# Presentation: 310973

## Lessons from Barrow, Alaska

Ron Brunner, Amanda Lynch, & Jim Maslanik 

Funded by Office of Polar Programs 
National Science Foundation

*Ron Brunner, Amanda Lynch, & Jim Maslanik *
*Funded by Office of Polar Programs *
*National Science Foundation*

**Context & Climate Change**

**Notes:**
I appreciate this opportunity to talk about “Context and Climate Change:  Lessons from Barrow, Alaska,” 
...on behalf of Amanda Lynch, Jim Maslanik, and other colleagues in a project funded by the National Science Foundation.

## Data from the NOAA 

**Data from the NOAA **
**ETOPO-5 dataset**

**Barrow**

**Notes:**
Barrow is located at the center of this image,  
at the northern-most point in the U.S., 
within the Arctic circle, and 
about 1,100 miles from the North Pole.
[NOAA 5 minute gridded bathymetry and topography]

## Our Integrated Assessment

**Designed to expand range of informed choices**
**Focuses on Barrow’s climate-related priority**
- Vulnerability to coastal erosion & flooding
**Report research & seek guidance annually **
**Our approach has been field-tested for 5 years**
**It is also intensive**
- Centered on one community, Barrow
- Comprehensive in range of vulnerability factors
- Integrative in focus on extreme events

**Notes:**
Our integrated assessment was designed from the outset to expand the range of informed choices for the people of Barrow.
It focuses on Barrow’s top climate-related priority, its vulnerability to coastal erosion and flooding 
This was the least tractable of various problems arising from climate change & variability we found in a week of conversations with Barrow residents in August 2000. 
We report our research results annually to the public and public officials in Barrow, and seek their guidance on further research at the same time.
Our approach has been field-tested for the last 5 years.
It is also intensive...

## Extreme Events in Barrow

**4 to 6 October 1954 **
**3 October 1963 – the great storm**
-    Fewer big storms, mid-1960s to mid-1980s
**12 and 20 September 1986**
**25 February 1989**
**10 August 2000**
**5 and 8 October 2002**
**29 July 2003**

**Notes:**
Multiple vulnerability factors interact in these extreme events, which provide a common focus of attention for residents of Barrow and researchers from many disciplines. 
The most damaging on record and in living memory was the great storm of October 3, 1963.
[The frequency and intensity of big storms declined from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s, a period when community development accelerated.
The big storms of September 1986 and August 2000 helped motivate policy responses to reduce vulnerabilities.]

## 3 October 1963

**3 October 1963**
**Photo by Grace Redding**

**Notes:**
Here is an indication of the damage from that great storm – a house destroyed and carried away by waves, with the bed still made on the second floor.
[Notice the crushed barrels of fuel oil and highchair among the debris on the right.]
[This photo was taken by Grace Redding, a young nurse, from the steps of the clinic in Barrow.]

## 1.  Information Needed

**Engage local knowledge and interests**
- Regional, national, and global info does not
**Relevant to decisions the local community controls or can influence**
- North Slope Borough controls some decisions
- Army Corps of Engineers and other agencies
- Alaska Congressional delegation
**Users need context-specific information**

**Notes:**
Now let me address directly the six areas of interest proposed by organizers of this workshop.
First, what information do decision makers need?
They need information that engages local knowledge and interests
Regional, national, and global information typically does not
They need information relevant to decisions the local community controls or can influence
The NSB controls some decisions affecting vulnerability to erosion and flooding of its coastal villages, including Barrow.
The Borough has some influence with the ACOE of engineers and other federal or state agencies 
On erosion & flooding issues, the Borough has the interest and support of Sen. Ted Stevens in the Alaska Congressional delegation 
In short, users need context-specific information.

## 2. Evaluation of Research

**Barrow trend data mostly satisfactory**
- Temperatures, winds, sea ice, erosion, flooding, development, and policies
**Models help clarify dynamics**
- Storm-track – ice-edge relationship, e. g.
**Projections are problematic**
- Profound uncertainties exist at local level
- Many factors interact in extreme events
- Adapt policy responses to high uncertainty

**Notes:**
Second, how do we evaluate the current state of research?
We have assembled trend data for Barrow on many vulnerability factors, using a variety of sources and methods.  The data are mostly satisfactory.   However, there are exceptions.  For example,
We need more than 6 decades of data to clarify whether the number of extreme events in Barrow is cyclical or not.
We have not found the key documents on a major beach nourishment decision made in 1992.
Experiments with numerical models have helped us clarify the dynamics of extreme events.  For example,
We are confident that big storms do not track the edge of the sea-ice as residents believed, but drive the edge.
Projections with any confidence are problematic, however.
Profound uncertainties exist at the local level, because 
uncertainty in each vulnerability factors is compounded by their interactions in extreme events. 
It’s better to adapt policy responses to high uncertainty, than attempt to reduce uncertainties.

## 3. Examples of Information Used

**Reconstruction of October 1963 storm**
- Planning emergency management exercise
- Promoting & platting an inland evacuation route
- Selecting a hospital site outside 1963 flood area
- Designing the $62 million Barrow GCCR facility
**Observations on erosion & development**
- Opening agenda beyond beach nourishment
**Long-term wind and erosion observations**
- Requested by NSB/ACOE feasibility study

**Notes:**
Third, what are some examples of information used to support decision-making?
Our reconstruction of the great storm of October 1963 has been used for ...
Our observations on erosion & development have helped open up the agenda beyond beach nourishment.
These observations are based on photometric analyses of 8 aerial photos of Barrow from 1948 to 2002.
They include measures of erosion along the coast, and changes in the number and location of coastal structures.
Our long-term wind and erosion observations were requested by the NSB/ACOE joint feasibility study, which is focused on beach nourishment and a possible sea wall.

