, high-impact
1338 events.
1339
1340 Furthermore, integrated Earth system models help inform improvements in observations.
1341 Models help fill gaps in observations and identify optimum observational and monitoring
1342 strategies. All such efforts in model evaluation, the assimilation of observational data into
1343 models, and the application of models to inform observational improvements come with
1344 enormous data challenges that will be compounded by the increases in model complexities and
1345 the multiplication of the observational data required to test them. These enhancements highlight
1346 the benefits of advances in information and data management and sharing, as will be discussed
1347 under Objective 1.5.
1348
1349 Many of the most important accomplishments of the next decade, for example, the most
1350 significant advances in understanding the dynamics of how human causes of climate change
1351 interact with natural climate system variability, will result directly from the integration of
1352 modeling and observational activities of USGCRP and its member agencies. In addition, the
1353 frontier of decadal climate predictability, as will be discussed immediately below, depends
1354 entirely on assimilating observations, particularly of the ocean, into state-of-the-art climate
1355 system models.
1356
1357 Objective 1.4: Integrated Modeling
1358
1359 Improve and develop advanced models that integrate across the physical, chemical, biological,
1360 and human components of the Earth system, including the feedbacks among and between them,
1361 to represent more comprehensively and predict more realistically global change processes
1362
1363 Modeling is an inherently integrative activity, synthesizing the understanding of the Earth
1364 system that we gain from measurement and theory. Efforts to develop models that integrate
1365 across Earth system components bring together researchers from many different disciplines.
1366 Efforts to use models in decision making bring scientists and stakeholders into close
1367 collaboration.
1368
1369 Though the atmospheric, oceanic, terrestrial, and cryospheric components of the Earth
1370 system have been part of coupled climate models for a number of years, work is still to be done
1371 to advance the capability of such models to fully represent important features of the physical
1372 climate system, such as mean tropical sea surface temperature, patterns of variability in the large-
1373 scale circulation, the diurnal cycle of precipitation, and monsoonal circulations, among others. In
1374 addition, a number of natural Earth system components, such as ice sheets, aerosols, land
1375 hydrology, vegetation, and biogeochemical cycles, have to be included more comprehensively
1376 and dynamically in models to address critical science questions and decision support needs.
1377
1378 Furthermore, there are many existing scientific models relevant for global change
1379 research that should be better integrated with climate system modelsexamples include crop
1380 models, energy demand models, food-web models, water-quality models, epidemiological
1381 models, models of human behavior, and models of the genetic diversity and dynamics of
1382 ecosystems, and econometric models, among others.
1383
1384 Text Box 6: Long-Term Observations Reveal Global Change.

1385
1386 Analyses of sustained observations, often supported by USGCRP member agencies and their international
1387 counterparts, are compared with pre-USGCRP observations, and demonstrate that the global integrated Earth
1388 system is undergoing significant and often challenging changes. Examples are:
1389
1390 Annual mean atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii is 20% higher
1391 in 2010 compared to 1960 and the rate of increase during the 2000s is twice as fast compared to the 1960s .
6
1392 The Antarctic ozone hole is starting to recover as atmospheric concentrations of CFC (chlorofluorocarbon) gases
1393 7
stabilized then decreased following the 1987 Montreal Protocol .
1394 The 10-year average global surface air temperature increased by 0.8C over the past 100 years, with much
1395 8
larger rates of increase over the past 30 years .
1396 Annual minimum sea ice coverage and annual average sea ice thickness in the Arctic Ocean have declined over
1397 the past 30 years .
9
1398 Global sea level is rising nearly twice as fast in 19922010 as compared to 19502000 .
10
1399 Greenland Ice Sheet melting increased 30% over the past 30 years.
11
1400 Over the last 50 years, precipitation has decreased significantly (15 to 40%) in the southeastern and
1401 southwestern United States, and increased particularly in the Northeast (10 to 20%), with an average national
1402 increase of 5%.
1403 Northern Hemisphere snow cover has been decreasing over the past 80 years and the snowpack is melting
1404 earlier by as much as 20 days in the western United States .
12
1405 The areal extent of global drought regions has doubled since the 1970s .
13
1406 Large and long-duration forest fires increased four-fold over the past 30 years in the U.S. western states and the
1407 length of the fire season has expanded by 2.5 months .
14
1408 Locations of major fisheries in the Bering Sea shifted northward over the past 35 years
15
.
1409 The ocean is acidifying at an unprecedented rate
16
with adverse effects on calcifying organisms (e.g., corals,
1410 17
clams, scallops, and oysters) .
1411 Strong wind speeds and higher wave heights have been observed across the worlds ocean over the past 20
1412 18
years .
1413 Nationwide, air quality improved significantly over the past 20 years for ground-level ozone, particulates, lead,
1414 carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide.
19
1415 Tree growth rates are changing due to the rising levels of atmospheric CO2, higher temperatures and longer
1416 growing seasons .
20
1417
1418 Advances in integrated Earth system modeling to overcome such limitations are both
1419 disciplinary and interdisciplinary, as they involve the representation of specific processes and the
1420 representation of the coupling among diverse processes (and methods). Furthermore, as already
1421 discussed, USGCRP will promote greater coordination of integrated observations and modeling.
1422 To achieve all of its goals in the coming decade, the Program will address these issues by
1423 promoting greater scientific progress in (1) the development of complex, integrated modeling
1424 systems for improved richness, realism, and accuracy of simulations, (2) the development and
1425 adoption of simplified and conceptual models for improved interpretation, and (3) the
1426 advancement of integrated modeling of all types specifically for decision support.
1427
1428 Model Complexity
1429
1430 Our growing understanding of the complexity of the Earth system is reflected in the
1431 increasing complexity of the models we use to describe it. Earth system complexity creates a
1432 dynamic tension for modeling, between capturing as much of this complexity as possible for
1433 comprehensiveness and realism, and synthesizing and simplifying to grasp the fundamental
1434 aspects of a process, phenomenon, or system.21 In the next decade, USGCRP will play a major
1435 role in managing this tension and promoting balance between these two poles.
1436
1437 The key to understanding the implications of and responses to global change is research
1438 that focuses on integration across Earth system components and processes and across spatial and
1439 temporal scales. Global change modeling reflects this integration, including the effect of human
1440 activities on the Earth system. USGCRP and its member agencies will foster the development of
1441 next-generation modeling systems that integrate more fully across all Earth system components
1442 and processes.
1443
1444 Continuing to place a high value on increasing model resolution in both space and time
1445 will be an important part of this effort. Increased resolution has important benefits for both
1446 scientific understanding and decision support. Most generally, it will often lead directly to
1447 increased realism of a simulation or accuracy of a prediction. Increased resolution can also
1448 dramatically improve the integration of model components, as more of this integration can occur
1449 by explicitly and dynamically modeling key processes rather than relying on parameterizations
1450 that represent those processes in a simplified manner.
1451
1452 In addition, high-resolution models can bridge the scale gaps inherent in global change,
1453 for example nesting regional models within global models. Such bridging of spatial scales can in
1454 turn create opportunities for eliminating some of the intellectual gaps between the science of the
1455 climate system and that of, for example, ecosystems, hydrologic systems, and social systems.
1456 This bridging of scale gaps can in turn foster bridging of the communication gaps that exist
1457 between global change science and the researchers and stakeholders dealing with issues of
1458 vulnerability, impacts, and adaptation at much finer scales. Similarly, incorporating additional
1459 process and impacts models into flexible Earth system modeling frameworks can enhance
1460 engagement, collaboration, and knowledge transfer across disciplines and the science-
1461 stakeholder divide.
1462
1463
1464 Model Interpretation, Conceptual Modeling, and Hierarchies of Model Complexity

1465
1466 Just as large-scale processes have important effects at localized scales, small-scale
1467 processes in turn affect the larger-scale environment. It is important to emphasize that reaching
1468 down from coarse to fine resolution is not the only pathway for model improvement.
1469 Development of an improved understanding of how to scale up insights from fine-scale process
1470 and impacts models will also be important as will better understanding of the mechanisms that
1471 drive climate conditions, for example, ocean-atmosphere and land-surface interactions.
1472
1473 More generally, modeling refers not only to the development of complex numerical
1474 codes, but also to the crafting of conceptual models that, through simplification of complexity
1475 down to core essentials, help bridge the gaps between observations and theory and between
1476 theory and scientific prediction. In the next decade, USGCRP and its member agencies will
1477 promote the development of coordinated hierarchies of models, from simple to complex, to help
1478 the broader global change community derive the maximum scientific understanding and practical
1479 meaning from the large USGCRP investment in complex, computer-intensive, integrated
1480 modeling.
1481
1482 Similarly, given the great increases in model complexity and precision, it will become
1483 more and more difficult to define uncertainties in possible models, for both scientific
1484 understanding and decision support. Uncertainty is an inherent feature of decision making, and
1485 its characterization can provide decision makers with a better understanding of available options.
1486 Meeting this challenge will call for greater coordination among agencies and institutions
1487 nationally and internationally to address issues, including increasing the transparency of model
1488 assumptions and enhancing model reproducibility, including assuring the continuing availability
1489 of enough computational resources to run the suite of models at the desired resolution and
1490 ensemble size, and covering the range of scenarios necessary to support policy making.
1491
1492 Integrated Modeling for Decision Support
1493
1494 Insights gained from applying the next generation of integrated Earth system models will
1495 support decision making about responding to change at global, national, regional, and local
1496 scales, for near-term and long-term time horizons. To be most useful, however, model structures
1497 and outputs will in many cases have to be aligned more closely with the needs of decision
1498 makers. USGCRP and its member agencies will on the one hand draw from the large existing
1499 body of decision sciences research, and on the other hand draw from Earth system science to
1500 improve understanding of key uncertainties, as well as help develop and apply new frameworks,
1501 to maximize the usefulness of its modeling efforts in decision support. Focus areas will include
1502 the derivation of regionally specific model outputs through the improvement and application of
1503 downscaling techniques and the production of model-generated information on short-timescale
1504 processes as such extreme events that have acute impacts on natural and human systems.
1505
1506 In addition, a fuller integration of the societal and human components into Earth system
1507 models is a top priority. It is also especially challenging. A key opportunity for USGCRP is to
1508 build on the insights and experience gained in this area from the development and application of
1509 Integrated Assessment Models (see Box 10), as well as to ensure that fundamental advances in
1510 the modeling of Earth system components and impacts flow into advancing the sophistication
1511 and capabilities of these models. This integration will have important benefits for both Earth
1512 system understanding and support for decision making about responding to global change.
1513
1514
1515 Box 10. Integrated Assessment Modeling.
1516
1517 Governments around the world, including the United States, want to
1518 have as much knowledge and information as possible about how global
1519 change might affect the economies, jobs, public health, food and water
1520 availability, infrastructure, and natural resources of their countries.
1521 Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) are key tools for helping
1522 scientists and policy makers understand the interconnections between
1523 both the natural and human components of the Earth system.
1524
1525 One of the greatest strengths of IAMs is that they allow researchers
1526 and decision makers to explore a range of what if questions about
1527 global change impacts and responses. In the past, IAMs have been
1528 used mainly to analyze the effects of possible greenhouse gas control
1529 policies and technological advances in energy production. Today,
1530 however, these tools are being adapted to help policy makers make
1531 better decisions about natural resource management, infrastructure
1532 fragility, public health, land development, food production, and coastal
1533 protection that are all affected by global change.
1534
1535 USGCRP plays a leadership role in coordinating the development and Figure B10.1. Integrated
1536 application of IAMs to address this broad range of impacts, Assessment Models incorporate
1537 adaptations, and vulnerabilities, bringing together the wide range of the the connections between
1538 necessary social and natural science expertise from its diverse set of components of Human Earth
1539 participating Federal agencies. Over the next decade, USGCRP will Systems and Natural Earth
1540 work with its agency partners to develop IAMs at the appropriate space Systems.
1541 and timescales for these new applications, improve methods for risk
1542 and uncertainty estimation within the models, develop interoperable modeling frameworks, and standardize the
1543 input data sources for the many different IAM modules and components. These advances will have enormous
1544 benefits for both improving fundamental scientific understanding of the interactions between human and
1545 natural processes and for informing responses to global change.
1546
1547
1548
1549 The application of Integrated Assessment Models to date has made emissions and land-
1550 use scenarios available for use in studies applying global climate models and has permitted
1551 analysis of the consequences of national and international emissions policies. However,
1552 Integrated Assessment Models can reach far beyond this application to provide a common
1553 framework for exploring the costs and benefits of adaptation and mitigation actions, the
1554 interactive consequences of these responses, and a combined risk perspective for decision
1555 making. USGCRP has an opportunity to foster the development of the next generation of
1556 Integrated Assessment Models that combine, within a common modeling framework, both the
1557 drivers and consequences of global change. USGCRP and its member agencies have a critical
1558 role to play in this effort, as it will call for significant cross-agency coordination to incorporate
1559 ongoing improvements in Earth system and impacts modeling into Integrated Assessment Model
1560 development.
1561
1562 Regardless of the type of model being applied in a decision support context, one
1563 particular challenge for many stakeholders and scientists is to articulate a role for modeling at the
1564 research-decision interface that goes beyond asking the question, What is going to happen (in
1565 my country, state, city) in the future? This question can be an extremely useful for decision
1566 making, but difficult to answer for aspects of the Earth system for which predictive capability is
1567 the most limited, such as biological and social systems, or for long time horizons for which
1568 uncertainties are large and potentially irreducible in the near term. A key focus of USGCRP
1569 modeling efforts over the next decade will be to better quantify these limits while expanding the
1570 range of benefits of modeling for decision support that do not explicitly depend on accurate,
1571 long-term forecasts of global change in specific regions and for specific socioeconomic sectors.
1572 These benefits include:
1573
1574 Enhanced capabilities for generating what if scenarios to use in bounding analyses and
1575 scenario planning exercises;
1576 Better insight into tradeoffs among alternative policies;
1577 Identification of previously unanticipated vulnerabilities, including the potential for rapid
1578 or accelerating change and threshold-crossing;
1579 Improved understanding of unintended consequences.
1580
1581 The role of both scientific and operational
1582 prediction will of course continue to be crucial in Text Box 7: Decadal Climate Predictability.
1583 both research and decision making contexts. In Planners at all levels of government and across
1584 particular, USGCRP will foster ongoing all sectors focus a great deal on looking ahead
1585 improvements in regional climate prediction at over time periods of a few months to several
years. Examples include emergency
1586 synoptic, seasonal, and interannual timescales. As preparedness, sustaining agricultural productivity,
1587 climate continues to change, information on these avoiding over-fishing, and maintaining
1588 timescales will become important inputs into infrastructure to ensure uninterrupted supplies of
food, energy, and freshwater to communities and
1589 decision making for adaptation responses in businesses. Planning outcomes in all of these
1590 particular, as this range encompasses key areas and many more are very sensitive to the
1591 planning horizons in many sectors but is not so season-to-season, year-to-year, and decade-to-
decade variations in weather and climate.
1592 long that forecast accuracy is unverifiable, or that
1593 learning and feedback could not readily occur. In Traditional weather forecasts for a particular town
1594 addition, it is widely expected that climate change or city only extend about two weeks into the
future. Longer-term, less-focused predictions
1595 over the next decades will lead to a world with used in agricultural and emergency planning are
1596 more frequent and intense extreme weather and only made about a year ahead of time. However,
1597 climate events, such as heat waves, storms, floods because of recent advances in computing
technology, combined with a new generation of
1598 and droughts. In such a world, managing Earth observations (especially of ocean
1599 competing demands on scarce resources and temperature and saltiness), there is now a great
1600 increased risks to vulnerable populations will opportunity to explore the limits of climate
predictability out to a decade and beyond.
1601 demand improved analytic capacity across the
1602 board, including an improved capability for Addressing the issue of decadal climate
1603 making relatively near-term climate predictions. predictability will call for all of the coordination
across Federal agencies, scientific disciplines,
1604 and U.S. and international researchers that
1605 Finally, the Program will coordinate and USGCRP can provide. It will depend on USGCRP
1606 enhance efforts to study climate system effectively implementing and sustaining ocean,
atmosphere, land, and ice observing systems;
1607 predictability over timescales of a decade or developing improved methods for using these
1608 more, as the necessary first step toward data in global climate models; and applying
1609 developing a practical climate prediction advanced computing capabilities. It will also
depend on USGCRP enhancing cooperation
1610 capability for longer planning horizons (Text Box between scientists and planners to ensure that
1611 7). Fundamental improvements in regional development, testing, and communication of new
1612 climate prediction on synoptic, seasonal, and scientific products and insights will ultimately be
relevant for supporting better decisions.
1613 interannual timescales, Earth system
1614 observational capabilities, and data assimilation
1615 approaches will provide the foundation for new activities at the leading edge of global change
1616 science and modeling.
1617
1618 Advances in decadal climate predictability have the potential to spur needed
1619 improvements in sector and regional impacts models, and lead to the development of new kinds
1620 of decision support tools for the new applications made possible by improved insights into
1621 climate variations and trends on these timescales.
1622
1623 Objective 1.5: Information Management and Sharing
1624
1625 Advance the capability to collect, store, access, integrate, visualize, and share data and
1626 information about the Earth system, the vulnerabilities of integrated human-natural systems to
1627 global change, and the responses to these vulnerabilities
1628
1629 Over the next decade, achieving the Programs goals will depend on making significant
1630 advances in the Nations information management and sharing capabilities. They will be vital for
1631 addressing the many dimensions of collaboration and coordination called for in this Strategic
1632 Plan. These improved capabilities, to capture, store, and integrate the rapidly growing data
1633 streams, as well as facilitate access and analyses of these data, will improve scientific
1634 understanding and develop responses that will lead to effective and sustainable responses to
1635 global change.
1636
1637 Although many aspects of data management have evolved since the previous USGCRP
1638 Strategic Plan in 2003, many of the challenges identified there still remain. Increasingly
1639 centralized data management storage and portal systems have been developed, but it is necessary
1640 to improve their organization, track data sources, and indicate data quality. There is also a need
1641 to improve interoperability among distributed data systems and to develop interfaces that permit
1642 integrated analysis. The ongoing explosion in data volume dictates development of user-
1643 friendly tools for manipulation, analysis, and knowledge transfer. In the coming decade,
1644 USGCRP will provide a forum for its agencies to address all of these issues, sharing best
1645 practices as well as assuring interoperability, and
Text Box 8: Global Change Information
1646 maintaining the flexibility to seize new opportunities System.
1647 for information management and sharing provided by
1648 emerging technologies. The Program is also pursuing The local-to-global-scale impacts of climate
variability and change, as well as the broader
1649 the development of a global change information issue of global change, have fueled a
1650 system to support coordinated use and application of growing public demand for timely and
1651 USGCRP knowledge and products (see Text Box 8). accessible information about present and
future changes. Providing scientific
1652 information about causes and effects of
1653 Integrated and Centralized Data Access global changes helps people make informed
1654 decisions in their lives, businesses, and
1655 With the advance of observational communities. USGCRP will lead an
interagency initiative to build a new global
1656 capabilities, computational power, and scientific change information system, providing timely
1657 research, there is both an opportunity for scientific and relevant data and information to
1658 progress in our study of the Earth system and a need stakeholders and the public. This system
supports many objectives across the Federal
1659 to manage the data and information generated about government, including the National Climate
1660 it. With some important exceptions, USGCRP Assessment and more timely access to
1661 agencies have generally pursued a distributed data information, the capacity to provide services
to a much broader set of audiences, more
1662 strategy over the last decade, in which individual transparency of data and results, and the
ability to update information in real time.
1663 agencies have established centralized archives for collecting and storing observational data
1664 resulting from their respective observational campaigns. This strategy of individual agency
1665 archive management will likely continue, as each agency, and its unique stakeholders, has
1666 specific data and information requirements. However, there is an opportunity to integrate across
1667 these networks to provide improved access and interoperability, with the global change
1668 information system being an important step.
1669
1670 In the coming decade, USGCRP will take a leadership role in coordinating these
1671 networks, in part through the Programs new global change information system, as well as by
1672 providing shared analytic capabilities and modeling frameworks to support integrated research.
1673 Specific issues that are imperative to be addressed to accomplish this in an effective way include
1674 data volume, data transparency and quality, data discovery, analysis tools, and community
1675 modeling.
1676
1677 Data volume continues to grow at an accelerating rate. Satellite instruments continue to
1678 collect a high volume of high-resolution (in time and space) measurements that are synthesized
1679 to create a record of the Earth system and its changes. In situ long-term network measurements
1680 provide valuable records of climate and environmental changes, often at high temporal
1681 resolution. Paleoclimate and process-based studies extend the historical record back in time,
1682 beyond that of instrumental records. Data from intensive field campaigns provide detailed
1683 information in particular regions. It is crucial to continue to collect and store these records, but
1684 this will also continue to present data management challenges. As an example of the increase in
1685 the amount of observational data available, the NASA Earth Observing System Data and Information
1686 System (EOSDIS) archive alone has grown from ~100 terabytes in the year 2000 to ~4,600
1687 terabytes in 2010, with comparable increases in other agencies archives.
1688
1689 Similarly, as computational capabilities improve, increasingly sophisticated models
1690 provide the opportunity to evaluate regional global change impacts on multiple timescales. These
1691 models will continue to integrate more Earth system components, increase resolution, and be run
1692 in large ensembles. As a result, they will generate ever-more output to be stored, shared, and
1693 analyzed. For example, during the time period that separates Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
1694 Change (IPCC) assessments, climate model resolution typically doubles, and the number of
1695 climate experiments conducted and diagnostics saved increases as well. The IPCC Fourth
1696 Assessment Report (2007) generated 35 terabytes of model data, but the upcoming Fifth
1697 Assessment Report is expected to generate over 3,000 terabytes of data. There is a similar
1698 explosion in reanalysis data sets, seasonal reforecasts, and seasonal-to-interannual climate
1699 simulation ensembles.
1700
1701 Addressing this data-volume challenge will require advanced technology to link users to
1702 the various data providers. There are important existing USGCRP agency efforts upon which the
1703 Program can build. For example, the Earth System Grid Federation is a data distribution portal
1704 that is currently used by many of the USGCRP agencies and international modeling centers. Its
1705 unified, virtual data-sharing environment links international climate research centers and
1706 provides a range of users with model-generated climate data, transforming distributed climate
1707 simulation data into a collaborative community resource. USGCRP will promote the access,
1708 search, and sharing of data by enhancing and expanding the use of such portals, while reducing
1709 duplication of effort by the science and policy user community and directing users to the best
1710 available data.
1711
1712 In this context, organization of data according to standardized ontologies, along with
1713 standards for cataloguing and inventorying metadata, will enable timely data discovery. In
1714 addition, USGCRP should continue to address issues of data storage, transfer, and speed of
1715 manipulation. Such unified data portals will have to allow users to work with the data close to its
1716 storage repository and extract and transfer only the needed results, due to the impracticality of
1717 directly transferring and keeping up to date the metadata associated with these huge data sets.
1718 Additional priorities include continued development of standardized file storage formats for
1719 enhancing access to data elements, data transfer protocols that permit data subsetting and
1720 transfer, and service-oriented architecture at the data centers maintaining the portals. In addition,
1721 data centers will need to cope with the generation and distribution of high-level data sets, or
1722 processed data that are most needed or requested by users. Analysis of large data sets depends
1723 upon the development of parallelized input/output methodologies, to facilitate rapid access to
1724 multiple stored data files.
1725
1726 In addition, all of the above also suggest prioritizing issues of data and information
1727 transparency, provenance, and quality. USGCRP and its member agencies will play a leadership
1728 role in enhancing transparency and quality through efforts to ensure open access and provide
1729 authoritative products and portals. These endeavors will facilitate the efficient identification,
1730 access, and use of the highest quality data and information to support research about (and
1731 decision making about responses to) global change. In addition, there is a growing collection of
1732 higher-level information about global change, and assessing its reliability is difficult for
1733 nonspecialists. Therefore, USGCRP will provide sources of credible global change information,
1734 with attention to the depth of scientific detail appropriate for diverse audiences. In this context,
1735 USGCRP leadership in providing for an open data policy will be important, both nationally and
1736 internationally.
1737
1738 To help researchers keep pace with the growing data volume and the ongoing need to
1739 make information available to a variety of users, USGCRP will encourage the development of
1740 enhanced tools to manipulate, synthesize, analyze, and visualize the data. Tool development
1741 must match the data level, application, and user sophistication. For example, the research
1742 community will increasingly depend on distributed analysis software (e.g., statistical tools) that
1743 can simultaneously access multiple observational and/or model data sets, taking into account
1744 varying spatial and temporal grids and data formats. Such software will increasingly require
1745 parallelization, as the data sets it accesses increase in size. Development of new, user-friendly,
1746 distributed visualization tools (e.g., including two- and three-dimensional maps, two-dimensional
1747 slice selection from three-dimensional fields, scatter plots for comparison of data sets, and
1748 feature tracking) will also be important.
1749
1750 Finally, whether it is improving the representation of currently modeled Earth system
1751 components, or incorporating additional physical, chemical, biological, or human components,
1752 processes, and interactions, achieving the next level of Earth system model integration will
1753 depend on advances in modeling infrastructure and frameworks. USGCRP will coordinate the
1754 development of flexible frameworks that promote modularity and interoperability in coupling
1755 together diverse component and process submodels. Such frameworks will be important for
1756 enabling parallel development of different model components, optimizing resources, and
1757 minimizing duplication of effort. In part, these activities will involve building on and continuing
1758 to foster efforts such as the Community Earth System Model and Earth System Modeling
1759 Framework that rely heavily on grass-roots participation. Promoting the development and
1760 widespread use of such frameworks is a central task for USGCRP so as to maximize
1761 collaboration, co-development of models, and, ultimately, coordinate integrated research efforts.
1762
1763 Integrated Knowledge for Stakeholders and Decision Makers
1764
1765 Data and information about Earth system processes and societal vulnerabilities in the
1766 context of global change will be demanded by an expanding pool of scientists, decision makers,
1767 and the public. Each of these groups presents a challenge to USGCRP and its member agencies
1768 to collect, store, publish, and serve this information in audience-appropriate forms. In general,
1769 these stakeholders often depend on information that is processed and synthesized.
1770
1771 In the next 10 years, the Program will address the unique information management and
1772 sharing challenges of providing integrated scientific knowledge in meaningful forms to global
1773 change stakeholders. Specific issues include integration of new types of data and information
1774 with Earth system data sets, and the development of new tools and methods for manipulating,
1775 synthesizing, analyzing, and visualizing integrated data sets.
1776
1777 As USGCRP supports efforts to respond to global change, new types of data and
1778 information will be generated that will be important to integrate with the Programs fundamental
1779 research findings and datasets. For example, USGCRP, via its sustained assessment process (see
1780 Goal 3) will encourage the development of databases of stakeholder needs and the details of their
1781 adaptation and mitigation projects, efforts, experiences, and best practices for supporting
1782 decision making. In addition, databases of information about diverse audiences and their
1783 perspectives on and understanding of global change will assist in the development of readily
1784 accessible, comprehensible scientific information and promote enhanced communication,
1785 education, and engagement.
1786
1787 As is the case for the research community, the multiple global change stakeholder
1788 communities will also benefit from distributed analysis and visualization tools to manipulate and
1789 synthesize these diverse data and information streams. Currently, Earth system data use typically
1790 requires an expert understanding of the available formats, data characteristics, software
1791 packages, calculation methods, and visualization software. Non-expert users would benefit
1792 greatly from user-friendly software and simple modeling tools for a variety of informational and
1793 decision-support applications.
1794
1795 Finally, USGCRP will embrace the power of advances in information technology to
1796 transform public engagement with science and harness public participation in research, as will be
1797 described in more detail below, under the Communicate and Educate Goal. Distributed
1798 computing, applications for mobile technology, and social networking have the potential to
1799 dramatically scale up citizen science, where interested members of the public serve as
1800 observers, modelers, and analyzers of the Earth system, contributing to the scientific enterprise
1801 and broadening the meaning of global change in their own lives.
1802
1803 Goal 2: Inform Decisions

