Modeling and maps

Understanding cumulative impacts and the future consequences on Arctic nature of climate and socio-economic drivers through modeling may become a powerful means to assist local and regional decision-makers in understanding and mitigating potential future developments and in advancing adaptation strategies. Climate change impacts, as well as increased demand by the global economy for Arctic natural resources will have a major impact on the livelihood, living conditions, and wellbeing of the people and communities in the Barents area. Modeling the individual and integrated impacts of human-induced pressures on biodiversity may help strengthen the integrated knowledge basis for policies on sustainable development (Glomsrød et al., 2017).

The GLOBIO3 model (see Box 7.4) has been developed to estimate and illustrate the global trends in integrated impacts of climate change and human-induced pressures on terrestrial biodiversity (Alkemade et al., 2009). It incorporates the impact of five different pressures: land use change, infrastructure development, land fragmentation, nitrogen deposition, and climate change. For this study, an assessment was made for three pilot areas in the Barents Region. The aim of this pilot analysis was to gather information to raise awareness about the consequences of the multi-drivers of change in indigenous peoples’ societies. Because the impact of nitrogen deposition in the Arctic is low (levels are below thresholds for impacts on Arctic biomes) this pressure is excluded from the present analysis.

The pilot studies concern three key areas: Finnmark county in Norway, the ‘Laponia’ area in Sweden, and the Nenets AO in Russia. ‘Laponia’ is located in Norrbotten county, Sweden and its borders comprise ten neighboring Sameby, as well as the Laponia region added to the World Heritage List by UNESCO in 1996. The three case studies are all located within the traditional reindeer herding areas of Sámi and

Box 7.4 GLOBIO3: Assessing biodiversity in the Barents Region GLOBIO3 was developed by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) for assessing global and regional biodiversity. GLOBIO3 has been successfully used in several integrated assessments at global, regional, national and sub-national level. It is well known for its application in global biodiversity assessments such as the Global Biodiversity Outlooks (GBOs) of the Convention on Biological Diversity, UNEP’s Global Environment Outlooks (GEOs) and the OECD’s Environmental Outlooks. It has also been applied for sub-national assessments in several temperate and tropical countries.

GLOBIO3 uses a Mean Species Abundance (MSA) indicator in which the species abundance of a disturbed ecosystem is compared with that of a reference state ecosystem. Th e MSA of originally occurring species is defi ned as the average abundance of originally occurring species relative to their abundance in the original or reference state. The model does not provide detailed information at individual species level. Th e impact of each

pressure is expressed as a value between 1 (undisturbed, green on the output map) and 0 (completely disturbed, red on the output map). In general, the reference state refers to primary or untouched ecosystems with ‘natural intactness’, but the model can also be used to assess impacts on older cultural ecosystems such as heathland, semi-natural grasslands and grazed tundra. GLOBIO3 is built on simple cause-effect relationships between pressures and biodiversity impacts derived from available literature, using meta-analysis for comparable ecosystems.

Th e quality of the model output can be improved using local data, traditional knowledge and expert knowledge.

GIS maps are used as the primary input from these cause-effect relationships. Scenario information is used to estimate the impact of pressures in the future. Th e model output comprises a remaining intactness map (measured by MSA), plus maps that display the contribution of each of the diff erent pressures. Th e model is designed as a decision-support tool for illustrating impacts on biodiversity, making it easier to understand the drivers

2050 2030

2010 2000

<0.5 0.5 - 0.6 0.6 - 0.7 0.7 - 0.8 0.8 - 0.95 0.95 - 1 MSA

Figure 7.4 Trend in mean species abundance (MSA) in the Arctic for the baseline scenario of the Rethinking Study (based on data from the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2010).

of ecosystem change. The aim of the model is to provide policymakers with information about the current and possible future status of biodiversity and expected trends in land-use and ecosystem services for different scenarios or policy options.

The GLOBIO3 model is designed such that each of four pressures (land use, infrastructure development, land fragmentation, climate change) are independent, in the sense that they impact biodiversity (expressed in MSA) in different ways. Land use change implies that biodiversity is negatively impacted through loss of natural area, from conversion of land into a different type with a lower intactness (e.g. by urban and agricultural development, forestry, mining, urbanization, and other socio-economic developments).

Infrastructure development affects biodiversity negatively by disturbances that can be linked to the presence and use of the infrastructure (e.g. by disturbance caused by cars or people on or near the roads and other installations). Land fragmentation implies a loss of connected nature areas (e.g.

representing a barrier to migration of species).

Climate change impacts are represented by changes in migration or disappearance of characteristic species from their original natural habitat areas.

