United States Department of Agriculture 

ADAPTATION
 

RESOURCES
 

FOR AGRICULTURE
 

Responding to Climate Variability and Change 

in the Midwest and Northeast 

A product of the USDA Midwest, Northeast, and Northern Forests Climate Hubs 
2
 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Adaptation Resources 

for Agriculture: 

Responding to Climate Variability and 

Change in the Midwest and Northeast 

Maria K. Janowiak, Daniel N. Dostie, Michael A. Wilson, Michael J. Kucera, 

R. Howard Skinner, Jerry L. Hatfield, David Hollinger, and Christopher W. Swanston 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Washington, DC 

Technical Bulletin 1944 

October 2016 

Published in cooperation with the USDA: 

Midwest, Northeast, and Northern Forests Climate Hubs 

Agricultural Research Service 

Natural Resources Conservation Service 

Forest Service 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 3 
Abstract 

Janowiak, M., D. Dostie, M. Wilson, M. Kucera, R. Howard Skinner, J. Hatfield, D. Hollinger, and C. Swanston. 2016. 

Adaptation Resources for Agriculture: Responding to Climate Variability and Change in the Midwest and 

Northeast. Technical Bulletin 1944. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

Changes in climate and extreme weather are already increasing challenges for agriculture nationally and 

globally, and many of these impacts will continue into the future. This technical bulletin contains information and 

resources designed to help agricultural producers, service providers, and educators in the Midwest and Northeast 

regions of the United States integrate climate change considerations and action-oriented decisions into existing 

farm and conservation plans. An Adaptation Workbook provides producers a flexible, structured process to 

identify and assess climate change impacts, challenges, opportunities, and farm-level adaptation tactics and 

continuously evaluate adaptation actions for improving responses to extreme and uncertain conditions. A 

synthesis of Adaptation Strategies and Approaches serves as a “menu” of potential responses organized to 

provide a clear rationale for making decisions by connecting planned actions to broad adaptation concepts. 

Responses address both short- and long-range timeframes and extend from incremental adjustments of existing 

practices to major alterations that transform the entire farm operation. Example adaptation tactics—prescriptive 

actions for agricultural production systems common in the region—for each approach guide producers, service 

providers, and educators to develop appropriate responses for their farms and location. Four Adaptation 

Examples demonstrate how these adaptation process resources are used. 

Keywords: climate change, adaptation, agriculture, adaptive management, Midwest, Northeast 

4 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Contents 

Abstract 4 

Contents 5 

Introduction 6 

Chapter 1: Climate Change Effects on Agriculture and Natural Resources 8 

Climate Change and Agriculture in the Midwest and Northeast 9 

Chapter 2: Adaptation in Agriculture 12
 

What is climate change adaptation? 12
 

Chapter 3: Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 18
 

A Menu of Adaptation Responses 19
 

Strategy 1: Sustain fundamental functions of soil and water. 21
 

Strategy 2: Reduce existing stressors of crops and livestock. 22
 

Strategy 3: Reduce risks from warmer and drier conditions. 24
 

Strategy 4: Reduce the risk and long-term impacts of extreme weather. 25
 

Strategy 5: Manage farms and fields as part of a larger landscape. 26
 

Strategy 6: Alter management to accommodate expected future conditions. 27
 

Strategy 7: Alter agricultural systems or lands to new climate conditions. 29
 

Strategy 8: Alter infrastructure to match new and expected conditions. 30
 

Chapter 4: Adaptation Workbook 32
 

Step 1: DEFINE management goals and objectives. 34
 

Step 2: ASSESS site-specific climate change impacts and vulnerabilities. 36
 

Step 3: EVALUATE management objectives given projected impacts and vulnerabilities. 37
 

Step 4: IDENTIFY adaptation approaches and tactics for implementation. 39
 

Step 5: MONITOR and evaluate effectiveness of implemented actions. 41
 

Next Steps 41
 

Chapter 5: Adaptation Workbook Examples 42
 

Dryland Farming in Nebraska 42
 

Beef Grazing in Missouri 51
 

Corn and Soybean Production in Iowa 54
 

Confined Dairy in Pennsylvania
 57 

Glossary 60
 

Literature Cited
 61

Appendix 1: Methods for Developing the Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 65 

Adaptation Workbook Worksheets 66 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 5 
introduction 


This publication provides perspectives, information, resources, and tools to producers, service 

providers, and educators in the Midwest and Northeast regions of the United States for 

responding to climate variability and change. Broadly defined, climate change adaptation 

includes all adjustments, both planned and unplanned, in natural and human systems 

occurring in response to climatic changes and subsequent effects (Parry et al. 2007; Smit et 

al. 1999). Since the effects of climate change are complex and far-reaching, and the scope, 

severity, and pace of future impacts are difficult to predict, numerous government agencies, 

universities, and private partners are working together to develop information, resources, and 

tools that support adaptation across all sectors of society. Of particular interest to agricultural 

producers and other land managers, the USDA is providing coordinated climate change 

assistance through the Regional Climate Hubs. The USDA Climate Hubs develop and deliver 

science-based, region-specific information and tools to land managers to enable climate 

informed decision making and provide access to USDA resources to implement 

those decisions. 

