Climate change and forests in India: adaptation opportunities and ...

Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change (2011) 16:161–175 DOI 10.1007/s11027-010-9261-y ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Climate change and forests in India: adaptation opportunities and challenges Murthy I K & Rakesh Tiwari & N. H. Ravindranath

Received: 5 March 2010 / Accepted: 24 August 2010 / Published online: 10 September 2010 # Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Abstract Climate change is projected to lead to shift of forest types leading to irreversible damage to forests by rendering several species extinct and potentially affecting the livelihoods of local communities and the economy. Approximately 47% and 42% of tropical dry deciduous grids are projected to undergo shifts under A2 and B2 SRES scenarios respectively, as opposed to less than 16% grids comprising of tropical wet evergreen forests. Similarly, the tropical thorny scrub forest is projected to undergo shifts in majority of forested grids under A2 (more than 80%) as well as B2 scenarios (50% of grids). Thus the forest managers and policymakers need to adapt to the ecological as well as the socio-economic impacts of climate change. This requires formulation of effective forest management policies and practices, incorporating climate concerns into long-term forest policy and management plans. India has formulated a large number of innovative and progressive forest policies but a mechanism to ensure effective implementation of these policies is needed. Additional policies and practices may be needed to address the impacts of climate change. This paper discusses an approach and steps involved in the development of an adaptation framework as well as policies, strategies and practices needed for mainstreaming adaptation to cope with projected climate change. Further, the existing barriers which may affect proactive adaptation planning given the scale, accuracy and uncertainty associated with assessing climate change impacts are presented. Keywords Adaptation . Barriers . Climate change . Forests . India

1 Introduction Forest ecosystems provide a wide range of provisioning, regulating, supporting and cultural services broadly termed the ‘ecosystem services’ (MEA 2003). Together with existing anthropogenic pressures such as human and livestock population growth leading to forest M. I K (*) : R. Tiwari : N. H. Ravindranath Centre for Sustainable Technologies, Indian Institute of Science, Malleswaram, Bengaluru 560 012, India e-mail: [email protected]

162

Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change (2011) 16:161–175

fragmentation, deforestation, degradation and habitat loss, climate change could contribute to significant changes in the delivery of such services (Ravindranath et al. 2006). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2007) concluded that the forest ecosystems would be affected by climate and global change in a range of ways through; i) direct impacts on the physical (temperature and precipitation) and chemical (CO2 fertilization) environment, ii) impacts on the component species such as geographic range shifts, changing interaction between species altered composition, iii) risk of extinction in respect of a third of the known biodiversity, iv) changes in functions such as diversity, maintenance, productivity, carbon sequestration, water cycling etc., and v) shifts in and possibly enhanced natural disturbances such as fires, pests and extreme climatic events. An assessment by Ravindranath et al. (2006) shows that under the projected climate change >70% of the forested grids in India are likely to experience shifts in forest types under both A2 and B2 SRES (Special Report on Emissions Scenarios), Nakicenovic et al. 2000. There are limitations and uncertainties with projections of climate change using Regional Climate Models as well as impact assessments using dynamic global vegetation model such as IBIS (Integrated Biosphere Simulator). Despite these limitations, there is a need to formulate an adaptation framework for the forest sector and discuss potential adaptation options for addressing climate change, since the impacts on forests could be irreversible and long term. This paper aims to address these objectives and also presents examples of ‘win-win’ adaptation options as well as the challenges in mainstreaming adaptation.

2 Impacts of climate change on forests As per State of Forest Report 2007 (FSI 2009) assessment, the forest cover of India is estimated to be 69.07 million hectare (Mha), which is 21.02% of the total geographical area of the country. “Open Forest” (28.84 Mha) category with 10–40 % canopy density is either patchy or degraded, and needs restoration and regeneration efforts. The Forest Survey of India has classified forests into 22 strata, based on the dominant tree species. The dominant forest stratum is the ‘miscellaneous’ category, accounting for 66% of total forest area, where no dominant tree species could be identified. Sal, teak, mixed conifers, upland hardwoods and bamboo are the other dominant forest strata. The approximate extent of forests on a functional basis is: Protection Forests—10 Mha; production Forests—15 Mha; Social Forests—25 Mha and Protected Area Network—14.8 Mha. Social Forests here do not include the small blocks of woodlands (less than 25 ha), trees in strips and farms. 2.1 Impacts of climate change according to BIOME model Ravindranath et al. (2006) in their assessment of the impact of projected climate change on forest ecosystems in India using climate projections of Regional Climate Model of the Hadley Centre (HadRM3) under the A2 (740 ppm CO2) and B2 (575 ppm CO2) scenarios of Special Report on Emissions Scenarios and the BIOME4 vegetation model concluded that under the climate projection for the year 2085, 77% and 68% of the forested grids in India are likely to experience shift in forest types under A2 and B2 scenarios, respectively. Further, indications of this assessment were a shift towards wetter forest types in the northeastern region and drier forest types in the northwestern region in the absence of anthropogenic disturbances. The study also concluded that increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration and climate warming would result in a doubling of NPP under the A2 scenario and over 70% increase under the B2 scenario.


