Scenarios of climate change and natural resource development: Complexity and uncertainty in the Nechako Watershed

Climate change and resource development interact to have significant impacts on both natural and human systems within watersheds. It is, however, difficult to conceptualize and communicate these intersections, as climate change and resource development are each independently uncertain and complex. We facilitated a process whereby stakeholders created plausible future scenarios for the Nechako Watershed in British Columbia, Canada. This region is reliant upon, and has been significantly affected by, many types of resource exploitation. During a full-day workshop, 32 stakeholders created scenarios for 2050 envisioning high and low levels of both resource development and climate change. The high and low levels of climate change were based on downscaled projections from global emissions scenarios, and the resource development levels were determined at the beginning of the workshop by the participants. The exercise was educational, and motivated stakeholders to conceptualize plausible future changes and their impacts, and the outcomes should motivate stakeholders to work towards realizing a more desired future. All scenarios (even low-low) were deemed to have significant negative impacts, suggesting that the Nechako Watershed is in a vulnerable state. The complexity of the exercise suggests that more capacity building may be necessary.     

Stakeholder engagement with environmental decision support systems: The perspective of end users

Environmental decision support systems (EDSS) are designed to assist natural resource managers and stakeholders to assess problems and select options for change. EDSS that combine community engagement in developing future scenarios with computer‐based land use planning and modelling tools are widely used internationally. However, these EDSS are often not used after the research and development phase. To best understand why the EDSS are not being used in the long term, the end users of the EDSS should be consulted—a perspective that is lacking in the literature. The research reported here presents the perspectives of stakeholders involved in a community climate change adaptation project in western Canada. Evidence from the community suggests that this project was successful in instigating change. However, the EDSS was not used after the project's end. Our findings indicate that, from the end users’ perspective, the project could have had much greater and sustained success had there been ongoing engagement and communication with them, particularly in the form of continued support for the use of EDSS after the development project.     

Coastal resident perceptions of nature-based adaptation options in Nova Scotia

Climate change risks to coastal communities may overwhelm current management strategies. The emergence of nature-based solutions could provide alternative approaches for climate adaptation; however, studies on their public acceptability are limited. This research focuses on the human dimensions of nature-based coastal adaptation solutions. The research sought to understand the kind of environmental changes participants were experiencing in their coastal communities of Nova Scotia and what management responses they observed being taken, if any. Online focus groups were held with coastal property owners in Nova Scotia to understand how they assess coastal risks and four approaches to nature-based coastal adaptation: living shorelines, accommodation, retreat, and dyke realignment to make space for wetland restoration. Results revealed ongoing trust in traditional hard-line approaches, but also interest in knowing more about nature-based options. There was general support for living shorelines, albeit with scepticism; a concern that accommodation is just a “band-aid” approach; resistance to retreat, despite general recognition of its future utility; and a lack of understanding of dyke realignment. The successful implementation of nature-based coastal adaptation approaches will require more evidence of their viability, better options for financing them, and engagement with communities around the best-fit alternatives for them.