1804
1805 Provide the scientific basis to inform and enable timely decisions on adaptation and
1806 mitigation
1807
1808 Global change is affecting many aspects of our society, livelihoods, and environment.
1809 Across the United States and around the world, people are making decisions to effectively minimize
1810 (mitigate) and prepare for (adapt to) global change. USGCRP and its member agencies past work on
1811 understanding the causes and consequences of global change has created a strong scientific
1812 foundation for informing decision makers who use science to understand and envision a range of
1813 potential impacts, risks, vulnerabilities, and trade-offs that are key for effective adaptation and
1814 mitigation actions. Over the next decade, USGCRP will add a more service-oriented element to
1815 the Program to better inform decision makersone that will increasingly conduct fundamental,
1816 use-inspired research, while delivering credible, relevant, timely, and accessible information.
1817
1818 USGCRPs success in informing decisions on global change depends on strengthening
1819 the dialogue and engagement between the science and decision making communities, with
1820 assessment being an essential tool (see Goal 3). This collaboration and coordination at the
1821 interface of science and decision making requires new methods and a framework for
1822 multidirectional information exchange. Key elements of USGCRPs role in informing decisions
1823 are to:
1824
1825 Facilitate meaningful engagements between scientists and decision makers, with a
1826 primary focus on assessing decision maker needs and science requirements, identifying
1827 critical gaps in knowledge and options for a use-inspired research agenda, and
1828 establishing new pathways for sustained dialogue.
1829 Provide access to relevant and accurate science through a platform of user-friendly
1830 global change information, tools, and services; manage risks by identifying uncertainties,
1831 and coordinate effective partnerships for multidirectional information sharing across
1832 scales (from local to international) and across sectors.
1833 Guide and coordinate Federal science efforts through the USGCRP to ensure they
1834 are useful and focused on relevant and beneficial societal outcomes.
1835 Inform Federal responses to global change through close, ongoing interaction with
1836 Federal agencies and departments as they develop and implement climate change
1837 adaptation plans, as well as mitigation measures and policies, built upon sound scientific
1838 understanding.
1839
1840 Objectives 2.1 (Inform Adaptation Decisions) and 2.2 (Inform Mitigation Decisions)
1841 present strategies and new approaches for informing global change-related decisions. Objective
1842 2.3 (Enhancing Climate Services) describes how to facilitate these decisions by building an
1843 effective framework for climate services. Objective 2.4 (Enhance International Partnerships)
1844 articulates the coordination of partnerships that leverage the strengths of international agencies
1845 and organizations in support of informed decisions. Taken together, these strategic objectives
1846 will enable public and private leaders to routinely access and integrate USGCRP global change
1847 information, research findings, and assessments into their analyses and overall adaptation and
1848 mitigation decisions.
1849
1850
1851 Box 11. Science to Inform Urban Adaptation.

1852
1853 Strong partnerships and informed leadership are helping Chicago develop a response to projected higher future
1854 temperatures (with heat waves potentially occurring up to once every three years) that may affect businesses and
1855 the general public. Using USGCRP member agency data, a multistakeholder task force developed the Chicago
1856 Climate Action Plan, which identifies adaptive strategies to long-term climate change trends, such as helping
1857 property owners prepare greener landscapes and improve energy efficiency, and implements a more climate-
1858 conscious urban design to manage heat and flooding. For example, the City of Chicago is working to reduce urban
1859 heat buildup and the demand for air conditioning by installing roofs covered with soil and vegetation that are up to
1860 77F (25C) cooler than nearby conventional roofs (Figures B11.1 and B11.2).
1861
Figure B11.1 (above) The green roof on top of Chicagos City Hall is designed to
cool the building and increase energy efficiency. Photo credit: City of Chicago,
http://www.chicagoclimateaction.org/pages/research___reports/8.php
Figure B11.2 (left) This infrared image, with a temperature scale on the right,
reveals that green roofs are cooler than the surrounding conventional roofs.
1862 Photo credit: Chicago Police Department and the Cook County Sheriff's
1863 Department.
1864
1865 In the future, USGCRP and its member agencies will continue to inform urban planning decisions by supporting
1866 the development of decision-relevant climate information. The Program will enhance the accessibility of this
1867 information through innovative knowledge-sharing tools like a global change information system (see Text Box
1868 8). USGCRP-supported assessments will provide researchers and community stakeholders with the opportunity
1869 to engage in a strategic dialogue to help identify knowledge gaps, project future global change conditions, and
1870 share information needs.
1871
1872
1873 Objective 2.1: Inform Adaptation Decisions
1874
1875 Improve the deployment and accessibility of science to inform adaptation decisions.
1876
1877 When considering options to reduce the risks of global change, decision makers need
1878 timely access to accurate and relevant information. Adaptation efforts underscore the need for a
1879 more strategic global change science agenda. This fundamental shift associated with the
1880 realignment of scope of the Program necessitates a sustained dialogue that enables information
1881 exchange and feedback among scientists, decision makers, and practitioners throughout the
1882 adaptation research, planning, implementation, and evaluation processes.
1883
1884 USGCRP will provide coordination functions to ensure that Federal science investments
1885 best address adaptation needs. Emphasis will be placed on a process for identifying on a
1886 continuing basis information gaps articulated by decision makers, developing options for filling
1887 these gaps through a use-inspired Federal research agenda for global change adaptation, and
1888 exploring pathways for improved integration of science to inform of adaptation actions. The
1889 National Assessment is explicitly including one approach to identifying these gaps in the
1890 research agenda. USGCRP and its member agencies will also explore ideas and options for
1891 building capabilities in the deployment of accessible, actionable science, tools, and services to
1892 inform adaptation decisions. As described above under the Advance Science goal, these
1893 considerations will be particularly important in the development of methodologies and
1894 approaches to assess global change risks, impacts, and vulnerabilities, for use on local-to-
1895 regional scales where many management decisions are made. Such methodologies are also
1896 needed to assess the outcomes of alternative adaptation options and to improve approaches for
1897 identifying and managing for extremes, including low-probability, high-impact events.
1898
1899 Improved understanding of the vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity of human
1900 and natural systems affected by global change will guide the setting of policy and management
1901 priorities for adaptation, and inform the development of next-generation adaptive management
1902 tools and approaches.
1903
1904 Defining best practices for transferring scientific knowledge to adaptation decision
1905 making will be guided in part by social science research evaluating the uptake of USGCRP
1906 research into decisions and its effectiveness in informing robust outcomes. This research will
1907 occur at the interface between the science, policy, and management communities, supported by
1908 USGCRP coordination.
1909
1910 Key components in facilitating an effective engagement between the science community
1911 and adaptation decision makers include:
1912
1913 Assess and address decision maker needs and science requirements by establishing
1914 sustained pathways and partnerships for continuously identifying the needs of adaptation
1915 practitioners and ensuring that these needs are addressed through a use-inspired Federal
1916 science agenda.
1917 Identify and communicate relevant information by developing and deploying a map
1918 of existing Federal science and services in support of adaptation.
1919 Develop new information exchange approaches through efforts such as the creation of
1920 an online clearinghouse or knowledge-management network for global change
1921 adaptation and knowledge sharing.
1922 Support public and private sector responses to global change through close, ongoing
1923 interactions and by supplying timely data and information streams. Particular focus will
1924 be on supporting Federal agencies and departments as they develop and implement
1925 climate change adaptation plans, as well as mitigation measures and policies, built upon
1926 sound scientific understanding.
1927
1928 Governments at all levels play a crucial role in the development and implementation of
1929 global change adaptation measures and policies, and as such, provide immediate and long-term
1930 opportunities to institute and develop these components of engagement. USGCRP and its
1931 member agencies will work with state, local, and tribal governments, as well as Federal agencies,
1932 as one means to build the capabilities for engagement and support needed by all decision makers.
1933 One near-term opportunity for demonstrating these pathways is to provide information and
1934 assistance to Federal agencies as they work to develop and implement agency-wide climate
1935 change adaptation plans as mandated under Executive Order 13514: Federal Leadership in
1936 Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance.
1937
1938 By improving connections between science and decision making, USGCRP and its
1939 member agencies will play a valuable role in informing decisions.
Box 12. New Tools Evaluate Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding Impacts.
Climate variability and change directly affect coastal

communities. USGCRP member agencies are
integrating multiple capabilities (observing, modeling,
prediction, and decision support) and multiple
scientific disciplines (climatology, meteorology,
oceanography, economics, and social science) to
provide these communities with a suite of climate
service tools that will help them make important
planning decisions. One example of a climate service
tool is the Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flooding
Impacts Viewer. Using data integrated from
USGCRP member agencies, this tool provides
simulations of sea level rise at local landmarks,
communicates the uncertainty of mapped sea levels,
models potential marsh migration, overlays social
Figure B12.1. An image of a barrier island and and economic data, and examines how tidal flooding
coastline as seen via NOAA's Sea Level Rise and will become more frequent. Communities can use
Coastal Flooding Impacts Viewer at this information to make stronger planning decisions
http://www.csc.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/slrviewer/i in important areas such as infrastructure
ndex.html maintenance, ecosystem management, and local
business development. This tool and other climate
service products will provide the real-time data needed to build resilient communities in the face of sea level rise
and other global changes.
1940
1941
1942 Objective 2.2: Inform Mitigation Decisions
1943
1944 Improve the deployment and accessibility of science to inform decisions on mitigation and the
1945 mitigation-adaptation interface.
1946
1947 Efforts to mitigate climate change focus on reducing emissions of atmospheric carbon
1948 dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Options include the capture and sequestration of greenhouse
1949 gas emissions, altered agricultural and forestry practices, more efficient use of energy, and a
1950 transition to low-carbon energy sources, such as wind, solar, and nuclear.
1951
1952 To make informed decisions about mitigation options at multiple spatial scales, decision
1953 makers should understand the effects of policy options on greenhouse gas emissions, the costs of
1954 reducing emissions, and the benefits of avoiding greenhouse gas emissions. Tools to inform
1955 mitigation decisions will be built on new research aimed at improving understanding of carbon
1956 storage in the Earth system, the development of scenarios of possible changes and impacts, and
1957 the identification of the social and ecological thresholds that help define limits to adaptation.
1958
1959 To be helpful to the broadest range of users, science should be translated into tools,
1960 information and practices that decision makers can understand and use. When mitigation actions
1961 involve market-based approaches, frameworks and inventories should be in place to measure,
1962 monitor, and validate actual emissions reductions. Existing and improved inventories are
1963 important parts of regular assessments that help inform national, state, and local policies (see
1964 also Goal 3, Sustained Assessments). The key components in facilitating an effective
1965 engagement between the science community and mitigation decision makers include:
1966
1967 Explore and address decision-maker needs and science requirements by serving as a
1968 boundary between the science and decision making communities, including initiating
1969 new engagements for specific mitigation research issues and building the capacity for
1970 translating science for specific decision contexts, particularly risk management
1971 frameworks.
1972 Identify relevant scientific information by analyzing and documenting current Federal
1973 capabilities for identifying, visualizing, and communicating existing environmental data
1974 to support management and mitigation science and service capabilities.
1975 Integrate Federal agency data and estimates of greenhouse gas emissions and sinks
1976 at multiple scales for all sectors and regions and provide such information to decision
1977 makers in an appropriate manner, and pilot new information products and tools for
1978 mitigation decisions, including tools and metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of
1979 mitigation actions and tradeoffs (e.g., local land-use impacts to ecosystems vs. global
1980 impacts from greenhouse gas emission reduction).
1981 Coordinate Federal agency research to inform the analysis of the greenhouse gas
1982 impacts of mitigation approaches, provide clear models and projections of potential
1983 impacts of policies, laws, and societal decisions on greenhouse gas impacts over time
1984 utilizing results of research to measure, report, and verify greenhouse gas emissions.
1985
1986 In the long term, the ability to manage greenhouse gas emissions through mitigation
1987 efforts will affect both the magnitude of the impacts to which we need to adapt, and the
1988 effectiveness of various adaptation options. Therefore, mitigation and adaptation actions are
1989 inextricably linked via the future costs of impacts versus current investments in mitigation. A
1990 better understanding of these linkages and interactions is necessary to develop effective
1991 adaptation and mitigation efforts and opportunities for co-benefits. Over the longer term,
1992 USGCRP and its member agencies will develop the scientific basis for understanding potential
1993 interactions, trade-offs, and consequences of coupled adaptation and mitigation strategies. This
1994 scientific basis will (1) advance coupled Earth system modeling that integrates across human and
1995 natural systems to assess the environmental, social, and economic outcomes of alternative
1996 adaptation and mitigation options; (2) advance social, behavioral, and economic research to
1997 improve understanding of human actions that lead to changes in emissions, and the costs of
1998 addressing those changes; and (3) improve understanding of policy and management decisions
1999 that build the resiliency of human and natural systems to global change impacts.
2000
2001 Objective 2.3: Enhancing Climate Services
2002
2003 Develop the tools and scientific basis to support an integrated system of climate services,
2004 supported by sustained, relevant, and timely data and information to support decision making.
2005
2006 Climate services are the development and timely provision of information products,
2007 including forecasts, based on accurate observations and model results that help people make
2008 informed decisions. These products support an integrated system of climate services, fueled by
2009 sustained, relevant, and timely data and information.
2010
2011 The local-to-global-scale impacts of climate variability and change have fueled a growing
2012 public demand for climate services. Climate services help people understand past, present, and
2013 likely future climate conditions (including natural variability), and how those conditions affect
2014 their lives, businesses and communities. Easy, intuitive access to these science-based services
2015 enables people to make informed decisions
2016 to support economic growth, reduce risks to Box 13. Construction and Climate.
2017 lives and property, and manage natural
2018 resources. The construction industry needs information on climate
2019 variability and change in order to adequately design
new construction projects. An example of how
2020 USGCRP agencies have been USGCRP member agencies have served the
2021 providing climate information that is construction industry is helping Boston evaluate the
2022 essential to many aspects of policy, design and placement of their new sewage treatment
plant.
2023 planning, and decision making for the past
2024 two decades; however, historically, this Bostons Deer Island Sewage Treatment Plant was
2025 information has not been well coordinated designed and built taking future sea level rise into
consideration. Because the level of the plant relative to
2026 across the agencies. As a result, there are the level of the ocean at the outfall is critical to the
2027 opportunities for improved accessibility to amount of rainwater and sewage that can be treated,
2028 more comprehensive, consolidated, and the plant was built 1.9 feet (0.6 meters) higher than it
would otherwise have been to accommodate the
2029 user-relevant climate-related data and amount of sea level rise projected to occur by 2050,
2030 information. Global change observations, the planned life of the facility.
2031 monitoring, modeling, predictions, and The planners recognized the importance of using the
2032 projectionsunderpinned by the best- best available information to plan future development.
2033 available natural and social science They assessed the sea level rise information to help
2034 provide the information basis for a make short- and long-term construction decisions that
kept the project moving forward but would allow for
2035 framework of national climate services. No improvements in later stages. For example, increasing
2036 single agency can provide the breadth of the plants height would be less costly to incorporate in
2037 information needed and this provides a the original design, or short-term construction phase,
while protective barriers could be added at a later
2038 unique opportunity for USGCRP and its date, as needed, at a relatively small cost.
2039 partners, including the private sector,
2040 academia, and other Federal agencies, to
2041 improve the effectiveness of its climate
2042 services that can meet the growing public
2043 demand for science that informs, but does
2044 not prescribe, decision making. There is
2045 also a need for better information in an
2046 adaptive management context, given the
2047 challenges in conducting deterministic
2048 predictions of future conditions.
2049
2050 To develop a set of accessible and
2051 useful climate services, USGCRP and its
2052 member agencies will combine their Figure B13.1. Deer Island Sewage Treatment Plant.
2053 scientific assets with scalable new Photo credit: Massachusetts Water Resources
Authority.
2054 partnerships for sharing knowledge,
2055 increasing public understanding, and
2056 building professional capacity. USGCRP will participate in Federal interagency partnerships to
2057 capitalize on their unique and complementary strengths. Recognizing the diverse but
2058 complementary roles of various agencies, USGCRP is well positioned to connect climate science
2059 to decision making in a highly structured and effective way. USGCRP coordinated agency
2060 climate services should provide data and information to established businesses seeking to
2061 specialize in the provision of services and products based on environmental and climate data. It
2062 is expected that as USGCRP improves the accessibility of climate information, entrepreneurs in
2063 the private sector will be able to find new opportunities to tailor services to meet the needs of
2064 manufacturers, farmers, retailers, wholesalers, planners, resource managers, and others regarding
2065 how to adapt their business or community development plans to a changing climate.
2066
2067 USGCRP will seek to work collaboratively with partners, including decision makers in
2068 the public and private sectors, to integrate outcomes from USGCRPs major goal areas in
2069 advancing science and sustaining assessments to inform decisions and promote understanding of
2070 global change vulnerabilities and opportunities. The key features upon which USGCRP agency
2071 climate services will be built include:
2072
2073 Observing Systems, Data Stewardship, and Climate Monitoring. USGCRP agencies
2074 will collect, preserve, and analyze the global environmental record for continuous climate
2075 monitoring and developing periodic assessments in support of climate services. This
2076 readily accessible, long-term archive will serve the Nations need for trusted climate-
2077 related information about the current and changing state of the climate system. A global
2078 change information system will be an important step in this direction (see Text Box 8).
2079 Predictions and Projections. USGCRP climate predictions and projections will provide
2080 information on multiple timescales for climate variability (from weeks to years), impacts,
2081 and longer-term changes (decades to centuries). Experimental analysis and translation
2082 tools will be developed with stakeholders to transform model projections into useful
2083 information at relevant spatial and temporal scales.
2084 Integrated Service Development and Decision Support. USGCRP and its member
2085 agencies will provide timely and relevant climate information to other Federal programs
2086 that address climate-related issues on various scales, from local, regional, and national to
2087 global. In addition, USGCRP will deliver data and information streams (that are designed
2088 to support specific decisions in regions and sectors) to the general public and to climate
2089 service providers that develop decision-support tools and other applications.
2090
2091 USGCRP will strive to ensure that the best-available climate information, tools, and
2092 services will be delivered to support public and private sector policy, planning, and decision
2093 making. Because many climate services are being provided today by individual agencies
2094 (national, state, and municipal) and outside the government, the key challenge for USGCRP will
2095 be to develop more effective coordination, communication and resultant synergy among these
2096 bodies (see Text Box 10). In addition, USGCRP will work closely with the Global Framework
2097 for Climate Services as it strives to incorporate a set of international arrangements that would
2098 establish an end-to-end system for providing climate services and applying them in decision
2099 making in an international context. The Nations need for climate services exceeds the scope of
2100 any individual organization or agency. Accordingly, a strong framework of interagency and
2101 external partners is key to the success of delivering climate services.
2102
2103
2104
2105
2106
2107
Box 14. Growing Seasons. 2108
2109
The agriculture industry in the United States generates over $200 billion a year in food and commodities
2110
from a diverse range of crops and animals. Climate change affects this industry by contributing to increased
productivity in certain crops and reducing productivity in others. 2111
2112
Crop responses in a changing climate reflect the interplay among three factors: changing temperatures,2113
changing water resources, and increasing carbon dioxide concentrations. Warming generally causes plants 2114
that are below their optimum temperature to grow faster, with obvious benefits. For some plants, such as 2115
cereal crops, however, faster growth means there is less time for the grain itself to grow and mature, 2116
reducing yields. For some annual crops, adjusting the planting date to avoid late season heat stress is2117one
strategy for adjusting to changes.
2118
The grain-filling period (the time when the seed grows and matures) of wheat and other small grains
2119
shortens dramatically with changing temperatures. Analysis of crop responses suggests that even moderate 2120
2121
changes in temperature will decrease yields of corn, wheat, sorghum, bean, rice, cotton, and peanut crops.
2122
Changing numbers of freezing days provide an example of how agriculture is affected by climate change. 2123
Since the mid-1970s, observations show that the number of days per year in which the temperature falls 2124
below freezing has declined by four to seven days over much of the Southeast. Some areas, such as 2125
western Louisiana, have experienced more than 20 fewer freezing days. These observations can help 2126 inform
farmers and others in the agriculture business to maximize their crop output. For scientists, these
2127
observations inspire future research around climate to continue to inform decision makers: Will these trends
2128
continue, accelerate, or change direction? How will next years freeze-free period compare to these trends?
2129
USGCRP will coordinate efforts of member agencies that, through observations, crop- and forest-growth 2130
models, and regional climate models, will provide authoritative information and tools that can be used by2131
farmers and landowners to make decisions relevant to agricultural production in a changing climate. 2132
2133
2134
Figure B14.1. Since the mid-1970s,
the number of days per year in
2135
which the temperature falls below 2136
freezing has declined by four to 2137
seven days over much of the
Southeast. Some areas, such as
2138
western Louisiana, have 2139
experienced more than 20 fewer 2140
freezing days. Climate models
project continues warming across
2141
the region, with the greatest 2142
increases in temperature expected 2143
in summer, and the number of very
hot days increasing at a greater rate
2144
than the average temperature. 2145
Image credit: NOAA/NCDC 2146
2147
2148
2149
2150
2151 Objective 2.4: Enhancing International Partnerships

