· 12345678 9101112 0 100 200 300 12 345 6 789101112 ... K L ˜M 0 100 200 300 12 345 6789101112...

��

��

��

��

��

��

• �� !

– ��

– " ��

• #��

• $� �#$#��%��& �'

– #%%��

– ��( ��

– �� ( �� %��

• )��

�� !�� !�� % �� % ��

��

• *+,-.�� /��

• *0.��

• 123.�� %�%�/��

(Kapos et al. 2000)

Freshwater Protection Resource extraction

��

��

Tourism BiodiversityCarbon storage

�� %��%��

(Barthlott et al. 1997)

$� � �� $� � ��

socioeconomic environment:• energy system

• agriculture

• tourism

physical environment:• ‘chronic‘ climate change (averages)

• ‘disturbances’ (extreme events)

chemical environment:• nitrogen deposition

• CO2 increase

political environment:• demand for forest functions

(e.g. Kyoto protocol)

(Bugmann 2001)

4�� 4��

• �� %��

�� 5��

– �� 6��( ��6� ��6� ��6�7

• �� % �� % �� 5��

– �� 8%��29��

– �� /�� 6�� /�% � ��

– %�� %��

• 8� �� 29:3�

– �� 6�� 6��

– �� %��

IPCC (2001)IPCC (2001)

$� ��%� 8�� % �$� ��%� 8�� % �

• � � �� 6��

��%�� 6� ,�,'

– ��% ��5��%��;�� <

– �� ;�� 6��6��(�6��<

– �, ,6�� % �� =�%��% %�� >

• "�� % �� ( �

⇒ ��% �� % �� ( �� ?

• @˚ "��& �� %�� 4A ��

�� B��

– � �� %��

– �� %� 8��

#�� #�� '�� '

��

$� �� %%��$� �� %%��

• )�� %�� /��6 �� %��

;�, �� <

Jahre 0

100

200

360

0

Vorrat (m3 ha-1)

• C�� %�� %�%��'

D��%D��

;E,��(��6��,��<

#� �� %�� #� �� %��

(Badeck et al. 2001)

��

• �� % � ��%��6�+33/:33��

• �� '� �� (�� B� � ��

• �� ;%�� !<

Scatlé, current climate Scatlé, temperature +3 °C

1525

1550

1575

1600

1625

1650

1675

1700

1725

1750

1775

1800

1825

1850

1875

1900

1925

1950

1975

1700

1750

1800

1850

1900

1950

2000

2050

2100

2150

2200

2250

2300

2350

2400

2450

2500

2550

2600

Bugmann &Bugmann & PfisterPfister (2000)(2000)

$� �� = 8�� >� � ��$� �� = 8�� >� � ��

$� �#$#��%��& �'$� �#$#��%��& �'

F,�#%%��F,�#%%��

��& �� & ��

• $�� %�� 4A�� '– � ��

G1��

– ��%�� %�� =�� =G1��( ��

– �� '��

• "�� '�� %�� %�� 8 �� – ��;� ��<

– �� ;�� <

� � � ��

�#$H )#H��I

�4�"��$#�F4F$J $�AHF��

$� �#$#��%��& �'$� �#$#��%��& �'

FF,�$� ��( �� FF,�$� ��( ��

• Second round:�� dedicated workshop in the middle of the project

– Aim 1: to critically evaluate first (preliminary) research results

– Aim 2: to discuss a strategy for vulnerability assessment

– Aim 3: to obtain guidance from the stakeholders for the research in the second half of the project

• First round:�� bilateral discussions in early project phase

– Aim 1: to learn about the experiences and major concerns of mountain stakeholders

– Aim 2: to identify the most important mountain ecosystem services and the associated indicator variables

#%%�� E�� (��(��;F<;F<

��

��

• Final round:bilateral discussions & meetings to evaluate project results, to take place in last project year

– Aim 1: to critically evaluate research results

• simulations

• semi-quantitative assessments (e.g., tourism)

– Aim 2: to provide feedback on

• adaptive capacity of SHs / sectors

• sectoral vulnerability

#%%�� E�� (��(��;FF<;FF<

$��$��E�E�

$� �#$#��%��& �'$� �#$#��%��& �'

FFF,�C�� FFF,�C��

canopy processes BIOME-BGC

hydrologic processes TOPMODEL

meteorological processes MT-CLIM

RHESSys

Hierarchical landscape representation maps

time series

developed by Band, Running, Thornton, Tague et al.