In this publication, we focus on the deliberate integration of climate change information 

into short-term management (< 5 years) and long-range planning (5 to 20 or more years), 

decisionmaking, and implementation actions within the control of agricultural producers (Box 

I.1). As newer, more precise information becomes available to improve decisionmaking, farmers 

should consider modifying long-range plans. While it is beyond the scope of this publication 

to comprehensively address all potential adaptations within the agricultural system, such as 

new technologies or changes in tariffs or the use of crop insurance programs, it is possible to 

extend the use of scientific information about future climate change impacts to the scale of 

individual farms. Individual farms have unique goals in the areas of profitability, productivity, 

land stewardship, or any combination thereof, depending on unique needs, and many climate 

change adaptation actions can benefit these farm-wide goals while also adjusting systems to 

changing conditions. 

The contents are organized as a set of interrelated chapters, each of which serves as an 

independent resource to help incorporate climate considerations into on-farm agricultural 

practices and develop adaptation actions that can be used to respond to climate variability 

and change. 

•	 Chapter 1: Climate Change Effects on Agriculture and Natural Resources briefly 

summarizes the effects of climate change on agriculture and natural resources of the 

Midwest and Northeast regions of the United States. 

•	 Chapter 2: Adaptation in Agriculture describes the role adaptation plays to help 

agricultural producers respond to the challenges and opportunities associated with climate 

variability and change. 

•	 Chapter 3: Adaptation Strategies and Approaches provides a synthesis of on-the-ground 

(i.e., farm- and landscape-level) climate adaptation strategies and approaches as a “menu” 

of potential responses. 

•	 Chapter 4: Adaptation Workbook presents a structured process for integrating climate 

change considerations and action-oriented decisions into the farm’s long range and annual 

operation plans. 

•	 Chapter 5: Adaptation Workbook Examples demonstrates how to use the Adaptation 

Workbook together with regional Adaptation Strategies and Approaches to develop 

tactics for real-world farm operations within the Midwest and Northeast regions of the 

United States. 

6 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Box I.1: 

About the Adaptation Resources for Agriculture 

The Adaptation Resources for Agriculture: 

•	 Supports producers, service providers, and educators

in the Midwest and Northeast Regions of the United 

States. 

–	 midwest: Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, 

Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, 

Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa. 

–	 Northeast: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, 

Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New 

York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, 

West Virginia and the District of Columbia. 

•	 Helps producers consider both short-term adaptive

management actions (< 5 years) and long-range 

strategic plans (5 to ~20 years, subject to farm type) 

•	 Promotes adaptation through multiple resources,

including: 

–	 A “menu” of many adaptation strategies and 

approaches (Chapter 3) and example tactics for 

row cropping and forages, confined livestock, 

grazing, orchards, and small fruit and vegetable 

production systems. 

–	 A five-step process outlined in the Adaptation 

Workbook (Chapter 4) to help producers 

incorporate climate change considerations into 

existing plans and develop adaptation actions at 

the scale of farms and fields . 

–	 Examples where climate change has been 

considered in real-world agricultural situations 

using the Resources provided by this publication 

(Chapter 5). 

The Resources in This Publication Do Not: 

•	 Recommend specific management actions or policy.

•	 Address the non-climate-related risks of an

agricultural enterprise, such as production, marketing, 

financial, human resource, and legal factors. 

•	 Attempt to list all possible climate adaptation actions

that a producer might implement. 

Leaves harness sunlight to convert atmospheric carbon dioxide into life-sustaining food and energy. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 7 
CHAPteR 1: 

Climate Change effects on Agriculture and Natural Resources 

 hanges in climate and extreme weather have 

already occurred and are increasing challenges for 

agriculture nationally and globally. Many of the impacts 

are expected to continue or intensify in the future. The 

effects of a changing climate and enhanced climate 

variability are already being seen across the Midwestern 

and Northeastern United States; over the past century, 

temperatures have risen across all seasons, growing 

seasons have become longer, precipitation patterns have 

changed, and extreme precipitation events have increased 

in frequency and severity (Hatfield et al. 2015; Hatfield 

et al. 2014; Tobin et al. 2015). Because of the sensitivity 

of agriculture to weather and climate conditions, these 

impacts can have substantial direct and indirect effects on 

farm production and profitability. 

Ongoing changes in climate have substantial impacts 

on the $98 billion agricultural sector in the Midwest and 

Northeast (Hatfield et al. 2015; Tobin et al. 2015). Diversity 

across these two regions, both in terms of climate and 

in agricultural commodities produced, indicates that 

potential responses to climate change will vary by location 

and commodity (Hatfield et al. 2015; Tobin et al. 2015; 

Gordon et al. 2015). In the south of this region, agricultural 

commodities are expected to be more vulnerable where 

the full effects of warmer temperatures and associated 

changes will be strongest (Gordon et al. 2015), while 

“Climate change poses unprecedented 

challenges to U.S. agriculture because of the 

sensitivity of agricultural productivity and 

costs to changing climate conditions.” 