2152
2153 Provide leadership in international partnerships to enhance the scientific basis for decision
2154 making.
2155
2156 Global change is an international concern. Vital resources, such as water and food
2157 supplies, cross geopolitical boundaries, and the effects of global change likewise extend to
2158 social, economic, and political systems regardless of location. U.S. leadership on global change
2159 issues necessitates understanding impacts and opportunities from a global perspective. Active
2160 dialogues and cooperation with international partners will strengthen and inform U.S. global
2161 change research efforts, policies, and investments domestically and abroad. Through
2162 international partnerships, USGCRP can leverage the best-available science and practices from
2163 around the world to inform U.S. policy and program decisions.
2164
2165 International institutions and activities such as the United Nations have demonstrated
2166 successful integration of international partnerships and information exchange by harmonizing the
2167 various missions and efforts of governmental institutions, non-governmental organizations,
2168 academia, and the public and private sector. By strengthening international partnerships,
2169 USGCRP can enable the application of data and information to U.S. activities effectively and
2170 efficiently, without redundancy of effort. The key features of the USGCRP approach to enhance
2171 international partnerships include:
2172
2173 Promote scientific diplomacy. Leveraging USGCRP and its member agencies strength
2174 in science, assessment, and education with international cooperation to strengthen science
2175 and technology partnerships will be a catalyst to other U.S. initiatives in policy and
2176 security.
2177 Support emerging boundary initiatives to meet the needs of appropriate decision
2178 makers. USGCRP will provide support for international organizations that are bridging
2179 the gap between scientific research and policy and public action. This initiative aligns
2180 with USGCRPs commitment to the end-to-end delivery of information, where relevant
2181 and accessible science is used to inform decisions.
2182 Inform U.S. humanitarian development efforts. The ability to assist foreign countries
2183 requires integrating multiple information streams, including climate predictions with a
2184 variety of social scientific data sets, such as economic and public health information so as
2185 to inform decisions from a cost-benefit perspective. USGCRP coordination of timely and
2186 relevant information regarding global change will inform more robust decisions related to
2187 U.S. international development efforts such as the Presidential Policy Directive on Global
2188 Development, especially in basic areas such as food security and health.
2189 Strengthen U.S. efforts to respond to global change. The State Departments
2190 Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review identified climate change as a
2191 destabilizing agent that affects many U.S. interests. American businesses will be affected
2192 by disruptions to global economic markets. Improving coordination and information
2193 exchange on topics related to global change such as population demographics or
2194 economic tradeoffs can inform a range of policy and investment decisions.
2195
2196 Effective partnerships will maximize domestic and international scientific exchange and
2197 best practices, and allow decision makers to make more informed science-based decisions
2198 domestically and globally. From the collective knowledge and experience across its
2199 participating Federal agencies, USGCRP is uniquely positioned to identify potential synergies
2200 with existing international organizations and pursue collaborative programs that bridge the
2201 environmental challenges faced by governments, businesses, and society. By leveraging
2202 domestic and international knowledge, USGCRP can achieve a global change research program
2203 that will support end-to-end delivery of products and services in climate science, assessment,
2204 education, and implementation. Through these activities, USGCRP will play a key role in
2205 informing decision makers about the impacts of international policies on various U.S. sectors and
2206 the international implications of U.S. policies.
2207
2208 USGCRP can profoundly advance the Nations capacity to apply scientific information to
2209 the strategic choices faced by decision makers in the context of global change. The best science
2210 will only benefit society when there is an ongoing process that evaluates the accessibility and use
2211 of the science for decision makers and society. USGCRP will strengthen connections between
2212 global change science, assessments, and decision making by: ensuring a responsive science
2213 agenda that meets decision maker needs, developing information pathways that support
2214 institutional decisions, engaging in ongoing evaluations of program effectiveness, and leveraging
2215 domestic and international capabilities and partnerships.
2216
2217 USGCRPs activities to inform decisions in a changing global environment will be
2218 conducted in coordination with its other goals: advancing science, conducting sustained
2219 assessments, and enhancing communication and education. Together, these strategic efforts will
2220 ensure that scientific information is timely, credible, relevant, and accessible, and that science is
2221 continuously and effectively communicated to planners and decision makers across all levels and
2222 sectors.
2223
2224
2225 Goal 3: Sustained Assessments

2226
2227 Build sustained assessment capacity that improves the nations ability to understand,
2228 anticipate, and respond to global change impacts and vulnerabilities.
2229
2230 Assessments are an essential tool for linking science and decision making. They survey,
2231 integrate, and synthesize science, within and between scientific disciplines and across sectors and
2232 regions. Assessments support the critical analysis of issues, highlighting key knowledge that can
2233 improve policy choices and identifying significant gaps that can limit effective decision making.
2234 They are vehicles for sustained dialogue among stakeholders across the country. Assessment
2235 activities also track progress by identifying changes in the condition of the integrated Earth
2236 system over time, advances in the underlying science, and changes in human response. As a
2237 result, they are a critical element in achieving USGCRPs vision.
2238
2239 Assessments have been an integral component
2240 of USGCRP since its inception. Individual agencies Text Box 9: National Climate Assessment.
2241 regularly use assessments to ensure that the agencies The USGCRP is required on a periodic basis
2242 are meeting their legal mandates, and to deploy the (not less frequently than every 4 years) to
2243 best available science toward achieving their mission. submit to the President and the Congress a
report that:
2244 Additionally, along with its strategic role as 1. Integrates, evaluates, and interprets the
2245 coordinator of Federal global change research, findings of the USGCRP and discusses
2246 USGCRP is required by the Global Change Research the scientific uncertainties associated with
such findings;
2247 Act of 1990 to conduct a National Climate 2. Analyzes the effects of global change on
2248 Assessment (see Text Box 9). USGCRP also the natural environment, agriculture,
2249 coordinates and supports U.S. participation in energy production and use, land and water
resources, transportation, human health
2250 appropriate international assessment efforts, such as and welfare, human social systems, and
2251 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. biological diversity; and
2252 USGCRP has the capacity, resources, and interest for 3. Analyzes current trends in global change,
both human- induced and natural, and
2253 comprehensive national and international assessment projects major trends for the subsequent
2254 of global change, and provides a link to U.S. 25 to 100 years.
2255 participation in other assessments. - Global Change Research Act of 1990
2256
2257 The National Context
2258
2259 USGCRP agencies have long employed assessments as a central tool to support decision
2260 making based upon scientific outcomes. Keys to success include a careful stakeholder
2261 engagement process, development of indicators to quantify the effectiveness of policies, and
2262 adaptive management. Climate change adds an additional stress to environments already
2263 experiencing multiple other global change stresses (e.g., population growth, land use change,
2264 urbanization, and industrialization). Encompassing climate in assessments is further complicated
2265 by the need to account for regional differences in climate change impacts. Many entities are
2266 conducting assessments and preparing strategies for adaptation and mitigation. Of particular
2267 importance are the adaptation efforts within the Federal government, efforts that will be
2268 supported by explicitly focusing on the science and decision support needs of the Federal
2269 agencies as information is developed for the National Climate Assessment. Not only is the
2270 Federal government a key partner in the nations efforts to adapt to climate change, it also has a
2271 direct stake in adaptation because climate change directly affects Federal services, operations,
2272 and programs across the country.
2273
2274 To improve effectiveness and regional
Text Box 10: The Federal Role in Making
Regional Knowledge Accessible. 2275 coordination, the Council on Environmental
2276 Quality, the Office of Science and Technology
The USGCRP Strategic Plan calls for enhanced 2277 Policy, and USGCRP are working together to
coordination and cooperation among the Federal
global change science and service programs 2278
to improve regional coordination to leverage
2279
realize its vision and contribute to a government- capacity and expertise of our existing institutions,
wide end-to-end approach to global change. 2280 while providing flexibility to reflect the regional
This vision is responsive to a shared and clearly
expressed need from communities across the 2281 context, including differences in issues, assets and
2282
United States for climate information and services capabilities. Strong Federal research programs in
to enable better planning and management 2283 of the eight identified regions (or hubs) will engage
risks of global change to people, places, and the
economy. As a part of this vision, USGCRP2284 and with existing Federal and non-Federal partners
its member agencies will meet regional needs 2285 throughout each region to coordinate climate
arising from local communities specific socio- 2286 science and services, connect decision makers and
economic, environmental, and cultural contexts.
2287 climate experts, and engage a broad range of
Planning is already underway, guided by the2288 stakeholders (see Text Box 10). This hub and
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and 2289
the spoke network approach should greatly facilitate
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP),
2290
to better use the capacity of existing institutions of employing common standards and information.
the Federal government and key partners to2291 more Employing common standards will, in turn,
efficiently and effectively deliver regional 2292 enhance understanding of projections of climate
knowledge. The USGCRP Strategic Plan goals for
Informing Decisions and Sustained Assessments 2293 impacts and promote best practices to adapt to
are carefully designed with this regional 2294 future climate.
coordination effort in mind. For instance, the2295
eight
regional networks of climate-related programs for
the National Climate Assessment are identical to
2296 USGCRP is responsible for satisfying the
those used in the CEQ and OSTP adaptation 2297 legal mandate of the Global Change Research Act
efforts. This shared approach will result in 2298 for a National Climate Assessment. The National
USGCRP being better able to improve access to
2299
Federal climate information, tools, and resources
Climate Assessment (National Assessment) is the
specific to each region and across regions, and 2300 USGCRP process that will produce an ongoing,
engage information users in a collaborative 2301and comprehensive assessment of climate change for
inclusive process of both using and creating
knowledge. USGCRP will support the
2302 the Nation, including impacts, vulnerabilities and
development of regional adaptation strategies 2303
by response strategies, within a context of how
strengthening the connections between Federal 2304 communities and the nation as a whole create
science and information users, and strengthening
the pathways by which stakeholder needs are
2305 sustainable and environmentally sound
incorporated into research priorities. 2306 development paths.
2307 In addition to the requirements of the Global Change Research Act to address specific
2308 components of natural and societal systems, assessments must account for the effects of global
2309 change where it directly impacts citizens livestheir geographic regionand so the National
2310 Assessment includes analyses within regions of the country as an integral component. The
2311 National Assessment is also nested within a global context and connected to the international
2312 assessments whose activities are also supported by USGCRP. The National Assessment
2313 develops focused investigations of regional and sectoral topics, as well as integrated topics that
2314 have high priority due to existing or anticipated climate stresses. These nested investigations
2315 allow for a more detailed and focused assessment of issues in specific locations and within
2316 natural and human systems. Finally, because of the complexity of climate change, national and
2317 international assessments are expected to prioritize issues that cut across traditional topics and
2318 political boundaries. Tackling issues that cut across political boundaries requires consideration
2319 of both geographically and biophysically defined regions (e.g., arid lands, coasts) and
2320 interactions between the natural and built environments (e.g., the nexus of energy, water, and
2321 land).
2322
2323 The strategic vision for the National Assessment differs in multiple ways from previous
2324 U.S. climate assessment efforts22. Building on the recommendations of the National Research
2325 Council, it will implement a long-term, consistent, and ongoing process for evaluation of climate
2326 risks and opportunities, and informing decision making processes within regions and sectors. An
2327 essential component of this process is to establish sustained assessment capacity both inside and
2328 outside of the Federal government that draws upon, and sustains, the work of stakeholders and
2329 scientists across the country. It will also be more focused on evaluating the current state of
2330 scientific knowledge relative to climate impacts and trends, and on supporting the Nations
2331 activities in adaptation and mitigation. The National Assessment will lead the development of a
2332 small, consistent suite of indicators of climate change that encompass metrics for progress in
2333 adaptation and mitigation activities using a risk-based framing. The National Assessment will
2334 also be the initial focal point for development of an interagency global change information
2335 system that will provide timely, authoritative, and relevant information, and permit production of
2336 a set of reports and web-based products that are useful for decision making at multiple levels (see
2337 Text Box 8). The benefits of these new approaches to assessment include increased efficiency
2338 and leveraging of existing resources within USGCRP, deeper stakeholder involvement, spread of
2339 new ideas and best practices, a way to feed back information from users into the science
2340 priorities, and improved capacity to cope with global change. The resulting infrastructure,
2341 protocols, and tools will be available more widely to enable assessment processes across multiple
2342 scales and sectors, conducted outside the USGCRP umbrella.
2343
2344 The International Context
2345
2346 USGCRP recognizes the international context of climate trends and the connections
2347 between risks and vulnerabilities to the United States that are generated by climate impacts
2348 elsewhere. Adaptation and mitigation decisions within the United States have impacts on other
2349 countries, and vice versa. There are other kinds of interactions, because some adaptation options
2350 may increase greenhouse gas emissions, and some kinds of mitigation efforts increase risks
2351 associated with climate impacts. These impacts occur within ecological, physical, social and
2352 political systems that affect countries across the globe, and so the United States should remain
2353 fully engaged with the international community given the strategic importance of global trade,
2354 security, and diplomacy.
2355
2356 USGCRP and its member agencies will continue to play a pivotal role in coordinating
2357 and supporting the active engagement of the Nations scientific community in appropriate
2358 international assessments, to ensure that national interests are represented. The Program also
2359 coordinates and supports U.S. scientist participation in the global assessment of the climate
2360 through the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, providing strong intellectual input to
2361 the process. The National Assessment activities will be coordinated with the efforts of the
2362 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and especially its North America chapter, to
2363 coordinate modeling activities, to maximize the benefit of work products from each to the other,
2364 and to better coordinate the involvement of U.S. volunteer scientists in both national and
2365 international assessments. Similarly, USGCRP will continue to act as a nexus for agency
2366 participation in other international assessments of global change, such as the Arctic Climate
2367 Impact Assessment and the Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion (see Box 17).
2368
2369 In addition to global-scale assessments, USGCRP will also work to ensure that we
2370 understand how our neighbors are addressing global change, and to communicate with them to
2371 enhance our joint successes. The regional hubs will need to engage with their international
2372 neighbors on issues ranging from water resources, to biological invasions and habitat shifts, to
2373 energy and transportation. Promoting scientific diplomacy can be a catalyst for other U.S.
2374 initiatives while also streamlining implementation of adaptation and mitigation activities.
2375 Extending beyond the Nations immediate boundaries, USGCRP assessments should also
2376 account for climate impacts on markets and people worldwide due to the increasingly complex
2377 fabric of international commerce.
2378
2379 Connections to Other Goals
2380
2381 Assessments support achievement of all of the other goals of the USGCRP Strategic Plan.
2382 For instance, they identify gaps in scientific understanding and highlight new scientific findings
2383 (Goal 1: Advance Science), which can then be transformed into policy-relevant information to
2384 inform decisions (Goal 2: Inform Decisions). Another important overlap with Advance Science
2385 is the critical issue of data management and deployment, as well as promoting interoperability
2386 and integration of climate-related information that is generated from a variety of sources.
2387 Similarly, the National Assessment will help synthesize and integrate scientific information for
2388 decision making related to global change across all sectors, regions, and scales, and improve the
2389 deployment and accessibility of science-based information to inform adaptation and mitigation
2390 decisions (Goal 2: Inform Decisions). Finally, successful assessment should establish sustained
2391 engagement among multiple stakeholders to enable effective decision making, which clearly
2392 overlaps with the central features of Goal 4: Communicate and Educateto reach diverse
2393 audiences and to establish effective engagement. Additionally, the National Assessment process
2394 will promote a workforce capable with coping with a multi-stressor environment that requires an
2395 adaptive risk management approach.
2396
2397 In addition to coordination with the other USGCRP Strategic Plan Goals, achieving this
2398 Goal requires successful responses to four objectives whose interacting elements support a
2399 comprehensive national assessment process, respond to the Global Change Research Act and
2400 provide a platform for U.S. participation in international assessments. These elements include:
2401
2402 Fully integrating the best scientific knowledge;
2403 Developing and deploying an ongoing assessment process;
2404 Ensuring the assessments captures relevant information to inform decision making;
2405 Continuously evaluating its progress and employing adaptive management over time.
2406
2407
2408
2409
2410 Box 15. Vulnerability Assessment and Climate Change Adaptation in New York City.
2411
2412 Projections for New York City (NYC) suggest that by mid-century, up to two feet (0.6 meters) of sea level rise will
2413 greatly increase the frequency of flooding and the impacts of storm surge in many areas of the city if adaptation
2414 measures are not taken. In preparation for such a scenario, NYC undertook a city-wide risk assessment using
2415 historical tide gauge data, climate model outputs, recent ice melt and paleoclimate data. NYC decision makers
2416 were engaged throughout the risk assessment to ensure climate information was linked to adaptation planning.
2417 This engagement is helping to foster novel approaches to NYCs long-term adaptation to sea level rise that
2418 include urban planning and architectural perspectives, and it serves as a model for the science-stakeholder
2419 interaction that will increasingly inform USGCRP science and the development of user-friendly climate
2420 information.
2421
2422 Sea level and climate modeling supported by USGCRP agencies and included in Intergovernmental Panel
2423 on Climate Change projections are critical for risk assessment efforts such as the one New York City undertook.
2424 USGCRP will develop global change models that provide information at regional scales the scales at which
2425 many adaptation decisions are made. USGCRP will also develop information services to ensure that scientific
2426 advances are useful and accessible to decision makers and managers.
2427 Figure B15.1. The light blue area
above depicts todays FEMA 100-
year flood zone for the city (the area
of the city that is expected to be
flooded every 100 years). With rising
sea levels, a 100-year flood at the
end of the century (not mapped here)
is projected to inundate a far larger
area of New York City, especially
under the higher emissions scenario.
Critical transportation infrastructure
located in the Battery area of lower
Manhattan could be flooded far more
frequently unless protected. The
increased likelihood of flooding is
causing planners to look into building
storm-surge barriers in New York
harbor to protect downtown New York
City. Image credit: New York City,
2428 Applied Science Associates, Inc.
2429
2430
2431 Objective 3.1: Scientific Integration
2432
2433 Integrate emerging scientific understanding of the integrated Earth system into assessments and
2434 identify critical gaps and limitations in scientific understanding.
2435
2436 Through the scientific endeavor, we continue to develop the capacity to understand
2437 observed climate events and trends, as well as to realistically project forward into the future
2438 (Goal 1: Advance Science). Assessments provide the opportunity for regular analysis and
2439 synthesis of the wealth of scientific data and understanding collected across the breadth of
2440 USGCRP agencies, all levels of government, the academic community, and the nonprofit and
2441 business sectors. Integrating and synthesizing our knowledge base, including traditional
2442 knowledge on a regular basis is crucial for informed adaptation, mitigation, and planning
2443 decisions, both nationally and internationally.
2444
2445 Integrating climate science into assessments also provides the requisite information to
2446 identify gaps in knowledge. For instance, Impacts, Adaptation, Vulnerability (IAV) models help
2447 formulate our understanding of the impacts of change, and the scope for adaptation of vulnerable
2448 populations or ecosystems (see Objective 1.4: Integrated Modeling), but need improvement to
2449 cope with the longer time scale of climate change. This information can then be used to assess
2450 options and prioritize investments in science and other Federal activities to maintain a sustained
2451 and coordinated research program that is responsive to both the Global Change Research Act and
2452 other ongoing assessment needs. The identification of science needs should include physical,
2453 ecological, and social science components that will allow prioritization of investments in
2454 adaptation and mitigation activities over the next decades. There is a particular need to continue
2455 to build the social science base for analysis of risks, vulnerabilities and adaptation options, as
2456 developed under Advance Science and Inform Decisions goals.
2457
2458 As the Nation moves forward to adapt to global change, the National Assessment needs
2459 to synthesize knowledge associated with adaptation and mitigation and to identify best practices
2460 from around the country and the globe, including risk-based approaches to community resilience
2461 and disaster preparedness. Components of the assessment reports should also integrate
2462 information to derive the latest knowledge how to facilitate making the best decisions under
2463 uncertainty given the long time line of global change and its impacts. This activity also has
2464 significant overlaps with Objective 3.3.
2465
2466 Scientific understanding will be applied to regional, sectoral, and crosscutting issues
2467 within the National Assessment to identify sustainable and environmentally sound development
2468 pathways as part of a comprehensive assessment of global change impacts, adaptation, and
2469 vulnerability. To achieve this understanding requires coordinated development of future visions
2470 of climate, societal, and related environmental conditions that provide common assumptions and
2471 scientific information to assessment teams in regions and economic sectors. These scenarios are
2472 not intended to predict the future, but to better understand the implications of uncertainties in
2473 decision making. A common, coordinated suite of scenarios is useful, but these scenarios can
2474 also provide input assumptions to various computer models that project forward in time to create
2475 an envelope of possible future climate states. The National Assessment and the U.S. components
2476 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change should facilitate the appropriate use of
2477 scenarios and technical guidelines and tools to enable regional and sectoral analyses that are
2478 useful to stakeholders and scientists. Nested assessments within the centrally developed
2479 scenario-driven model outputs should also be supported to provide analysis at a variety of spatial
2480 scales. These assessments will help establish common bounding assumptions across the Nation,
2481 but they do not preclude using alternative scenarios developed for more specific reasons.
2482
2483 In addition, a major challenge for our scientific understanding, and assessments
2484 generally, is the strongly voiced need from policy makers for realistic projections at decision-
2485 relevant spatial and temporal scales. As the desired temporal and spatial scales shrink from long
2486 term and global toward a more local scale, in some cases uncertainties in model output can
2487 increase and hence the value of the information may be more limited. Providing multiple
2488 timescale (e.g., seasonal to decadal) and spatial-scale information, while maintaining scientific
2489 rigor, is a strategic priority that will require significant effort over the coming decade (see Text
2490 Box 7). It will also be crucial to clearly communicate the current status of uncertainties in
2491 understanding and in the modeling efforts. Over the next decade, USGCRP will coordinate
2492 closer integration of IAV models and global climate models, as well as the National Assessment
2493 and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change efforts, which historically have developed
2494 independently.
2495
2496 Increasingly, international collaborations on observations, scientific assessments, and
2497 model intercomparison projects are crucial components for understanding the U.S. context of
2498 climate change and ozone depletion. Such collaborations synergistically enhance the capabilities
2499 of the U.S. science effort, and broaden the science basis for international assessments. USGCRP
2500 will continue to play a key role in leading, coordinating, and responding to international
2501 assessments, fostering U.S. participation and leadership in global efforts, such as the
2502 International Panel on Climate Change and the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (see Box 17).
2503 USGCRP will also support scientific involvement within the context of international
2504 collaborations that fulfill U.S. obligations to treaties such as the Vienna Convention for the
2505 Protection of the Ozone Layer, and other assessments that are critical for efforts towards
2506 environmental treaty verification.
2507
Box 16. Assessments to Improve Conservation Action.
State, Federal, Tribal and nongovernmental organizations are responding to USGCRP findings on climate
change and other landscape-scale changes, using them to identify opportunities for conservation and restoration
at multiple scales. Nationwide, conservation organizations are partnering with government agencies on
assessments to understand the combined impacts of climate change and other stressors and to integrate that
knowledge into conservation actions. Assessments, particularly when repeated or sustained, evaluate the
effectiveness of the science, decision-support tools, and approaches, and the progress they allow. Through its
goal of Sustained Assessments, USGCRP is creating a framework to enhance coordination and integration of
various efforts across the country. The intent is to provide decision makers with authoritative information about
natural resource management opportunities and constraints.
For example, Figure B16.1 displays wildlife corridors identified by State fish and wildlife agencies. Such
corridors permit wildlife adaptation (such as migration) to a multitude
of stressors, including climate change. Interagency cooperation
promotes efficient assessment of existing corridors that facilitates
effective placement of adaptation actions, such as the wildlife-
crossing overpass (Figure B16.2), to permit migrations hindered by
human barriers.
Figure B16.1. Wildlife corridors in the

