Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic: Perspectives from the Barents Area

92

Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic: Perspectives from the Barents Area

AMAP, 2012. Arctic Climate Issues 2011: Changes in Arctic Snow,Water,Ice and Permafrost.SWIPA 2011OverviewReport. Arctic Monitoring andAssessment Programme (AMAP),Oslo, Norway. AMAP, 2015a. Summary for Policy-makers: Arctic Climate Issues 2015. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. AMAP, 2015b. AMAP Assessment 2015: Black Carbon and Ozone as Arctic Climate Forcers. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. AMAP, 2017. Snow, Water, Ice and permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA). Arctic Monitoring an Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. Andrew, R., 2014. Socio-Economic Drivers of Change in the Arctic (SEDoCA). Center for International Climate and Environmental Research (CICERO),Oslo. Anenberg, S.C., J.D. Schwartz, D. Shindell, M. Amann, G. Faluvegi, Z. Klimont, G. Janssens-Maenhout, L. Pozzoli, R.Van Dingenen, E. Vignati, L. Emberson, N.Z. Muller, J.J. West, M. Williams,V. Demkine,W.K.Hicks, J. Kuylenstierna, F. Raes and V. Ramanathan, 2012. Global air quality and health co-benefits of mitigating near-term climate change through methane and black carbon controls. Environmental Health Perspectives, 120:831-839. Arbo, P.,A. Iversen,M. Knol, T. Ringholm and G. Sander, 2013. Arctic futures: conceptualizations and images of a changing Arctic. Polar Geography, 36:163-182. Arctic Council, 2009.Arctic Marine ShippingAssessment 2009 Report. Protection of theArctic Marine EnvironmentWorking Group (PAME), Akureyri. Arctic Council, 2013. Arctic Resilience Interim Report 2013. Stockholm Environment Institute and Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm. Arendt, A., A. Bliss, T. Bolch, J.G. Cogley, A.S. Gardner, J.-O. Hagen, R. Hock,M. Huss, G. Kaser, C. Kienholz,W.T. Pfeffer, G. Moholdt, F. Paul, V. Radić, L. Andreassen, S. Bajracharya, N.E. Barrand,M.Beedle,E.Berthier,R.Bhambri,I.Brown,E.Burgess, D. Burgess, F. Cawkwell, T. Chinn, L. Copland, B. Davies, H. De Angelis, E. Dolgova, L. Earl, K. Filbert, R. Forester, A.G. Fountain, H. Frey, B. Giffen, N. Glasser, W.Q. Guo, S. Gurney, W. Hagg, D. Hall, U.K. Haritashya, G. Hartmann, C. Helm, S. Herreid, I. Howat, G. Kapustin, T. Khromova, M. König, J. Kohler, D. Kriegel, S. Kutuzov, I. Lavrentiev, R. LeBris, S.Y. Liu, J. Lund,W. Manley, R. Marti, C. Mayer, E.S. Miles, X. Li, B. Menounos,A.Mercer,N.Mölg, P.Mool,G.Nosenko,A.Negrete, T. Nuimura, C. Nuth, R. Pettersson,A. Racoviteanu, R. Ranzi, P. Rastner, F. Rau, B. Raup, J. Rich, H. Rott,A. Sakai, C. Schneider, Y. Seliverstov, M. Sharp, O. Sigurðsson, C. Stokes, R.G.Way, R. Wheate, S. Winsvold, G. Wolken, F. Wyatt and N. Zheltyhina, 2015.Randolph Glacier Inventory –ADataset of Global Glacier Outlines: Version 5.0, Global Land Ice Measurements from Space, Boulder, Colorado. Digital Media. Årthun, M. and C. Schrum, 2010. Ocean surface heat flux variability in the Barents Sea. Journal of Marine Systems, 83:88-98.

which suppress the natural restoration of the environment. To some extent this speculation might also be applied to pollutants; for which the amount and type found might also increase with population and economic growth in the region. In contrast to feedbacks, which occur in the climate system and may be predicted (at best) but not changed, those in the joint ‘environment-socio-economic’ system could theoretically be affected in advance, in order to reduce any negative effect. This is conceptualized in Figure 4.18 where human actions are shown in green and yellow boxes and environmental responses in blue boxes. The sequence of environmental responses in the Barents area is shown in boxes 3 to 6 and 8 to 10. The pure environmental feedback from box 5 to box 1 is probably an inevitable outcome of permafrost thaw. The other feedback (box 10 to box 2) is triggered by human activities aimed at draining waterlogged areas (7). The negative result of this action (more wildfires) could be mitigated by adaptation actions, thus eliminating the entire chain (boxes 7 to 10) and the corresponding feedback. Similar chains of actions, responses and feedbacks could be also constructed for the other drivers discussed in this chapter. A detailed analysis of whether these possible feedbacks are realistic and what adaptation actions could be used to avoid/enhance their negative/positive consequences, is beyond the scope of this chapter. Abramov, V.A., 1992. Russian iceberg observations in the Barents Sea 1933-1990. Polar Research, 11:93-97. ACAP, 2014. Reduction of Black Carbon Emissions from Residential Wood Combustion in the Arctic: Black carbon inventory, abatement instruments and measures. Arctic Contaminants Action Program (ACAP). ACIA, 2004. Impacts of a Warming Arctic. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA). Cambridge University Press. ACIA, 2005. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. Cambridge University Press. Akperov, M., I. Mokhov, A. Rinke, K. Dethloff and H. Matthes, Cyclones and their possible changes in the Arctic by the end of the twenty-first century from regional climate model simulations. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 122:85-96. Aleksashenko, S., 2015. The Russian economy in 2050: Heading for labor-based stagnation. Brookings Up Front. www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2015/04/02-russia- economy-labor-based-stagnation-aleksashenko Alekseev, G.V., E.I. Aleksandrov, N.I. Glok, N.E. Ivanov, V.M. Smolyanitskij, N.E. Kharlanenkova and Ulin, 2015. Evolution of the area of a sea ice cover of Arctic regions in conditions of modern changes of a climate. Research of the Earth from Space. 2015. No. 2. pp. 5-19. (In Russian) AMAP, 2011. AMAP Assessment 2011: Mercury in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring andAssessment Programme (AMAP),Oslo, Norway. References

Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online