More Like this

1. Deeper topsoils enhance ecosystem productivity and climate resilience in arid regions, but not in humid regions

   https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.16944  

   Zhang, Yakun ; Desai, Ankur R. ; Xiao, Jingfeng ; Hartemink, Alfred E. ( September 2023 , Global Change Biology)

   Understanding the controlling mechanisms of soil properties on ecosystem productivity is essential for sustaining productivity and increasing resilience under a changing climate. Here we investigate the control of topsoil depth (e.g., A horizons) on long‐term ecosystem productivity. We used nationwide observations (n = 2401) of topsoil depth and multiple scaled datasets of gross primary productivity (GPP) for five ecosystems (cropland, forest, grassland, pasture, shrubland) over 36 years (1986–2021) across the conterminous USA. The relationship between topsoil depth and GPP is primarily associated with water availability, which is particularly significant in arid regions under grassland, shrubland, and cropland (r = .37, .32, .15, respectively,p < .0001). For every 10 cm increase in topsoil depth, the GPP increased by 114 to 128 g C m⁻² year⁻¹in arid regions (r = .33 and .45,p < .0001). Paired comparison of relatively shallow and deep topsoils while holding other variables (climate, vegetation, parent material, soil type) constant showed that the positive control of topsoil depth on GPP occurred primarily in cropland (0.73, confidence interval of 0.57–0.84) and shrubland (0.75, confidence interval of 0.40–0.94). The GPP difference between deep and shallow topsoils was small and not statistically significant. Despite the positive control of topsoil depth on productivity in arid regions, its contribution (coefficients: .09–.33) was similar to that of heat (coefficients: .06–.39) but less than that of water (coefficients: .07–.87). The resilience of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes varied in different ecosystems and climatic regions. Deeper topsoils increased stability and decreased the variability of GPP under climate extremes in most ecosystems, especially in shrubland and grassland. The conservation of topsoil in arid regions and improvements of soil depth representation and moisture‐retention mechanisms are critical for carbon‐sequestration ecosystem services under a changing climate. These findings and relationships should also be included in Earth system models.

    

   more » « less
2. Levers and leverage points for pathways to sustainability

   https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10124  

   Chan, Kai M. A. ; Boyd, David R. ; Gould, Rachelle K. ; Jetzkowitz, Jens ; Liu, Jianguo ; Muraca, Barbara ; Naidoo, Robin ; Olmsted, Paige ; Satterfield, Terre ; Selomane, Odirilwe ; et al ( July 2020 , People and Nature)

   Humanity is on a deeply unsustainable trajectory. We are exceeding planetary boundaries and unlikely to meet many international sustainable development goals and global environmental targets. Until recently, there was no broadly accepted framework of interventions that could ignite the transformations needed to achieve these desired targets and goals.

   As a component of the IPBES Global Assessment, we conducted an iterative expert deliberation process with an extensive review of scenarios and pathways to sustainability, including the broader literature on indirect drivers, social change and sustainability transformation. We asked, what are the most important elements of pathways to sustainability?

   Applying a social–ecological systems lens, we identified eight priority points for intervention (leverage points) and five overarching strategic actions and priority interventions (levers), which appear to be key to societal transformation. The eightleverage pointsare: (1) Visions of a good life, (2) Total consumption and waste, (3) Latent values of responsibility, (4) Inequalities, (5) Justice and inclusion in conservation, (6) Externalities from trade and other telecouplings, (7) Responsible technology, innovation and investment, and (8) Education and knowledge generation and sharing. The five intertwinedleverscan be applied across the eight leverage points and more broadly. These include: (A) Incentives and capacity building, (B) Coordination across sectors and jurisdictions, (C) Pre‐emptive action, (D) Adaptive decision‐making and (E) Environmental law and implementation. The levers and leverage points are all non‐substitutable, and each enables others, likely leading to synergistic benefits.

   Transformative change towards sustainable pathways requires more than a simple scaling‐up of sustainability initiatives—it entails addressing these levers and leverage points to change the fabric of legal, political, economic and other social systems. These levers and leverage points build upon those approved within the Global Assessment's Summary for Policymakers, with the aim of enabling leaders in government, business, civil society and academia to spark transformative changes towards a more just and sustainable world.