Source: Climate Change and Agriculture in the United States: 


Effects and Adaptation. (Walthall et al. 2012)
 

extreme rainfall events are expected to be more common 

to the north and east (Kunkel et al. 2013). One analysis 

in the Midwest projected that major commodity crops, 

including corn, soybeans, and wheat, will be increasingly 

susceptible to lower crop yields without significant 

adaptation (Gordon et al. 2015). 

Although some regions and sectors may have improved 

yields, the overall impacts of climate change are generally 

expected to be negative (Ainsworth and Ort 2010; Hatfield 

et al. 2014). Individual producers may experience increased 

risks from heat stress on crops and livestock, damage 

to commodities and infrastructure from extreme events, 

and long-term challenges as current systems, practices, 

crops, and breeds become increasingly less suited to 

climatic conditions. Ecosystem services may also be altered 

or disrupted (Box 1.1). As changes in the mean climate 

and climate variability become more pronounced, it will 

Box 1.1: 

Effects on Ecosystem Goods and Services 

Agriculture is an essential activity that supports human life. While agriculture supplies the food, fibers, and 

other materials used in everyday life, it also provides a 

much wider array of ecosystem services and goods that 

support human well-being. These ecosystem services 

are numerous and complex (Ahmed 2002), and it is 

not possible to assess all of the ways in which they are 

potentially affected by changes in weather and climate 

(Walthall et al. 2012). For these reasons the effects of climate change on agriculture must always be considered 

within the context of other changes happening within 

natural and socioeconomic systems. 

ecosystem services provided by agroecosystems include: 

•	 Provisioning services, which provide food, 

pharmaceuticals, fiber, and fuel products. 

•	 Regulating services, which regulate ecosystem 

processes such as groundwater flow; erosion control; 

flood protection; water purification and temperature 

control; pollination, weed, insect, disease, and 

parasite pest control; air quality and greenhouse gas 

emission control; carbon sequestration; local climate 

modification; and biodiversity. 

•	 Cultural Services, which provide non-material 

benefits such as spiritual enhancement, tourism and 

recreational opportunities, and aesthetic experiences. 

•	 Supporting Services that include basic soil aggregate 

arrangement, hydrological cycling, atmospheric and 

mineral nutrient cycling, and wildlife habitat. 

8 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

become increasingly important to address potential risks 

to agricultural production and food security (Howden et al. 

2007; Walthall et al. 2012). 

Climate Change and Agriculture in the 

Midwest and Northeast 

Numerous assessments describe both the observed and 

anticipated global, national, and regional changes in climate 

and associated effects on agriculture (Box 1.2). This section 

summarizes some of the most important changes that 

have already occurred and their effects relevant to the 

crop and livestock production systems typically found in 

the Midwest and Northeast regions of the United States. 

Changes in temperature, precipitation, concentration of 

carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and other climatic 

factors directly affect production either positively or 

negatively, while severe weather and other climate-related 

hazards increase the risk of damage and adverse economic 

impacts. Already the number of weather- or climate-related 

disasters costing more than 1 billion dollars is increasing 

(Smith and Katz 2013, Walthall et al. 2012). Shifts in weeds, 

insects, or disease infestation, and their range, frequency, 

and intensity may in turn indirectly affect agriculture and 

amplify or counteract the direct effects of climate change. 

As these changes continue to intensify into the future, 

they may add new stress, exacerbate existing stressors 

in agroecosystems, or result in new opportunities for 

agriculture production. 

Direct Effects of Changing Climate Conditions on 

Crops and Livestock 

•	 Annual average and seasonal air temperatures are 

increasing. Average annual air temperatures have 

increased by 1 to 4 °F (2 °C) over the past century 

(Kunkel et al. 2013b; Kunkel et al. 2013a). The greatest 

warming has occurred along coastal margins and in the 

north, including the upper Great Lakes, and during the 

winter season. Temperatures are projected to increase 

another 4.5 to 9.5 °F by 2085. Changes in expected 

average annual temperatures greatly affect the selection 

of perennial crop species and varieties, livestock species 

and breeds, and engineering design criteria for livestock 

building construction, and energy supply. 

•	 Seasons are shifting. The length of the frost-free season 

has increased by 9 to 10 days across the Midwest and 

Northeast, and it is expected to increase by 18 to 30 

days by 2055 (Kunkel et al. 2013b; Kunkel et al. 2013a). 

Earlier spring thaws and later first frosts in autumn 

could result in greater growth and productivity, but only 

if temperatures do not exceed upper limits for growth, 

there is enough water and nutrients, and disease 

and pathogens are not constraints (Fuhrer 2003). 

However, earlier spring thaws can be detrimental to fruit 

production if early bud development increases exposure 

to late spring frosts. Growing degree-days for crops are 

shifting, creating opportunities to experiment with new 

crops, varieties, and markets. Heating or cooling degreedays for livestock and energy use are similarly shifting. 

