* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Document 8903984
General circulation model wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Soon and Baliunas controversy wikipedia , lookup
Michael E. Mann wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Workshop Report May 11, 2012 Vermont Agricultural Resilience in a Changing Climate Kate Westdjik, MS V. Ernesto Méndez, PhD Rachel Schattman, MS Martha Caswell, MPP Photo credit: Vern Grubinger Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group Department of Plant & Soil Science Jeffords Hall, 63 Carrigan Drive http://www.uvm.edu/~agroecol/?Page=Vtresearch.html Executive Summary Participants identified research as a key priority for building agri- This fall, Tropical Storm Irene devastated farms across Vermont, cultural resilience in Vermont’s changing climate - specifically research reminding us of the threat climate change poses to food security and on soil health, water quality, farmer livelihoods. On May 11th, 60 service providers, researchers, renewable energy, and iden- policy makers and educators gathered in the UVM Billings North tification and assessment of Lounge to hear from panelists and discuss how climate change affects climate change best manage- and is affected by Vermont agriculture. The event was facilitated by the ment Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group (ARLG), a research group led Several groups ranked research by Dr. V. Ernesto Méndez, an associate professor in the College of Agri- on soil health management as culture and Life Sciences. Funding support was provided by the Gund moderately to high time and Institute for Ecological Economics, the UVM Department of Plant and cost intensive, but agreed that Soil Science, the UVM Food Systems Spire, and the UVM Environmental many in the state were working on this topic area. Participants ranked Studies Program. research on both water quality and renewable energy as very difficult to The purpose of this event was to network and prioritize research and outreach needs to assist the Vermont agricultural community in adapting to and mitigating climate change. Following an introduction from the UVM researchers and staff participat- practices (CCBMPs). Ben Waterman - UVM Extension/Center for Sustainable Agriculture staff, facilitates a breakout groups. achieve, high cost, requiring long term attention with few people working on it in the state, suggesting that research on these topics are notable areas for policy makers and funders. Participant assessment of research capacity for CCBMPs suggested a need for more researchers and outreach staff to focus on climate change best management practices for ing in this long-term initiative, the majority of the state. the event was spent in breakout groups assessing feasibility and resources available to address Discussion indicated that outreach and education related to the “key areas of focus” identified by a pre-workshop research priorities mentioned above is crucial, but participants also em- survey. phasized the importance of tools and skill-building for additional topics Workshop findings were distilled from discussions in all six breakout groups including rankings of key topics using the categories of Workshop panelist, Vern Grubinger - UVM Extension Professor and Director of NE SARE “Easy to accomplish/Difficult”, “Low Financial Cost/High Financial Cost”, “Short term effort/Long term effort” and “Cur- such as financial management, risk management and economic viability in general. Several participants commented that technical assistance for on-farm business planning is readily available but access to and knowledge of these resources could be improved. rently worked on/No one working on it”. Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group 1 Participants commented on the “volatility” of the food system mendation was to focus on the needs of farmers and communities first, and climate change issues in the state, specifically noting that long term and that farmer livelihoods - particularly economic viability - must be a thinking about these policies would bring stability, but also that this is top priority. Groups agreed that capacity for community resilience was rare and challenging in our system. Many agreed that policies and re- lacking at the local level, suggesting that this is an important gap in the lated programs need to be more flexible, and that access to policies and strategy that should be addressed. programs is hindered by lack of information and coordination between agencies. This suggests that agricultural policies and programs would have more impact if they were more flexible to the diverse needs of farmers, and if it were easier for farmers to learn about and participate in them. Several participants suggested that consumer choice might be an important driver of climate change best management practices on farms. Policies, such as green labeling or other certification programs, could encourage farmer adoption of CCBMPs by creating a market for products grown using those practices. Farmland conservation was raised by several groups as an impor- The ARLG is pleased that this event fulfilled its purpose of allowing attendees to network, talk about their current efforts to address Vermont agricultural resilience, initiate new collaborative projects, and identify areas where more work needs to be done. There are many efforts underway in Vermont that address climate change, but it is time to increase the communication between people engaged in these programs and enhance collaboration as well. The ARLG and the broader project team will continue to work to identify research and program gaps, initiate further