   A freePlain Language Summarycan be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

    

   more » « less
3. Resilience of human settlements to climate change needs the convergence of urban planning and urban climate science

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s43762-022-00035-0  

   Ye, Xinyue ; Niyogi, Dev ( December 2022 , Computational Urban Science)

   Abstract The impact of climate extremes upon human settlements is expected to accelerate. There are distinct global trends for a continued rise in urban dwellers and associated infrastructure. This growth is occurring amidst the increasing risk of extreme heat, rainfall, and flooding. Therefore, it is critical that the urban development and architectural communities recognize climate impacts are expected to be experienced globally, but the cities and urban regions they help create are far more vulnerable to these extremes than nonurban regions. Designing resilient human settlements responding to climate change needs an integrated framework. The critical elements at play are climate extremes, economic growth, human mobility, and livability. Heightened public awareness of extreme weather crises and demands for a more moral climate landscape has promoted the discussion of urban climate change ethics. With the growing urgency for considering environmental justice, we need to consider a transparent, data-driven geospatial design approach that strives to balance environmental justice, climate, and economic development needs. Communities can greatly manage their vulnerabilities under climate extremes and enhance their resilience through appropriate design and planning towards long-term stability. A holistic picture of urban climate science is thus needed to be adopted by urban designers and planners as a principle to guide urban development strategy and environmental regulation in the context of a growingly interdependent world. 

   more » « less
4. The Implications of Global Change for the Co‐Evolution of Argentina's Integrated Energy‐Water‐Land Systems

   https://doi.org/10.1029/2020EF001970  

   Wild, Thomas B. ; Khan, Zarrar ; Zhao, Mengqi ; Suriano, Micaela ; Bereslawski, Julia L. ; Roberts, Paula ; Casado, Jose ; Gaviño‐Novillo, Marcelo ; Clarke, Leon ; Hejazi, Mohamad ; et al ( August 2021 , Earth's Future)

   This study seeks to understand how Argentina's energy, water, and land (EWL) systems will co‐evolve under a representative array of human and earth system influences, including socioeconomic change, climate change, and climate policy. To capture Argentina's sub‐national EWL dynamics in the context of global change, we couple the Global Change Analysis Model with a suite of consistent, gridded sectoral downscaling models to explore multiple stakeholder‐engaged scenarios. Across scenarios, Argentina has the economic opportunity to use its vast land resources to satisfy growing domestic and international demand for crops, such as oil (e.g., soy) and biomass. The human (rather than earth) system produces the most dominant changes in mid‐century EWL resource use. A Reference scenario characterized by modest socioeconomic growth projects a 40% increase in Argentina's agricultural production by 2050 (relative to 2020) by using 50,000 km²of additional cropland and 40% more water. A Climate Policy scenario designed to achieve net‐zero carbon emissions globally shortly after mid‐century projects that Argentina could use 100,000 km²of additional land (and 65% more water) to grow biomass and other crops. The burden of navigating these national opportunities and challenges could fall disproportionately on a subset of Argentina's river basins. The Colorado and Negro basins could experience moderate‐to‐severe water scarcity as they simultaneously navigate substantial irrigated crop demand growth and climate‐induced declines in natural water availability. Argentina serves as a generalizable testbed to demonstrate that multi‐scale EWL planning challenges can be identified and managed more effectively via integrated analysis of coupled human‐earth systems.

    

   more » « less
5. Environmental and Social Risks to Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health—A Bottom-Up, Resource-Focused Assessment Framework

   https://doi.org/10.3390/earth2030026  

   Pielke, Roger A. ; Adegoke, Jimmy ; Hossain, Faisal ; Niyogi, Dev ( September 2021 , Earth)

   Risks from human intervention in the climate system are raising concerns with respect to individual species and ecosystem health and resiliency. A dominant approach uses global climate models to predict changes in climate in the coming decades and then to downscale this information to assess impacts to plant communities, animal habitats, agricultural and urban ecosystems, and other parts of the Earth’s life system. To achieve robust assessments of the threats to these systems in this top-down, outcome vulnerability approach, however, requires skillful prediction, and representation of changes in regional and local climate processes, which has not yet been satisfactorily achieved. Moreover, threats to biodiversity and ecosystem function, such as from invasive species, are in general, not adequately included in the assessments. We discuss a complementary assessment framework that builds on a bottom-up vulnerability concept that requires the determination of the major human and natural forcings on the environment including extreme events, and the interactions between these forcings. After these forcings and interactions are identified, then the relative risks of each issue can be compared with other risks or forcings in order to adopt optimal mitigation/adaptation strategies. This framework is a more inclusive way of assessing risks, including climate variability and longer-term natural and anthropogenic-driven change, than the outcome vulnerability approach which is mainly based on multi-decadal global and regional climate model predictions. We therefore conclude that the top-down approach alone is outmoded as it is inadequate for robustly assessing risks to biodiversity and ecosystem function. In contrast the bottom-up, integrative approach is feasible and much more in line with the needs of the assessment and conservation community. A key message of our paper is to emphasize the need to consider coupled feedbacks since the Earth is a dynamically interactive system. This should be done not just in the model structure, but also in its application and subsequent analyses. We recognize that the community is moving toward that goal and we urge an accelerated pace. 

   more » « less