Water runoff from a heavy rain negatively impacts crop production and downstream water bodies. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 9 
•	 The number of hot days and hot nights are increasing. 

Nighttime temperatures have persistently increased 

during the 20th century, and this trend is expected 

to continue (Kunkel et al. 2013a; Kunkel et al. 2013b). 

Extreme high temperatures (defined as greater than 900 

F) and heat waves are also projected to increase (Walsh 

et al. 2014). Without a cooling off period at night, 

animals become more subject to heat stress, especially 

when coupled with higher relative humidity. Warmer 

summers may shorten the period for small grain to 

mature, and high nighttime temperatures can adversely 

affect plant biomass accumulation, crop yields, and 

quality. 

•	 Precipitation patterns are changing. Annual 

precipitation has increased in the Midwest and 

Northeast, and there has been a shift toward larger 

precipitation events (Kunkel et al. 2013a; Kunkel et 

al. 2013b). Future precipitation amounts have a high 

degree of uncertainty, but point toward the potential 

for increased cold-season precipitation and relatively 

less change in precipitation during the growing season. 

More intense and concentrated precipitation events are 

expected to create wetter soils under these conditions, 

while at the same time, increased temperatures and 

evapotranspiration may lead to drier soil conditions 

between precipitation events (Bryan et al. 2015; Hatfield 

et al. 2014). This could lead to increased frequency of 

soil moisture stress or drought and suppressed crop 

yields. 

•	 Higher concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide 

may disproportionately benefit plant species. More 

than 95 percent of the world’s plant species assimilate 

carbon dioxide from the atmosphere using the C3 

pathway, while the rest use the C4 pathway. The most 

recognizable crop species in the C4 category include 

sugarcane and corn. Under elevated carbon dioxide 

concentrations, C3 plants are often better able to 

increase production in response to additional carbon 

dioxide than C4 plants (Walthall et al. 2012). Many 

confounding factors in the environment, such as 

interactions with tropospheric ozone pollution, influence 

plant response to changing climate. 

Box 1.2: 

Climate Change Assessments 

Climate change assessments are important resources that summarize and detail climate impacts across 

various sectors, regions, and ecosystems. Through the 

multitude of reports, it is clear that the climate is already 

changing with visible consequences at State, regional, 

national, and international levels. 

•	 Walthall, C.L., et al. 2012. Climate Change and

Agriculture in the United States: Effects and 

Adaptation. United States Department of Agriculture. 

186 p. Available at 

www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/effects.htm. 

•	 Melillo, J.M., T.C. Richmond, G.W. Yohe, (eds.). 2014.

Climate Change Impacts in the United States: the 


Third National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global 


Change Research Program. 841 p. Available at 


www.nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads.
 

•	 Tobin, D., M. Janowiak, D. Hollinger, R.H. Skinner, C.

Swanston, R. Steele, R. Radhakrishna, A. Chatrchyan. 

2015. Northeast Regional Climate Hub Assessment 

of Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation and 

Mitigation Strategies. United States Department of 

Agriculture. 65 p. Available from the USDA Northeast 

Climate Hub at 

www.climatehubs.oce.usda.gov/northeast. 

•	 Hatfield, J., C. Swanston, M. Janowiak, R. Steele, J.

Hempel, J. Bochicchio, W. Hall, M. Cole, S. Hestvik, 

J. Whitaker. 2015. Midwest and Northern Forests 

Regional Climate Hub Assessment of Climate 

Change Vulnerability and Adaptation and Mitigation 

Strategies. United States Department of Agriculture. 

55 p. Available from the USDA Midwest Climate Hub 

at www.climatehubs.oce.usda.gov/midwest. 

10 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Hazardous Risks to Agriculture From 

Weather and Climate 

•	 An increase of extreme precipitation events increases 

risk of damage to crops, soils, and infrastructure. In the 

Northeast, the region has experienced a greater than 

70 percent increase in extreme precipitation since the 

mid-1900s (Walsh et al. 2014). Intense rainfall events 

and excessive rain caused by multiple events passing 

over the same area in a short period of time can erode 

soils; damage crops and infrastructure; overtop waste 

storage facilities; delay planting or harvesting; transport 

sediment, nutrients, and pesticides offsite; and result in 

greater expenses and/or lower yields. 

•	 An increase of flood damage is also expected. Areas of 

the Northeast and Midwest are vulnerable to increased 

flooding due to changes in the frequency or intensity of 

extreme precipitation events including thunderstorms, 

tropical storms, and coastal storm surges (Melillo et al. 

2014). Often flood damage occurs well downstream 

of the area receiving the extreme precipitation, a 

greater concern in the Midwest due to the extent of 

agricultural lands located in flood-prone areas. Flooding 

may also cause more erosion along flashy streams 

in steep mountainous areas and in coastal areas of 

the Northeast subject to storm surges. Floods may 

render crops unsuitable for market, delay planting, and 

damage young plants. They may also increase risks of 

soil compaction from using heavy equipment on wet 

soils; transport of sediment, nutrients, and pesticides; 

and contamination of agricultural fields with pollutants 

carried from upstream sources. 