western United States. Photo credit:
Western Governors Association. Figure B16.2. A wildlife overpass in Montana.
Photo credit: Scott Jackson.
2510 Objective 3.2: Ongoing Capacity

2511
2512 Strengthen and evolve ongoing capacity to conduct assessments with accessible, transparent,
2513 and consistent processes and broad participation of stakeholders across regions and sectors.
2514
2515 Fostering an ongoing capacity to conduct assessments across the Nation requires the
2516 cooperation of a broad network of entities outside the government as well as the efforts of
2517 USGCRP agencies. One approach to broad engagement is to establish a network of partners or
2518 network of networks that links and aligns Federal capacity with a wide range of interested
2519 communities. The intent is to partner with groups with both interest in climate and the capability
2520 to provide capacity to support the National Assessment and other assessments, such as
2521 governmental bodies (state, local, tribal), regional entities (e.g., Governors associations),
2522 nongovernmental organizations, trade associations (e.g., the Water Utility Climate Alliance), and
2523 academic institutions. The National Assessment intends to strengthen capacity to conduct
2524 assessments in a number of ways (e.g., training, technical assistance, partnerships with states,
2525 communities, nongovernmental organizations, and stakeholder groups) to improve institutional
2526 capability for, and commitment to, regular assessments.
2527
2528 Establishing a continuing, adaptive approach to national and international assessments,
2529 and an efficient and effective delivery of climate science and services (Goal 2: Inform
2530 Decisions), starts with better coordination of Federal agency climate science, assessments, and
2531 services in each region and economic sector (see Text Box 10). Many Federal agencies have
2532 regional offices and programs with unique assets and capabilities, through which they actively
2533 engage with extensive networks of partners at the local-to-regional scale, including partners in
2534 academia, state, local and tribal governments and in the private sector. Harmonizing efforts
2535 within each region, and providing benchmark scenarios of future conditions, benefits both
2536 decision makers and information providers by avoiding duplication of efforts and leveraging
2537 existing capabilities. Coordination of these efforts must be founded on a commitment to
2538 sustained engagement and collaboration with public and private sector decision makers in a
2539 process of shared learning and joint problem solving. Additionally, USGCRP, via its
2540 international alliances, will be able to provide a valuable interface with international science,
2541 assessment, adaptation, and mitigation experience and promote improved access to information
2542 that supports climate services at multiple scales.
2543
2544 National coordination of Federal climate activities therefore requires a framework that
2545 provides effective regional and cross-regional coordination to meet the overall national needs,
2546 while preserving the necessary flexibility for enabling different approaches within any given
2547 region. The Federal effort should focus in particular on supporting regional and international
2548 adaptation capacity and thus extends beyond both the National Assessment and USGCRP.
2549
2550 USGCRP will coordinate national assessment efforts across regions and sectors at
2551 multiple scales and build a sustained, collaborative network of public and private partners and
2552 stakeholders who are engaged in the National Assessment process, maximizing integration with
2553 related public and private sector efforts and institutions and supporting both regional and sectoral
2554 assessment capacity. The National Climate Assessment Development and Advisory Committee
2555 has been designed to foster the ongoing capacity of the assessment process and more fully
2556 engage all regions, sectors, and perspectives across the country as well as internationally.
2557
2558 Objective 3.3: Inform Responses

2559
2560 Inform responses to global change with accurate, authoritative, and timely information that is
2561 accessible to multiple audiences in multiple formats.
2562
2563 Many decision makers, whether in government, nongovernmental organizations, or
2564 private industry, require information about global change. These audiences need scientific
2565 insights into the status, risks, and opportunities for adaptation and mitigation at a variety of
2566 scales, as well as the capacity to evaluate the utility of alternative approaches. A key role for
2567 USGCRP agencies is providing accurate, authoritative, and timely climate-related information,
2568 developed as part of Goal 1 (Advance Science) and Goal 2 (Inform Decisions), across the nation
2569 and the world. Consistent scenarios of the future (Objective 3.1) provide a concrete example of
2570 this USGCRP role, and national indicators of global change should be developed to act as a
2571 benchmark across federal to local planning efforts. The network designed to foster an ongoing
2572 capacity for assessment (Objective 3.2) must be intentionally designed to provide an information
2573 foundation for climate services so that best practices can be strengthened, needs identified, and
2574 tool developed to meet needs at all scales of decision making. These efforts will maximize
2575 equitable access to information that supports adaptation and mitigation decision making,
2576 especially for regions, sectors, ecosystems, populations, and systems (e.g., transportation,
2577 energy) that are identified as most vulnerable.
Box 17. International Assessments.

USGCRP and its member agencies coordinate a wide range of scientific participation
in international assessments, where U.S. scientists play an important role in
analyzing the current state of science and adaptation efforts worldwide. For instance,
USGCRP supports participation of U.S. scientists on the International Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC), and the activities of the IPCC Working Group on Impacts,
Adaptation, and Vulnerability. USGCRP coordinates participation of U.S. contributors
to all IPCC working groups, and leads the coordination of author nominations and
government and expert reviews of IPCC products in cooperation with other federal
entities.
Another example of an important U.S. contribution coordinated through USGCRP

was the development of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA). ACIA was an
international project to evaluate and synthesize knowledge on climate variability,
climate change, and increased ultraviolet radiation and their consequences. The
United States is a member of the eight-nation Arctic Council, a high-level intergovernmental forum that requested this
major assessment in response to clear evidence of major impacts on the Arctic and its people. Working through the
International Arctic Science Committee, USGCRP agencies supported the requisite activities to bring this critical
effort to fruition. Looking ahead, the United States will chair the Arctic Council in
2017, during which significant related activities, including the ongoing Arctic Change
Assessment, and other relevant activities, including the development of the U.S.-
chaired Sustained Arctic Observation Network, will be well underway. USGCRP will
closely coordinate the Alaska regional assessment chapter of its 2017 National
Climate Assessment report with U.S. participation in these next pan-Arctic
assessment and monitoring efforts.
Assessment Panels have been integral to the United Nations Environment

Programmes ozone protection regime since the very beginning of the
implementation of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer. Its panels for Technology and Economic Assessment, Scientific Assessment,
and Environmental Effects Assessment have helped the Parties to reach informed
decisions and mitigation actions that have led to a reduction in the ozone hole. The
United States, as one of the parties, relies on USGCRP science and observations to
monitor the ozone layer and understand its dynamics.
2578 USGCRP will continue building rigorous processes to ensure the quality and
2579 transparency of data, information, and knowledge that are provided from the wide range of
2580 sources (see also Objectives 1.5 and 2.3). The network (Objective 3.2) will provide not only
2581 traditional sources of information such as peer-reviewed literature but will also use information
2582 services to incorporate Federal government data and multiple other sources of useful
2583 information, including state governments, businesses, or nongovernmental organizations, as well
2584 as traditional knowledge from tribal sources. All of these sources will need to be evaluated prior
2585 to inclusion in assessment products with a consistent, clear, and objective procedure that not only
2586 exceeds the requirements of the Federal Information Quality Act, but also holds up to critical
2587 external appraisal.
2588
2589 It is critical for USGCRP to develop and deploy effective and efficient communications,
2590 outreach, education, and engagement processes including web-based data and tools and new
2591 media (e.g., social networking) to help make assessment information accessible and useful to the
2592 wide array of Program stakeholders. Successful implementation will include a national discourse
2593 on global change that involves scientists and other stakeholders and promotes a more literate
2594 citizenry relative to climate issues. Online access will increase the usefulness of the data and
2595 information collected for the assessments as well as support development of climate-related
2596 educational curricula. The development of a comprehensive and user-friendly website will be a
2597 critical component of the assessment, requiring a data architecture that supports robust archiving,
2598 retrieval, and quality assurance. Indeed, the needs of the National Climate Assessment will be an
2599 initial test bed for development of a Federal interagency global change information system that
2600 will provide timely and relevant data and information to stakeholders, including the public (see
2601 Text Box 8). Development of this information system will require close coordination with
2602 implementation of Goal 4 (Communicate and Educate).
2603
2604 Informing responses to global change requires ongoing evaluation of key issues for the
2605 Nation and evaluating progress towards reducing the Nations vulnerability and risk. USGCRP,
2606 through the National Assessment process, will engage in designing and sustaining a small,
2607 coordinated suite of climate-related physical, ecological, and societal indicators that are easily
2608 communicated to interested parties. They will be tracked as a part of ongoing, long-term
2609 assessment activities, with adjustments as necessary to adapt to changing conditions and
2610 understanding. These indicators should:
2611
2612 Provide meaningful climate-relevant information about the status and trends in of key
2613 physical, ecological, and social variables and values to inform decisions on management,
2614 research, and education at regional to national scales, for key sectors identified by the
2615 National Assessment process.
2616 Provide an early warning of changes in climate-related conditions of selected resources
2617 and valued systems to help develop effective mitigation measures and reduce costs of
2618 management.
2619 Provide data to better understand the climate-driven dynamic nature and condition of
2620 Earths systems and societies and to provide reference points for comparisons.
2621
2622 The resulting national metrics will help decision makers understand progress being made
2623 in adapting to and mitigating climate change effects based on implemented policies and
2624 activities. The metric dashboard in Figure 3 provides a user-friendly method to understand the
2625 cross-cutting indicators on a broad, comprehensive level, but also permits the user to focus on
2626 specific indicators that may contain information more applicable to their particular region of the
2627 country. By having this information easily accessible on a timely basis, decision makers around
2628 the nation can more quickly develop new ideas and practices to improve their ability to respond
2629 and adapt to climate change.
Figure 3: National Indicators to Inform Decisions
2630 Objective 3.4: Evaluate Progress

2631
2632 Ensure ongoing evaluation of assessment processes and products, and incorporate the findings
2633 into an adaptive response for systemic improvement.
2634
2635 A full evaluation of the national and international components of the USGCRP
2636 assessment process and products will be undertaken in an iterative and adaptive fashion.
2637 Assessment products and processes to be evaluated include those mandated by the Global
2638 Change Research Act of 1990, the corresponding and relevant processes and products described
2639 in this USGCRP decadal strategy, the U.S. components of the International Panel on Climate
2640 Change, and the National Assessment processes and products. Evaluation of progress toward
2641 achieving the objectives of the National Assessment, and USGCRP participation in other
2642 assessments, will be institutionalized into the annual USGCRP work plan to support
2643 improvements in methodologies, process, and products of the assessments. The National
2644 Climate Assessment Development and Advisory Committee, a Federal advisory committee
2645 responsible for producing Assessment reports, will provide ongoing advice on Assessment
2646 processes. Finally, the National Research Council will be engaged to conduct an independent,
2647 external review of the National Assessment and other USGCRP assessment involvements.
2648
2649 Public peer review of the assessment reports will likely involve academic, state, industry,
2650 international, and other groups conducting global change research. Criteria and metrics for peer
2651 review should include: scientific integrity of products and processes; evaluation of the degree of
2652 integration, evaluation, and interpretation of findings; evaluation of the scientific adequacy of
2653 analysis of global change effects; transparency and credibility of data and sources evaluated
2654 within the context of the Federal information quality requirements; and others.
2655
2656 Consultation with actual and potential users of the results prior to, during, and upon
2657 completion of assessment processes and product development will ensure that such results are
2658 useful in developing policy responses to global change. Criteria could include, for example,
2659 evaluations of the degree to which products are used and useful by targeted stakeholders, a
2660 review of the salience, credibility, and legitimacy of products and processes, and measures of
2661 increases in capacity.
2662
2663 Evaluation of participatory processes includes assessment of the quality, effectiveness,
2664 and sustainability of participation, and the extent of geographic and sectoral participation. The
2665 criteria for evaluation will in part consist of assessing how the various participation processes
2666 have contributed to the goals of the assessments. Other potential criteria for evaluating
2667 participation include assessing the breadth of representation in various activities, the nature of
2668 the relationships developed among the individuals and organizations that participate in National
2669 Assessment and other assessment activities, and the success in achieving the objectives and
2670 outcomes outlined in the National Assessment strategic plan. Evaluating progress toward
2671 building sustained assessment processes will come through a variety of formal and informal
2672 channels as part of a logical process that tracks participation from the time that an activity is
2673 initiated through the ultimate outputs, outcomes, impacts of the participation, and evaluation of
2674 the process and products. Each activity that includes participation should include the opportunity
2675 for participants to provide feedback on their experience, minimally through a written evaluation,
2676 but also through mechanisms such as pre- and post-activity surveys of knowledge and capacity,
2677 more focused written or oral evaluations, and follow-up discussions with organizers.
2678
2679 Goal 4: Communicate and Educate

