Description:    Climate change is an issue of great importance for human rights, public health, and socioeconomic equity because of its diverse consequences overall as well as its disproportionate impact on vulnerable and socially marginalized populations. Vulnerability to climate change is determined by a community’s ability to anticipate, cope with, resist, and recover from the impact of major weather events. Climate change will affect industrial and agricultural sectors, as well as transportation, health, and energy infrastructure. These shifts will have significant health and economic consequences for diverse communities throughout California. Without proactive policies to address these equity concerns, climate change will likely reinforce and amplify current as well as future socioeconomic disparities, leaving low-income, minority, and politically marginalized groups with fewer economic opportunities and more environmental and health burdens. This review explores the disproportionate impacts of climate change on vulnerable groups in California and investigates the costs and benefits of the climate change mitigation strategies specified for implementation in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). Lastly, knowledge gaps, future research priorities, and policy implications are identified. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-19 DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0310-7 Authors Seth B. Shonkoff, Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, Division of Society and Environment, University of California, Berkeley, 137 Mulford Hall, MC 3144, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Rachel Morello-Frosch, Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management & School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, 137 Mulford Hall, MC 3114, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Manuel Pastor, Departments of Geography and American Studies and Ethnicity, University of Southern California, 3620 S. Vermont Ave, KAP-462, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0255, USA James Sadd, Department of Environmental Science and Geology, Occidental College, 1600 Campus Rd., Los Angeles, CA 90041, USA Journal Climatic Change Online ISSN 1573-1480 Print ISSN 0165-0009

Description:    Globally, urban growth will add 1.5 billion people to cities by 2030, making the difficult task of urban water provisions even more challenging. In this article, we develop a conceptual framework of urban water provision as composed of three axes: water availability, water quality, and water delivery. For each axis, we calculate quantitative proxy measures for all cities with more than 50,000 residents, and then briefly discuss the strategies cities are using in response if they are deficient on one of the axes. We show that 523 million people are in cities where water availability may be an issue, 890 million people are in cities where water quality may be an issue, and 1.3 billion people are in cities where water delivery may be an issue. Tapping into groundwater is a widespread response, regardless of the management challenge, with many cities unsustainably using this resource. The strategies used by cities deficient on the water delivery axis are different than for cities deficient on the water quantity or water quality axis, as lack of financial resources pushes cities toward a different and potentially less effective set of strategies. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-10 DOI 10.1007/s13280-011-0152-6 Authors Robert I. McDonald, Worldwide Office, The Nature Conservancy, 4245 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203, USA Ian Douglas, School of Environment and Development, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL UK Carmen Revenga, Worldwide Office, The Nature Conservancy, 4245 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203, USA Rebecca Hale, School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, 1711 South Rural Road, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA Nancy Grimm, Faculty of Ecology, Evolution, & Environmental Science, Arizona State University, 1711 South Rural Road, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA Jenny Grönwall, 110 Marlyn Lodge, Portsoken St, London, E1 8RB UK Balazs Fekete, CUNY Research Foundation, The City College of New York, 160 Convent Avenue, New York, NY 10031, USA Journal AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment Online ISSN 1654-7209 Print ISSN 0044-7447

Description:    The condition of many wetlands across Australia has deteriorated due to increased water regulation and the expansion and intensification of agriculture and increased urban and industrial expansion. Despite this situation, a comprehensive overview of the distribution and condition of wetlands across Australia is not available. Regional analyses exist and several exemplary mapping and monitoring exercises have been maintained to complement the more general information sets. It is expected that global climate change will exacerbate the pressures on inland wetlands, while sea level rises will adversely affect coastal wetlands. It is also expected that the exacerbation of these pressures will increase the potential for near-irreversible changes in the ecological state of some wetlands. Concerted institutional responses to such pressures have in the past proven difficult to sustain, although there is some evidence that a more balanced approach to water use and agriculture is being developed with the provision of increasing funds to purchase water for environmental flows being one example. We identify examples from around Australia that illustrate the impacts on wetlands of long-term climate change from palaeoecological records (south-eastern Australia); water allocation (Murray-Darling Basin); dryland salinisation (south-western Australia); and coastal salinisation (northern Australia). These are provided to illustrate both the extent of change in wetlands and the complexity of differentiating the specific effects of climate change. An appraisal of the main policy responses by government to climate change is provided as a basis for further considering the opportunities for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. Content Type Journal Article Category Effects of Climate Change on Wetlands Pages 1-21 DOI 10.1007/s00027-011-0232-5 Authors C. M. Finlayson, Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, PO Box 789, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia J. A. Davis, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia P. A. Gell, Centre for Environmental Management, School of Science and Engineering, University of Ballarat, PO Box 663, Ballarat, VIC 3353, Australia R. T. Kingsford, Australian Rivers and Wetland Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia K. A. Parton, Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, PO Box 883, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia Journal Aquatic Sciences - Research Across Boundaries Online ISSN 1420-9055 Print ISSN 1015-1621