•	 Severe wind and storm hazards may increase. 

Thunderstorms, tornadoes, hail, lightning, strong winds, 

severe snow, and ice storms currently occur in the 

Midwest and Northeast, and it is unclear whether these 

events will become more common in the future. Severe 

storms cause human and livestock fatalities and injuries 

and damage to crops and infrastructure. The Northeast 

has already experienced an increase in severe tropical 

storms and hurricanes compared to other regions and 

can expect the risk of hazards from them to continue 

increasing. 

•	 Warmer temperatures increase the potential for soil 

moisture stress and drought. Higher temperatures drive 

water losses from evaporation and plant transpiration. 

A large amount of agriculture in the Midwest and 

Northeast is not irrigated, increasing vulnerability 

of these crops to summer drought and associated 

economic impacts (Hatfield et al. 2015; Tobin et al. 

2015). Droughts may cause declines in crop yield and 

quality and shortage of forage supply on pasture. In 

addition to agricultural impacts, droughts affect water 

supplies, resulting in potential water use restrictions in 

metropolitan areas and may result in competition of 

limited water resources by urban and agricultural users. 

Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture 

•	 Competition from weeds and invasive plant species 

may increase. The complexity of the system and how 

direct and indirect effects of climate change influence 

plants makes projecting net outcomes challenging. 

Complex interactions between elevated carbon dioxide, 

higher temperatures, and altered precipitation may 

influence the success of weedy and invasive plant 

species within plant communities (Walthall et al. 2012). 

Extreme climatic events, such as drought, flooding, and 

strong storms, which are predicted to become more 

frequent with climate change, may also be a factor. 

•	 Populations of many damaging insects may increase. 

Insects that overwinter in the Northeast, such as corn 

earworm, flea beetle, and the spotted-wing Drosophila, 

are already present at higher levels earlier in the season 

and this trend is expected to continue as temperatures 

warm (Tobin et al. 2015). Shorter winters bring an earlier 

arrival of migratory insects, allowing more generations 

of pests to develop within a season (Walthall et al. 2012). 

•	 The risk of plant pathogens may rise. Increased 

temperature can increase pathogen survival over 

winter, can increase the period of infectivity, allow for 

more infection cycles in season, and result in pathogen 

populations expanding into new areas (Elad and 

Pertot 2014). 

•	 The risk of pressure from pathogens and parasites of 

livestock may rise. Earlier springs and warmer winters 

may allow for greater proliferation and survivability of 

animal pathogens, parasites, and disease vectors. Hotter 

weather has the potential to increase the incidence of 

several health issues affecting dairy cows or increase the 

potential of toxin-producing fungi in forage (Gaughan et 

al. 2009). 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 11 
CHAPteR 2: 

Adaptation in Agriculture 

 s the scientific understanding of the effects and 

consequences of climate variability and change 

improves, agricultural producers are searching for ways to 

apply this information to planning and decisionmaking and 

put it into action. Broad descriptions of climate change 

effects are widely published in scientific literature, but each 

farm will be uniquely impacted and require customized 

responses (Box 2.1). This chapter describes the role of 

adaptation in agriculture in responding to the challenges 

and opportunities associated with climate variability and 

change and provides context for the Adaptation Strategies 

and Approaches presented in the next chapter. Often 

these responses can simultaneously provide co-benefits 

towards multiple goals, such as soil health improvement, 

water quality protection, wildlife habitat management, or 

greenhouse gas mitigation (Box 2.2), and may or may not 

be distinguishable from on-farm practices already planned 

or underway. 

What is climate change adaptation? 

Climate change adaptation can help to reduce the risks 

from climate variability and change, increase the resilience 

of systems to potential disruptions, and even alter systems 

to be better able to take advantage of future conditions. 

Climate adaptation includes all adjustments, both planned 

and unplanned, in natural and human systems occurring 

in response to climatic changes and subsequent effects 

(Smit et al. 1999; Parry et al. 2007). Adaptation actions are 

generally intended to address the greatest risks brought 

about by climate variability and change, but they can also 

spur innovative solutions and opportunities (Walthall et al. 

2012). 

It is important to acknowledge that agricultural producers 

continuously adjust to changing conditions. These may 

include market price fluctuations, increasing input costs, 

new neighbors, labor shortages, pest invasions, and 

adverse weather conditions. These adjustments to farm 

operations are critical to maintaining production, profit, 

and stewardship levels. At the same time, producers may 

need to make additional adjustments to respond to a wider 

potential for extreme weather events, increased variations 

in climate, and changes in long-term climate trends. 

Box 2.1: 

Principles of Adaptation 

Agricultural producers have many tools available to begin addressing climate change; however, a new perspective is needed to expand management considerations 

to new issues, spatial scales, timing, and prioritization of 

efforts. The following principles can serve as a starting point for this perspective (Swanston and Janowiak 

2012): 

•	 Prioritization and triage: Prioritize actions for adaptation 

on resources that are vulnerable and the likelihood 

that actions to reduce vulnerability will be effective. 