2680
2681 Advance communications and education to broaden public understanding of global change
2682 and empower the workforce of the future.
2683
2684 From our communities, to our businesses, to our government agencies, global changes
2685 increasingly need to be considered when making decisions. Decision makers and leaders are the
2686 focus of USGCRPs Inform Decisions Goal. The Communicate and Educate Goal will address
2687 public understanding and workforce development.
2688
2689 The public is best served when connections between research outcomes and the things
2690 people care about (e.g., clean drinking water or shifts in their communitys coastline) are clear
2691 and shown explicitly. Public surveys and assessments on the state of environmental literacy
2692 indicate that new approaches to communication and education efforts are needed to engage
2693 citizens in global change and related societal issues, such as energy and food security, and water
2694 availability.23
2695
2696 In the next decade, USGCRP will focus not only on fostering greater public
2697 understanding of the science through the dissemination of relevant, timely, and credible global
2698 change information, but also on gaining greater understanding of the publics science and
2699 information needs through engagement and dialogue. This dialogue will be accomplished by the
2700 Program integrating communication, education, and engagement into its core activities.
2701
2702 As the leading Federal authority on global change science, USGCRP and its member
2703 agencies are uniquely positioned to serve as the gateway to global change information. Many
2704 Federal agencies have the capacity to communicate with citizens on specific aspects of global
2705 change information. However, it is important to recognize that the great strength of USGCRP is
2706 in its ability to coordinate those Federal agencies in combined communication and education
2707 efforts.
2708
2709 The USGCRP strategy for communication, education, and engagement efforts in the next
2710 decade will build on the strengths of the participating agencies. The Program will coordinate the
2711 development of multi-agency products and programs, grow and expand the reach of information
2712 beyond single agencies, and ensure that feedback and input from public engagement is shared
2713 broadly within the Federal global change science community.
2714
2715 USGCRP will accomplish its Communicate and Educate goal through four objectives
2716 that will be used to guide Program activities:
2717
2718 Objective 4.1 (Strengthen Communication and Education Research): Strengthen global
2719 change communication and education research to enhance practices.
2720
2721 Objective 4.2 (Reach Diverse Audiences): Enhance existing and employ emerging tools and
2722 resources to inform and educate effectively, providing for information flow in multiple
2723 directions.
2724
2725 Objective 4.3 (Increase Engagement): Establish effective and sustained engagement to enable
2726 a responsive and wholly integrated Program.
2727 Objective 4.4 (Cultivate Workforce): Cultivate a capable, diverse workforce that is
2728 knowledgeable about global change.
2729
2730 The first three objectives address the need for broadening public awareness and
2731 understanding of global change through better understanding of citizens existing knowledge and
2732 information needs. They also address the need to (1) employ a robust combination of tools and
2733 methods to effectively meet those needs, (2) build and sustain relationships to foster greater
2734 understanding of USGCRP programs and activities, and (3) develop methods and processes for
2735 engagement and dialogue. Objective 4.4 focuses on communication and education activities that
2736 will help build the diverse national workforce needed to fill jobs in areas of global change
2737 science. The U.S. Department of Labor estimates that jobs requiring science expertise are
2738 expected to grow much faster than the average for all occupations through 2018.24 USGCRP
2739 agencies can play a key role in making sure that the workforce has the broad scientific expertise
2740 necessary to respond to future needs.
2741
2742
2743 Box 18. Building Climate Literacy.
2744
2745 Climate literacy is knowledge and understanding of the concepts and processes
2746 that control Earths climate; the influence of climate on individuals,
2747 communities, and society; and the influence of humans on climate. In
2748 partnership with scientific and educational organizations, USGCRP developed
2749 Climate Literacy: The Essential Principles of Climate Science (2009). The
2750 publication continues to be used as a valuable resource for teachers, students,
2751 and community leaders as a topic for discussion within local communities, and
2752 as a guide for the development of informal learning resources and science
2753 curriculum content standards around the country.
Figure B18.2. High

school students
watch a
2757 Figure B18.1. Cover of demonstration at a
2758 the report Climate Science Careers
in Search of
2759 Literacy: The Essential
Women
Principles of Climate
2760 Science, published in conference. Photo
2761 2009 (for a copy, go to credit: Argonne
National
2762 http://www.climatescienc
Laboratory.
e.gov/Library/Literacy/ )
2763
2764
2765
2766 Objective 4.1: Strengthen Communication and Education Research
2767
2768 Strengthen global change communication and education research to enhance practices
2769
2770 A major goal for USGCRP is to understand the connections among the environmental
2771 knowledge, opinions, attitudes, and behaviors of its diverse audiences. Such information will
2772 help USGCRP and its member agencies share scientific information effectively with the
2773 Programs different audiences, including Federal, state, local and tribal organizations; local
2774 adaptation planners; scientists; green businesses; students; and climate-interested citizens.
2775 Knowing the interests and background of the audiences at any given juncture is an important
2776 factor for communicating and educating effectively, as are the many important lessons that are
2777 provided by social science.25 As USGCRP plans its communication, education, and engagement
2778 activities for the next 10 years, understanding the motivations, needs, and learning styles of our
2779 diverse stakeholders will be a key in developing tools and resources that are successful and
2780 widely used.
2781
2782 Research to Assess Global Change Communication Effectiveness
2783
2784 Over the past decade, numerous agencies and institutions have invested in research on
2785 global change science knowledge and communication. USGCRP and its member agencies will
2786 develop an understanding of what this research shows about the audiences and stakeholders the
2787 Program wants to reach, and identify priority areas where additional research is needed.
2788 Information gathered using a variety of research tools and methods, such as large-scale surveys,
2789 literature reviews, and listening sessions will form the groundwork for prioritizing our efforts.
2790 USGCRP will work with its member agencies to analyze the additional social science and
2791 education research that should be prioritized.
2792
2793 Establishing a global change information system (see Text Box 8), assisting agency
2794 communications efforts using a variety of social media tools, and effectively coordinating
2795 national education programs are just a few areas where research and coordinated
2796 communications activities can help the public understand options for shaping future directions.
2797 Developing global change science communicators and science storytellers, and creating a
2798 strategy for how best to communicate using new tools, are other areas that research can also
2799 strengthen.
2800
2801 Objective 4.2: Reach Diverse Audiences
2802
2803 Enhance existing and employ emerging tools and resources to inform and educate effectively,
2804 providing for information flow in multiple directions
2805
2806 Supporting research to understand audiences and gain insight into what sorts of tools and
2807 strategies will work to reach those audiences is only the first step in developing a strong
2808 communications and education program within USGCRP. USGCRP and its member agencies
2809 will develop and use the methods and tools for translating the science, and bringing it to those
2810 who need it, in the most efficient, straightforward, and engaging manner, as needed to support all
2811 the other goals.
2812
2813 Employ Technological and Human Advances
2814
2815 The fields of communications and education are changing quickly in the 21st century,
2816 with new technologies for building social networks and interactivity that are reaching vast new
2817 audiences. The USGCRP of the future will need to adopt many existing technological advances,
2818 as well as embrace emerging ones, to provide global change educational information and
2819 communications. Social media will play a growing role in USGCRP communications activities,
2820 and communicators and educators within the Program will work to develop other new media
2821 tools that can engage the public in global change science. With its coordination role among the
2822 Federal agencies, USGCRP has the advantage of being able to combine and build upon the
2823 existing skills and considerable technological capacities of individual agencies to cooperate in
2824 devising cutting-edge communication and education tools. In addition, USGCRP will promote
2825 people-driven capabilities, such as agency extension services and community-based outreach to
2826 reach a more diverse audience. And above all, flexibility will be key for developing the most
2827 relevant, usable, and timely resources. USGCRP communications and education should remain
2828 up-to-date and build in adaptability to emerging technologies as a main component of its
2829 communications and education programs, including the evaluation of their effectiveness.
2830
2831
2832 Box 19. Science Learning.
2833
2834 Learning is a life-long process. Museums, botanical gardens, zoos, aquariums, and libraries, as well as TV, the
2835 Internet, and other communications technologies help to generate awareness of and interest in the natural world.
2836 By taking advantage of these information resources, where new concepts may be introduced or others elaborated
2837 upon, people can increase their scientific understanding and use it to enrich their interactions with the world around
2838 them.
2839
2840 USGCRP Federal agency members use informal environments for
2841 science learning, through activities such as developing community-
2842 educator partnerships and direct engagements with diverse audiences.
2843 For example, a resource package, The Climate Change Wildlife and
2844 Wildlands Toolkit for Formal and Informal Educators
2845 (http://www.globalchange.gov/resources/educators/toolkit ) was
2846 developed by multiple USGCRP agencies based on the award-winning
2847 and very popular toolkit first published in 2001. The updated 2007
2848 toolkit includes an easy-to-understand overview of the science of
2849 climate change, a DVD, classroom activities aligned with national
2850 science standards, and information on habitats and wildlife in 11
2851 ecoregions, as well as information on what kids can do to help.
2852 Figure B19.1. A citizen science backyard
2853 Future directions for USGCRP informal education activities could bird-banding program run by Smithsonian
2854 include contributing to: Migratory Bird Center. Photo credit:
2855 Smithsonian Institution.
2856 Museum exhibits and programs, including citizen science
2857 projects, to educate and engage citizens on the environmental changes happening around them
2858 Online resources for students and parents that include short presentations on a series of scientific topics
2859 and the opportunity to ask questions of scientists who are working for/with USGCRP agencies
2860 Resources and activities for K12 learners based on recent science findings that can be used in science-rich
2861 out-of-school settings by facilitators who know how to organize and support science learning
2862
2863
2864 Support Forums
2865
2866 Such communications tools are not just limited to technological resources, but also
2867 include resources that define new ways of communicating and educating. As such, an important
2868 component of USGCRP communication and education will be developing communities of
2869 practice, where communications and education experts will have the opportunity to discuss
2870 projects that have the potential to span agencies and scientific specialty fields, and leverage skills
2871 that exist within each agency for the benefit of the greater whole. USGCRP will support
2872 interagency groups that function as communities of practice, bringing together diverse education,
2873 communication, public information, extension services, engagement, and new media experts
2874 together to share research findings, tools, and practices, and work together to develop
2875 interagency projects.
2876
2877 Promote Interdisciplinary Education

2878
2879 Finally, essential to the USGCRP mission is the improvement of the scientific accuracy,
2880 educational effectiveness, and usability of communication and education materials and resources.
2881 These resources must incorporate an integrated Earth system science approach, social science,
2882 and educational research findings and promote an interdisciplinary framework. Education and
2883 communications practices must reinforce the main ideas of the climate literacy framework, they
2884 must be aligned with National and state standards, and they must be developed in collaboration
2885 with state and local entities. USGCRP will coordinate its efforts with other education initiatives
2886 to provide students and educators with innovative learning opportunities.
2887
2888 Further, USGCRP and its member agencies will provide the knowledge base for informal
2889 science learning programs at zoos, botanical parks, arboretums, museums, aquariums,
2890 community organizations, and similar institutions. Such informal settings can provide ideal
2891 opportunities to citizens of all ages and backgrounds to explore ways in which global change are
2892 affecting local communities. With an appropriately forward-looking approach, global change
2893 education and communication efforts within USGCRP agencies will serve the broader need to
2894 invest in our next generation of scientists, engineers, and educators so America can remain at the
2895 forefront of innovation and competition in the 21st century global marketplace.
2896
2897 Objective 4.3: Increase Engagement
2898
2899 Establish effective and sustained engagement to enable a responsive and wholly integrated
2900 USGCRP
2901
2902 Effective engagement with a person, group, or organization requires a dialogue to better
2903 understand stakeholder needs, issues, understanding, and expectations. Transparency and
2904 openness in communication and education builds credibility and trust. USGCRP will seek to
2905 engage a broad array of stakeholders, both within the United States and internationally, to ensure
2906 that Federal science is effective in addressing their issues and needs. The Program is uniquely
2907 positioned to broaden and expand existing relationships with stakeholders as well as forge new
2908 relationships through the extension of participating Federal agencies.
2909
2910 Build and Maintain Relationships
2911
2912 USGCRP will develop programs and forms of engagement to facilitate communication
2913 and education among citizens, stakeholders, partners, and the participating agencies. Providing
2914 timely, reliable, and credible information products and services to these audiences, which are
2915 relevant and easy to use, will be the key to establishing long-lasting relationships. Providing
2916 these products is important across the program and in the context of the National Climate
2917 Assessment.
2918
2919 Tailoring engagement methods to stakeholders needs supports effective engagement, and
2920 positive outcomes. USGCRP and its partner agencies will use current knowledge of audiences,
2921 including understanding of their interests, motivations, and needs as related to global change
2922 science (Objective 4.1) to develop effective engagement tools and technologies (Objective 4.2).
2923 USGCRP will employ appropriate methods and processes for engaging with and seeking
2924 feedback and input from partners, participating agencies, and constituents. Engagement
2925 activities will create pathways for public feedback and information needs that will be considered
2926 during the development of annual science priorities (see Goal 1: Advance Science), and to help
2927 guide development of more effective decision support tools (see Goal 2: Inform Decisions).
2928
2929
2930 Box 20. Global Change in Your Backyard.
2931
2932 Phenology is a scientific term for the timing of activity of plants
2933 and animals, such as the appearance each year of leaves and
2934 flowers, maturation of crops, emergence of insects, laying of
2935 eggs, timing of hibernations, and the migration of birds.
2936 Knowledge of phenology is critical for helping farmers and
2937 gardeners know when to plant or harvest, helping
2938 environmental managers anticipate drought and wildfire risks,
2939 and helping public health officials anticipate allergy season or
2940 the spread of mosquito-borne diseases. Phenology is,
2941 fundamentally, natures calendar.
2942
2943 We know that changes in phenology are among the most
2944 sensitive biological indicators of global change. Across the
2945 world today, many springtime events are occurring earlier
2946 and fall events happening laterthan in the past. These
2947 changes are happening quickly for some species and more
2948 slowly, or not at all, for others, altering relationships and Figure B20.1. Image courtesy of the
2949 processes that have been stable for thousands of years. National Phenology Network
2950 Scientists need more and better information about the pace
2951 and patterns of these changes to answer key scientific
2952 questions and to build the tools and models needed to help people understand and adapt to the changes.
2953
2954 The USA National Phenology Network (USA-NPN) monitors the
2955 phenology of plants, animals, and landscapes and provides key data
2956 to uncover trends and changes on a national scale. USA-NPN is a
2957 partnership among governmental and nongovernmental science and
2958 resource management agencies and organizations, the academic
2959 community, and the public. These groups and institutions work
2960 together to collect and organize species and timing information to
2961 inform research, education and outreach, agriculture, tourism and
2962 recreation, human health, and natural resource conservation and
2963 management. USA-NPN encourages people of all ages and
2964 backgrounds to observe phenological events as a way to discover
2965 and explore the world. By providing a place for people to enter, store,
2966 and share their observations, it also makes it possible for the general
Figure B20.2. Citizen scientists2967
at public to help researchers improve our understanding about how
work in Sonora, Mexico. Photo2968 changes in phenology relate to climate change.
2969 credit: D. Rosemartin.
2970 USA-NPN activitieswhich are supported by a number of USGCRP
2971 agenciesare organized through its National Coordinating Office at
2972 the University of Arizona. Continued support will be critical to help USA-NPN engage even more members of the
2973 public in the scientific enterprise and make it easier for their observations to become part of the large body of Earth
2974 system data used by researchers, farmers, government officials, and businesses. Harnessing new technologies,
2975 such as applications for mobile devices and social networking sites, will be key for future progress. Overall,
2976 increasing public involvement in the process of science, including data collection, analysis, and interpretation, will
2977 strengthen our national global change research enterprise and increase public literacy in global change science.
2978
2979
2980
2981
2982 Develop Methods and Processes

2983
2984 USGCRP and its member agencies will take specific actions to better understand
2985 information pathways and channels by conducting audience analyses to learn how audiences
2986 create, receive, and use information. The Program will expand its reach by leveraging existing
2987 communications and engagement channels established by the participating Federal agencies.
2988 USGCRP will use collaboration technologies, such as tools that help people share different
2989 perspectives, collaborate across disciplines, and facilitate the creative process. The development
2990 of both virtual and actual communities of practice will provide the opportunity for
2991 communication and education professionals to network and identify counterparts and partners as
2992 well as to share knowledge and best practices.
2993
2994 Objective 4.4: Cultivate Workforce
2995
2996 Cultivate a capable, diverse workforce that is knowledgeable about global change.
2997
2998 Cultivating a capable, diverse national workforce that is knowledgeable about global
2999 change and is environmentally literate in general will take significant strategic collaborations and
3000 systemic efforts. The complexity of the science requires input and knowledge from many
3001 different disciplines to prepare such a workforce. To have new scientists and future leaders with
3002 a strong understanding of the interrelated nature of coupled human-natural systems, they should
3003 receive academic preparation and professional development. An interdisciplinary approach is
3004 essential, combining physical, biological, and socio-economic sciences. Furthermore, the green
3005 jobs critical for adaptation and mitigation of global change will encompass many levels of
3006 expertise, from scientific discovery, to business, to facilitation in the implementation of
3007 environmental technologies. Students and others interested in environmental science and green
3008 careers are going to be looking for high-quality academic programs and cutting-edge research to
3009 prepare them for this growing employment sector of the future.
3010
3011 USGCRP is uniquely positioned to coordinate an effort to raise environmental literacy
3012 and develop a future workforce that actively integrates global change and environmental
3013 considerations into future activities. USGCRP will also work to promote workforce gender,
3014 racial, ethnic, cultural, and physical diversity. Focusing on diversity will ensure that distinct
3015 perspectives, talents, and skills are fully used and will permit the development of a more
3016 adaptable, creative, and relevant workforce.
3017
3018 Build Federal Workforce Knowledge and Capabilities
3019
3020 The scope of the workforce to be addressed by USGCRP and its member agencies
3021 includes the private sector and the federal workforce. USGCRP will continue to work with
3022 cadres of federal employees and contractors so that they are knowledgeable about the
3023 connections between natural and human systems, build linkages across disciplines, and are
3024 skilled in communication and engagement with targeted stakeholders and decision makers. They
3025 must be capable of using science to develop tools and resources that are useful to communities,
3026 and the public and the private sector as they make decisions informed by the science of global
3027 change.
3028
3029 Through USGCRP discussions, member agencies can collaborate to assess what skills are
3030 necessary to ensure the workforce can meet all of these needs. USGCRP agencies can then
3031 apply that information to design appropriate learning and development activities to allow the
3032 federal workforce to respond to global change needs now and into the future.
3033
3034 Develop a Next-Generation Workforce
3035
3036 USGCRP will leverage partnerships among the Federal agencies to support workforce
3037 development needs and interests at the federal, state, and local levels as well as at universities
3038 and in the private sector. USGCRP member agencies will promote interdisciplinary
3039 opportunities at the undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral levels to ensure a knowledgeable
3040 and well-trained workforce for continued advances in sustainability, climate, and global change
3041 science; provide the knowledge base for teaching and training programs at colleges and
3042 universities with particular emphasis on bridging physical, biological, social sciences, and
3043 engineering; and support educators professional development in science, technology,
3044 engineering, mathematics (STEM) and social sciences as they inspire and educate the next
3045 generation to achieve in career paths relevant to global change, in and beyond the STEM fields.
3046
3047 The pace and impacts of global change are occurring outside the range of past
3048 experience, rendering many of our current adaptive mechanisms insufficient. Incorporation of
3049 science is essential for successful planning, implementation, and evaluation of the U.S.
3050 adaptation and mitigation strategies. The intimate interactions within the natural-human system
3051 also call for full-scale multidecadal engagement with stakeholders, decision makers, and citizens.
3052 USGCRP and its member agencies will provide timely, relevant, and accessible information to
3053 the Nation and its international partners, and will use the feedback from such engagement to
3054 inform its directions for scientific research, as well as the provision of information and services.
3055
3056 The communication and education objectives and directions outlined in this section
3057 represent a commitment to include communication, education, and engagement as a foundational
3058 and integral component of everything USGCRP does. USGCRP and its member agencies will
3059 build from existing capabilities, incorporate existing and new findings from communication and
3060 education research into its practices, and expand partnerships within and beyond the Federal
3061 government. USGCRP will also integrate robust evaluation in all its processes and be nimble
3062 and flexible in its implementation.
3063
3064 IV: COORDINATING WITH OTHER NATIONS AND INTERNATIONAL

3065 ORGANIZATIONS
3066
3067 USGCRP cooperates internationally because it enhances and complements the strengths,
3068 interests, and needs of USGCRP and its partner agencies. The issues and challenges that
3069 USGCRP faces are global and are larger than the United States can deal with on its own. For
3070 any field of science, this vast scope would imply that international engagement is critical. For
3071 USGCRP science, however, the importance of international engagement is even greater.
3072
3073 Recognizing the strategic benefits of Text Box 11: International Cooperation.
3074 collaborating with international partners,
3075 USGCRP is required, in the Global Change Understanding and responding to environmental
change at global and regional levels requires far
3076 Research Act of 1990, to: (1) coordinate U.S. greater scientific expertise, technological capabilities,
3077 activities with other nations and international and resources than any one country can manage
3078 organizations on global change research alone. Congress recognized the need for international
cooperation at the outset of the USGCRP.
3079 projects and activities, (2) promote international
3080 cooperation and access to scientific data and The international scientific community has recognized
3081 information, and (3) participate in international the need for a new unifying vision to coordinate global
change research at the international level. The
3082 global change research by developing nations. leadership of the International Council for Science
3083 Through international engagement, USGCRP (ICSU), with input from USGCRP, is shaping the
3084 and its member agencies can effectively development of an international vision with support
and contributions by agencies that fund global
3085 leverage existing and future scientific environmental change research. The Belmont Forum
3086 capabilities to more effectively use resources to and the International Group of Funding Agencies for
3087 accomplish goals and strategic priorities. Global Change Research (IGFA) are working with
ICSU and the International Social Science Council
3088 (ISSC) to redefine what is needed to understand
3089 USGCRP engages in many international global and regional change.
3090 global change activities by supporting a variety
In parallel, long-standing international organizations
3091 of international programs such as the World such as the World Meteorological Organization
3092 Climate Research Program (WCRP), the (WMO), the United Nations Environment Program
3093 International Geosphere-Biosphere Program (UNEP), and the Consultative Group on International
Agricultural Research (CGIAR) system are
3094 (IGBP), the International Human Dimensions restructuring their organizations to develop new
3095 Program (IHDP), the Earth Systems Science programs that address climate and global change.
3096 Partnership (ESSP), DIVERSITAS, and the Best available scientific practices and observations at
local and regional scales are essential for these
3097 SysTem for Analysis, Research and Training organizations to successfully deliver actionable
3098 (START). In addition, individual USGCRP information to end users and decision makers globally.
3099 agencies support other programs and projects
Although the United States and other major
3100 that provide coordination of multidisciplinary industrialized countries presently conduct the great
3101 research relevant to global environmental majority of research on climate and global change, to
3102 change. understand such change on global and regional scales
will require scientific information and observations
3103 from some regions of the globe where scientific
3104 These activities have resulted in capabilities are not well developed. Therefore, it will
3105 substantially improved understanding of the be increasingly important to help the countries in these
regions, their scientists, and their institutions build
3106 Earth system processes that underlie global capabilities and knowledge that will enable them to
3107 change. They have provided both scientific contribute to regional and global programs.
3108 results and data that have improved models of
3109 global change and scenarios that predict such
3110 change and its impact, and these activities have made major contributions to the work of the
3111 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and to its assessments (see Box 17). In addition,
3112 support of the international programs has helped introduce social science perspectives, and has
3113 promoted science engagement and capacity building in developing countries. These programs
3114 and their associated infrastructure provide an essential framework within which U.S. scientists
3115 lead, conduct, and participate in a wide range of international global change research projects
3116 that advance key scientific objectives of the USGCRP. In addition, these global efforts have
3117 provided the U.S. science community with opportunities to develop long-term collaborative
3118 partnerships with their international colleagues.
3119
3120 USGCRP will identify potential synergies with existing international partners and
3121 investigate collaborating with new programs to the extent that these programs help meet the
3122 USGCRP needs. For example, there are opportunities for USGCRP to effectively coordinate
3123 research in specific geographical regions by cooperating with specific international research
3124 networks such as the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research, the Asia-Pacific
3125 Network for Global Environmental Change and the African Network for Environmental System
3126 Science.
3127
3128 Another example of an international effort to advance cooperation among the
3129 international global environmental change community can be found in the outcomes of the
3130 World Climate Conference-3 (2009; http://www.wmo.int/wcc3/page_en.php), which decided to
3131 establish a Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) to strengthen the application of
3132 science-based climate prediction and services around the world. Such a framework could be
3133 tremendously valuable in managing global climate-related risks because it maximizes the
3134 existing global investments in observing, monitoring, and modeling systems, and climate service
3135 delivery, and has the potential to offer significant economic, public health and safety, and
3136 security benefits for participating countries. The GFCS vision aligns well with the new USGCRP
3137 focus on providing end-to-end capacity, and is highly relevant to the natural, physical, and social
3138 science research that is being undertaken in USGCRP agencies. USGCRP is already working
3139 with WCRP to develop the modeling and understanding components of GFCS that will
3140 emphasize linkages to adaptation and observations. USGCRP can further contribute to, and
3141 benefit from, this emerging framework through increased coordination with the international
3142 community on climate services.
3143
3144 USGCRP science is also related to issues of domestic and international policy, which
3145 require a close connection between the physical and biological sciences traditionally emphasized
3146 by USGCRP and the social and behavioral sciences. Although the natural sciences can provide
3147 insight into how the environment may change, the social sciences provide the critical information
3148 about the sources of these changes, as well as how people and societies behave in the face of
3149 change, and how their societal values may address the policy decisions that are made in a given
3150 country. Given that such values and behavior may vary from one country to the next, it is
3151 important that the global dimensions of the social sciences relevant to the relationship with the
3152 environment are understood, and this can only be done through international cooperation.
3153
3154 Global Earth observations are another area in which international partnerships leverage
3155 investments and increase useable science. Sustained global observing systems, including both
3156 surface-based networks (including measurements made from aircraft, balloons, and mobile
3157 oceanic observing platforms) and satellites, are critical components of global environmental
3158 research, as are shorter-term, intensive field-based research. Although many countries have their
3159 own capabilities, to provide a

