Coupled Natural and Human Systems

Coupled Natural and Human Systems

Ecosystem goods,

services, risks

Land management,

human impacts

CNHS

People

Values, attitudes, knowledge,

behaviors

Policies

Land use planning

Economic development

Open space

NGOs and community institutions

Population

Size, distribution

External influences

Markets, transportation, wealth,

policy, etc.

Climate change

Ecosystem

services

Ecosystem risks

Economics

Political Economic

Structures

Technology

Policy

Demographics

Actors/agents,

Preferences, Decisions

History/Legacy

Human Subsystem

Climate

EcoHydrology

Biogeochemistry

Biodiversity

Soils and Geology

Topography

Natural Subsystem

Vegetation

Invasive species

Land Cover

Land Use

Infectious disease

Institutions

Tenure

Practice

Fig. 1: Coupled Human-Environment SystemFigure 1. Coupled human-environment system showing some of the components and the

inherent feedbacks within the system. Modified from the Boston Report of the NEON Land Use

Committee http://www.neoninc.org/documents/LUC_Boston_Report.pdf .

Coupled Natural Human System

Studies emerging from IPCC, IGBP, IHDP as well as the NSF Biocomplexity and HSD program underscore the critical need for a comprehensive ecological research program to study and understand the coupled human-environment systems in which synergy and feedbacks, not just directional relationships, frame the analysis.

NEON will succeed in transforming ecology, forecasting future ecological conditions, and addressing societal objectives including management needs only if it explicitly includes the human system as an integral piece of its design and implementation.

This requires a design that (1) addresses the coupled human-natural system; (2) allows for continental and regional questions to be answered through a well-conceived hierarchy of sampling, extrapolation, and forecasting, and (3) links NEON research with mission-oriented agencies and organizations at

local, state, and federal levels.

National Ecological Observatory Network:

NEON Land Use Subcommittee Report Introduction

• Feedbacks of land use and landscape patterns to

humans

•Demography

•Risk from fire

•Economics

• Assessment of tradeoffs and land use decisions

• Rational policy reactions

Topics

Area at exurban densities grew from 5% in 1950 to 25% in 2000.

Demography

Brown et al. in review

Rasker, R. and A.J. Hansen. 2000. Natural amenities and population growth in the

Greater Yellowstone region. Human Ecology Review 7(2):30-40.

Demography: MT, ID, WY

Positive correlations with features of mountainous portion of region: forest cover,

variation in elevation, high ppt.

Positive correlation with percent of county in protected status.

Rasker, R. and A.J. Hansen. 2000. Natural amenities and population growth in the

Greater Yellowstone region. Human Ecology Review 7(2):30-40.

Demography: GYE

Best Model: access to airport, high ppt, variation in elevation, college degree

Conclude: ?

•The wildland–urban interface (WUI) is the area where houses meet or

intermingle with undeveloped wildland vegetation.

•The WUI is thus a focal area for human–environment conflicts, such as

the destruction of homes by wildfires, habitat fragmentation, introduction

of exotic species, and biodiversity decline.

•The WUI in the conterminous United States covers 719 156 km2 (9% of

land area) and contains 44.8 million housing units (39% of all houses).

•WUI areas are particularly widespread in the eastern United States,

reaching a maximum of 72% of land area in Connecticut. California has

the highest number of WUI housing units (5.1 million).

Radeloff, V.C., R.B. Hammer, S.I. Stewart, J.S. Fried, S.S. Holcomb, and J.F.

McKeefry. 2005. The wildland-urban interface in the United States.

Ecological Applications, 15(3):799–805.

Gude, P.H. , R. Rasker, J. van den

Noort. In Review. Potential for

Future Development on Fire-Prone

Lands. Journal of the American

Planning Association.

Gude, P.H. , R. Rasker, J. van den Noort. In Review. Potential for Future

Development on Fire-Prone Lands. Journal of the American Planning

Association.

•In a county-by-county study of 11 western states, we found that

only 14 percent of the available “wildland interface” in the West is

currently developed, leaving tremendous potential for new home

construction in the remaining 86 percent.

•If just half of the wildland interface is developed in the future,

annual firefighting costs could escalate to $4.3 billion.

Factors Influencing Susceptibility

Regional fuel and fire patterns

Location in the Landscape

Defensible space around homes

Home construction

Defensible Space

•The social, environmental and fiscal costs of wildfire have

escalated dramatically over the last few years.

•In 2003 alone the federal government spent $1.3 billion on fire

suppression.

•Nevertheless, in that fire year 4.9 million acres of public land

burned, 5781 structures were destroyed, and 30 people lost their

lives (National Interagency Fire Center, NIFC 2004).

Costs to Humans

Kaval, P., J. Loomis, D. Theobald. 2005. Using GIS to investigate the

relationships between stakeholder opinion about wildfire and landscape context.

International Association of Agricultural Economists 26th conference.