Description:    The tree species composition of a forested landscape may respond to climate change through two primary successional mechanisms: (1) colonization of suitable habitats and (2) competitive dynamics of established species. In this study, we assessed the relative importance of competition and colonization in forest landscape response (as measured by the forest type composition change) to global climatic change. Specifically, we simulated shifts in forest composition within the Boundary Waters Canoe Area of northern Minnesota during the period 2000–2400  AD . We coupled a forest ecosystem process model, PnET-II, and a spatially dynamic forest landscape model, LANDIS-II, to simulate landscape change. The relative ability of 13 tree species to colonize suitable habitat was represented by the probability of establishment or recruitment. The relative competitive ability was represented by the aboveground net primary production. Both competitive and colonization abilities changed over time in response to climatic change. Our results showed that, given only moderate-frequent windthrow (rotation period = 500 years) and fire disturbances (rotation period = 300 years), competition is relatively more important for the short-term (〈100 years) compositional response to climatic change. For longer-term forest landscape response (〉100 years), colonization became relatively more important. However, if more frequent fire disturbances were simulated, then colonization is the dominant process from the beginning of the simulations. Our results suggest that the disturbance regime will affect the relative strengths of successional drivers, the understanding of which is critical for future prediction of forest landscape response to global climatic change. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-31 DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0098-5 Authors Chonggang Xu, Division of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87544, USA George Z. Gertner, Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, W-523 Turner Hall, MC-047, 1102 South Goodwin Ave, Urbana, IL 61801, USA Robert M. Scheller, Environmental Science and Management, Portland State University, P.O. Box 751, Portland, OR 97207, USA Journal Climatic Change Online ISSN 1573-1480 Print ISSN 0165-0009

Description:    This paper explores two issues that have been receiving increasing attention in recent decades, climate change adaptation and natural disaster risk reduction. An examination of the similarities and differences between them reveals important linkages but also significant differences, including the spectrum of threats, time and spatial scales, the importance of local versus global processes, how risks are perceived, and degree of uncertainty. Using a risk perspective to analyze these issues, preferential strategies emerge related to choices of being proactive, reactive, or emphasizing risk management as opposed to the precautionary principle. The policy implications of this analysis are then explored, using Canada as a case study. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-15 DOI 10.1007/s10584-011-0259-6 Authors David Etkin, Disaster and Emergency Management, Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional Studies, York University, 4700 Keele St, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M3J 1P3 J. Medalye, Political Science, Faculty of Liberal Arts & Professional Studies, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada K. Higuchi, Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Journal Climatic Change Online ISSN 1573-1480 Print ISSN 0165-0009

Description:    Within climate change impact research, the consideration of socioeconomic processes remains a challenge. Socioeconomic systems must be equipped to react and adapt to global change. However, any reasonable development or assessment of sustainable adaptation strategies requires a comprehensive consideration of human-environment interactions. This requirement can be met through multi-agent simulation, as demonstrated in the interdisciplinary project GLOWA-Danube (GLObal change of the WAter Cycle; www.glowa-danube.de ). GLOWA-Danube has developed an integrated decision support tool for water and land use management in the Upper Danube catchment (parts of Germany and Austria, 77,000 km 2 ). The scientific disciplines invoked in the project have implemented sixteen natural and social science models, which are embedded in the simulation framework DANUBIA. Within DANUBIA, a multi-agent simulation approach is used to represent relevant socioeconomic processes. The structure and results of three of these multi-agent models, WaterSupply, Household and Tourism, are presented in this paper. A main focus of the paper is on the development of global change scenarios (climate and society) and their application to the presented models. The results of different simulation runs demonstrate the potential of multi-agent models to represent feedbacks between different water users and the environment. Moreover, the interactive usage of the framework allows to define and vary scenario assumptions so as to assess the impact of potential interventions. It is shown that integrated modelling and scenario design not only provide valuable information, but also offer a platform for discussing complex human-environment-interactions with stakeholders. Content Type Journal Article DOI 10.1007/s11027-010-9274-6 Authors Anja Soboll, Department of Geography, University of Munich, Luisenstrasse 37, 80333 Munich, Germany Michael Elbers, Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, Kurt-Wolters-Strasse 3, 34109 Kassel, Germany Roland Barthel, Institute of Hydraulic Engineering, University of Stuttgart, Pfaffenwaldring 7a, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany Juergen Schmude, Department of Geography, University of Munich, Luisenstrasse 37, 80333 Munich, Germany Andreas Ernst, Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, Kurt-Wolters-Strasse 3, 34109 Kassel, Germany Ralf Ziller, Institute of Hydraulic Engineering, University of Stuttgart, Pfaffenwaldring 7a, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany Journal Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Online ISSN 1573-1596 Print ISSN 1381-2386