3160 comprehensive global data set, there is a
3161 need to develop an intelligently integrated Text Box 12: International Observations.
3162 and consistent observing system that Many U.S. global change observing systems benefited
3163 addresses both sustained and shorter-term greatly from highly substantive international
3164 (intensive) observations, with collaborations. Some illustrations provide a view of the
important role played by other countries.
3165 transparency relative to aspects such as NASA and the French space agency Centre National
3166 calibration, algorithms, and data d'Etudes Spaciales (CNES) designed, built and
3167 utilization. launched three research satellite missions to
3168 establish stable, high-accuracy, and well-calibrated
3169 Many U.S. global change global sea level time series measurements, now
3170 observing systems have benefited greatly operated by NOAA in the United States and
European Organisation for the Exploitation of
3171 from highly substantive international
Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT). A fourth
3172 collaborations. Eleven countries are satellite mission to continue the sea level -climate
3173 partnering with NASA on currently data record is being planned.
3174 operating satellite instruments, which are NASA worked with international partners in the
3175 producing invaluable data for studies of design of its Global Observing System, for example,
3176 global change. Many more countries the Netherlands Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI)
3177 allow deployment of U.S. global change instrument (which includes contributions from
Finland) flies on NASAs Aura satellite, and Japans
3178 equipment within their borders (or provide Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and
3179 their own capability) for calibration and Reflector Radiometer (ASTER) instrument is on
3180 validation of satellite measurements NASAs Terra satellite.
3181 and/or gathering of complementary data. The Aquarius satellite, built jointly by the United
3182 States (NASA) and Argentinas Comisin Nacional
3183 In the case of process-oriented de Actividades Espaciales (CONAE) to record sea
3184 field campaigns, access to the territory and surface salinity measurements, was launched in
June, 2011.
3185 airspace of other countries, the ocean, and In situ observing systems have benefited through
3186 Arctic is crucial to comprehensive data international collaboration. U.S. agencies depended
3187 collection. Field campaigns in these areas on international investments in the 3,000-element
3188 typically require the joint efforts of free-floating Argo float array to deploy U.S. floats
3189 multiple countries to achieve critical mass and to contribute additional floats.
3190 in terms of comprehensiveness of Data integration initiatives, such as the Global
Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), bring data
3191 observations, including data collection
from disparate sources together for use by scientists
3192 among multiple platforms, such as ships and citizens.
3193 and/or aircraft.
3194
3195 Sustained observing systems external to the traditional USGCRP membership are another
3196 increasingly important supply of data and information for USGCRP interests. Acquiring these
3197 measurements requires close collaboration with other international organizations and
3198 increasingly with the private sector. Examples include global marine and meteorological
3199 measurements as well as social science information, such as census data and economic impact
3200 information.
3201
3202 For these reasons, USGCRP works with its sibling interagency groups such as USGEO
3203 and the Interagency Working Group on Digital Data, which help set the standards and coordinate
3204 collection and distribution of Earth observation data in a long-term, durable, and usable fashion.
3205
3206 To effectively participate in future international efforts, USGCRP will continue to

3207 evaluate relevant activities and articulate a clear role for itself in programs that benefit the goals
3208 and missions of the USGCRP and its partner agencies.
3209
3210 V. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY

3211
3212 This decadal Strategic Plan builds toward a program for USGCRP that explicitly links
3213 scientific discovery to societys needs, thereby contributing to a government-wide end-to-end
3214 approach to global change. It articulates the Programs research goals, provides a framework for
3215 informing decisions and assessing progress, and outlines shared capabilities to support
3216 interagency activities. USGCRPs set of strategic goals and objectives provide a strong research
3217 foundation for understanding global change, and a basis for expanded partnerships with other
3218 parts of the government, academia, and the private sector. This chapter outlines guiding
3219 principles that the Program will use in making decisions on implementing this next-generation
3220 Strategic Plan. It also discusses approaches for updating the Plan as progress is evaluated. Two
3221 important mechanisms to achieve this vision are discussed, including updated research strategies
3222 every three years using best practices from adaptive management, and an annual process for use
3223 by OSTP, OMB, CEQ, and member agencies as future annual budgets are developed.
3224
3225 Guidelines for Implementing the Strategic Plan
3226
3227 USGCRP goals are ambitious yet necessary, and include much greater emphasis on
3228 decision support than was included in previous plans. Not all aspects of this Plan can be
3229 implemented simultaneously, particularly in the current economic climate. Because the Plan is a
3230 10-year vision for Program directions, USGCRP will use a phased approach to implementing its
3231 goals and objectives. The following set of guiding principles will assist agencies and USGCRP
3232 in assessing progress and balance and developing near-, intermediate-, and long-term priorities
3233 over the next 10 years. The guiding principles will help ensure that implementation of the
3234 Strategic Plan is both realistic and flexible while maintaining research excellence and increasing
3235 the development and application of use-inspired tools and activities. These guiding principles
3236 include:
3237
3238 Ensure continuing strength at the scientific foundation of USGCRP (observations,
3239 modeling, and process research), and that the foundation is used to support all four goals.
3240 Develop flexible plans for phasing in new activities and priorities over the decade that
3241 accommodate budget realities and build upon member agencies strengths. Develop a
3242 portfolio of essential foundational and new activities that:
3243 o Promote scientific progress that achieves results having direct societal benefit;
3244 o Have strong interdependencies among the USGCRP agencies that are facilitated
3245 through USGCRP leadership and coordination;
3246 o Build the capacity within USGCRP for interdisciplinary research and related
3247 activities, especially between the natural science and human components of the earth
3248 system, and translation of science for societal benefit and related risk management
3249 decision making;
3250 o Enable discoveries through transformational research that can lead to breakthroughs
3251 in how the country understands and responds to global change.
3252 Build connections within and beyond USGCRP member agencies, and with other
3253 interagency bodies, that leverage federal investments and promote the widest use of
3254 Program results in supporting the countrys responses to global change;
3255 Focus on international partnerships that enhance science assessment and response
3256 activities in the United States and globally;
3257 Review progress regularly of interagency activities to evaluate priorities and the balance
3258 between research and service goals;
3259 Use adaptive management principles of evaluation and learning to improve Program
3260 outcomes.
3261
3262 Adaptive Program Management
3263
3264 The Global Change Research Act (GCRA) requires that USGCRP provide an updated
3265 Strategic Plan (referred to as the Revised Research Plan in legislation) every three years and
3266 make it available for public comment prior to its release. USGCRP will use these triennial
3267 updates, which will incorporate the findings of the ongoing National Assessment, as an
3268 opportunity to evaluate Program directions, effectiveness, and balance, and to modify plans as
3269 necessary to respond to changing conditions and Program progress. USGCRP will also consult
3270 with the National Research Council to ensure that a broad perspective is considered.
3271
3272 To achieve the goals of the Program, USGCRP will need to incorporate the perspectives
3273 of those using the research to inform decisions. Questions about who needs the research, what
3274 research is needed to inform decisions, and in what form the research results are needed will
3275 provide guidance to USGCRP as it implements this Strategic Plan.
3276
3277 Interagency Collaboration
3278
3279 Collaboration is central to implementation of the shared priorities of USGCRP and its
3280 member agencies. The collaboration stems from the involvement of multiple agencies in a given
3281 area, whose programs have been carried out with full knowledge and appreciation of all the
3282 agencies related activities. The history of such collaboration is reflected in the Programs annual
3283 report to Congress, Our Changing Planet. Table 2 provides an overview of six focus areas for
3284 USGCRP for fiscal years 20092011, and shows agency participation in the different areas. The
3285 pie chart in Figure 4 uses budget information from FY 2010 and shows the percentage of
3286 Program investments in the focus areas, relative to the total FY 2010 budget for USGCRP of
3287 $2.18B.
3288
3289
3290 Table 2: Primary Areas of USGCRP Interagency Collaboration 20092011
3291
3292 * USGCRP participating organizations from the Department of Commerce (DOC) are the National Institute of Standards and
3293 Technology (NIST) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Focus Areas Participating Agencies

Improving our knowledge of Earths past and present DOC*, DOE, DOI, NASA, NSF, SI, USDA
climate variability and change.
Improving our understanding of natural and human forces DOC, DOE, DOI, DOT, EPA, NASA, NSF, USDA
of climate change.
Improving our capability to model and predict future DOC, DOE, DOI, HHS, NASA, NSF, SI, USAID,
conditions and impacts. USDA
Assessing the Nations vulnerability to current and DOC, DOE, DOI, DOT, EPA, NASA, NSF, USDA
anticipated impacts of climate change.
Providing climate information and decision support tools. DOC, DOI, DOT, EPA, NASA, NSF, SI, USAID,
USDA
Climate Change Communication and Education. DOC, NASA, NSF, SI, USDA
3294 The Subcommittee on Global Change Research Principals will use the guiding principles
3295 for implementation in their assessment of Program structure and governance to make
3296 modifications that may be needed to enhance interagency collaboration (see Next Steps, below).
3297
3298
3299
3300 Prioritization
3301
3302 The Global Change Research Act (Section 105) sets requirements for USGCRP to follow
3303 in developing shared priorities, linked to annual budget development. Such shared priorities
3304 advance the collective goals of the Program, and also support global change activities in the
3305 agencies (and parts of agencies) that fall outside the purview of the current USGCRP program
3306 and budgetary portfolios.
3307
3308 Each year, the USGCRP Principals develop global change research priorities that address
3309 science gaps and opportunities and emerging societal and scientific needs. These priorities are
3310 compiled in a guidance memorandum that is intended to provide a framework for the USGCRP
3311 participating agencies for use in setting priorities, with the goal of promoting interagency
3312 cooperation and connectivity to the broad USGCRP directions.
3313
3314 In addition to feasibility of implementation, the Program also uses the following criteria
3315 in framing priority areas: (1) their role in advancing the goals and objectives of the Strategic
3316 Plan, (2) the need for multi-agency participation and USGCRP coordination to achieve the
3317 priorities, and (3) the magnitude of their contributions to fundamental understanding and
3318 improved decision making.
3319
3320
3321 Next Steps

3322
3323 In 2012, the Subcommittee on Global Change Research Principals will evaluate structural
3324 and governance aspects of the Program and develop an Implementation Framework for a
3325 USGCRP that effectively implements its research portfolio. The Framework will be used to
3326 assess and modify, as needed, the mechanisms and operational process of the USGCRP
3327 enterprise, including the Principals, the National Coordination Office, and the Interagency
3328 Working Groups. The Framework will also be developed with the intent of providing
3329 appropriate connectivity to National Science and Technology Council and Committee on
3330 Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability subcommittees, the National Climate
3331 Assessment, agency adaptation activities, interagency taskforces, and other types of interagency
3332 working groups. Reflective of the adaptive program management structure in the new strategic
3333 plan, the Implementation Framework will include periodic internal assessments to ensure that
3334 form follows changing function.
3335
3336 APPENDIX I: PROGRAM ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION BY

3337 AGENCY/DEPARTMENT
3338
3339 The following pages present information about the contributions to USGCRP. For each
3340 department, the section titled Principal Areas of Focus highlights and summarizes activities
3341 ongoing within that department.
3342
3343 Department of Agriculture
3344
3345 Principal Areas of Focus
3346
3347 The U.S. Department of Agricultures (USDAs) global change research program aims to
3348 empower land managers, policy makers, and Federal agencies with science-based knowledge to
3349 manage the risks, challenges, and opportunities posed by climate change; reduce greenhouse gas
3350 emissions; and enhance carbon sequestration. Meeting USDAs goals for expanded economic
3351 opportunity, helping rural America thrive, promoting the sustainability of agricultural
3352 production, and conserving natural resources requires understanding climate changes influences
3353 and the options for managing them. USDA is unique among many Federal agencies in the broad
3354 spectrum of its missions, which include research, applications, technology transfer, public land
3355 management, technical assistance, and communications and delivery. USDA draws upon this
3356 diversity to identify climate change challenges and priorities in continuing to meet the needs of
3357 its stakeholders, decision makers, and collaborators. This work is important to ensuring
3358 sustained food security for the Nation and the world; maintaining and enhancing forest and
3359 natural resource health; and identifying strategic risks to agricultural production from changing
3360 temperature and precipitation as well as pests, disease, and invasive species.
3361
3362 USDA supports USGCRP on multiple fronts. The Department conducts in-house
3363 research and sponsors extramural investigations focused on understanding climate change effects
3364 on natural and managed ecosystems, developing the knowledge and tools to enable adaptation
3365 under a changing climate, enhancing mitigation of atmospheric greenhouse gases, and providing
3366 science-based information for decision support. USDA conducts assessments and projections of
3367 climate change impacts on agricultural and natural systems, and develops greenhouse gas
3368 inventories. Conservation systems promoted by the USDA integrate USGCRP research findings
3369 into farm and natural resource management, and help build resiliency to climate change on both
3370 private and public lands. Development and deployment of decision support tools is a cornerstone
3371 of the Departments climate change efforts. USDA maintains critical long-term data collection
3372 and observation networks, including the Snowpack Telemetry (SNOTEL) network, the Soil
3373 Climate Analysis Network (SCAN), the National Resources Inventory (NRI), and the Forest
3374 Inventory and Assessment (FIA). Analysis and modeling work includes biophysical subjects as
3375 well as economic analysis of climate change effects and adaptation options. Finally, USDA
3376 engages in communication, outreach, and education through multiple forums, including its vast
3377 network of agricultural extension services.
3378
3379
3380 Department of Commerce