The structure of the model is such that the impact of the four pressure types can be combined to generate a total impact on biodiversity. The impact of climate change in the current GLOBIO3 model is based on global model data and is limited to cause-effect relations between the fraction of remaining species in a biome and average change in global mean temperature (Bakkenes et al., 2006;

Arets et al., 2014; van Rooij et al., 2017). The global model data referred to here are climate output data from IMAGE (Integrated Model for the Assessment of Global Environmental Change) and are used to simulate the environmental consequences of human activity worldwide (Stehfest et al., 2014).

In this study, an assessment of current and future biodiversity in the circumpolar Arctic was first made with GLOBIO3 based on global data and a baseline scenario from the Rethinking Global Biodiversity Strategies Study (Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2010).

However, the scenarios in the Rethinking study are based on global macroeconomic assumptions and not adjusted to Arctic conditions (see Figure 7.4).

For an accurate analysis at the regional Arctic level, detailed spatial data must be used.

Nenets. This chapter presents the full outcome for Finnmark (Section  7.3.1.1) and preliminary results for the Nenets AO (Section 7.3.1.2). The aim is that by including key drivers of change for Arctic ecosystems and using local data, traditional knowledge and expert knowledge, this study will help to establish whether GLOBIO3 could be a useful tool for assessing impacts on biodiversity in the Arctic. For this reason, key drivers of change for Arctic ecosystems are used as well as local data, traditional knowledge and expert knowledge (van Rooij et al., 2017). Additional map data of the Laponia area were derived from the Swedish RenGIS model. RenGIS was developed with the support of 51 reindeer herding units in Sweden, and offers much guidance as to how participatory mapping can inform and empower practitioners on the ground on issues related to land-use change (see Section 7.4.1).

7.3.1.1

GLOBIO3 – Finnmark, Norway

At the local scale, the GLOBIO3 model was first applied to Finnmark county, a core area for Sámi reindeer herding in Norway. The aim was to determine the current and future impacts of land use, infrastructure development, land fragmentation and climate change on biodiversity. Data from national and local sources were used and included spatial data from ecosystem mapping and municipal zoning plans (for infrastructure development). The projection of future biodiversity was based on the assumption that land use and infrastructural developments found in existing provincial and municipal development plans would be realized by 2030. In addition, extreme climate change was represented by a temperature increase of 7°C in Finnmark added to the future scenario.

Figure 7.5 shows the resulting impact maps of land use, infrastructure development, land fragmentation and climate change on present-day (2011) biodiversity. Land use clearly has the greatest impact, followed by land fragmentation and infrastructure development, which both have strong local impacts. The climate change impact is still relatively limited.

The corresponding impacts on future (2030) biodiversity are also shown in Figure 7.5. The most eye-catching differences between the current and future sets is seen in the land use and infrastructure maps. The four pressure-related impact maps have also been combined, resulting in a total impact map of the current (2011) and future (2030) biodiversity situation in Finnmark (Figure 7.6).

A useful way to envisage the challenge that pastoralists face in moving with their animals through time and space in Finnmark is to overlay their migration routes onto the combined impact maps (Figure 7.7). For reindeer herders, it became clear during the GLOBIO3 GIS workshop on 3 September 2016 in Skaidi, Norway, that the ‘devil is in the detail’. Using insets, the graphic shows three reindeer herding districts: Fálá, Fiettar and Gearretnjárga and compares the situation in 2011 and 2030. By 2030, the reindeer herding districts highlighted are likely to be experiencing significant impacts on biodiversity, mainly through infrastructure developments and land fragmentation. Reindeer herders at the workshop mentioned that some of the large impact areas overlap with calving grounds and important bottleneck zones of migration routes.

1

0.05 Inland water MSA

1

0.05 Inland water MSA

1

0.05 Inland water MSA

0.957 0.963

Inland water 2011

Land use

Climate change Fragmentation

Infrastructure

0.790 0.757 Inland water 2030

Figure 7.5 Mean species abundance (MSA) in Finnmark from GLOBIO3 showing present-day (2011; left ) and future (2030; right) impacts on biodiversity of land use, infrastructure development, land fragmentation and climate change (Wilbert van Rooij / Plansup).

Because land-use change between 2011 and 2030 is limited in Finnmark, the change in biodiversity status over this period is largely due to climate change and current plans for new infrastructure that increase land fragmentation. Th e additional infrastructure and fragmentation impact is caused by the planned development of new roads, a railway track, wind farms, mines, energy infrastructure, urban areas and cabins. While climate change has a limited impact across the entire Finnmark area, the impacts of infrastructure developments can be very high but are also local.

