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:    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 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

Description:    Soil carbon stocks and sequestration have been given a lot of attention recently in the study of terrestrial ecosystems and global climate change. This review focuses on the progress made on the estimation of the soil carbon stocks of China, and the characterization of carbon dynamics of croplands with regard to climate change, and addresses issues on the mineralization of soil organic carbon in relation to greenhouse gas emissions. By integrating existing research data, China’s total soil organic carbon (SOC) stock is estimated to be 90 Pg and its inorganic carbon (SIC) stock as 60 Pg, with SOC sequestration rates in the range of 20–25 Tg/a for the last two decades. An estimation of the biophysical potential of SOC sequestration has been generally agreed as being 2 Pg over the long term, of which only 1/3 could be attainable using contemporary agricultural technologies in all of China’s croplands. Thus, it is critical to enhance SOC sequestration and mitigate climate change to improve agricultural and land use management in China. There have been many instances where SOC accumulation may not induce an increased amount of decomposition under a warming scenario but instead favor improved cropland productivity and ecosystem functioning. Furthermore, unchanged or even decreased net global warming potential (GWP) from croplands with enhanced SOC has been reported by a number of case studies using life cycle analysis. Future studies on soil carbon stocks and the sequestration potential of China are expected to focus on: (1) Carbon stocks and the sequestration capacity of the earths’ surface systems at scales ranging from the plot to the watershed and (2) multiple interface processes and the synergies between carbon sequestration and ecosystem productivity and ecosystem functioning at scales from the molecular level to agro-ecosystems. Soil carbon science in China faces new challenges and opportunities to undertake integrated research applicable to many areas. Content Type Journal Article Category Review Pages 1-11 DOI 10.1007/s11434-011-4693-7 Authors JuFeng Zheng, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China Kun Cheng, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China GenXing Pan, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China Pete Smith, Institute of Biological and Environmental Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, 23 St Machar Drive, Aberdeen, AB24 3UU UK LianQing Li, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China XuHui Zhang, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China JinWei Zheng, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China XiaoJun Han, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China YanLing Du, Institute for Resource, Ecosystem and Environment of Agriculture, and Research Center of Agriculture and Climate Change, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, 210095 China Journal Chinese Science Bulletin Online ISSN 1861-9541 Print ISSN 1001-6538

Description:    Since Westman (1977) and Ehrlich (1982) put forward the concepts of “the service of nature” and “ecosystem service functions”, respectively, methods for conducting value accounting for them, and their practical application have become the subjects of intense study. Based on an overview of available research findings, we discuss three scientific hypotheses. First, the terrestrial ecosystem offers both positive and negative service functions. Second, changes in terrestrial ecosystem service functions lie not only in the number of ecosystem types and the coverage area of each type, but also in their quality. Third, the value of terrestrial ecosystem service functions should be assessed both in terms of the value stocked and the value added. We collected land use data from China during the period 1999–2008, and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index data based on remote sensing images from the Global Inventory Modeling and Mapping Studies for the same period. We then calculated and analyzed spatial and temporal changes in China’s terrestrial ecosystem service values over the 10-year period. Considering temporal change, the total value (stocked) of China’s terrestrial ecosystem service functions decreased from 6.82 trillion Yuan RMB in 1999 to 6.57 trillion Yuan RMB in 2008. During that period, the positive value decreased by 240.17 billion Yuan RMB and the negative value increased by 8.85 billion Yuan RMB. The decrease in total value lies mainly in the humidity control, soil formation, and waste recycling functions. The total value (added) of China’s terrestrial ecosystem service functions increased by 4.31 billion Yuan RMB in 2000, but decreased by 0.13 billion Yuan RMB in 2008 (based on the constant price of China in 1999). The value (added) was a negative figure. From the perspective of spatial change, we can see that the supply of China’s terrestrial ecosystem service functions fell slightly over the past 10 years, mainly in Northeast and Southern China. As a result of human activities on ecosystems, the loss of ecosystem service functions’ value was relatively prominent in Shanxi and Gansu provinces, compared with an increase in value in Shaanxi Province. Terrestrial ecosystem service functions’ value per unit area was relatively high in mid- and East China, showing a prominent spatial change over the 10-year period, but low in Western China. Some conclusions are drawn after an in-depth analysis of the factors causing the spatial and temporal changes in China’s terrestrial ecosystem service functions, in the hope that our suggestions will be helpful for the management of China’s terrestrial ecosystems. Content Type Journal Article Category Article Pages 1-12 DOI 10.1007/s11434-012-4978-5 Authors Yao Shi, State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100085 China RuSong Wang, State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100085 China JinLou Huang, State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100085 China WenRui Yang, Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning and Design, Beijing, 100045 China Journal Chinese Science Bulletin Online ISSN 1861-9541 Print ISSN 1001-6538