163

2.2 Impacts of climate change according to IBIS model The latest assessment of impact of climate change on forest ecosystems in India using a dynamic vegetation model IBIS (for details refer to Chaturvedi et al. 2010) indicates that about 39% and 34% of forested grids are likely to undergo shifts in vegetation type under both A2 and B2 climate scenarios, respectively with a trend towards increased occurrence of the wetter forest types (Fig. 1). Approximately 47% and 42% of tropical dry deciduous grids are projected to undergo shifts under A2 and B2 scenarios respectively, as opposed to less than 16% grids comprising of tropical wet evergreen forests. Similarly, the tropical thorny scrub forest is projected to undergo shifts in majority of forested grids under A2 (more than 80%) as well as B2 scenarios (50% of grids). The impacts of climate change on the different states of India are also varied (Fig. 2) based on the percentage of forested grids impacted or that undergo change under both A2 and B2 scenarios. States such as Chattisgarh, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh are projected to experience change in 73%, 67% and 62% of the forested grids while in Madhya Pradesh it is about 50% under the A2 scenario. Under the same scenario, the change predicted for the northeastern states is less than 5% of the forested grids. At the national level, 35% and 30% of the forested grids are projected to experience change under both A2 and B2 scenarios. Wilby et al. (2009), reviews the existing tools and methods for downscaling and simulating climate change, opines that the use of climate scenarios for impact assessment has grown steadily since the 1990s, uptake of such information for adaptation is lagging by nearly a decade in terms of scientific output. Further stress that, the climate change scenarios can meet some, but not all, of the needs of adaptation planning. This issue, in the current scenario, is true and further challenging in the forest sector, more so in the Indian context. Existing studies based on equilibrium (BIOME) and dynamic models (IBIS)

Tropical thorn Tropical dry evergreen Subalpine and alpine Himalayan dry temperate Tropical semi evergreen Tropical dry deciduous Himalayan moist temperate Tropical moist deciduous Litoral and swamp Subtropical broad-leaved hill Tropical wet evergreen

B2 Scenario

Subtropical pine

A2 Scenario

Subtropical dry evergreen 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Percent change of forested grids undergoing change Fig. 1 Percentage of forested grids projected to be impacted under A2 and B2 SRES scenarios, as simulated by IBIS model

164


North eastern states

A2 scenario

Others

B2 scenario

Uttar Pradesh Jharkhand Uttarakhand Orissa Gujarat Tamil Nadu Himachal Pradesh Rajasthan Maharashtra Karnataka Andhra Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Chhattisgarh 0

25

50

75

Percent forested grids projected to change Fig. 2 Percentage of grids (state-wise) projected to undergo change under A2 and B2 SRES scenarios, as simulated by IBIS model

adopted for assessing the impacts have limitations, but may be adequate to initiate action to prevent the adverse impacts. 2.3 Need for adaptation Changes in forests are only partly driven by climate. In many parts of the world, including India, the main drivers of changes in status of forests include land use change, socioeconomic pressures and forest policies. These factors affect both the area under forests, biodiversity, species composition, biomass productivity, and regeneration. It is therefore important to assess the impacts of climate change within the framework of changes in environmental and socio-economic factors which may occur at the same time. Rising atmospheric CO2 concentration and climate change will be an additional stresses on the forests. Forests have long gestation periods going up to centuries. Decisions made today are based on the assumption that the climate will remain relatively stable throughout a forest’s life (Spittlehouse and Stewart 2003). However, with different studies across the world indicating changes ranging from large-scale biome shifts (Aber et al. 2001; Scott et al. 2002) to relatively less extensive or moderate disruptions in forest growth (Loehle 2000), there is cause for concern. The development of adaptation measures for some time in the future, under an uncertain climate, in an unknown socio-economic context is bound to be highly speculative (Burton et al. 2002). However, development and adoption of adaptation strategies will have to begin today as very long gestation period is involved in forest response to any changes and some impacts such as loss of biodiversity are irreversible (Ravindranath 2007). Further, projected impacts for India indicate that 40% to 70% of the forested grids are likely to experience change under a changed climate, resulting in forest


165

die back and loss of biodiversity, which is irreversible (Ravindranath et al. 2004). Given a large dependence on forests for fuelwood, fodder, non timber forest products and livelihoods, it becomes important to consider adaptation to climate change in planning and implementation of all forest developmental programmes.