3381
3383
3384 The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National
3385 Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) comprise the Department of Commerce
3386 contribution to USGCRP.
3387
3388 NOAAs strategic climate goal is an informed society anticipating and responding to
3389 climate and its impacts. This is an end-to-end endeavor, and the overall objective is to provide
3390 decision makers with a predictive understanding of the climate and to communicate climate
3391 information so that people can make more informed decisions in their lives, businesses, and
3392 communities. These outcomes are achieved through implementing a global observing system,
3393 focused research to understand key climate processes, improved modeling capabilities, and the
3394 development and delivery of climate information services. NOAA aims to achieve its climate
3395 goal through the following strategic objectives:
3396
3397 Improved scientific understanding of the changing climate system and its impacts.
3398 Assessments of current and future states of the climate system that identify potential
3399 impacts and inform science, service, and stewardship decisions.
3400 Mitigation and adaptation efforts supported by sustained, reliable, and timely climate
3401 services.
3402 A climate-literate public that understands its vulnerabilities to a changing climate and
3403 makes informed decisions.
3404
3405 NOAA will advance this goal as it continues to build upon its strong scientific foundation
3406 and decades of engagement and collaboration with interagency, academic, international, and
3407 private sector partners.
3408
3409 NIST provides measurements and standards that support accurate, comparable, and
3410 reliable climate observations. NIST also performs calibrations and special tests of a wide range
3411 of instruments and techniques for accurate measurements. In FY 2009, NIST is included as a
3412 discrete element of the USGCRP crosscut to provide specific measurements and standards of
3413 direct relevance to the program.
3414
3415 Department of Defense
3416
3418
3419 The Department of Defense (DOD)while not supporting a formal mission dedicated to
3420 global change researchcontinues a history of participation in the USGCRP through sponsored
3421 research that concurrently satisfies both national security requirements and the goals of the
3422 USGCRP. All data and scientific results obtained using DOD basic research funds are routinely
3423 made available to the civil science community. DOD science and technology investments are
3424 coordinated and reviewed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (Office of Basic Sciences)
3425 and the individual research agenciesthe Office of Naval Research (ONR), the Air Force Office
3426 of Scientific Research (AFOSR), the Army Research Office (ARO), and the Defense Advanced
3427 Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Together they have the responsibility to jointly develop the
3428 DOD Basic Research Plan (BRP), which undergoes a biennial program review by a panel of
3429 experts from universities, industry, and nonprofit research institutions (Defense Basic Research
3430 Review). As the performance of DOD systems, platforms, and operations may be influenced by
3431 the natural environmental conditions, understanding the variability in the Earth's environment is
3432 of interest to many DOD science programs. Much of the research performed under the ONRs
3433 Operational Environments focus area and the AROs Environmental Sciences Division, for
3434 example, lead to fundamental understanding of physical processes that are of particular relevance
3435 to USGCRP.
3436
3437 In the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the DOD formally recognized the need
3438 to understand and adapt to the impacts of climate change on DOD facilities and military
3439 capabilities. The DOD relies on the Strategic Environmental Research and Development
3440 Program (SERDP), a joint effort among DOD, the Department of Energy, and the Environmental
3441 Protection Agency, to develop climate change assessment tools. The DOD will regularly
3442 reevaluate climate change risks and opportunities in order to develop policies and plans to
3443 manage its effects on the Departments operating environment, missions, and facilities.
3444
3445 Department of Energy
3446
3448
3449 The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science supports DOEs climate research to
3450 discern the relationship between the global climate system and energy production and use. The
3451 DOE climate research mission is to advance a robust predictive understanding of Earths climate
3452 system with sufficient certainty and spatio-temporal resolution that decision makers can adopt
3453 climate projection outputs to develop and deploy secure and sustainable solutions for the
3454 Nations energy and environmental challenges. The integrated portfolio of research ranges from
3455 molecular-level to regional-scale studies with emphases on multidisciplinary
3456 experimentation/observations and the development/evaluation of advanced computer models.
3457 DOE provides national leadership in climate-relevant process research and modeling of the
3458 atmosphere, including clouds and aerosols, and of the terrestrial carbon cycle; climate and Earth
3459 system modeling for both global and regional scales, and enhanced by DOEs leadership high-
3460 performance computing capabilities; experimental research on the effects of climate change on
3461 ecosystems; integrated analysis of climate change impacts; and analysis and distribution of large
3462 climate data sets through the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison and the
3463 Earth System Grid.
3464
3465 DOE supports three primary research activities along with a national scientific user
3466 facility. The areas of research are: (1) Atmospheric System Research that focuses on the basic
3467 science and process studies governing aerosols, clouds, and radiative transfer; (2) Terrestrial
3468 Ecosystem Science that focuses on long-term field experiments and in situ modeling in regions
3469 of critical concern to climate predictability; and (3) Climate and Earth System Modeling to
3470 integrate and assess all critical components into a high-resolution interdependent prediction
3471 system. The Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Climate Research Facility is a
3472 scientific user facility. DOEs high-profile research activities include the Program for Climate
3473 Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison, the Earth System Grid, and the AmeriFlux carbon cycle
3474 observational network.
3475
3476 Department of Health and Human Services
3477
3479
3480 The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) supports a broad portfolio of
3481 research related to environmental health and the health effects of global change. The National
3482 Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provide the
3483 focus for this effort.
3484
3485 The potential health effects of climate change are not fully understood. Complex
3486 interactions between humans, ecosystems, and the changing environment will lead to a variety of
3487 complicated health effects. Some of these effects are already occurring. Higher temperatures will
3488 likely increase tropospheric ozone concentrations that contribute to cardiovascular and
3489 pulmonary illness. Droughts and floods can cause injury and lead to sanitation problems as well
3490 as mold and chemical exposures. The ranges of vector-borne and zoonotic pathogens and the
3491 transmission of food- and water-borne pathogens are likely to be impacted. Extreme heat events
3492 are predicted to become more frequent and intense, and such events will have a major impact on
3493 areas and populations that are not well adapted to them. The limited set of activities and projects
3494 identified in the FY 2009 through FY 2010 USGCRP HHS budgets are focused on improving
3495 our capability to model and predict the impacts of climate change on human health. These
3496 activities are briefly described relative to the USGCRP goals. More extensive HHS efforts not
3497 identified in the USGCRP budget are described further on in this agency description. The full
3498 scope of HHS activities and projects will help to predict and address these and other health
3499 consequences of climate change.
3500
3501 Department of the Interior
3502
3504
3505 Like several other USGCRP agencies, the Department of the Interior (DOI) is both a
3506 natural resource management agency and a science agency. DOI global change research is
3507 conducted though the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), but several other DOI bureaus contribute
3508 to the goals of the USGCRP Strategic Plan through activities such as monitoring, impact
3509 assessments, and adaptation planning.
3510
3511 Evolving from an organization that was created to inventory the Nations public lands
3512 and natural resources, the mission of the 21st century USGS is most simply expressed in its
3513 maxim Science for a Changing World. Emphasis on climate and land-use change has
3514 increased substantially over the past five years as USGS scientists have worked in collaboration
3515 with other USGCRP agencies to meet the pressing needs of the U.S. Department of the Interior,
3516 policy makers, and resource managers for scientifically valid state-of-the-science information
3517 and predictive understanding of global change and its effects. The USGS Climate and Land Use
3518 Change mission leads research, adaptation, and mitigation activities to help the Nation
3519 understand, adapt to, and mitigate global change and its impacts on society, resource availability,
3520 and economic development.
3521
3522 USGS studies of the interactions among climate, Earth surface processes, and ecosystems
3523 across space and time contribute directly to the strategic goals and core competencies of the U.S.
3524 Global Change Research Program. The USGS Climate and Land Use Change Research and
3525 Development Program supports fundamental scientific research to understand processes
3526 controlling Earth system responses to global change over broad temporal and spatial scales and
3527 model impacts of climate and land-cover change on ecosystems and other natural resources in a
3528 range of environments, from the Arctic to the tropics. USGS geographic analyses and land
3529 remote-sensing programs (such as the LANDSAT satellite mission and the National Land Cover
3530 Database) provide basic data that can be used to assess changes in land use and land cover,
3531 ecosystems, and water resources resulting from the interactions between human activities and
3532 natural systems. The science products and data sets from these programs are essential for
3533 conducting quantitative studies of carbon storage and greenhouse gas flux in the Nations
3534 ecosystems. Over the past three years, the USGS has developed scientifically based methods for
3535 assessment of biologic and geologic carbon sequestration, and the USGS is currently conducting
3536 the assessments called for in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
3537
3538 The USGS National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center is leading the
3539 establishment of eight DOI regional Climate Science Centers and responds to the research and
3540 management needs of partners by providing science and technical support regarding the impacts
3541 of climate change on fish, wildlife, and ecological processes. The DOI Climate Science Centers
3542 will provide robust predictive and empirical tools for natural resource managers to test adaptive
3543 strategies, reduce risk, and increase the potential for hydrologic and ecological systems to be
3544 self-sustaining, resilient, or adaptable to climate change and related disturbances.
3545
3546 Department of State
3547
3549
3550 Through Department of State (DOS) annual funding, the United States is the worlds
3551 leading financial contributor to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
3552 (UNFCCC) and to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)the principal
3553 international organization for the assessment of scientific, technical, and socioeconomic
3554 information relevant to the understanding of climate change, its potential impacts, and options
3555 for adaptation and mitigation. Recent DOS contributions to these organizations provide
3556 substantial support for global climate observation and assessment activities in developing
3557 countries. DOS also works with other agencies in promoting international cooperation in a range
3558 of bilateral and multilateral climate change initiatives and partnerships.
3559
3560 Department of Transportation
3561
3563
3564 The Department of Transportation (DOT) conducts research and uses existing science to
3565 improve decision-making tools to address climate change. DOT supports research that (1)
3566 examines the potential impacts of climate variability and change on transportation infrastructure
3567 and services, (2) examines increasing energy efficiency and reducing greenhouse gases, and (3)
3568 improving transportation greenhouse gas data and modeling. DOT has many programs that have
3569 either direct or indirect climate benefits, and is working to develop cross-modal strategies to
3570 reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
3571
3572 DOTs Center for Climate Change is the Departments focal point for information and
3573 technical expertise on climate change. The Center coordinates research, policies, and actions
3574 related to transportation and climate change with DOTs component organizations. While also
3575 supporting DOTs core goals of safety, mobility, environmental stewardship, and security, the
3576 Center promotes comprehensive approaches to reduce greenhouse gases, to prepare for the
3577 potential impacts of climate change, and to develop necessary adaptations to transportation
3578 operations and infrastructure. The Center supports the USGCRP focus areas through these
3579 objectives.
3580
3581 The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) participates in the Center and also has
3582 programs to identify and assess and identify potential measures to reduce fuel consumption and
3583 greenhouse gas emissions. FAA conducts research to support USGCRP Core Competency area
3584 2; leveraging research with other U.S. Government agencies to reduce uncertainties surrounding
3585 aviation emissions and their effect on climate change. More specifically, FAA works with
3586 NASA, NOAA, and EPA in the Aviation Climate Change Research Initiative (ACCRI), which is
3587 a practical-need-driven research program with an objective to identify and address key scientific
3588 gaps and uncertainties regarding aviation climate impacts while providing timely scientific input
3589 to inform optimum mitigation actions and policies. FAA also works with NASA and Transport
3590 Canada in the Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction (PARTNER)
3591 Center of Excellence, which fosters advances in alternative fuels, emissions, noise, operations,
3592 aircraft technologies, and science and decision making for the betterment of mobility, economy,
3593 national security, and the environment.
3594
3595 FAA has a number of ongoing operational initiatives to reduce fuel consumption and thus
3596 the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced by aviation, including improved air traffic
3597 management, reduced vertical separation minimums, and the voluntary airport low-emissions
3598 program that assists in deploying low-emissions technology to airport operations. Additionally,
3599 FAA participates heavily in the work program of the International Civil Aviation Organizations
3600 Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection, and provides technical expertise and data to
3601 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the United Nations Framework
3602 Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in support of the overall DOT mission on
3603 international climate change work.
3604
3605 Other Departmental initiatives also address climate change and improve the overall
3606 sustainability of the U.S. transportation sector but are not specifically part of the USGCRP
3607 budget crosscut for DOT. Examples are as follows:
3608
3609 The FAA, with support from NASA, has developed the continuous lower energy,
3610 emissions, and noise (CLEEN) program as a government industry consortium to develop and
3611 mature environmentally promising technologies for more efficient energy use, reduction in
3612 aircraft noise and emissions as well as advancing alternative fuels for civil subsonic jet aircraft.
3613 Similarly, the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) is a forum that engages
3614 national and international stakeholders and coordinates their activities to advance exploration,
3615 qualification, certification and deployment of aviation alternative fuels.
3616
3617 DOT is developing models to predict future conditions and impacts of climate on the
3618 nations transportation system. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is leading
3619 strategies for risk and vulnerability assessments as well as providing climate information on
3620 regional impacts of climate change in order to assist the transportation community in making
3621 decisions. FHWA, in collaboration with other agencies provides climate change information to
3622 the transportation community. An example is the recent FHWA publication Regional Climate
3623 Change Effects: Useful Information for Transportation Agencies (May 2010). In addition,
3624 FHWA is in the process of developing official risk and vulnerability assessment tools for
3625 transportation professionals.
3626
3627 Through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT is
3628 improving the fuel economy of the nations on-road vehicles, including a recent joint rulemaking
3629 with EPA to establish fuel economy and greenhouse gas emission standards for MY 20122016.
3630 Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction (TIGGER) is a grant program
3631 from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 that is awarding $100 million in
3632 funding to transit agencies that reduce energy consumption and/or greenhouse gas emission.
3633
3634 DOT is working with EPA and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
3635 (HUD) in the Partnership for Sustainable Communities to ensure that housing and transportation
3636 goals are met while simultaneously protecting the environment, promoting equitable
3637 development, and helping to address the challenges of climate change.
3638
3639 The Center for Climate Change leverages resources by building strategic partnerships and
3640 reaching out to state and local agencies, environmental advocates, industry, and academia. This
3641 effort ranges from simple information exchange to ongoing partnerships in major research
3642 initiatives and conferences. The Center builds DOT capacity and awareness by conducting
3643 educational forums and establishing a clearinghouse for research and policy coordination related
3644 to transportation and climate change.
3645
3646 Environmental Protection Agency
3647
3649
3650 The core purpose of EPAs Global Change Research Program is to develop scientific
3651 information that supports stakeholders, policy makers, and society at large as they respond to
3652 climate change and associated impacts on human health, ecosystems, and socioeconomic
3653 systems in the United States. EPAs research is focused on topics driven by the Agencys
3654 mission and statutory requirements, and includes: (1) improving the scientific understanding of
3655 global change effects on air quality, water quality, ecosystems, and human health in the context
3656 of other stressors; (2) assessing and developing adaptation options to effectively respond to
3657 global change risks, increase resilience of human and natural systems, and promote their
3658 sustainability; and (3) developing an understanding of the potential environmental impacts and
3659 benefits of GHG emission reduction strategies to support sustainable mitigation solutions. EPAs
3660 program emphasizes the integration of knowledge across the physical, chemical, biological, and
3661 social sciences into decision-support frameworks that recognize the complex interactions
3662 between human and natural systems at national, regional, and local scales. This information is
3663 further leveraged by EPA Program Offices and Regions in support of mitigation and adaptation
3664 efforts and to promote communication with external stakeholders and the public.
3665
3666 National Aeronautics and Space Administration
3667
3669
3670 The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) conducts a program of
3671 breakthrough research to advance fundamental knowledge on the most important scientific
3672 questions on the global and regional integrated Earth system. NASA Earth Science conducts and
3673 sponsors research, collects new observations from space, develops technologies, and extends
3674 science and technology education to learners of all ages. NASAs goal is to understand the
3675 changing climate, its interaction with life, and how human activities affect the environment. In
3676 association with national and international agencies, NASA applies this understanding for the
3677 well-being of society. The NASA program encompasses most of the core competency areas of
3678 the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).
3679
3680 NASA presently has 14 on-orbit satellite missions: Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance
3681 Monitor (ACRIMSAT), Aqua, Aquarius/SAC-D, Aura, the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared
3682 Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO), CloudSat, Earth Observing (EO), the Gravity
3683 Recovery And Climate Experiment (GRACE), Jason, Landsat-7, the Ocean Surface Topography
3684 Mission (OSTM), the Solar Radiation and Climate Experiment (SORCE), Terra, and the
3685 Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM). On March 4, 2011, NASAs Glory satellite did
3686 not reach orbit altitude when the launch vehicle malfunctioned. On June 9, 2011, the Aquarius
3687 sea surface salinity instrument was launched on Argentinas SAC-D satellite.
3688
3689 NASA has five missions in development for launch in 20102015. Three missions
3690 (NPOESS Preparatory Project [NPP], Landsat Data Continuity Mission [LDCM], and Global
3691 Precipitation Measurement [GPM]) are foundational missions, which the Decadal Survey1
3692 assumed would be precursors to Decadal Survey missions. Two missions, Soil Moisture Active
3693 Passive (SMAP) and the Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite-2 (ICESat-2), are Tier I Decadal
3694 Survey missions. The Decadal Survey is the principal determinant of the priorities of NASAs
3695 Earth Science satellite missions beyond those currently in development.2
3696
3697 The Presidents FY 2012 Budget Request continues the acceleration, which had begun in
3698 FY 2011, of NASAs formulation, development and launch of Decadal Survey missions; all are
3699 relevant to research on global climate change. The augmentation makes possible a larger number
3700 of Decadal Survey missions in the coming decade.
3701
3702 The Presidents FY 2012 Budget Request recognizes the need for continuity in critical
3703 climate observations and data records, and continues funding to develop an Orbiting Carbon
1
National Research Council (2007) Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and
Beyond. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 428 pp.
2
NRC, 2007: Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond. The National
Academies Press, Washington, DC, 418 pp.
3704 Observatory (OCO-2) mission to measure atmospheric CO2 to replace the mission that failed to
3705 reach orbit in 2009, with a target launch date of early 2013. NASA continues development of a
3706 GRACE-Continuity mission working towards a launch in 2016; refurbishes a Stratospheric
3707 Aerosol and Gas Experiment (SAGE-III) instrument to measure aerosols, ozone water vapor and
3708 other trace gases in the upper troposphere and stratosphere as early as 2014; and, develops a Pre-
3709 Aerosols, Clouds, and Ecosystems Pre-ACE, or PACE) mission to measure ocean color, clouds,
3710 and aerosols as early as 2018.
3711
3712 The Decadal Survey recommended creation of a Venture class program of small,
3713 frequent, predictably scheduled science mission opportunities to spur innovation and enable the
3714 training of future Earth science leaders. Four of five Earth Venture-1 (EV-1) extended airborne
3715 science observing campaigns, which had been selected in FY 2010, had flight operations in
3716 2011, and some activities will conduct operations through 2015. In June 2011, NASA released
3717 the first call for proposals for a complete space flight mission, EV-2, with selections to be made
3718 in 2012. The solicitations for suborbital and orbital missions will continue in alternate years.
3719 The first annual solicitation to develop satellite instruments for a mission of opportunity, called
3720 EV-I, occurred in 2011, with selection scheduled for 2012.
3721
3722 NASA aircraft- and surface-based instruments are used to calibrate and enhance
3723 interpretation of high-accuracy, well-calibrated, stable satellite measurements. NASA supports
3724 state-of-the-art computing capability and capacity for extensive global integrated Earth system
3725 modeling. NASA, in recording approximately 4 terabytes of data every day, maintains the
3726 worlds largest scientific data and information system for collecting, processing, archiving, and
3727 distributing Earth system data to worldwide users.
3728
3729 National Science Foundation
3730
3732
3733 National Science Foundation (NSF) programs address global change issues through
3734 investments that advance frontiers of knowledge, provide state-of-the-art instrumentation and
3735 facilities, develop new analytical methods, and enable cross-disciplinary collaborations while
3736 also cultivating a diverse highly trained workforce and developing resources for public
3737 education. In particular, NSF global change research programs support the research and related
3738 activities to advance the fundamental understanding of physical, chemical, biological, and human
3739 systems and the interactions among them. The programs encourage interdisciplinary approaches
3740 to studying Earth system processes and the consequences of change, including how humans
3741 respond to changing environments and the impacts on ecosystems and the essential services they
3742 provide. NSF programs promote the enhancement of models to improve understanding of
3743 integrated Earth system processes and to advance predictive capability. NSF also supports
3744 fundamental research on the processes used by organizations and decision makers to identify and
3745 evaluate policies for mitigation, adaptation, and other responses to the challenge of a changing
3746 and variable environment.
3747
3748
3749 Smithsonian Institution

3750
3752
3753 Within the Smithsonian Institution, global change research is primarily conducted at the
3754 National Air and Space Museum, the National Museum of Natural History, the National
3755 Zoological Park Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, the Smithsonian Environmental
3756 Research Center, and the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute. Research is organized around
3757 themes of atmospheric processes, ecosystem dynamics, observing natural and anthropogenic
3758 environmental change on daily to decadal time scales, and defining longer term climate proxies
3759 present in the historical artifacts and records of the museums as well as in the geologic record at
3760 field sites. The Smithsonian Institution program strives to improve knowledge of the natural
3761 processes involved in global climate change, to provide a long-term repository of climate-
3762 relevant research materials for present and future studies, and to bring this knowledge to various
3763 audiences, ranging from scholarly to the lay public. The unique contribution of the Smithsonian
3764 Institution is a long-term perspectivefor example, undertaking investigations that may require
3765 extended study before producing useful results and conducting observations on sufficiently long
3766 (e.g., decadal) timescales to resolve human-caused modification of natural variability.
3767
3768 U.S. Agency for International Development
3769
3771
3772 The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) supports a number of
3773 programs that enable decision makers to apply high-quality climate information to decision
3774 making. USAID is the lead contributor to bilateral assistance, with a focus on capacity building,
3775 civil society building, and governance programming, and creating the legal and regulatory
3776 environments needed to address climate change. USAID leverages its significant technical
3777 expertise to provide leadership in development and implementation of low-emissions
3778 development strategies, creating policy frameworks for market-based approaches to emission
3779 reduction and energy sector reform, promoting sustainable management of agriculture lands and
3780 forests, and mainstreaming adaptation into development activities in countries most at risk.
3781 USAID has long-standing relationships with host country governments that enable it to work
3782 together to develop shared priorities and implementation plans. USAIDs engagement and
3783 expertise in agriculture, biodiversity, health, and other critical climate sensitive sectors provide
3784 an opportunity to implement innovative cross-sectoral climate change programs. Finally, USAID
3785 bilateral programs work in key political and governance areas that multilateral agencies cannot.
3786
3787 APPENDIX II: GLOSSARY OF TERMS

3788
3789 Abrupt climate change: Rapid climate change occurring at time scales faster than the typical
3790 time scale of the responsible forcing. (IPCC, 2007, WGI)
3791 Adaptation: Adjustment in natural or human systems to a new or changing environment that
3792 exploits beneficial opportunities and moderates negative impacts.
3793 Adaptive capacity (in relation to climate and global change impacts): The ability of a system
3794 to adjust to climate and global change (including climate variability and extremes) to moderate
3795 potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences (IPCC,
3796 2007).
3797 Adaptive management: Operational decisions principally for managing entities that are
3798 influenced by climate variability and change.
3799 Adaptive management decisions: Operational decisions, principally for managing entities that
3800 are influenced by climate variability and change. These decisions can apply to the management
3801 of infrastructure (e.g., a wastewater treatment plant), the integrated management of a natural
3802 resource (e.g., a watershed), or the operation of societal response mechanisms (e.g., health alerts,
3803 water restrictions). Adaptive management operates within existing policy frameworks or uses
3804 existing infrastructure, and the decisions usually occur on time scales of a year or less. See policy
3805 decisions.
3806 Aerosols: A collection of airborne solid or liquid particles, with a typical size between 0.01 and
3807 10 m that reside in the atmosphere for at least several hours. Aerosols may be of either natural
3808 or anthropogenic origin (IPCC, 2007).
3809 Albedo: The fraction of solar radiation reflected by a surface or object, often expressed as a
3810 percentage (IPCC, 2007).
3811 Anthropogenic: Resulting from or produced by human beings.
3812 Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2004): An international project of the Arctic Council and
3813 the International Arctic Science Committee, to evaluate and synthesize knowledge on climate
3814 variability, climate change, and increased ultraviolet radiation and their consequences.
3815 Assessments: Processes that involve analyzing and evaluating the state of scientific knowledge
3816 (and the associated degree of scientific certainty) and, in interaction with users, developing
3817 information applicable to a particular set of issues or decisions.
3818 Atmosphere: The gaseous envelope surrounding Earth (IPCC, 2007).
3819 Biodiversity: The total diversity of all organisms and ecosystems at various spatial scales (IPCC,
3820 2007).
3821 Biofuel: Any liquid, gaseous, or solid fuel produced from plant or animal organic matter, for
3822 example, soybean oil, alcohol from fermented sugar, and wood. Second-generation biofuels are
3823 products such as ethanol and biodiesel derived from biomass by chemical or biological
3824 processes.
3825 Biomass: The total mass of living organisms in a given area or volume (IPCC, 2007).
3826 Biosphere: The part of the Earth system comprising all ecosystems and living organisms, in the
3827 atmosphere, on land or in the ocean, included derived dead organic matter, such as litter, soil
3828 organic matter, and oceanic detritus (IPCC, 2007).
3829 Biogeochemical cycle: A pathway by which a chemical element, such as carbon, or compound,
3830 like water, moves through Earth's biosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere, and lithosphere (NSF).
3831 Carbon cycle: The term used to describe the flow of carbon (in various forms, e.g., as carbon
3832 dioxide) through the atmosphere, ocean, terrestrial biosphere, and lithosphere (IPCC, 2007).
3833 Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous cycling: See biogeochemical cycle
3834 Climate: The statistical description in terms of the mean and variability of relevant measures of
3835 the atmosphere-ocean system over periods ranging from weeks to thousands or millions of years
3836 (IPCC, 2007).
3837 Climate change: A statistically significant variation in either the mean state of the climate or in
3838 its variability, persisting for an extended period (typically decades or longer). Climate change
3839 may be due to natural internal processes or to external forcing, including changes in solar
3840 radiation and volcanic eruptions, or to persistent human-induced changes in atmospheric
3841 composition or in land use. See also climate variability (IPCC, 2007).
3842 Climate feedback: See feedback.
3843 Climate model: A numerical representation of the climate system based on the mathematical
3844 equations governing the physical, chemical and biological properties of its components and
3845 including treatment of key physical processes and interactions, cast in a form suitable for
3846 numerical approximation making use of computers. (IPCC, 2007, and National Snow and Ice
3847 Data Center)
3848 Climate prediction: A climate prediction or climate forecast is the result of an attempt to
3849 produce an estimate of the actual evolution of the climate in the future, for example, at seasonal,
3850 interannual, or long-term timescales (IPCC, 2007).
3851 Climate projection: A projection of the response of the climate system to emission or
3852 concentration scenarios of greenhouse gases or aerosols, or radiative forcing scenarios, often
3853 based upon simulations by climate models. Climate projections are distinguished from climate
3854 predictions in order to emphasize that climate projections depend upon the
3855 emission/concentration/radiative forcing scenario used, which are based on assumptions
3856 concerning, for example, future socioeconomic and technological developments that may or may
3857 not be realized and are therefore subject to substantial uncertainty (IPCC, 2007).
3858 Climate scenario: A plausible and often simplified representation of the future climate, based on
3859 an internally consistent set of climatological relationships, that has been constructed for explicit
3860 use in investigating the potential consequences of anthropogenic climate change.
3861 Climate system: The highly complex system consisting of five major components: the
3862 atmosphere, the hydrosphere, the cryosphere, the land surface and the biosphere, and the
3863 interactions among them (IPCC, 2007).
3864 Climate variability: Variations in the mean state and other statistics of climatic features the
3865 climate on temporal and spatial scales beyond that of individual weather events. These variations
3866 are often due to internal processes within the climate system (internal variability), or to variations
3867 in natural or anthropogenic external forcing (external variability).
3868 Climate scenario: A plausible and often simplified representation of the future climate, based
3869 on an internally consistent set of climatological relationships, that has been constructed for
3870 explicit use in investigating the potential consequences of anthropogenic climate change, often
3871 serving as input to impact models.
3872 Climate services: The timely production and delivery of useful climate data, information, and
3873 knowledge to decision makers.
3874 Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability (CENRS): A
3875 subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) established to assist the
3876 NSTC in increasing the overall productivity and application of federal research and development
3877 efforts in the areas of environment, natural resources, and sustainability, and to provide a formal
3878 mechanism for interagency coordination in these areas. CENRS encompasses the Subcommittee
3879 on Global Change Research, the steering committee of the United States Global Change
3880 Research Program.
3881 Community Earth System Model: A global climate model based out of the National Center for
3882 Atmospheric Research that can be used to simulate the many components of Earths climate
3883 system, including the ocean, atmosphere, sea ice, and land cover.
3884 Complex system: A system composed of interconnected parts that as a whole exhibit one or
3885 more properties not obvious from the properties of individual parts.
3886 Cryosphere: The component of the climate system consisting of all snow, ice, and frozen ground
3887 (including permafrost) on and beneath the surface of the Earth and ocean.
3888 Data assimilation: The process of combining a model with observational data to provide an
3889 estimate of the state of the system that is better than could be obtained using the data or the
3890 model alone (NOAA/GFDL).
3891 Decision support: The provision of timely and useful information that addresses specific
3892 questions.
3893 Downscaling: A method that derives local- to regional-scale (10 to 100 km) information from
3894 larger-scale models or data analyses (IPCC 2007).
3895 Earth system: The unified set of physical, chemical, biological, and social components,
3896 processes and interactions that together determine the state and dynamics of Planet Earth,
3897 including its biota and its human occupants (ESSP).
3898 Earth System Modeling Framework: Open-source software for building and coupling weather,
3899 climate, and related models.
3900 Ecosystem: A system of living organisms interacting with each other and their physical
3901 environment as an ecological unit.
3902 Ecosystem services: Ecological processes or functions having monetary or nonmonetary value
3903 to individuals or society at large. There are supporting services such as productivity or
3904 biodiversity maintenance; provisioning services such as food, fiber, or fish; regulating services
3905 such as climate regulation or carbon sequestration; and cultural services such as tourism or
3906 spiritual and aesthetic appreciation.
3907 El Nio-Southern Oscillation (ENSO): A basin-warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean east of
3908 the dateline associated with a fluctuation of a global-scale tropical and subtropical surface
3909 pressure pattern called the Southern Oscillation, occurring on an approximately two to seven
3910 year timescale. The alternate cold phase of the Southern Oscillation is known as La Nia (IPCC,
3911 2007).
3912 Emergent behavior: The feature of complex systems by which cause-effect relationships
3913 between individual components at the subsystem level are not additive or aggregate in simple
3914 ways when all of the components are linked to form the system. Emergent properties of the
3915 system as a whole appear (Global Change and the Earth System, IGBP).
3916 Emissions: In the climate change context, emissions refer to the release of greenhouse gases
3917 and/or their precursors and aerosols into the atmosphere over a specified area and period of time.
3918 End-to-end: The nature of research needed to address the end-to-end climate and global
3919 change issue, from understanding causes and processes to supporting actions needed to cope
3920 with the impending societal problems of climate and global change (NRC 2009).
3921 Executive Order 13514 (Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic
3922 Performance): A 2009 Executive Order to establish an integrated strategy towards sustainability
3923 in the Federal government and to make reduction of greenhouse gas emissions a priority for
3924 Federal agencies.
3925 Exposure: In the context of vulnerability to climate change, exposure refers to the climate-
3926 related stressors that influence particular systems, and can include stressors such as droughts
3927 (e.g., in the context of water resources, agriculture, forestry) or sea level rise (e.g., coastal
3928 flooding, habitat loss) (National Climate Assessment Report Series, Volume 9)
3929 Extreme weather event: An event that is rare within its statistical reference distribution in a
3930 particular place. Definitions of rare vary, but an extreme weather event would normally be as
3931 rare as or rarer than the 10th or 90th percentile.
3932 Feedback: An interaction mechanism between processes such that the result of an initial process
3933 triggers changes in a second process and that in turn influences the initial one. A positive
3934 feedback intensifies the original process, and a negative feedback reduces it (IPCC, 2007).
3935 Forcing: A natural or human-induced factor that influences climate.
3936 General Circulation (GCM) or Atmosphere/Ocean Global Climate Model: A numerical
3937 representation of the climate system based on the physical, chemical, and biological properties of
3938 its components, their interactions and feedback processes, and accounting for all or some of its
3939 known properties (IPCC, 2007).
3940 Geo-engineering: Deliberate large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment as a strategy
3941 to counteract anthropogenic climate change (NRCs Americas Climate Choices: Advancing the
3942 Science of Climate Change).
3943 Global change: Changes in the global environment (including alterations in climate, land
3944 productivity, oceans or other water resources, atmospheric chemistry, and ecological systems)
3945 that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life (Global Change Research Act of 1990)
3946 Global change information system: An information system that establishes data interfaces and
3947 interoperable repositories of climate and global change data which can be easily and efficiently
3948 accessed, integrated with other data sets, maintained over time and expanded as needed into the
3949 future.
3950 Global change research: Study, monitoring, assessment, prediction, and information
3951 management activities to describe and understand the interactive physical, chemical, and
3952 biological processes that regulate the total Earth system; the unique environment that the Earth
3953 provides for life; changes that are occurring in the Earth system; and the manner in which such
3954 system, environment, and changes are influenced by human actions.
3955 Global Change Research Act (GCRA): A 1990 act establishing the United States Global
3956 Change Research Program, an interagency program aimed at understanding and responding to
3957 global change, including the cumulative effects of human activities and natural processes on the
3958 environment, to promote discussions toward international protocols in global change research,
3959 and for other purposes.
3960 Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS): A system of systems linking together
3961 existing and planned observing systems around the world and promoting common technical
3962 standards so that data from thousands of different instruments can be combined into coherent
3963 data sets.
3964 Global Framework for Climate Services: An outcome of the World Climate Conference
3965 (WCC-3) of the United Nations World Meteorological Organization, with the goal of the
3966 development and provision of relevant science-based climate information and prediction for
3967 climate risk management and adaptation to climate variability and change, throughout the world.
3968 Greenhouse effect: Trapping and build-up of infrared radiation (heat) in the atmosphere
3969 (troposphere) near the Earths surface. Some of the heat flowing back toward space from Earth's
3970 surface is absorbed by water vapor, carbon dioxide, ozone, and several other gases in the
3971 atmosphere and then reradiated back toward Earths surface. If the atmospheric concentrations of
3972 these greenhouse gases rise, the average temperature of the lower atmosphere will gradually
3973 increase (US EPA).
3974 Greenhouse gas (GHG): Any gas that absorbs infrared radiation (heat) in the atmosphere.
3975 Greenhouse gases include, but are not limited to, water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous
3976 oxide, chlorofluorocarbons, hydrochlorofluorocarbons, ozone, hydrofluorocarbons,