conversations, and support future work that leads to collaborative Vermont agricultural resilience in a changing climate. tant part of the strategy, but, based on participant assessments, may not require additional attention or capacity compared to other approaches to climate change resilience. Almost all of the breakout groups stated that coordination, collaboration, and systems-thinking were crucial for the success of this work. As we collaborate, participants reminded each other to define and clarify terms and to be aware of and continue to support existing, ongoing efforts. Many raised concerns about the additional time and patience collaboration requires. A few commented that climate change adaptation can be fun, especially when flexible support is available to Erica Campbell - Vermont Farm to Plate Program Director, facilitates a breakout group. encourage creativity and entrepreneurship. Another common recom- 2 Report for Vermont Agricultural Resilience in a Changing Climate Workshop - May, 2012 Background Methods The effects of Tropical Storm Irene are not distant in the memory of Vermonters. For farmers in the Green Mountain State, the flooding that accompanied last fall’s storm is just one example of the potential impacts from a changing climate. Other concerns related to climate change include an increasing pressure from plant diseases, pests, and weeds, disruptions in local, regional, and global supply chains, and many others. On May 11th, 60 service providers, researchers, policy makers and educators gathered in the UVM Billings North Lounge to hear from panelists and discuss how climate change affects and is affected by Vermont agriculture. The event was facilitated by the Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group (ARLG), a research group led by Dr. V. Ernesto Méndez, an associate professor in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Funding support was provided by the Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, the UVM Department of Plant and Soil Science, the UVM Food Systems Spire, and the UVM Environmental Studies Program. The workshop breakout groups were designed as “focus groups”2 to prioritize and assess feasibility and resources available to address key areas of focus identified by the survey. Each breakout group had a preassigned facilitator and notetaker, and participants were asked to choose three “areas of focus” from a list before joining their group. The breakout groups were divided into the activity categories of “research”, “outreach”, “policy”, “education” and “practice/implementation” (two groups), for a total of six groups. Participants did not have to identify with the activity category to join the group (e.g. a researcher did not have to join the research group); they were encouraged to cross-pollinate. The purpose of this event was to network and prioritize research and outreach needs to assist the Vermont agricultural community in adapting to and mitigating climate change. The half day workshop included remarks from Leslie Ann-Dupigny Giroux (State Climatologist and UVM Professor of Geography), Heather Darby (UVM Extension Associate Professor) and Vern Grubinger (Director of New England Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) and UVM Extension Professor) - see the event website for the full agenda and access to their presentation slides. Following an introduction to the UVM researchers and staff participating in this long-term initiative (see Appendices or the website for project description), the majority of the event was spent in breakout groups discussing “key areas of focus” for addressing types of agricultural resilience that were identified in a preworkshop survey of participants1. Each breakout group was tasked to first choose three “areas of focus” as a group, and then to rank these on flip chart paper using the categories of “Easy to accomplish/Difficult”, “Low Financial Cost/ High Cost”, “Short term effort/Long term effort” and “Currently worked on/No one working on it”3. After ranking each of their three “areas of focus”, each breakout group summarized their conclusions in a report out to the larger group (see website for these notes). The detailed notes from the breakout groups were analyzed for common themes using the methods described in Butler et al. (see endnote). Quantitative data from the flip chart matrices were recorded and are presented along with qualitative findings in the next section. Photo: Chris Koliba - UVM Associate Professor of Community Development and Applied Economics, facilitates a breakout group. Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group 3 Key Findings and Interpretations The following findings were distilled from discussions in all six breakout groups. The discussion includes common themes addressed by all or many of the groups and, where possible, rankings of key topics using the categories of “Easy to accomplish/Difficult”, “Low Financial Cost/ High Cost”, “Short term effort/Long term effort” and “Currently worked on/No one working on it”. This section also includes interpretations of these findings including potential gaps, needs or opportunities requiring attention. The graphics included in this section present summary findings from several of the working groups. The larger stars at the bottom of the graphics represent the ‘scores’ that each group provided for each particular issue addressed (e.g. cost) on the particular topic being addressed by the breakout group (e.g. soil health management). Participants identified research as a key priority for building agricultural resilience in Vermont’s changing climate- specifically research on soil health, water quality, renewable energy, and