•	 Flexible and adaptive management: Maintain a 

decisionmaking framework that is flexible and 

incorporates new knowledge and experience over 

time, in this case with impacts from climate variability 

and change. 

•	 “No regrets” decisions: Look for actions that result in a 

wide variety of benefits under multiple scenarios and 

have little or no risk. 

•	 Precautionary actions: Where vulnerability is high, 

taking precautionary actions to reduce risk in the near 

term is extremely important. 

•	 Support mitigation: Many adaptation actions are 

complementary with actions to mitigate greenhouse 

gas emissions. Practices that help adapt farms to 

changing conditions may also reduce emissions or 

sequester carbon (Box 2.2). 

12 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Applying Adaptation Concepts to Agriculture 

Greater climate variability and change increases the need 

for producers to be able to cope with changing, uncertain, 

and increasingly novel situations. Within the agriculture 

sector, adaptation can occur at a variety of scales ranging 

from sector-wide changes, (e.g., trade policies, government 

programs, insurance options, and technologies) to sitespecific responses, (e.g., production system inputs, tillage, 

crop species, crop rotations, and harvest strategies) 

(Walthall et al. 2012; Hatfield et al. 2014; Smit and Skinner 

2002). Further, adaptation strategies for agriculture can be 

divided into broad categories: farm production practices, 

farm financial management, farm infrastructure, new 

technological developments, and government programs 

and insurance. The first three categories involve enterprisescale decisionmaking by producers while the last two 

address the broad socioeconomic system and are typically 

the responsibility of public agencies and agribusiness 

(Walthall et al. 2012; Smit and Skinner 2002). 

This document provides information to work on the scale 

of farms and fields where an agricultural producer has 

control for decisionmaking and action. First steps are 

likely to focus on incorporating climate considerations into 

existing decisionmaking and planning activities, changing 

management as appropriate to respond to new challenges 

and opportunities, and increasing capacity to cope with 

more change in the future. It’s important to recognize that 

the scales used to present climate change information 

(e.g., for regions or States, or for the middle or end of the 

century) are not the same as those used to make farmlevel decisions (e.g., for farms or fields, or for the next 

season, year, or decade (Schmidt et al. 2014; Howden et al. 

2007). For this reason, local experience and professional 

judgement is critical for interpreting climate information 

and adaptation options. 

Importantly, many actions that producers currently 

implement are likely to have climate adaptation benefits, 

and actions to promote climate change adaptation 

can complement producer motives as well as improve 

ecosystem services (Figure 2.1). The Adaptation Strategies 

and Approaches presented in Chapter 2 can be considered 

when enhancing existing farm or conservation practices or 

even adopting new structures, practices, or systems. 

Figure 2.1 shows how actions for adapting agricultural systems to 

a changing climate complement producer motives and enhance 

ecosystem services. The first step for planning and implementing 

climate change adaptation is to look for these “win-win-win” 

opportunities. 

Autonomous and Intentional Adaptation 

The agricultural sector is dynamic and constantly changing. 

Although there is an increasing emphasis on adaptation 

to address climate variability and change, producers 

are always changing their actions in response to the 

changing environment around them. Farm practices and 

infrastructure are often adjusted in response to changing 

biophysical conditions, such as pests and diseases, as well 

as socioeconomic changes in markets, policies, and tariffs 

(Anwar et al. 2013; Smit and Skinner 2002). 

Because of this continuous learning and improvement 

within many agricultural settings, many actions may have 

climate change adaptation benefits even if climate was not 

an explicit consideration in the decisionmaking (Schmidt 

et al. 2014). For example, a dairy farmer may decide to 

improve a barn to increase the building’s cooling capacity 

based upon expected gains in milk production; this action 

may reduce the effects of rising temperatures even though 

the increased frequency of hot weather resulting from 

climate change was not a deliberate consideration. Many 

producers are likely to implement these “autonomous” 

adaptations (Anwar et al. 2013; Smit and Skinner 2002; 

Smit et al. 1999). 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 13 
Box 2.2: 

Adaptation and Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Benefits 

Climate change adaptation and greenhouse gas mitigation present two different, yet interrelated, human responses to climate change. As discussed in this chapter, 

adaptation actions work to reduce the vulnerability of 

natural or human systems to expected climate change 

effects and enable agriculture systems to cope with 

new and future conditions. Mitigation, in the context of 

climate change, results in the reduction of greenhouse 

gases present in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gas 

mitigation is particularly relevant to agriculture because 

of the emissions produced by the sector as a whole; 

agriculture accounted for 9 percent of national emissions in 2013 (U.S. EPA 2015). Greenhouse gas mitigation 

also presents opportunities for agriculture to sequester 

more carbon in healthy soils, which regulate water and 

nutrient cycling, buffer against adverse impacts such as 

erosion, and ultimately increase plant biomass production. 