Description:    Four wetland maps for all China have been produced, based on Landsat and CBERS-02B remote sensing data between 1978 and 2008 (1978, 1990, 2000 and 2008). These maps were mainly developed by manual interpretation and validated by substantial field investigation in 2009. Based on these maps, we analyzed the 2008 wetland distribution in China and discussed wetland changes and their drivers over the past 30 years. (i) There were about 324097 km 2 of wetlands in 2008, for which inland marshes or swamps were the most common wetland type (35%), with lakes (26%) second. Most of the wetlands were in Heilongjiang, Inner Mongolia, Qinghai and Tibet, occupying about 55% of the national wetland area. (ii) From 1978 to 2008, China’s wetland area continually and significantly decreased, by about 33% based on changes in the wetland map. This was in sharp contrast to the increase in artificial wetlands, which increased by about 122%. Inland marshes accounted for the main loss of total wetlands from 1978 to 2000. From 2000 through 2008, riverine and lacustrine wetlands constituted the main wetland loss. Fortunately however, the rate of wetland loss decreased from 5523 to 831 km 2 /a. (iii) The change ratio of lost natural wetlands (including inland and coastal wetlands) to non-wetlands has decreased slightly over the past 30 years. From 1978 to 1990, nearly all natural wetlands (98%) lost were transformed into non-wetlands. However, the ratio declined to 86% from 1990 to 2000, and to 77% from 2000 to 2008. (iv) All Chinese provinces were divided into three groups according to patterns of wetland changes, which could relate to the driving forces of such changes. Tibet was completely different from other provinces, as it was one representative example in which there was a net wetland increase, because of global warming and decreased human activity since 1990. Increased economic development caused considerable wetland loss in most eastern provinces, and artificial wetlands increased. Content Type Journal Article Category Article Pages 1-11 DOI 10.1007/s11434-012-5093-3 Authors ZhenGuo Niu, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China HaiYing Zhang, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China XianWei Wang, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China WenBo Yao, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory for Earth System Modeling, Center for Earth System Science, Institute for Global Change Studies, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084 China DeMin Zhou, Resource Environment and Tourism, Capital Normal University, Beijing, 100037 China KuiYi Zhao, Northeast Institute of Geography and Agricultural Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Changchun, 130012 China Hui Zhao, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China NaNa Li, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China HuaBing Huang, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China CongCong Li, Department of Geography and Remote Sensing, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875 China Jun Yang, College of Forestry, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing, 100083 China CaiXia Liu, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China Shuang Liu, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China Lin Wang, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China Zhan Li, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China ZhenZhong Yang, Department of Geography and Remote Sensing, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875 China Fei Qiao, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China YaoMin Zheng, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China YanLei Chen, Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, 94720 USA YongWei Sheng, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles, 90095 USA XiaoHong Gao, Department of Life and Geographic Sciences, Qinghai Normal University, Xining, 810008 China WeiHong Zhu, Department of Geography, Yanbian University, Yanbian, 133002 China WenQing Wang, School of Environment and Ecology, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361005 China Hong Wang, School of Geographical Information Science, Hohai University, Nanjing, 211100 China YongLing Weng, School of Surveying and Mapping Transportation Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096 China DaFang Zhuang, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101 China JiYuan Liu, Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101 China ZhiCai Luo, School of Surveying and Mapping, Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430079 China Xiao Cheng, Department of Geography and Remote Sensing, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875 China ZiQi Guo, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China Peng Gong, State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science, Jointly Sponsored by Institute of Remote Sensing Applications, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100101 China Journal Chinese Science Bulletin Online ISSN 1861-9541 Print ISSN 1001-6538

Description:    Socio-economic and climatic stresses affect local communities’ vulnerability to flooding. Better incorporation of socio-economic stress in local vulnerability assessments is important when planning for climate adaptation. This is rarely done due to insufficient understanding of their interaction, in both theory and practice. The omission leads to critical weaknesses in local adaptation strategies. This study analyses how socio-economic stress interact with climatic stress and shape local vulnerability to flooding, and how such stress can be more efficiently managed within local government organisations. A framework containing potential stresses was developed and applied to investigate how socio-economic stress affected exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity in two case studies, using interview and group exercise transcripts. Cases consisted of major development projects in two Swedish municipalities, Gothenburg and Lilla Edet. The cases were similarly exposed to climatic stress but differed in socio-economic context, and previous professional climate change experience. Fierce foreign competition and market structure were seen as the two most significant socio-economic stresses influencing local vulnerability to flooding through shaping the ‘local’ worldview. In falling order sensitivity, exposure, and adaptive capacity were seen to be influenced by the socio-economic stresses. Two approaches to efficiently incorporate climatic and socio-economic stress in local management are proposed: shifting the focus of vulnerability assessments towards future sensitivity of people and settlements, rather than on the current infrastructure’s sensitivity, would facilitate their use in planning and by ‘mainstreaming’ adaptation into long-term strategic planning vulnerability would be more dynamically addressed and periodically revised. Content Type Journal Article Category Original Article Pages 1-16 DOI 10.1007/s11027-011-9337-3 Authors Mattias Hjerpe, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research and Water and Environmental Studies - Department for Thematic Studies, Linköping University, Nya Kåkenhus, SE-601 74 Norrköping, Sweden Erik Glaas, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research and Water and Environmental Studies - Department for Thematic Studies, Linköping University, Nya Kåkenhus, SE-601 74 Norrköping, Sweden Journal Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Online ISSN 1573-1596 Print ISSN 1381-2386