0

5

10

15

20

observed

simulated

H��'�Regional Hydro-Ecological Simulation SystemC

limat

e tim

e se

ries

data

GIS inputs

DEM soil types vegetation drainage networks

�� %%��%%��;FF<;FF<

Watershed Hillslopes Zones Patches

TOPMODEL MT-CLIM BIOME-BGC

�� %%��%%��;FFF<;FFF<

Alptal

Saltina

Dischma

Hirschbichl

Löhnersbach

Verzasca

Pyrenees

)�� '�4��)�� '�4��

!Climate zones after Baumgartner et al. (1983)

)�� '�)�� '�H %� � �� H %� � ��

��

area 46.8 km2

forest 52%

grass 42%

other 6%

850 1950 m

Alptal

��

area 43.3 km2

forest 10%

grass 38%

other 52%

1700 3100 m

Dischma

��

area 77.0 km2

forest 35%

grass 34%

other 31%

Saltina

700 3400 m

��

area 44.6 km2

forest 42%

grass 30 %

other 28%

650 2550 m

Hirschbichl

)�� '�)�� )�� '�)��

Monthly runoff [m3/s] in two catchments

�� ;F<;F<

simulated

observed

0

5

10

0

5

10

Dis

chm

aA

lpta

l

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Year

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

0

50

100

150

0

50

100

150

0

50

100

150

-200

-100

0

100

200

-200

-100

0

100

200��

��

�

��

��

Evapotranspiration Net Ecosystem C Exchange B

ayre

uth

S

arre

bour

g

Tha

rand

t

simulated

observed1996 1997 1998

1996 1997 1998

1996 1997 1998 1996 1997 1998

1996 1997 1998

1996 1997 1998

�� ;FF<AET in [mm month-1]; NEE in [g m-2 month-1]

� ��

�#$H )#H��I

�4�"��$#�F4F$J $�AHF��

F�%�� % �� K��L��M�

Alptal: nivo-pluvial préalpin* Hirschbichl: nival alpin*

Saltina: nivo-pluvial méridional*Dischma: nivo-glaciaire*

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

current climate

month month

month month

* Definition of regions after Weingartner & Aschwanden (1992)

F�%�� % �� K��L��M�



0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

current climate

+2°C

month month

month month


0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 120

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12



F�%�� % �� K��L��M�

current climate

+2°C

+4°Cmonth month

month month


0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12



current climate

F�%�� %� �%�� K��L��M�

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12month month

month month

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12


0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12



current climate

+ 20 %

F�%�� %� �%�� K��L��M�

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12month month

month month

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12


0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12



current climate

+ 20 %

- 20 %

F�%�� %� �%�� K��L��M�

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12month month

month month

0

100

200

300

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12


H ��'�� ;FF<H ��'�� ;FF<

)�� 'E�� 6�� K�� M

ZierlZierl (in prep.)(in prep.)

3,-N3,0**,N:*,++2,:N/ 23.�%� �%

2,N32,++*,*-2,O*2,N*P�*Q)

3,-03,00-,*:*,N32,NN��

R��/ ��/ E R��/ � %#%��/ R��J ��

• very important service

• seasonal changes matter most,even though storage is possible

• different ‘water stakeholders’have very different interests:

– hydropower generation (mainly winter; but also summer – see 2003!)

– drinking water (year-round)

– irrigation (summer; particularly in Mediterranean/other dry areas)

�#$H

��( �� %��

�� )�� 6��

0 3000 6000 9000 12000 [g/m2]

�� #�%��

-600

-400

-200

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

+ 1°C temperature

�� #�%��

chan

geca

rbon

stor

age

[g m

-2]

��

-600

-400

-200

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

+ 1°C temperature

H ��'�)��;FF<H ��'�)��;FF<

chan

ge c

arbo

n st

orag

e[g

m-2

]

��

-600

-400

-200

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

+ 1°C temperature

+ 2°C temperature

-600

-400

-200

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

+ 1°C temperature

+ 2°C temperature

�� #�%��

H ��'�)��;FF<H ��'�)��;FF<

chan

ge c

arbo

n st

orag

e[g

m-2

]