identification and assessment of climate change best management practices (CCBMPs). Research on soil health management was ranked by two breakout groups as moderately difficult to achieve, and by one group as moderately easy because there is general agreement in the state that this is important. The three groups ranked research on soil health management as moderately to high time and cost intensive, and agreed that many in the state were working on this topic area. Low Cost...............................................................................................................................................................High Cost Easy.............................................................................................................................................................................Difficult Short-Term Effort...........................................................................................................................Long-Term Effort Currently worked on.............................................................................................................No-one working on this Research on SOIL HEALTH MANAGEMENT 4 Although both water quality and renewable energy were mentioned in several breakout groups, only one group scored them as a “key areas of focus” for research. This group ranked both topics as very difficult to achieve, high cost, requiring long term attention with few people working on it in the state, suggesting that research on water quality and renewable energy are areas for policy makers and funders to take note. Low Cost...............................................................................................................................................................High Cost Easy.............................................................................................................................................................................Difficult Short-Term Effort...........................................................................................................................Long-Term Effort Currently worked on.............................................................................................................No-one working on this Research on WATER QUALITY & RENEWABLE ENERGY Diffusion of best management practices was selected as an important issue by one of the breakout groups, ranking it as difficult, medium cost, long term, with neither few nor many people working on it. Therefore, there may be a need for more researchers and outreach staff to focus on climate change best management practices for the state. Low Cost...............................................................................................................................................................High Cost Easy.............................................................................................................................................................................Difficult Short-Term Effort...........................................................................................................................Long-Term Effort Currently worked on.............................................................................................................No-one working on this Diffusion of BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Outreach and education were mentioned as crucial strategies in all six breakout groups, though many participants spoke to the challenge of generalized outreach when the audience’s needs are diverse. Outreach and education related to the research priorities mentioned above is crucial, but participants also emphasized the importance of tools and skill-building for addi- Report for Vermont Agricultural Resilience in a Changing Climate Workshop - May, 2012 tional topics such as financial management, risk management and economic viability in general. Outreach and support for on-farm business planning was selected as a key area of focus by two of the six breakout groups but there was no agreement between the groups about the scores. One of the “Practice/Implementation” breakout groups felt that this was a difficult, high cost endeavor with very few people working on it, while the “Education” group ranked it as easy, moderate cost, with many people working on it. This suggests that technical assistance for on-farm business planning is readily available but access to and knowledge of these resources could be improved. Policies to support adaption for climate change were discussed as important. Participants commented on the “volatility” of the food system and climate change issues in the state, specifically noting that long term thinking about these policies would bring stability, but that this is rare and challenging in our system. Many agreed that policies and related programs need to be more flexible, and that access to policies and programs is hindered by lack of information and coordination between agencies. This suggests that agricultural policies and programs would have more impact if they were more flexible to the diverse needs of farmers, and if it were easier for farmers to learn about and participate in them. Two breakout groups selected policy programs, such as the Environmental Quality Incentive Program’s High Tunnel Initiative, as important drivers of agricultural resilience, and both ranked policy programs in general as moderately difficult and costly. There was also discussion of a disconnect between federal policy and VT-specific needs, highlighting a need for better New England representation at the national level. Several participants suggested that consumer choice might be an important