3 Adaptation framework and options Mitigation and adaptation are two options for addressing climate change. The fourth assessment report of the IPCC (2007) advocates this two-pronged approach to address climate change. Mitigation involves reducing GHG emissions or enhancing sinks in forests and soil. The IPCC defines adaptation to climate change as ‘adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities’. Adaptation can be autonomous, reactive, anticipatory or planned. Adaptation is needed to cope with climate impacts and damages caused as a result of climate change, and is required in all sectors. Adaptation is necessary in the short and longer term to address impacts resulting from the warming that would occur even for the lowest GHG stabilization scenarios assessed. There are risks, damages and costs associated with climate change and unmitigated climate change in the long term which is likely to exceed the capacity of natural, managed and human systems to adapt. So far, mitigation has received greater attention as compared to adaptation, both from a scientific as well as policy perspective. One plausible reason for this could be that climate change emerged as a problem related to the long-term disturbance of the global geobiochemical cycles and associated effects on the climate system (Cohen et al. 1998). However firstly, no matter how robust mitigation measures are, a certain degree of climate change is inevitable due to historical emissions and the inertia of the climate system (IPCC 2001). Secondly, while the effects of mitigation may take several decades to manifest, most adaptation activities take effect almost immediately. Thirdly, such measures can be applied on a regional or local scale, and their effectiveness is less dependent on actions of others. Fourthly, adaptation besides addressing the risks associated with changes in the climate in future typically reduces risks associated with current climate variability. Adger et al. (2007) concluded that while adaptation is increasingly regarded as an inevitable part of the response to climate change, such adaptation processes and actions face significant limitations, especially in vulnerable nations and communities. In most of the cases, adaptation strategies are being implemented to address climate conditions as part of risk management, resource planning and initiatives linked to sustainable development. An adaptation strategy aims to increase the resilience of natural systems such as forests to possible changes in climate conditions where this is likely to be feasible and cost effective, and takes account of the social and economic dimensions. It is a framework for managing future climate risks. It offers the potential of reducing future economic, social, and environmental costs. 3.1 Adaptation practices Forest ecosystems require the longest response time to adapt, say through migration and regrowth. Further, a long gestation period is involved in developing and implementing adaptation strategies in the forest sector (Ravindranath 2007 and Leemans and Eickhout 2004). Thus there is a need to develop and implement adaptation strategies. Several ‘no regret’ or ‘win-win’ policies and forest management practices could be considered to adapt

166


to the impacts of climate change. As a first step to adaptation, there is a need to conduct model-based projection of impacts of climate change at regional level using global dynamic vegetation models to identify vulnerable regions, forest types and species. This would enable planning adaptation practices and strategies. Adaptation practices are likely to vary for different forest types and regions, depending on the current status of the forests, knowledge of the projected impacts and access to information on suitable silvicultural practices and forest management strategies. Some examples of the ‘win-win’ adaptation practices are as follows:

& & & & & & & & & & & &

Anticipatory planting of species along latitude and altitude Promote assisted natural regeneration Promote mixed species forestry Promote species mix adapted to different temperature tolerance regimes Develop and implement fire protection and management practices Adopt thinning, sanitation and other silvicultural practices Promote in situ and ex situ conservation of genetic diversity Develop drought and pest resistance in commercial tree species Develop and adopt sustainable forest management practices Expand Protected Areas and link them wherever possible to promote migration of species Conserve forests and reduce forest fragmentation to enable species migration Adoption of energy efficient fuelwood cooking devices to reduce pressure on forests

Forest planning and development programmes and policies may have to be altered to address the likely impacts of climate change and appropriately adopt various policy and management practices to minimize the adverse impacts and vulnerability. Examples of policies and strategies include:

& & & & & & &

Incorporate adaptation practices in forest planning both for the short and long term Promote forest conservation since biodiversity rich forest are less vulnerable due to varying temperature tolerance of plant species Halt forest fragmentation to promote migration of species Link protected areas and create corridors to promote migration Promote community forest management to create long-term stake for communities in conserving forests and biodiversity Build capacity to develop and implement adaptation strategies Promote in situ and ex situ conservation of threatened species.