��

-600

-400

-200

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

+ 1°C temperature

+ 2°C temperature

+20% precipitation

-20% precipitation

-600

-400

-200

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

+ 1°C temperature

+ 2°C temperature

+20% precipitation

-20% precipitation

�� #�%��

H ��'�)��;FF<H ��'�)��;FF<

H ��'�)��;FFF<H ��'�)��;FFF<

-200

0

200

400

2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100

climate change: -10 % precipitationclimate change: +2 C temperatureland use change: afforestation above 1400 m

chan

ge in

car

bon

stor

age

[g m

-2]

Year

)�� ,�� '�� #�%��

��

)#H��I• increasingly recognized by SHs,

also in mts

• politically important

• SHs expect that LU changesare more important thanclimate & deposition (and our results support this)

• large LU changes are going on / may be continue in the future (see scenarios, and yesterday’s field trip!)=> role of mountains for future carbon balance of the continent

• relevance of natural disturbances (fires, insects, etc.)

��( �� %��

��

summer recreation

- hiking, biking

- plant / animal watching

winter recreation- skiing, snowboarding

wellness

health care

high water qualitylocal food of high quality

sunshine (good weather)

high biodiversity

landscape aesthetics

landscape structure

‘intact’, cultivated nature

good snow cover

��

landscape indices

biodiversity indices

# of sunny/ rainy days

snow safeness

water/food quality

$��

Protection fromnatural hazards

good infrastructure- local (shops etc.)- access (roads etc.)

Risk of landslides

snow

1.4.1983 1.5.1983 1.6.1983 1.7.1983 1.8.1983

$�� Snow cover

�� (Elsasser & Messerli, 2001) :

- presence of snow cover of >30 cm deep

- during at least 100 days in the period 1 December – 15 April

- in 7 out of 10 winters

��

��

$�� Snow cover

currentclimate +1 °C +2 °C +3 °C

elevation of snow safeness

(basis: 1991 - 2000)

E��

#�%��

2100 m 2300 m 2400 m 2600 m

1400 m 1600 m >1600 m >1600 m

$�AHF��

• the SH discussions changedour views!

• infrastructure is most impor-tant => safety from natural hazards is the �� concern

• tourism/recreation relies on a wide range of ecosystemservices (freshwater, snow, landscape aesthetics, natural hazards), is �� to these services!

• new strategy:

– determine (quantitatively) the �� change: slope stability

– then work out changes in �� ecosystem services, using RHESSys etc.

– interpret (qualitatively) these changes in terms of their consequences for tourism & recreation

��( �� %��

��% ��

• Prerequisite for the accessibility and inhabitability of mountain regions(cf. summer 2003: Matterhorn, Grindelwald glacier)

• Assessment of slope stability based on– topography– soil moisture– amount of root carbon (grass/forest)– land use patterns

• …it’s in the works!

I#$AH#4��#�#HE�

• cf. Tourism (above):protection is crucial

• SHs identified large variety of natural hazards that arerelevant for their interests:floods, landslides, permafrost melting, debris flows during glacier melting, avalanches, insect infestations, windthrow events, etc.

• we must restrict ourselves to a small subsetof these hazardse.g. slope stability (is key for mitigating many natural hazards)

��( �� %��

)��)��

)��;F<)��;F<

• �� 7

7�� % ��

��

• �%�� % �� %��

� B��

• )��

�� '

– �� ;23/:3 ��<'�4A�� 6�I�� %��

– �� '�;1:3 ��<'�)��

)��;FF<)��;FF<

• ��( ��

– ��%�� %�� %��& �

– �� ;�� <

• #��%�� %�� ;�� (�??<'

– ��

;�� S �� 6�� L �� #�%�� <

– �� '�%�� ;�� ?<

– ��'�%�� ;� �� ?<

– ��'�%�� 6��

��

��%�6�� S

$��(�� ?

· 12345678 9101112 0 100 200 300 12 345 6 789101112 ... K L ˜M 0 100 200 300 12 345 6789101112...

Documents

Transcript of · 12345678 9101112 0 100 200 300 12 345 6 789101112 ... K L ˜M 0 100 200 300 12 345 6789101112...