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

244

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

References ACIA, 2004. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment: Impacts of a Warming Arctic. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA). Cambridge University Press. ACIA, 2005. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. Cambridge University Press. Adger, W.N., J.M. Pulhin, J. Barnett, G.D. Dabelko, G.K. Hovelsrud, M. Levy, Ú. Oswald Spring and C.H. Vogel, 2014. Human security. In: Field, C.B., V.R. Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir, M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma, E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and L.L.White (eds.), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects.Contribution ofWorking Group II to the FifthAssessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. pp. 755-791. Cambridge University Press. Alexandrovsky, S.V., 2004. Dolgovechnost naryzhnuh ograzdayshih konstrukcy [Durability of outer fence constructions]. NIISF RAACN, Moscow. AMAP, 2011. Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA):ClimateChange and theCryosphere.ArcticMonitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. AMAP, 2013. AMAP Assessment 2013: Arctic Ocean Acidification. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo Norway. Amundsen,H.,2012.Differing discourses of development in the Arctic: The case of nature-based tourism in northern Norway. The Northern Review, 35:125-146. Amundsen,H.,F.Berglund andH.Westskog,2010.Overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation – a question of multilevel governance? Environment and Planning C, 28:276-289. Andersson, L.,A. Bohman, L.Well,A. Jonsson, G. Persson and J. Farelius, 2015.Underlag till kontrollstation 2015 för anpassning till ett förändrat klimat [Basis for control station 2015 for adaptation to a changing climate]. Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI). Report No. Klimatologi Nr 12, SMHI, SE-601. Angell, E. and K.B. Stokke, 2014. Vulnerability and adaptive capacity in Hammerfest, Norway. Ocean and Coastal Management, 94:56-65. Anisimov, O. and V. Kokorev, 2013. Constructing optimal ensemble projections for predictive environmental modelling in Northern Eurasia. Ice and Snow, No. 1. 83-92. (in Russian). Arctic Council, 2013a. Taking stock of adaptation programs in the Arctic Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic: Part B. Arctic Council. Arctic Council, 2013b. Arctic Resilience Interim report 2013. Stockholm Environment Institute and Stockholm Resilience Centre. Arspas, 2017. Russian Federation Ministry for Emergencies (MCHS). Forest and pit fires. ARSPAS Information and Exhibition Center of MCHS. www.arspas.ru/mchs/ spravochnik/1/les.php

yet clear. There are gaps in knowledge with respect to the way increasing urban development will affect local communities, and whether the trend will shift away from urban centers back to local communities in the event that employment opportunities in rural areas increase. This indicates gaps in knowledge concerning the financial, social, political and environmental resources needed to facilitate such reversals. There are significant gaps in knowledge about how climate change will impact society (see Chapter 6 for details). The science-policy interface is highly relevant for developing useful climate and socio-economic scenarios, that can also be combined for better assessments of the localized impacts.There are also significant gaps in knowledge about how to develop and apply climate- and socio-economic scenarios, individually and combined.There is limited knowledge about economic and societal costs of climate change damage, risk mitigation, and adaptation efforts, set against the economic and societal costs of not adapting. This is essential knowledge for adaptation- related decision-making across nations,sectors,and livelihoods. There is a need for statistics and economic analysis in order to be able to assess the costs and benefits of adaptation measures and options at different levels, and for comparing successful adaptation across and within a given region. The development of culturally-specific risk communication addressing multiple and perhaps partially unknown stressors is associated with both knowledge gaps and the science- policy interface. For the Barents area, there are significant knowledge gaps on the impacts of external socio-political and climatic factors. For example, it is unclear how the increased influx of refugees will affect the demography of the region (immigrants are currently the main source of population increase in northern Scandinavian communities), and the potential for increased immigration driven by climate change further south. Given the role of governance tools in adaptation processes, there is a need to develop knowledge about the effectiveness of current adaptation processes, level of implementation, lessons learned, best management practices, and how to consider future adaptation measures. The different types of cumulative and interacting effects across local and international scales presented in this chapter are at the heart of gaps in knowledge and the science-policy interface.To be able to anticipate such effects anddevelop robust adaptionoptions it is necessary to engage both scientific and other evidence- based sources of knowledge (such as time-tested traditional, local and indigenous knowledge) in recognizing the challenge in co-production of both knowledge and knowledge gaps. Acknowledgments Amundsen, Dannevig, Karlsson and Hovelsrud are funded by the Norwegian Environment Agency and by home institutions. Keskitalo’s work on this chapter is funded by theMISTRAArctic Sustainable Development research program.