3977 perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride (US EPA).
3978 Human system: Any system in which human organizations play a major role. Often, but not
3979 always, the term is synonymous with society or social system, for example, agricultural
3980 system, political system, technological system, or economic system (IPCC, 2007).
3981 Human-natural system: Integrated systems in which human and natural components interact,
3982 such as the interaction between socioeconomic and biophysical processes in urban ecosystems
3983 (Urban Ecology Research Laboratory, University of Washington)
3984 Hydrologic cycle: The flow of water through the Earth system via the processes of evaporation,
3985 vertical and horizontal transport of vapor, condensation, precipitation, and the flow of water from
3986 continents to the ocean.
3987 Hydrological systems: The systems involved in movement, distribution, and quality of water
3988 throughout Earth, including both the hydrologic cycle and water resources (IPCC, 2007).
3989 Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability Models (IAV): Models of specific socioeconomic
3990 sectors or systems of particular societal interest, such as agriculture, coasts, energy,
3991 transportation, health, forestry, fisheries, and water resources, that can be used to investigate the
3992 sensitivity of these sectors and systems to climate and global change to support both process
3993 understanding and decision making.
3994 In situ: Measurements obtained through instruments that are in direct contact with the subject
3995 (e.g., a soil thermometer), as opposed to those collected by remote instruments (e.g., a radar
3996 altimeter).
3997 Integrated Assessment Models: A method of analysis that combines results and models from
3998 the physical, biological, economic, and social sciences, and the interactions between these
3999 components, in a consistent framework, to evaluate the status and consequences of
4000 environmental change and the policy responses to it.
4001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): an international scientific body for the
4002 assessment of climate change, established by the United Nations Environmental Programme and
4003 the UN World Meteorological Organization.
4004 IPCC AR4: The fourth in a series of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
4005 Change, intended to assess the most recent scientific, technical, and socio-economic information
4006 produced worldwide concerning climate change, its potential effects, and options for adaptation
4007 and mitigation.
4008 Land cover: The vegetation and artificial built-up materials covering the land surface, including
4009 areas of vegetation (forests, shrublands, crops, deserts, lawns), bare soil, developed surfaces
4010 (paved land, buildings), and wet areas and bodies of water (watercourses, wetlands).
4011 Land use: The total of arrangements, activities and inputs undertaken in a certain land cover
4012 type (a set of human actions). The term land use is also used in the sense of the social and
4013 economic purposes for which land is managed (e.g., grazing, timber extraction and
4014 conservation).
4015 Land use and land cover change: A change in the use or management of land by humans that
4016 may lead to a change in land cover (IPCC, 2007).
4017 Metadata: Information describing properties of data.
4018 Mitigation (climate change): An intervention to reduce the causes of change in climate. This
4019 intervention could include approaches devised to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to the
4020 atmosphere; to enhance their removal from the atmosphere through storage in geological
4021 formations, soils, biomass, or the ocean; or to alter incoming solar radiation through several
4022 geo-engineering options.
4023 Monitoring: A scientifically designed system of continuing standardized measurements and

4024 observations and the evaluation thereof.
4025 Nonlinearity: A process in which there is no simple proportional relation between cause and
4026 effect (IPCC 2007).
4027 National Academy of Sciences (NAS): An honorific society of distinguished scholars engaged
4028 in scientific and engineering research established by an Act of Congress in 1863, which calls
4029 upon the NAS to "investigate, examine, experiment, and report upon any subject of science or
4030 art" whenever called upon to do so by any department of the government.
4031 National Climate Assessment (NCA): An assessment conducted under the auspices of the
4032 Global Change Research Act of 1990, which requires a report to the President and the Congress
4033 every four years that evaluates, integrates and interprets the findings of the United States Global
4034 Change Research Program.
4035 National Research Council (NRC): The operating arms of the National Academy of Sciences.
4036 NRC enlists committees of the nations top scientists, engineers, and other experts to provide
4037 independent advice to the government on matters of science, technology, and medicine.
4038 National Science and Technology Council (NSTC): A Cabinet-level Council established by
4039 Executive Order that is the principal means within the executive branch to coordinate science
4040 and technology policy across the diverse entities that make up the Federal research and
4041 development enterprise.
4042 Observations: Standardized measurements (either continuing or episodic) of variables in climate
4043 and related systems.
4044 Observing system: A coordinated series of instruments for long-term observations of the land
4045 surface, biosphere, solid Earth, atmosphere, and oceans to improve understanding of Earth as an
4046 integrated system.
4047 Ocean acidification: The phenomenon in which the pH of the ocean becomes more acidic due
4048 to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from human activities, which, in turn,
4049 increase the amount of dissolved carbon dioxide in seawater. Ocean acidification may lead to
4050 reduced calcification rates of calcifying organisms such as corals, mollusks, algae and crustacea.
4051 Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP): A division of the Executive Office of the
4052 President (EOP) established by Congress in 1976 with a broad mandate to advise the President
4053 and others within the EOP on the effects of science and technology on domestic and international
4054 affairs. The 1976 Act also authorizes OSTP to lead interagency efforts to develop and implement
4055 sound science and technology policies and budgets, and to work with the private sector, state and
4056 local governments, the science and higher education communities, and other nations toward this
4057 end.
4058 Ozone: A very active colorless gas, readily reacting with many other substances. See ozone hole
4059 and scientific assessments of ozone depletion.
4060 Ozone hole: A depletion of the ozone layer in the Earths atmosphere over the Antarctic region
4061 caused by anthropogenic chlorine and bromine compounds in combination with the specific
4062 meteorological conditions of that region. See scientific assessments of ozone depletion.
4063 Paleoclimate: Changes in climate on the scale of the entire history of Earth as opposed to
4064 human-recorded data using instrumentation. Historical climate datapaleodataare preserved
4065 within natural resources such as corals, rocks, ocean and lake sediments, ice cores, tree rings,
4066 shells, and microfossils and extend the archive of weather and climate back hundreds to millions
4067 of years.
4068 Parameterization: In climate models, this term refers to the technique of representing processes
4069 that cannot be explicitly resolved at the spatial or temporal resolution of the model (subgrid-scale
4070 processes) by relationships between model-resolved larger-scale flow and the area- or time-
4071 averaged effect of such subgrid-scale processes (IPCC, 2007).
4072 Permafrost: Ground (soil or rock and including water, ice, and organic material) that remains at
4073 or below freezing for at least two consecutive years (IPCC, 2007).
4074 Prediction: A probabilistic description or forecast of a future climate outcome based on
4075 observations of past and current climatological conditions and quantitative models of climate
4076 processes (e.g., a prediction of an El Nio event).
4077 Projection: A description of the response of the climate system to an assumed level of future
4078 radiative forcing. Changes in radiative forcing may be due to either natural sources (e.g.,
4079 volcanic emissions) or human induced causes (e.g., emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols,
4080 or changes in land use and land cover). Climate projections are distinguished from climate
4081 predictions in order to emphasize that climate projections depend on scenarios of future
4082 socioeconomic, technological, and policy developments that may or may not be realized.
4083 Radiative forcing: A process that directly changes the average energy balance of the
4084 Earth-atmosphere system by affecting the balance between incoming solar radiation and
4085 outgoing or radiation. A positive forcing tends to warm the surface of the Earth and a negative
4086 forcing tends to cool the surface.
4087 Remote sensing: The technique of obtaining information about objects through the analysis of
4088 data collected by instruments that are not in physical contact with the object of investigation.
4089 Resilience: The ability of a system to recover its capacity to function after disturbance.
4090 Scenario: A coherent description of a potential future situation that serves as input to more detail
4091 analyses or modeling. Scenarios are tools that explore, if, then. statements, and are not
4092 predictions of or prescriptions for the future.
4093 Scientific assessments of ozone depletion: Periodic assessments of the latest scientific findings
4094 related to the ozone layer that fulfill the requirements of an 1987 international agreement known
4095 as the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer.
4096 Seasonal time scale: On the order of 100 days (a season).
4097 Seasonal-to-interannual timescales: Timescales longer than those associated with individual
4098 weather systems (i.e., beyond the range of credible day-to-day forecasts), up to a few years. The
4099 El Nio-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is an example of seasonal-to-interannual variability.
4100 Sensitivity: The degree to which a system is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by
4101 climate-related stimuli. The effect may be direct (e.g., a change in crop yield in response to a
4102 change in the mean, range, or variability of temperature) or indirect (e.g., damages caused by an
4103 increase in the frequency of coastal flooding due to sea-level rise).
4104 Sequestration: The process of increasing the carbon content of a carbon reservoir other than the
4105 atmosphere.
4106 Sink: Any process, activity, or mechanism that removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol, or a
4107 precursor of a greenhouse gas or aerosol from the atmosphere.
4108 Spatial and temporal scales: Climate may vary on a large range of spatial and temporal scales.
4109 Spatial scales may range from local (less than 100,000 km2), through regional (100,000 to 10
4110 million km2) to continental (10 to 100 million km2). Temporal scales may range from seasonal to
4111 geological (up to hundreds of millions of years).
4112 Stakeholders: Individuals or groups whose interests (financial, cultural, value-based, or other)
4113 are affected by climate variability, climate change, or options for adapting to or mitigating these
4114 phenomena. Stakeholders are important partners with the research community for development
4115 of decision support resources.
4116 Storm surge: The temporary increase, at a particular locality, in the height of the sea due to
4117 extreme meteorological conditions (low atmospheric pressure and/or strong winds) (IPCC,
4118 2007).
4119 Stressor: A chemical or biological agent, environmental condition, external stimulus or event
4120 that causes stress to an organism or system.
4121 Subcommittee on Global Change Research (SGCR): The steering committee of the U.S.
4122 Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) under the Committee on Environment, Natural
4123 Resources, and Sustainability, overseen by the Executive Office of the President. SGCR is
4124 composed of representatives from each of the member agencies of the USGCRP.
4125 Sustainability: Balancing the needs of present and future generations while substantially
4126 reducing poverty and conserving the planets life support systems.
4127 Sustainable development: Development that meets the needs of the present without
4128 compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Brundtland Commission
4129 (IPCC, 2007).
4130 Synoptic timescale: On the order of 10 days.
4131 System: Integration of interrelated, interacting, or interdependent components into a complex
4132 whole.
4133 Technology: A piece of equipment or a technique for performing a particular activity.
4134 Terabytes (TB): A multiple of the unit byte for digital information. One terabyte is equivalent to
4135 1012 bytes.
4136 Teleconnection: A connection between climate variations over widely separated parts of the
4137 world (IPCC, 2007).
4138 Timescale: Characteristic time for a process to be expressed.
4139 Tipping point: A critical threshold at which a tiny perturbation can qualitatively alter the state
4140 or development of a system (Lenton, 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences).
4141 Three-dimensional ocean heat content: The heat stored in the volume of the worlds ocean.
4142 Threshold: A point in a system after which any change that is described as abrupt is one where
4143 the change in the response is much larger than the change in the forcing. The changes at the
4144 threshold are therefore abrupt relative to the changes that occur before or after the threshold and
4145 can lead to a transition to a new state (IPCC, 2007, WGI)
4146 Uncertainty: An expression of the degree to which a value (e.g., the future state of the climate
4147 system) is unknown (IPCC, 2007).
4148 United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP): An interagency program that
4149 coordinates and integrates federal research on changes in the global environment and their
4150 implications for society. USGCRP began as a presidential initiative in 1989 and was mandated
4151 by Congress in the Global Change Research Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-606), which called for "a
4152 comprehensive and integrated United States research program which will assist the Nation and
4153 the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of
4154 global change." Thirteen departments and agencies participate in the USGCRP, which was
4155 known as the U.S. Climate Change Science Program from 2002 through 2008. The program is
4156 steered by the Subcommittee on Global Change Research under the Committee on Environment
4157 and Natural Resources, overseen by the Executive Office of the President, and facilitated by a
4158 National Coordination Office.
4159 U.S. Group on Earth Observations: An interagency group established in 2005 under the White
4160 House Office of Science and Technology Policys Committee on Environment, Natural
4161 Resources, and Sustainability to lead federal efforts to achieve a national Integrated Earth
4162 Observation System. Through USGEO, the United States further supports cooperative,
4163 international efforts to build the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS).
4164 Vulnerability: The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse
4165 effects of climate and global change, including climate variability and extremes, as well as
4166 climate change in conjunction with other stressors (expanded from IPCC, 2007),
4167 Weather: The specific condition of the atmosphere at a particular place and time. It is measured
4168 in terms of parameters such as wind, temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, cloudiness,
4169 and precipitation.
4170
4171
4172
4173
1 Committee on Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Community Assessment and Strategy for the Future, National
Research Council. 2007. Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond.
National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 456 pp.
2
Committee on Abrupt Climate Change, National Research Council. 2002. Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises, Global
Climate Change Impacts in the United States, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 244 pp.
3
Karl, T.R., J.M. Melillo, and T.C. Peterson, eds. 2009. Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Cambridge
University Press, 192 pp.
4
Committee on America's Climate Choices, Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, National Research Council. 2010.
America's Climate Choices, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 118 pp.
5
World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates Report, August 11, 2011, USDA World Agricultural Outlook Board
6
America's Climate Choices: Panel on Advancing the Science of Climate Change; National Research Council. 2010. Advancing
the Science of Climate Change, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., page 186.
7
Ibid., page 193.
8
Ibid., page 206.
9
Ibid., pages 212 and 213.
10
Ibid., page 238.
11
Ibid., page 241.
12
Ibid., page 261.
13
Ibid., page 265.
14
Ibid., page 274.
15
Ibid., page 282.
16
Ibid., page 285.
17
Ibid., page 298.
18
Young, I.R., S. Zieger, and A. V. Babanin. 2011. Global trends in wind speed and wave height.
Science, http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1197219.
19
Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. Our Nations Air: Status and Trends Through 2008, EPA Publication Number EPA-
454/R-09-002, Research Triangle Park, NC, page 1. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/2010/ (accessed September
16, 2011).
20
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0912376107
21
Held, I.M. 2005. The gap between simulation and understanding in climate modeling. BAMS, 86:16091614,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-86-11-1609.
22
http://globalchange.gov/what-we-do/assessment/nca-reports
23
Americas Climate Choices: Panel on Informing Effective Decisions and Actions Related to Climate Change. 2010. Informing
an Effective Response to Climate Change, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 348 pp.
24
http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2009/11/art5full.pdf (accessed September 16, 2011).
25
Ibid.

Review Us Global Change Research Program Strategic Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review Us Global Change Research Program Strategic Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Review of the

U.S. Global Change

Draft Strategic Plan

Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research Program

Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate

Board on Environmental Change and Society

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

International Standard Book Number -13: 978-0-309-25237-9

Copies of this report are available from the program office:

Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

WARREN M. WASHINGTON (Chair), National Center for Atmospheric Research,

LAURIE GELLER, Study Director

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Robert H. Corell, Global Environment and Technology Foundation, Arlington VA

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Institutional oversight for this project was provided by:

BOARD ON ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES AND CLIMATE

ANTONIO J. BUSALACCHI, JR. (Chair), University of Maryland, College Park

CHRIS ELFRING, Director

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Institutional oversight for this project was provided by:

BOARD ON ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE AND SOCIETY

MEREDITH A. LANE, Board Director

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

2. CONVEYING THE IMPORTANCE AND VALUE OF

3. GLOBAL CHANGE VERSUS CLIMATE CHANGE 8

4. COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC TOPICS WITHIN PROGRAM GOALS 1-4..12

5. PROCESS, STRUCTURE, AND IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES....41

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

x An effective global change research enterprise requires an integrated observational system

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

x In the Committees judgment, it would be a mistake to postpone phasing in the newer

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

x improving the accuracy and lead times of seasonal climate forecasts,

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

"Global change" means changes in the global environment (including alterations in

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

3 See further discussion at: http://www.icsu.org/earth-system-sustainability-initiative;

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

OBSERVATIONS, MODELING, AND DATA MANAGEMENT

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Issues Raised by Increasing Data and Model Resolution. As our technological

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.