John Harrington, Jr. RII-Track 1: 2009 - 2014 NSF Award No. EPS-0903806)

1. John Harrington, Jr. • RII-Track 1: 2009 - 2014 • NSF Award No. EPS-0903806) • PHASE VI: Climate Change and Energy: Basic Science, Impacts, and Mitigation • Susan Wahl • RII-Track 2: 2009 - 2012 • NSF Award No. EPS-0919443 • Collaborative Research: EPSCoR RII Track 2 Oklahoma and Kansas: A cyberCommons for Ecological Forecasting

2. The extent of the gallery forest on Konza Prairie Biological Station increased 70% from 162 ha in 1939 to 274 ha in 2002

3. Social Ecological Systems efforts sponsored by Kansas NSF EPSCoR: • Climate Change & Energy • Biofuels • Impacts & Adaptation • cyberCommons • Woody Invasion • Ecological Forecasting • Understanding Land Cover Change

4. Climate Change and Energy: Basic Science, Impacts, and Mitigation The IPCC Working Group format of Science, Impacts & Adaptation, and Mitigation was used to help conceptualize the integration

5. NSF EPSCoREcological Forecasting Human Dimensions funding for:a new faculty member Dr. Kendra McLauchlan Dr. Marcellus Caldus Stakeholder Interviews Summer 2007 36 semi-structured interviews of farmers/ranchers & local specialists across the Kansas/Republican River basin Major goals • Learn from local stakeholders • Understand the drivers of land use change • Identify the main information sources that inform decisions to alter land use

6. Drivers of Land Use Change Economics / business as usual New land uses or management practice Responses to short-term variations Technological applications While the economy is ‘king,’ there is an underlying ethic of land stewardship Larger parcels or parcels that are closer together are seen as desirable for adoption of new practices Early adopters are very important in the eventual adoption of new practices/technologies by a majority of the land user population

7. Information SourcesProducers Specialists • Higher ups – in their organization • Trade publications • Professional journals (by some) • E-mail • Internet • Feds – information stream from within the agency – some are able to filter the info stream for local conditions • National standards with some ability to make local adjustments • Extension – more universal access to a variety of information sources • There is a need to think it through (reason) • The process involves considerable synthesis • What they see on the land • It is important that they “can see it working” locally • Neighbors • Demonstration plots • What they hear [face-to-face] • At the coffee shop • From an agronomist/extension agent • Information that they consume • Trade publications • Newsletters • Radio/Television • Internet • What they know [tradition/experience]

8. Communication Channels for Information Flow to Land Use and Cover Change Decision Makers Oral  face-to-face, ag radio Observations  neighbors, demonstration plots, field days Electronic  Internet Written  Trade publications, local newspaper, newsletters, extension bulletins

9. Conclusions Limited sample size Economics is the main concern Specialists suggest that on-going/recent changes are no-till management, residential, or recreation uses In order to influence change, there is a need to communicate with key producers in a region New information (e.g., global change) needs to be tailored to local conditions and introduced by trusted local information providers For specialists, local experience results in an increased ability to tailor information to match local conditions While producers anticipate variability, they are vulnerable to change (BAU mindset)

10. Joan Nassauer GRA Beau Burkitt SWAT modeling 3 scenarios: Commodity production Water quality Biodiversity Nitrogen load (Kg/ha) entering the river Designing Resilience

11. The LTER Social Science Workshopin Athens, GA (Aug 3-5, 2005) • Four fundamental and cross-cutting questions were identified: • What are the human dimensions of an LTER site? • How do people and organizations influence the spatial and temporal scale of environmental conditions? • What affects the distribution of ecological goods and services across spatial and temporal scales? • What role does science have in environmental decision- making?

12. Flint Hills Socio-Ecological System Biotic Structure Plant community structure (species, lifeform, LAI, grassland/woodland conversion); consumer communities/foodwebs; microbial communities; native/non-native interactions; landscape structure; biodiversity Regional Drivers Climate; Regional economy and human demography; Human Behavior Demographic shifts; changes in land- and water-use; regulatory action Disturbance Regimes Press: land-use change and landscape conversion; directional climate change; nutrient enrichment Pulse: increased climate variability (storms/floods; periodic droughts) Q2 Q5 Q1 Ecosystem Function Terrestrial and aquatic productivity; decomposition rates; net C exchange; nutrient cycling; hydrologic coupling of terrestrial/aquatic ecosystems; ground water/surface water interactions Human Outcomes Health-related risks; economic security; cultural identity; science literacy Ecosystem Services Rangeland quality/productivity; water quality/quantity; biodiversity maintenance; disease regulation; wildlife conservation ; aesthetic values Q4 Q3 Q1: How do long-term changes in land-use (rangeland, agricultural, residential uses) interact with directional climate change and short-term climate variability (storms, droughts) to alter ecosystem structure and function in the Flint Hills? Q2: How are feedbacks between ecosystem processes (productivity, decomposition, nutrient cycling, hydrology) and biotic structure (land cover, vegetation structure, consumer, microbial communities, biodiversity) affected by land-use change and climatic variability? What is the influence of changing landscape structure on these feedbacks? Q3: How does altered biotic structure and function affect regional ecosystem services (rangeland quality/productivity, water quality/quantity, biodiversity maintenance, disease regulation, wildlife conservation, aesthetic values)? Q4: How does the human population of the Flint Hills perceive and respond to changes in ecosystem goods and services (e.g., water quality, non-native species, biodiversity losses, etc.)? Q5: How do humans decisions and actions affect land- and water-use in the Flint Hills and responses to current and future climatic variability?

13. KNZ Human Dimensions Efforts Agrarian Transition A look at the rural sociology and environmental history related to agricultural changes in the Flint Hills • US per capita beef consumption • and Flint Hills cattle inventory

14. The LTER Ecosystem Services Workshop (May 2007) Assess ecosystem services for our LTER site, then select six critical ecosystem services: supporting - primary production - to grow grass for cattle 2. provisioning – food - beef 3. provisioning - genetic diversity -Konza Prairie and the Tall Grass Prairie Preserve as sites to 'save' or 'bank' the species of the region 4. cultural – inspirational - books, music about the region 5. cultural - aesthetic - photography (Apr 2007 Natl Geog), viewing prairie fires, night sky viewing 6. cultural - ecotourism - scenic drives and the TG Prairie Preserve

15. NSF has made supplemental funding available to the LTER Network for adding a human dimensions component and ‘extending the inference’ KNZ has been heavily involved in SES supplemental activities

16. A decade of human dimensions work I’ve learned the importance of mixed methods approaches that add understanding to data-based explanations. There is a tendency for non-social scientists to think that social scientists come in ‘one size fits all.’ The ecosystem services concept and land cover change are useful approachs for addressing the status and on-going changes in a landscape. My ecologist colleagues are interested in expanding their work to include a human dimensions component. NSF has been reluctant to build human dimensions funding into existing programs (e.g., LTER funding). There is a growing pool of funds, typically new programs at NSF, for Biocomplexity, SES, CHANS and now SEES projects.

17. Global Change: Some Concluding Thoughts Because complex systems science based approaches are relatively new ways to conceptualize the Earth, the citizens of out planet face huge challenges for the several generations. The Bottleneck

18. All organisms change their immediate environment. We have changed things –what should we do? who should provide the leadership? when should we change? “To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” Buckminster Fuller “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.”Margaret Mead