## 4. Communicating Information

**Substantive information must be relevant **
- Climate change adaptation accepted in Barrow
**Constructive if not necessary to...**
- Select one priority problem of the community
- Provide common focus of attention
- Work with leaders & the public over time
- Renew trust & credibility in various ways
**Each big storm renews interest **
- It opens a window of opportunity

**Notes:**
Fourth, what are methods for communicating information, including uncertainty?
Above all, substantive information must be relevant to local knowledge and interests.
It helps that climate change and adaptation are accepted in Barrow and the Arctic. 
[Go to Bowhead slide]

**Notes:**
Consider, for example, this ad circulating in Barrow last spring.  Acknowledging global warming, Bowhead Transportation advanced its deadline for receiving cargo by two weeks.
[Bowhead is a subsidiary of UIC, the village corporation in Barrow.]

## 4. Communicating Information

**Substantive information must be relevant **
- Climate change adaptation accepted in Barrow
**Constructive if not necessary to...**
- Select one priority problem of the community
- Provide common focus of attention
- Work with leaders & the public over time
- Renew trust & credibility in various ways
**Each big storm renews interest **
- It opens a window of opportunity

**Notes:**
It is also constructive to...
Select one priority problem –erosion & flooding in Barrow.
Provide a common focus of attention – big storms, or extreme events.
Work with community leaders and the public over time.
And to renew the community’s trust and credibility in various ways 
We have found it useful to 
To avoid predicting the unpredictable; we emphasize past trends instead.
To provide interim results that are useful; and 
To accept our role as scientific advisors, not decision makers. 
We do not make policy recommendations.
In addition, each big storm renews interest in communicating with us.  It opens a window of opportunity.

## 5.  Evaluating Outcomes

**Rely on unobtrusive observations**
- Requests for our data and other research
- Use of our research in decisions
- Continued willingness to cooperate
**Monitor range of policy choices available**
- In accord with our purpose
**Beware of performance measures**
- A history of dysfunctional consequences

**Notes:**
Fifth, how do we evaluate outcomes?
We rely on unobtrusive observations, including
Requests for our data and other research, and use of our research in decisions, as noted above.
We also rely on continued willingness to cooperate in various forms – sharing documents, giving interviews, participating in meetings, and unsolicited appraisals.
[One from Barrow last month (October 14, 2005): 
“Please find more funding.  The Big Storms projects were very important to the local residents, and they are one of the few projects people ask about often!”]
We monitor the range of policy choices available, in accord with our purpose of expanding the range of informed choices.
Finally, it is important to beware of quantitative performance measures.
There is a long history of dysfunctional consequences, including distortions of the behavior measured and goal substitutions.

## 6. Opportunities for Research

**Factoring global problem of adaptation **
- Each local problem is more tractable
- Working in parallel can maximize experience
**Adapting our intensive approach**
- Other communities as they become ready to cope with their climate adaptation problems
**Networking similar local communities**
- Maximize experience available to each
- Clarify their common interest for adapting state and federal programs to their needs

**Notes:**
Sixth, what are the opportunities for improved research in support of decision-making?
We recommend factoring the global problem of adaptation to climate change & variability into many local problems.
Each local problem is more tractable than the global one.
Many communities working in parallel can maximize the amount of timely experience to harvest.
We recommend adapting our intensive approach to other communities as they become ready to cope with their adaptation problems.
That is likely to occur after extreme events cause coastal erosion and flooding, or when signs of climate change become more obvious – as they already are in the Arctic.
Finally, we recommend networking similar local communities to
Maximize the amount of experience available to each, and 
To help them clarify their common interest for adapting...

## Working Conclusions

**Science cannot significantly reduce profound uncertainties at the local level**
**Sound policy incorporates uncertainties & multiple community values & constraints**
- A sound policy process adjusts these policies
**The community is best positioned to decide its policies & take responsibility**
**In short, context matters in adaptations**

**Notes:**
Finally, we have three working conclusions on adaptations to climate change & variability.
First, science cannot significantly reduce profound uncertainties at the local level.   
However, an intensive approach can reconstruct and update local trends, clarify the underlying dynamics, and harvest experience for policy purposes.
Second, sound policy incorporates these uncertainties, and many community values and constraints. 
Minimizing vulnerability to climate change is only one of the community’s interests, and must compete with other interests for limited resources.
Sound policy process adjusts these policies as events unfold.
Monitoring, evaluating, & terminating failed policies are as important as planning.
Third, the local community....  Responsibility comes from living with the consequences of the community’s decisions.
With few exceptions, higher-level decision makers cannot know enough about Barrow to make sound policy decisions.
In short, context matters.

## Contributors & Colleagues

**People of Barrow**
**Matt Beedle**
**Elizabeth Cassano**
**Anne Jensen**
**Melinda Koslow**
**Leanne Lestak**
**Bill Manley**

**Linda Mearns**
**Matt Pocernich**
**Glenn Sheehan**
**Page Sturtevant**
**James Syvitski**
**Claudio Tebaldi**
**Jason Vogel**

**Notes:**
In closing, I  would like to thank the people of Barrow, and other contributors and colleagues in the research project represented here.