•They did survey in 2001 on Colorado homeowners living within 10

miles of public lands to determine willingness to pay for prescribed

fires, fire prevention, fire suppression.

•Estimated fire hazard for each homeowner.

•All respondents were wiling to pay an annual amount for all three

techniques. $300-$700 depending on situation.

•Willingness to pay was increased based on:

•perceived danger to home

•Increased fire frequency

•Less defensible space

Teton

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Population Change in GYE

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Pe

rso

na

l In

co

me

(in

millio

ns

of

19

97

do

lla

rs)

Non-labor sources

Farm and ag. services

Other

Services and professional

Mining

Economic Performance in

GYE:

5 slowest growing counties

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Pe

rso

na

l In

co

me

(in

millio

ns

of

19

97

do

lla

rs)

Non-labor sources

Farm and ag. services

Other

Services and professional

Mining

Economic Performance in

GYE:

5 fastest growing counties

What role do natural amenities play in stimulating personal income and economic growth?

• Land-use change to provide food, fiber, timber, and space for

settlements is one of the foundations of human civilization

• There are often unintended consequences, including feedbacks

to climate, altered flows of freshwater, changes in disease vectors,

and reductions in biodiversity

DeFries, R.S., J.A Foley, and G.P Asner. 2004. Land-use choices: balancing

human needs and ecosystem function. Frontiers in Ecology and

Environment 2(5): 249–257.

• Land-use decisions ultimately

weigh the inherent trade-offs

between satisfying immediate human

needs and unintended

ecosystem consequences, based on

societal values

• Ecological knowledge to assess

these ecosystem consequences is

a prerequisite to assessing the full

range of trade-offs involved in land

use decisions.

DeFries, R.S., J.A Foley, and G.P Asner. 2004. Land-use choices: balancing

human needs and ecosystem function. Frontiers in Ecology and

Environment 2(5): 249–257.

Evaluating Trade-offs

Evaluating Trade-offs

Win-win

Big loss –small gain

Win-lose

Small loss–big gain

Figure 7. Examples of possible relationships between land-use change to provide ecosystem goods for human needs and ecosystem function, including “win–win” (red) in which immediate goal (water purification) increases with longer-term goal to maintain ecosystem function (land preserved), and “small loss–big gain” (black) in which small reduction in satisfying immediate goal (number of rural homes) has major benefit for long-term ecosystem goal (breeding habitat). Other possibilities include “win–lose” (dotted red line) and “big loss–small gain” (dotted black line).

Does conservation pay economically in gye?

How do we move towards the real costs of sprawl?

How about urban development?

How much do human consumption patterns and

human numbers influence the need for intense land

use?

Rational Policy Reactions?

Case Study:

Dynamics of a Wildland and Exurban Coupled Natural and Human

System: Interactions, Education, and Implications for Adaptive

Management in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Dogs, cats

Water pollution

Water pollution

Weedy Plants

Synanthropic predator/brood

parasite effects

Hypothetical zones of ecological impact in and around the exurban site

undeveloped study sites

Fig. 2. Conceptualization of the NA-CNHS. Feedbacks

among different components and at different scales create

complex dynamics. Our three overarching questions focus

on the interactions among components leading to more

sustainable management.

Q(a). What are the effects of exurban development on

biodiversity in subdivisons and adjacent wildlands,

specifically the effects of nonindigenous plant species (NIS)

and mesocarnivores on the demography and community

structure of plants and birds?

H1. Exurban development alters plant and bird species abundances favoring

NIS, mesopredators, and brood parasites at the expense of other types of native

species.

H2. These effects on species abundances with home resident property

management behaviors and with exurban density.

H3. The expanded NIS and mesocarnivore/brood parasite species favored by

exurban development increases NIS invasion rates in adjacent wildlands and

reduces reproduction for native bird species sufficiently to convert population

source areas to population sinks.

H4. The distance and intensity of penetration into adjacent wildlands vary with

resident property management behaviors and exurban density.

Q2. How does valuation of NAs influence property

management decisions relative to social, economic, and

cultural factors? To what extent does new environmental

knowledge impact NA valuation, and, in turn, property

management decisions?

H21. NAs explain significant variation in exurbanite choice of property beyond

that explained by traditional social, economic, and cultural factors.

H22. Valuation of NA varies with ecological knowledge

H23. Higher levels of NA valuation predict more sustainable property

management behaviors

Q3. To what extent does informal environmental education

cause exurbanites to modify their valuation of NA and property

management behavior to be more sustainable?

H31. There is a treatment effect of informal science education on exurbanites’

knowledge of ecosystems and valuation of NAs.

H32. Informal education on exurban interactions with ecological systems leads to

more sustainable property management behaviors by exurbanites.

Fig. 5. Conceptual outline of the Wildland-Exurban

Agent-based Land management model (WEAL) to be

developed in this project