7.3.1.2

GLOBIO3 – Nenets AO, Russia

Th e GLOBIO3 model was also applied to the Nenets AO to assess cumulative impacts for present (2009) and future (2030) biodiversity. Th e total MSA map for this region is shown in Figure 7.8 (upper plot). Th e okrug is a core area for Nenets reindeer herding and other traditional livelihoods. To create a picture of current and planned infrastructure development, data on land use and other pressures were obtained from the MODIL-NAO report (Dallman et al., 2010) and the Nenets AO 2030

2030 2011

1

0.05 Inland water MSA

Figure 7.6 Mean species abundance (MSA) in Finnmark from GLOBIO3 showing the combined impacts of land use, infrastructure development, land fragmentation and climate change on current (2011) and future (2030) biodiversity (Wilbert van Rooij / Plansup).

FÁLÁ/KVALØY (20)

GEARRETNJÁRGA (21)

FIETTAR (22) FÁLÁ/KVALØY

(20)

GEARRETNJÁRGA (21)

FIETTAR (22)

2011

2030

Reindeer migration routes

MSA

Calving grounds

0 0.5 1

Figure 7.7 Total mean species abundance (MSA) in Finnmark from GLOBIO3 under current (2011) and future (2030) conditions, overlain by seasonal reindeer migration routes, with insets showing the reindeer herding districts Fálá,Fiettar and Gearretnjárga and their calving grounds (Levi Westerveld, GRID-Arendal).

report (Nenets Autonomous Okrug, 2009a,b), as well as various other reports by commercial organizations active in the region (Bambulyak et al., 2015). For the estimate of future biodiversity, it was assumed that several of the infrastructure developments mentioned in the above reports would be implemented and that new mines would be created near the planned roads and railways. As for Finnmark, the Nenets AO future scenario includes a 7°C increase in temperature. To calculate the future infrastructure and fragmentation impact, the current (2009) fragmentation lines in the Nenets AO were combined with the new fragmentation lines (i.e. new roads, terminals, railways and above ground pipelines, and the planned mineral and gravel extraction) following the same methodology as for the Finnmark study. As land in the Nenets AO is used extensively for reindeer herding and little urban and agricultural expansion is expected, the future land use impact will be similar to that of 2009. However, the prospects for hydrocarbon and mining developments are considerable, especially near the planned new roads and railway tracks. Such developments will have a signifi cant local impact on biodiversity and traditional land use in these areas, all of which are important for reindeer herding and other traditional livelihoods (see Figure 7.8, lower plot).

7.3.1.3

First conclusions on the use of modeling tools

The GLOBIO3 model is currently the main tool for determining the cumulative impact of drivers of biodiversity loss. It provides support to planners and decision-makers

investigating potential development projects within the vicinity of indigenous peoples’ communities and grazing lands. Th e results reported here have contributed to the development of the GLOBIO3 model for Arctic conditions and show the need for further improvements in order to represent the specifi c characteristics of important Arctic socio-ecological systems such as reindeer herding. Th e preliminary results and maps were presented for dialogue with Sámi reindeer herders to test the quality and relevance of the model calculations in view of their traditional and local knowledge. It was emphasized in the dialogue that the maps are potentially useful tools if they are supplemented with interpretations based on traditional and local knowledge. An important lesson gained from this dialogue is that the biodiversity loss illustrated in red on the maps must be interpreted with caution. While red is clearly a warning that planned developments may be detrimental to biodiversity in these grazing areas, it does not mean the aff ected areas should be considered completely lost because they could still be important for migration and grazing at certain times.

Knowledge of the cumulative impacts and potential future consequences of climate and socio-economic drivers achieved through modeling, and improved by traditional and local knowledge gained through dialogue with the indigenous peoples aff ected, may provide a powerful tool to assist local and regional decision-makers in planning future developments and advancing adaptation strategies.

GLOBIO3 provides a mechanism for indigenous societies to plan for future change. Success depends on a full engagement and consultation with local rights holders and use of their traditional knowledge in discussions about future possible consequences. Figure 7.7 demonstrates the future challenges that three reindeer herding districts in Norway are likely to face should development proceed as projected up to 2030. Lands designated as calving grounds by the state would be strongly impacted. Th is raises serious questions for the agricultural and land use policies in Norway because the model governing the economy of reindeer herding is based on maximizing calf production and slaughter.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently concluded that protecting grazing lands would be the most important adaptation measure for reindeer herders under climate change (Nymand Larsen et al., 2014). Th e cumulative eff ects of multiple drivers of change on the calving grounds and summer pastures used by reindeer herders in Norway, added to by inappropriate governance strategies is already aff ecting the inland pastures of Finnmark. One possibility could be to develop specially protected areas for reindeer herding, such as the protected areas developed in Laponia, Sweden (Green, 2009) and the concept of ‘territory of traditional nature use’ in Russia (Russian Federation, 2001; Kryazhkov, 2008).

Im Dokument Impact analysis and consequences of change (Seite 195-200)