It has to be noted that given the uncertainties and limitations of climate change projections at the regional level and impact assessment models, it is not feasible to identify forest type and region-specific adaptation practices. Thus only generic adaptation measures are suggested. 3.2 Adaptation framework Adaptation is adjustment in ecological, social, or economic systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli and their effects or impacts and therefore involves adjustments to reduce the vulnerability of communities, regions, or activities to climatic change and variability. Such measures are required to mitigate transition as well as the equilibrium impacts. In other words, adaptation is continued adjustment to constantly changing climate parameters. Given that climate is one of the many drivers of ecosystem change (Chambers et al. 2007 and Chapin et al. 2008), there is a need to gain an understanding of the non-climatic factors that influence forest disturbance regimes via interaction with climate effects, thereby taking the form of


167

feedback systems that would either stabilize or destabilize forest ecosystems (Bonan 2008). Figure 3 provides an illustration of this feedback system, resulting from current exposure and vulnerability, and the resulting adaptive capacity, which would determine the response of the system to future changes in climate and social probabilities. As forest conditions change, there is an inherent need to change policy and management measures to minimize the negative impacts of climate change and to derive benefits arising from climate change. Forest management in the context of climate change should aim to moderate or offset the potential damages of climate change and at the same time try to take advantage of the opportunities created by that change (Innes et al. 2009). Adaptive management is one such strategy that involves a process of observation, analysis, planning, action, monitoring, reflection and new actions (Colfer 2005). Arvai et al. (2006) argue that the principles of “adaptive management” (Holling 1978 and Walters 1986) should be applied to the challenge of addressing complexity and uncertainty in adaptive management as it is impossible to provide prescriptive recommendations for the adaptation of forests to climate change. However, a framework for assessment and planning is needed. The steps in development of an adaptive management framework (Fig. 4) are given below: Step 1: Assessment of current status of forests There is a need to assess the current state of forests—the extent and type of forests and fragmentation in order to gain an understanding of the sector for which adaptation framework is to be developed. This assessment could be carried out using remote sensing and field studies conducted in different regions and at the national level. Such an assessment would help understand the current biodiversity, biomass and carbon stocks as well as regeneration status. Step 2: Assessment of current pressures The current pressures on the forests could be physical, biological as well as socio-economic. Such an assessment helps identify factors contributing to the current status of forests, its biodiversity, biomass stocks, etc. Physical pressures on the system include climate variables such as rainfall and temperature, while biological pressures would include assessing the Fig. 3 Thematic representation of the feedback of natural and social systems, resulting from current exposure and vulnerability to climate change (Smit and Wandel 2006)

Current Exposures and Sensitivities Current Adaptive Strategies Adaptation Needs, Options

Future Exposures and Sensitivities Future Adaptive Strategies

Expected Changes in Natural and Social Systems

168

Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change (2011) 16:161–175 Assess current adaptive capacity

Identify drivers of change Assess current status of forest

Assess impacts of climate change using dynamic vegetation models

Physical Biological

Identify key forest / plantation types

Social

Assess vulnerability of forest sector to climate change

Policy

Assess factors determining adaptive capacity to climate change impacts

Select stratification compatible with impact assessment model Identify barriers to implementation of strategies

Formulate adaptation practices strategies and policies

Enhance capacity identify institutional arrangements

Implement adaptation strategies

Fig. 4 Framework for development of adaptation strategy for the forest sector

occurrence of pests and diseases and occurrence of invasive species. An understanding of the socio-economic pressure could be gained by assessing the current dependence of communities on the forest ecosystems for various goods and services. Finally assess the forest product extraction rates and land use conversion practices. Step 3: Assessment of current capacity An assessment of the current capacity of communities to changes in climate or forest product flow is very important to identify coping strategies developed by communities over time in response to changes in forest product flow, resulting due to perturbation in either the climate or non-climate parameters such as increased demand for a product or decreased production of a forest produce, fire and pest attacks. It is necessary to assess the capacity of the forest departments to manage forests in the context of current pressures. Step 4: Assessment of policies, programmes and institutions A critical evaluation of the current policies and programmes is needed to understand which policies and programmes render the sector more vulnerable and others that would help increase the resilience of forests. There is no method or model for such an assessment, but should be based on published literature linking such policies and impacts of climate change. It is important to assess the ongoing and proposed strategies, measures as well as programmes if any to climate-proof them and ensure the goals of adaptation are realised. Also needed is a critical assessment of the capacity of institutions that are actively or passively related to the forest ecosystems, such as forest departments and community institutions. Step 5: Impact assessment Assessment of impacts of climate change using dynamic global vegetation models and scenarios of climate projection will give insights into distribution of forest types under the changed climate, the resulting changes in biodiversity, net primary productivity, dominance