Description:    Geoengineering methods are intended to reduce climate change, which is already having demonstrable effects on ecosystem structure and functioning in some regions. Two types of geoengineering activities that have been proposed are: carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) removal (CDR), which removes CO 2 from the atmosphere, and solar radiation management (SRM, or sunlight reflection methods), which reflects a small percentage of sunlight back into space to offset warming from greenhouse gases (GHGs). Current research suggests that SRM or CDR might diminish the impacts of climate change on ecosystems by reducing changes in temperature and precipitation. However, sudden cessation of SRM would exacerbate the climate effects on ecosystems, and some CDR might interfere with oceanic and terrestrial ecosystem processes. The many risks and uncertainties associated with these new kinds of purposeful perturbations to the Earth system are not well understood and require cautious and comprehensive research. Content Type Journal Article Category Review Paper Pages 1-20 DOI 10.1007/s13280-012-0258-5 Authors Lynn M. Russell, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Dr. Mail Code 0221, La Jolla, CA 92093-0221, USA Philip J. Rasch, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 902 Battelle Boulevard, P. O. Box 999, MSIN K9-34, Richland, WA 99352, USA Georgina M. Mace, Centre for Population Biology, Imperial College London, Ascot, Berks SL5 7PY, UK Robert B. Jackson, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708, USA John Shepherd, Earth System Science, School of Ocean and Earth Sciences, National Oceanography Centre, University of Southampton, European Way, Southampton, SO14 3ZH UK Peter Liss, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ UK Margaret Leinen, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, 5600 US Rt 1 North, Fort Pierce, FL 34946, USA David Schimel, NEON Inc, 1685 38th Street, Boulder, CO 80305, USA Naomi E. Vaughan, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, NR4 7TJ, UK Anthony C. Janetos, Joint Global Change Research Institute Pacific Northwest National Laboratory/University of Maryland, 5825 University Research Court, Suite 3500, College Park, MD 20740, USA Philip W. Boyd, NIWA Centre of Chemical & Physical Oceanography, Department of Chemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand Richard J. Norby, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Bethel Valley Road, Bldg. 2040, MS-6301, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6301, USA Ken Caldeira, Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution, Stanford, CA 94305, USA Joonas Merikanto, Division of Atmospheric Sciences, Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, P.O Box 64, 00014 Helsinki, Finland Paulo Artaxo, Institute of Physics, University of São Paulo, Rua do Matão, Travessa R, 187, São Paulo, SP CEP 05508-090, Brazil Jerry Melillo, The Ecosystems Center, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA M. Granger Morgan, Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA Journal AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment Online ISSN 1654-7209 Print ISSN 0044-7447