Greenhouse gas mitigation is a necessary component 

of an integrated climate change response sometimes 

referred to as climate smart agriculture. Moreover, it 

can help to reduce the amount of adaptation needed in 

the future by reducing the degree to which greenhouse 

gases disrupt the climate system. While this document 

focuses on actions that agricultural producers can take 

to enhance the ability of farms to adapt to changing 

conditions, it is important to note that many practices 

that help adapt farms to changing conditions also have 

mitigation benefits. 

When evaluating adaptation responses, producers can 

decide to place additional emphasis on actions that 

also mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. For example, 

a producer using the Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 

4) can identify management objectives for greenhouse 

gas mitigation, such as increasing soil organic carbon or 

reducing the use of nitrogen fertilizers that can convert 

to nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas. 

Farm Practice Adaptation Benefits Mitigation Benefits 

Use of cover crops Increased soil cover and organic matter 

reduces water loss and the potential for 

drought stress; increased cover reduces 

erosion associated with extreme weather 

Increased carbon sequestration in soils 

Adjust nitrogen application rates to 

account for precipitation rates and local 

conditions (Moebius-Clune et al. 2010) 

Reduces nitrogen leaching and 

denitrification that may occur with 

increasing amounts of spring precipitation 

Lower levels of nitrogen fertilizer application 

reduce nitrous oxide losses from the 

fertilizer, as well as carbon dioxide emissions 

from fertilizer production 

Use tree cover or silvopasture systems 

for livestock production (Schoeneberger 

et al. 2012) 

Increases shading of livestock to reduce 

heat stress 

Trees provide carbon sequestration 

14 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

The intentional consideration of observed and expected 

changes in climate can help to further reduce risks to the 

productivity and profitability of farms and improve the 

stewardship of natural resources. Effective adaptation 

requires that producers and other land managers be 

intentional in the selection and implementation of 

adaptation actions (Stein et al. 2014). This intentionality 

specifically considers climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities for the particular area of concern, and allows 

producers to design responses appropriately. For example, 

beef producers may recognize that the occurrence of 

drought is likely to continue increasing in their region and 

have their water well drilled deeper to ensure adequate 

livestock drinking water, or they might reduce their 

herd numbers to lower the drinking water demand. The 

Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 4) describes one process 

that can be used to explicitly consider climate change 

and develop intentional actions. Additional resources and 

tools may also be useful for assessing the future effects 

of climate change or for adapting agriculture and natural 

resource management planning and activities to expected 

future conditions (Box 2.3). 

Short- and Long-Term Timeframes 

It is important to identify actions for both near-term and 

long-term timeframes that help farmers adapt to changes 

in climate, as is done for changing markets, feed supply, 

regulations, and nearly all other farm operations (Schmidt 

et al. 2014; Takle et al. 2014). Producers typically rely on 

weather forecasts to make day-to-day decisions such 

as planting annual crops, pruning tree crops, managing 

nutrients and pests, and harvesting. Climate forecasts have 

the potential to play a large role in the decisionmaking 

and planning process especially for farmers’ long term 

plans such as crop rotations, market and product changes, 

investments in infrastructure, farm succession, etc. (Takle 

et al. 2014). For example, corn growers may need to make 

seed purchases several months ahead of knowing field 

conditions at planting time while needing to secure rental 

Box 2.3: 

Additional Adaptation Resources and Tools 

The Adaptation Workbook outlined in Chapter 4 provides a structured but flexible process to consider the 

potential effects of climate change and variability in 

order to make climate-informed decisions for agricultural production and associated activities. Some decisions 

require specific tools to assess the effects of climate 

change over different future timeframes. Additionally, 

several other adaptation resources lay out similar processes or provide decision-support tools for adapting to 

climate change in agriculture as well as natural resource 

management: 

•	 The Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning

Center offers guidance through the Animal 

Agriculture in a Changing Climate project. Adapting 

to a Changing Climate: A Planning Guide is available 

through eXtension at www.articles.extension.org/ 

pages/69055/adaptation-and-risk-management. 

•	 The U.S. Agency for International Development

(USAID) and Catholic Relief Services offer guidance 

through the Climate Change Adaptation Pocket Field 

Guide: Extension Practice for Agricultural Adaptation 

available at 


www.meas-extension.org/meas-offers/training.
 

•	 USDA’s National Climate Hub hosts the Climate Hubs

Tool Shed, which provides access to tools from across 

the country to assist producers in adapting to climate 

variability and change available at www.climatehubs. 

oce.usda.gov/content/tools-and-data. 

•	 An Adaptation Workbook for Forest Management and 

Conservation outlines a similar process for managing 

forests and other natural ecosystems. Access the 

online version of this workbook at 

www.adaptationworkbook.org. 

•	 The National Wildlife Federation also has a Guide 

to Climate Smart Conservation to design and carry 

out wildlife conservation measures in the face of a 

rapidly changing climate. This guide is available at 

www.nwf.org/What-We-Do/Energy-and-Climate/ 

Climate-Smart-Conservation/Guide-to-Climate-SmartConservation.aspx. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 15 
contracts or finances to purchase land a year or more 

before cropping takes place (Figure 2.2). 