169

of species, pest and fire occurrence, etc. Such an analysis should be done at the regional level and according to forest types. Step 6: Vulnerability assessment An assessment of the vulnerability of the system, both biological and socio-economic could be conducted by linking the impact assessment model outputs with information generated on the current dependence of communities and management systems, as well as the current capacity, institutions and policies. This can be done by identifying and selecting key biological, economic and livelihood indicators to assess the vulnerability of forests. Vulnerability assessment would involve analysis of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity of systems. Step 7: Identify factors determining adaptive capacity of forests There is a need to assess technical, economic, institutional and policy factors that would determine the adaptive capacity of forests and forest dependent communities. This is done based on the assessment carried out in Steps 3, 4 and 6. Adaptive capacity of the forest departments to manage forests in the face of climate change impacts need to be assessed. Step 8: Develop adaptation strategies Develop adaptation practices, strategies and policies to reduce vulnerability and enhance adaptive capacity so as to adapt to projected climate change impacts. These include technologies or silvicultural practices, capacity building activities, financing as well as institutional arrangements. Developing adaptation strategies would require silvicultural experiments to identify practices to cope with drought, pest attack, fire, etc., long-term monitoring of forest vegetation to identify temperature tolerant tree species and modeling to assess future response of vegetation. Step 9: Identify barriers to adaptation Identify technical, financial and institutional barriers to planning and implementing adaptation practices, policies and institutional arrangements to overcome the barriers to promote adaptation. Step 10:

Implement and monitor

Implementation of proposed adaptation strategies and programmes coupled with periodic monitoring to assess the performance and response so as to enable adaptive planning and management. The monitoring mechanism should be formulated in such a manner that it can capture and document changes in forest species, processes and ecosystems, and at the same time enable evaluation of effectiveness of adaptation strategies (Innes et al. 2009). Finally the decision on implementation of adaptation measures will be made by the key stakeholders namely; forest department and local communities. Thus it is very important to include a clear role for the key stakeholders and their perspectives. Currently, very little research has occurred and no empirical evidence is available on potential adaptation strategies and approaches or methods for developing adaptation strategies in India and even globally.

4 Adaptation options Climate change is projected to result in shift of forest types in most states causing irreversible damage, potentially rendering several species extinct and affecting livelihoods and markets. Thus forest managers and policymakers need to address both the ecological as

170


well as social and economic impacts of climate change. There is therefore a need to incorporate climate concerns into long-term forest policy and management plans, particularly the Forest Working Plans that are formulated in India for a 10-year period or more. India has formulated a large number of innovative and progressive forest policies in the past that have contributed to reducing the vulnerability and increasing resilience (Ravindranath et al. 2004). However, there needs to be a mechanism to tailor these policies to incorporate adaptation to climate change as well as ensure effective implementation of these policies. Potential policies, strategies and practices are discussed in this section. i: Effective implementation of existing policies/acts/guidelines: There is a need to improve and ensure effective implementation of existing policies/acts/guidelines such as the Forest Conservation Act of 1980; the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and 2002; and wildlife conservation programmes such as the Project Tiger and Project Elephant. ii: Expand Protected Areas: There is a need to increase area under Protected Areas and also to link Protected Areas, Reserve Forests and Wildlife Reserves. There is also a need to enhance area under Protected Areas in mountainous regions, ideally spanning an elevation gradient so as to facilitate species migration with increasing temperature. Assisted migration of provenances and species might be used to adapt to climate change (Millar et al. 2007). Expansion of protected areas again requires working with communities residing close to forest areas and providing alternatives for their livelihoods given the large dependence of communities on forests for subsistence and livelihood. This task could be undertaken only by taking into confidence the communities as it was done in the past under the Joint Forest Management Programme. iii: Provision of natural corridors: There is a need to ensure the natural corridors, needed for migration of both plant and animal species under changed climate situation, are maintained. This can be possible only by reducing fragmentation of forests and other ecosystems. This is however a difficult task given the large human population and fragmented nature of forests in India. New policies may be needed to involve local communities in such efforts, by creating livelihood opportunities. iv: Adaptation plans for wildlife species: The impacts of climate change on wildlife, is less understood. There is a need to formulate specific plans to help wildlife including flagship species and endangered species such as the elephant, rhino, tiger and lion migrate and adapt. These plans have to be prepared on the basis of existing knowledge of the ecology and distribution of species and the anticipated climate change in the regions of their present-day distribution. v: Afforestation and reforestation under climate change: India has a target of bringing one-third of its geographic area under forest cover and also is about to launch the Greening India Mission programme under which a thrust to afforestation has been given with a target to afforest additional 10 Mha of degraded forest lands. Given this large thrust for afforestation, there is a need to incorporate adaptation practices and adopt strategies such as mixed species forestry, planting of ecologically compatible and locally valued species coupled with soil restoration and anticipatory planting of species. Mortimore (2001) has also emphasized the importance of soil conservation and well-managed tree plantations in adaptation forestry. Afforestation and reforestation should be taken up in the light of climate impact studies, i.e., plant species that are likely to survive under the projected climate. vi: Improved silvicultural practices: The current silvicultural practices adopted in plantations, dominated by exotics and monocultures are enhancing the vulnerability of forests. There is therefore a need to develop and adopt silvicultural practices that


171

would reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience. This requires research to identify practices that reduce vulnerability of plant species and forest types to changing climate parameters. Some of the potential silvicultural practices are:

& & & & & &

Promotion of natural regeneration in degraded forest lands Promotion of mixed species forestry on degraded non-forest lands Anticipatory planting of species along the altitudinal and latitudinal gradient In-situ and ex-situ conservation of plant and animal species Adoption of short rotation species Adoption of sustainable harvest practices for timber and non-timber products.

vii:

Promoting community forestry: Twigg (1999) argues that existence of communitybased organizations, allow people to respond to emergencies rapidly, efficiently and fairly, using the available community resources economically. Involvement of communities in raising, protection, maintenance and management of plantations and forests coupled with soil moisture conservation activities and soil restoration works will significantly help adaptation. For example, rejuvenation of oak trees instead of pines in the degraded lands of the western Himalayas would bring direct as well as indirect benefits to communities practicing agro-horticulture in the region. The Joint Forest Management model could be adopted for promoting community forestry. viii: Decrease pressure on natural forests: There is need to enhance support to afforestation and reforestation programmes and increase area covered to meet the demand for timber and fuelwood, to reduce pressure on primary forests. Coupled with this should be widespread dissemination and awareness building on fuelwood conservation programmes and devices that help reduce the dependence of communities on forests for fuelwood. ix: Forest fire management: Innovative and region specific fire management strategies need to be formulated as opposed to measures generally adopted for prevention of fire, not taking into consideration the risk of fire in a region and its impacts. Such strategies would enable management of different ecosystems for varied purposes such as grass production or tree species management.

5 Barriers to adaptation Forest sector responses to extreme climate events and longer-term changes in climate patterns have been reactive in most cases (Roberts et al. 2009). This is because, stakeholders in the forest sector have diverse interests and values that can impede efforts to formulate adaptation strategies and realizing the goals of adaptation (Spittlehouse 2005). Thus, like for all other programmes, policies and strategies, barriers to adoption of adaptation strategies exist and they include:

&

Lack of reliable assessment of climate impacts and damage ○ Uncertainty regarding future climate outcomes globally, nationally and at a detailed regional level ○ Lack of climate projections and predictions that can be used in impacts and adaptation studies at regional level, for example it is still not feasible to assess impacts at species level for a given region ○ Climate projections, translated to meaningful and simple set of ‘forecasts’ of the possible changes, both short-term and long-term is crucial and is currently lacking.

172

&


Lack of information relating to climate change impacts and the benefits of adaptation ○ Difficulties in establishing and valuing system–specific responses to climate change

& &

Lack of funding and support for long-term research and development into alternative silvicultural practices, improved climate data and monitoring Lack of cost-benefit analyses of adaptation options ○ National and regional-scale social and economic analysis of vulnerabilities and adaptation options

& &

Paucity of institutional, financial and policy environments that support adaptation and manage the transition to new systems Absence of pilot projects that have incorporated win-win adaptation technologies and practices.

The factors contributing to ineffective adoption of adaptation strategies and the difficulties in formulating adaptation strategies and practices themselves highlight the need for research and information gathering. The present state of knowledge of the interactions and relationship between climate parameters and species responses at the ecosystem / landscape and individual level is inadequate for the purpose of assessing future climate change impacts. Given this, there is need for research on i) climate change, climate variability and species responses at different scales and levels—both plant community as well as individual plant species level; ii) climate impact modeling using dynamic vegetation models coupled with adaptation and parameterized to better represent Indian forest diversity; iii) focused research on stressed, sensitive and rare species and ecosystems and iv) implications of climate change on mitigation potential, carbon sinks and adaptation given that India is undertaking large-scale afforestation programmes and clean development projects in the forest sector.

6 Conclusions Developmental goals normally reflect national priorities that need to be implemented under resource and capacity constraints (Stiglitz 1998). But, a common framework for development and adaptation is needed for implementation at the national level within the twin constraints of resources and capacity. Mainstreaming climate change adaptation into national policies and development activities is therefore widely recommended (Klein et al. 2007; Cowling et al. 2008; Huq and Ayers 2008) especially as national development agenda and fiscal spending in many developing countries continue to be shaped by predominantly non-climatic drivers leaving behind the most vulnerable people and ecosystems to potential climate change impacts. Adaptation involves both preparation and response to climate change impacts. In many ways, adaptation is development that is resilient to climate change and climate variability. The difference between adaptation and development begins to show once the magnitude of warming increases beyond a few degrees. The warmer the world, the more innovative we will need to become in our adaptation approaches, as the chances of crossing critical ecological, physical, and social thresholds increase. Integrating climate change adaptation considerations into policy processes and decision-making across spatial scales is critical in managing the impacts of climate change for forest sector. An adaptation strategy, to be effective, must result in climate risk being considered as a normal part of decision-making, allowing forest departments