driver of climate change best management practices on farms. Policies, such as green labeling or other certification programs, could encourage farmer adoption of CCBMPs by creating a market for products grown using those practices. On the other hand, some comments described an aversion or stigma towards environmental conservation that could make implementation of these policies problematic. The practice of farmland conservation was prioritized as a “key area of focus” for two of the six breakout groups. It was ranked as moderately to very difficult to accomplish, moderate to high cost, long term, with many people working on it. This suggests that farmland conservation is an important part of the strategy, but may not require additional attention or capacity compared to other approaches. Low Cost...............................................................................................................................................................High Cost Easy.............................................................................................................................................................................Difficult Short-Term Effort...........................................................................................................................Long-Term Effort Currently worked on.............................................................................................................No-one working on this Practice of FARMLAND CONSERVATION In general, participants had many suggestions about the “process” or “how” we should work together to enhance resilience to climate change in our food system. Almost all of the breakout groups stated that coordination, collaboration, and systems-thinking were crucial for the success of this work. The policy breakout Process: • How the work gets done group prioritized “coordinated approaches” • How the work is designed and managed as their top three “ar• How the work is monitored and evaluated eas of focus”, conclud(Source: Facilitative Leadership: Tapping the Power of Participation (1997), ing that it is difficult to Interaction Associates for Social Change (IISC): Boston, MA) achieve, moderate cost, long term, with few people working on it. This highlights an important niche role that must be filled in order to successfully address agricultural resilience in the state. As we collaborate, participants reminded each Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group 5 other to define and clarify terms and to be aware of and continue to support existing, ongoing efforts. Many raised concerns about the additional time and patience collaboration requires. A few commented that climate change adaptation can be fun, especially when flexible support is available to encourage creativity and entrepreneurship. Another common process recommendation was to focus on the needs of farmers and communities first, and that farmer livelihoods particularly economic viability - must be a top priority. Two breakout groups discussed “community resilience” as a “key area of focus”, ranking it as difficult to accomplish, moderate to low cost and long term. The two groups disagreed about the number of people working on the issue in general, but both groups agreed that capacity for community resilience was lacking at the local level, suggesting that this is an important gap in the strategy that should be addressed. Appendices 1. Full Project Overview 2. May 11th, 2012 Event Agenda 3. May 11th, 2012 Event Participant List 4. List of related materials • Presentation by Dr. Lesley-Ann Dupigny-Giroux “How do Climate Variability and Change Influence Vermont Agriculture” • Presentation by Dr. Heather Darby: “Working with Farmers in the Face of a Changing Climate” • Presentation by Dr. Vern Grubinger: “Climate Change, Resilience and Agriculture in Vermont” • Presentations by Dr. Ernesto Méndez, Kate Westdijk & Rachel Schattman (Workshop Organizers) Conclusions • All materials are available on the project Website: http://www. uvm.edu/~agroecol/?Page=Vtresearch.html The need for deeper information about the effects of a changing climate on Vermont farms is real. At this event, it was the hope of the ARLG that attendees would network, talk about their current efforts to address Vermont agricultural resilience, initiate new, collaborative projects and identify areas where more work needs to be done. There are many efforts underway in Vermont that address climate change, but it is time to increase the communication between people engaged in these programs and enhance collaboration as well. The ARLG and the broader project team will continue to work to identify research and program gaps, initiate further conversations, and support future work that leads to collaborative Vermont agricultural resilience in a changing climate. • Research Brief: Schattman, R. and V.E. Méndez (2012) Vermont farm resilience in a changing climate: survey of agricultural service providers. Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group Research Brief: University of Vermont. • Workshop Breakout Group: Report Out Endnotes: 1 Schattman, R. and V.E. Méndez (2012). Vermont farm resilience in a changing climate: survey of agricultural service providers. Agroecology and Rural Livelihoods Group Research Brief: University of Vermont. 2 Butler, L. M., et al. (1995). Focus Groups: A Tool for Understanding Community Perceptions and Experiences. Published by “Partnerships in Education and Research” 3 These categories were loosely derived from the Macmillan Matrix, available at: http://www.icl.org/resourcefree/macmillan-matrix 6 Report for Vermont Agricultural Resilience in a Changing Climate Workshop - May, 2012