Description:    To avoid dangerous changes to the climate system, the global mean temperature must not rise more than 2 °C from the 19th century level. The German Advisory Council on Global Change recommends maintaining the rate of change in temperature to within 0.2 °C per decade. This paper supposes that a geoengineering option of solar radiation management (SRM) by injecting aerosol into the Earth’s stratosphere becomes applicable in the future to meet those temperature conditions. However, a failure to continue the use of this option could cause a rapid temperature rebound, and thus we propose a principle of SRM use that the temperature conditions must be satisfied even after SRM termination at any time. We present economically optimal trajectories of the amounts of SRM use and the reduction of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions under our principle by using an economic model of climate change. To meet the temperature conditions described above, the SRM must reduce radiative forcing by slightly more than 1 W/m 2 at most, and industrial CO 2 emissions must be cut by 80 % by the end of the 21st century relative to 2005, assuming a climate sensitivity of 3 °C. Lower-level use of SRM is required for a higher climate sensitivity; otherwise, the temperature will rise faster in the case of SRM termination. Considering potential economic damages of environmental side effects due to the use of SRM, the contribution of SRM would have to be much smaller. Content Type Journal Article Category Original Article Pages 1-26 DOI 10.1007/s11027-012-9414-2 Authors Takanobu Kosugi, College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, 56-1 Toji-in Kitamachi, Kita-ku, Kyoto, 603-8577 Japan Journal Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Online ISSN 1573-1596 Print ISSN 1381-2386

Description:    This review reports background information on wetlands in the Northeast Asia and High Asia areas, including wetland coverage and type, significance for local populations, and threats to their vitality and protection, with particular focus on the relationship of how global change influenced wetlands. Natural wetlands in these areas have been greatly depleted and degraded, largely due to global climate change, drainage and conversion to agriculture and silviculture, hydrologic alterations, exotics invasions, and misguided management policies. Global warming has caused wetland and ice-sheet loss in High Asia and permafrost thawing in tundra wetlands in Northeast Asia, and hence induced enormous reductions in water-storage sources in High Asia and carbon loss in Northeast Asia. This, in the long term, will exacerbate chronic water shortage and positively feed back global warming. Recently, better understanding of the vital role of healthy wetland ecosystems to Asia’s sustainable economic development has led to major efforts in wetland conservation and restoration. Nonetheless, collaborative efforts to restore and protect the wetlands must involve not only the countries of Northeast and High Asia but also international agencies. Research has been productive but the results should be more effectively integrated with policy-making and wetland restoration practices under future climatic scenarios. Content Type Journal Article Category Research Article Pages 1-9 DOI 10.1007/s00027-012-0281-4 Authors Shuqing An, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Ziqiang Tian, River and Coastal Environment Research Center, Chinese Research Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing, 100012 People’s Republic of China Ying Cai, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Teng Wen, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Delin Xu, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Hao Jiang, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Zhigang Yao, The Wetland Management Station, Jiangsu Administrate of Forestry, Nanjing, 210036 People’s Republic of China Baohua Guan, The Institute of Geography and Limnology, China Academy of Science, Nanjing, 210008 People’s Republic of China Sheng Sheng, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Yan Ouyang, The State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, The Institute of Wetland Ecology, School of Life Science, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093 People’s Republic of China Xiaoli Cheng, Key Laboratory of Aquatic Botany and Watershed Ecology, Wuhan Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan, 430074 People’s Republic of China Journal Aquatic Sciences - Research Across Boundaries Online ISSN 1420-9055 Print ISSN 1015-1621

Description:    This paper reviewed 42 studies of how local knowledge contributes to adaptation to climate and climate change in the Asia-Pacific Region. Most studies focused on traditional ecological or indigenous knowledge. Three simple questions were addressed: (1) How are changes in climate recognized? (2) What is known about how to adapt to changes in climate? (3) How do people learn about how to adapt? Awareness of change is an important element of local knowledge. Changes in climate are recognized at multiple time scales from observations that warn of imminent extreme weather through expectations for the next season to identification of multi-year historical trends. Observations are made of climate, its impact on physical resources, and bio-indicators. Local knowledge about how to adapt can be divided into four major classes: land and water management, physical infrastructure, livelihood strategies, and social institutions. Adaptation actions vary with time scale of interest from dealing with risks of disaster from extreme weather events, through slow onset changes such as seasonal droughts, to dealing with long-term multi-year shifts in climate. Local knowledge systems differ in the capacities and ways in which they support learning. Many are dynamic and draw on information from other places, whereas others are more conservative and tightly institutionalized. Past experience of events and ways of learning may be insufficient for dealing with a novel climate. Once the strengths and limitations of local knowledge (like those of science) are grasped the opportunities for meaningful hybridization of scientific and local knowledge for adaptation expand. Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-20 DOI 10.1007/s11027-012-9407-1 Authors Louis Lebel, Unit for Social and Environmental Research, Faculty of Social Sciences, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200 Thailand Journal Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Online ISSN 1573-1596 Print ISSN 1381-2386