173

and local forest dependent communities to reflect their risk preferences just as they would for other risk assessments. There is therefore a need to develop, disseminate and implement the knowledge, tools and technologies required to effectively engage in devising and implementing adaptation strategies. There are several assessment frameworks which can potentially help reduce vulnerability to climate change. At the same time, new tools are needed to address lacunae that have been identified, such as tools for screening projects for their exposure to climate risks (Agarwala 2004) and economic valuation of climate change impacts (OECD 2005). Financing adaptation activities and costs associated with the impacts of climate change is necessary for at least pilot projects to draw lessons. In India, a large rural population is dependent on forests for products such as fuelwood, fodder, timber, non timber products and services such as replenishing of soil fertility, water recharge, and land stability. Ensuring continued availability of goods and services from forests to aid adaptation is not an option, but an imperative (NAPCC 2008). Further, increasing the production of non-timber forest products for increasing and supplementing fodder available for livestock, the Greening Mission has proposed integration of fodder trees and shrubs in the plantation activities (NAPCC 2008). All such interventions in forest sector could significantly contribute to reducing vulnerability of rural population and enhance resilience to potential climate change impacts, even beyond forest sector. There are opportunities in forest sector to enhance mitigation and adaptation synergy (Ravindranath 2007 and Nabuurs et al. 2007) and the same could be adopted in the following manner: –

Incorporate adaptation strategies and practices in all long-term mitigation projects to reduce vulnerability to projected climate change. ○ Afforestation, reforestation, forest conservation and biofuel production programmes could incorporate adaptation practices.

–

Consider adaptation programmes such as watershed conservation, shelterbelt, coastal mangrove plantation and agro-forestry as potential mitigation activities and enhance their mitigation potential.

However, far more work is needed if adaptation itself has to be seen as an essentially dynamic, continuous and non-linear process (ILRI 2006). Some of the challenges in promoting adaptation are as follows: – – – – –

Mainstream climate change—ensure that the responses to projected impacts are integral to policymaking priorities at all levels Monitoring of forest sector response to climate change and improved forecasting and early warning systems Education and awareness creation on climate change among the forest department, forest dependent communities and researchers Linking research to policy-making and management Linking research to existing local knowledge of climate related hazards and involving local communities in decision-making processes related to adaptation.

Adaptation is the only way to deal with the inescapable impacts of climate change. Therefore there is a need for dedicated efforts to mainstream adaptation. Once climate change awareness and capacity begins to grow, integration of adaptation into national, sectoral and local development plans can be initiated.

174


Acknowledgements Research for this publication was conducted under the project “Impact of climate change on tropical forest ecosystems and biodiversity in India”, funded by the Royal Norwegian Embassy, in collaboration with CICERO, Oslo. We thank the Royal Norwegian Embassy and CICERO for their support.

References Aber J, Ronald P, Neilson MS, Lenihan JM, Bachelet D, Drapek RJ (2001) Forest Processes and Global Environmental Change: Predicting the Effects of Individual and Multiple Stressors. Bioscience 51 (9):735–751 Adger WN, Agrawala S, Mirza MMQ, Conde C, Brien KO, Pulhin J, Pulwarty R, Smit B, Takahashi K (2007) Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and capacity, Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Agarwala S (2004) Adaptation, Development Assistance and Planning: Challenges and Opportunities. IDS Bulletin 35(3):50–54 Arvai I, Bridge G, Dolsak N, Franzese R, Koontz T, Luginbuhl A, Robbins P, Richards K, Korfmacher SK, Sohngen B, Tansey J, Thompson A (2006) Adaptive management of the global climate problem: Bridging the gap between climate research and climate policy. Clim Change 78(1):217–225. doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9094-6 Bonan GB (2008) Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science 320:1444–1449 Burton I, Huq S, Lim B, Pilifosova O, Schipper EL (2002) From impacts assessment to adaptation priorities: the shaping of adaptation policy. Climate Policy 2:145–159 Chambers JQ, Asner GP, Morton DC, Anderson LO, Saatch SS, Espirito-Santo FDB, Palace M, Souza C (2007) Regional ecosystem structure and function: ecological insights from remote sensing of tropical forests. Trends Ecol Evol 22:414–423 Chapin FS, Trainor SF, Huntington O, Lovecraft AL, Zavaleta E, Natcher DC, Mcguire AD, Nelson JL, Ra L, Calef M, Fresco N, Huntington H, Rupp TS, Dewilde L, Naylor RL (2008) Increasing wildfire in Alsaka’s boreal forest: pathways to potential solutions of a wicked problem. Bioscience 58:531–540 Chaturvedi Rajiv K, Ranjith Gopalakrishnan, Mathangi Jayaraman, Bala G, Joshi NV, Sukumar R, Ravindranath NH (2010). Impact of climate Change on Indian forests: A dynamic vegetation modeling approach. doi:10.1007/s11027-010-9257-7 Cohen S, Demeritt D, Robinson J, Rothman D (1998) Climate change and sustainable development: towards dialogue. Global Environmental Change 8(4):341–371 Colfer CJP (ed.) (2005) The complex forest: Communities, uncertainty, and adaptive collaborative management. Resources, for the future/CIFOR, Washington DC Cowling RM, Egoh B, Knight AT, O’Farrell PJ, Reyers B, Rouget M, Roux DJ, Welz A, Wilhelm-Rechman A (2008) An operational model for mainstreaming ecosystem services for implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 105(28):9483–9488 FSI (2009) The State of Forest Report 2007. Forest Survey of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Dehra Dun Holling CS (1978) Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Wiley, Chichester Huq S, Ayers J (2008) Streamlining adaptation to climate change into development projects at the national and local level. In: Financing climate change policies in developing countries. European Parliament, Brussels ILRI (2006) The International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) and The African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) (2006), Mapping Climate vulnerability, Report to the Department for International Development (DFID) 173 pp Innes J, Joyce LA, Kellomaki S, Louman B, Ogden A, Parotta J, Thompson I et al (2009) Adaptation of forest and people to climate change—A global assessment report. In: Risto Seppala., Alexander Buck and Pia Katila (Eds) International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO) IPCC (2001) Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report, 2001a, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva, Switzerland IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Parry ML,


175

Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK Klein RJT, Eriksen SEH, Naess LO, Hammill A, Tanner TM, Robledo C, O’Brien KL (2007) Portfolio screening to support the mainstreaming of adaptation to climate change into development. Climate Change 84(1):23–44 Leemans R, Eickhout B (2004) Another reason for concern: regional and global impacts on ecosystems for different levels of climate change. Global Environmental Change 14:219–228 Loehle C (2000) Forest ecotone response to climate change: sensitivity to temperature response functional forms. Can J For Res 30:1632–1645 Millar CI, Stephenson NI, Stephens SI (2007) Climate change and forests of the future: managing in the face of uncertainty. Ecol Appl 17:2145–2151 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A framework for Assessment. Island Press, Washington Mortimore M (2001) Overcoming variability and productivity constraints in Sahelian agriculture. In Benjaminsen TA, Lund C (eds.) Politics, property and production in the West African Sahel: Understanding natural resources management: 233–255, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, Uppsala Nabuurs, GJ et al (2007) Forestry. In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Nakicenovic N et al (2000) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios: A Special Report of Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge NAPCC (2008) National Action Plan on Climate Change. Available via http://www.pmindia.nic.in/Pg01-52. pdf. Cited on 28th Jan 2010. OECD (2005) National Approaches to Adaptation: Some Lessons Learnt from recent OECD and UNFCCC Workshops. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and International Energy Agency, OECD/IEA, 2005 Ravindranath NH (2007) Mitigation and adaptation synergy in forest sector. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 12(5):843–853 Ravindranath NH, Joshi NV, Sukumar R, Murthy IK, Suresh HS (2004) Vulnerability and Adaptation to climate Change in the Forest Sector. In: Ravindranath NH, Sharma SK, Garg A, Bhattacharya S, Murthy IK (eds.) Universities Press, Hyderabad, 2004 Ravindranath NH, Joshi NV, Sukumar R, Saxena A (2006) Impact of climate change on forests in India. Curr Sci 90(3):354–361 Roberts G, Parotta J, Wreford A (2009) Current adaptation measures and policies. In: Adaptation of forest and people to climate change—A global assessment report. Seppala R, Buck A, Katila P (eds.) International Union of Forest Research Organizations (IUFRO) Scott D, Malcolm JR, Lemieux C (2002) Climate change and modeled biome representation in Canada’s national park system: implications for system planning and park mandates. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 11:475– 484 Smit B, Wandel J (2006) Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change 16 (3):282–292 Spittlehouse D (2005) Integrating climate change adaptation into forest management. The Forestry Chronicle 81(50):691–695 Spittlehouse LD, Stewart RB (2003) Adaptation to climate change in forest management. BC Journal of Ecosystems and Management. 4(1). Available via http://www.forrex.org/jem/ISS21/vol4_no1_art1.pdf . Cited on 28th Jan 2010 Stiglitz JE (1998) Towards a new paradigm for development: strategies, policies, and processes. Prebisch Lecture, 19 October 1998 Twigg J (1999) The Age of Accountability? Future Community Involvement in Disaster Reduction. Australian Journal of Emergency Management 14(4):51–58 Walters CJ (1986) Adaptive management of renewable resources. Macmillan, New York, 374 p Wilby RL, Troni J, Biot Y, Tedd L, Hewitson BC, Smith DG, Sutton RT (2009) A review of climate risk information for adaptation and development planning. Int J Climatol 29(9):1193–1215