Several different frameworks exist for thinking about 

adaptation at multiple temporal scales, but all identify the 

need to consider both short-and long-term adaptation 

options and identify ways to accommodate increasing 

levels of change over time: 

•	 Anwar et al. (2013) describe climate adaptation 

as a continuum of actions that range from shortterm incremental change toward more substantive 

transformational actions. In this way, the short-term 

initiatives can inform longer term strategy through a 

“learn by doing” approach. 

•	 Stokes and Howden (2010) describe a transition from 

incremental adaptations, which will eventually have a 

limited effectiveness under severe climate change, to 

more systemic and transformational change. 

•	 Jarvis et al. (2011) describe a short-term focus on risk 

management to address issues related to food security, 

with a longer term shift toward progressive adaptation 

that facilitates change. 

•	 Easterling (1996) describes an emphasis on short-term 

resilience to increase the capacity of systems to recover 

from disruptions, followed by long-term adaptation 

where the form and function of a system is deliberately 

altered. 

•	 Schmidt et al. (2014) suggest that producers identify 

short-term “quick fixes” that utilize management or 

technology to reduce impacts, as well as long-range 

planned adaptations. 

Midwest Corn Growers’ Decision Calendar

Figure 2.2 the Midwest Corn Grower’s Decision Calendar shows an example of considerations over short- and long-term timeframes. 

Source: Takle et al. (2014). 

16 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Managing for Persistence and Change 

Adaptation responses will vary widely, from actions 

that maintain existing conditions all the way through to 

transformational changes to the farm, such as changing 

production systems or even the lands used to produce 

commodities. This continuum can be roughly categorized 

into two contrasting options for responding to climate 

change: managing for persistence versus managing for 

change (Stein et al. 2014) (Figure 2.3). 

•	 Managing for persistence generally focuses on 

maintaining the current system by reducing the climate 

change impacts that are pushing it in an unproductive 

direction. This includes actions to increase the resistance 

of a farm or agricultural system to change, as well as 

actions that increase its resilience (i.e., ability to bounce 

back) from disruptions. 

•	 Managing for change moves farm activities toward the 

new conditions created by climate change. Managing for 

change can range from small changes such as trying out 

new crop or livestock species that are better suited to 

warmer climates, to major changes that fundamentally 

transform farm operations. 

Managing for persistence and for change are not 

mutually exclusive ideas, and any farm enterprise may 

do some of both. Further, there are instances where a 

nearer term focus on managing impacts and maintaining 

current conditions sets up a longer term plan to change 

management goals and practices. For example, a 

farmer could focus on maintaining the current rotation 

of field crops and use cover crops to build better soils 

before shifting to an entirely new cropping system. The 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches presented in 

the next chapter describe a diverse menu of adaptation 

responses that producers can use to intentionally develop 

customized actions based on their needs. 

Figure 2.3. An illustration of adaptation options to manage for persistence and change, as well as no adaptation, over short- and longterm timeframes. Note that producers can switch options at any point, such as managing for persistence until conditions meet a threshold 

where change is preferable. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 17 
CHAPteR 3: 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

 ne of the major challenges of adapting agricultural 

systems to climate change is translating broad 

science-based concepts of climate adaptation (Chapter 

2) into specific, tangible on-farm actions. This chapter 

addresses that challenge by providing a synthesis of 

adaptation responses from the literature, which are 

organized in a tiered structure from broad concepts to 

specific actions (Figure 3.1). Eight broad strategies, each 

with their own more specific approaches, were synthesized 

from dozens of scientific papers that discussed adaptation 

actions at a variety of scales and locations. The strategies 

and approaches were reviewed by a diverse pool of 

producers, researchers, and other professionals from 

across the Midwest and Northeast (Appendix 1) and are 

broadly applicable across a diversity of commodities and 

production systems. These strategies and approaches are 

designed to serve as “stepping stones” to enable producers 

to understand the rationale for making decisions and taking 

appropriate actions to adapt to climate variability and 

change (Box 3.1). 

The adaptation strategies and approaches are presented 

as a menu of possible adaptation responses that producers 

may consider. By using the Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 

4), producers can select relevant adaptation strategies and Figure 3.1. Adaptation strategies, approaches, and tactics address 

different levels of specificity and decisionmaking. 

Box 3.1: 

Using the Adaptation Strategies and Approaches Menu 

The adaptation strategies and approaches menu can 

provide: 

•	 A full spectrum of possible adaptation responses

that can help sustain viable agricultural systems or 

transform unviable ones to meet the challenges of 

climate change, 

•	 A menu of adaptation strategies and approaches from

which producers can better understand the rational 

for making decisions and develop tactical actions best 

suited to meeting their goals and needs, 

•	 Examples of tactics to implement an approach,

recognizing that the producer will design specific 

actions, and 

•	 A platform for discussing climate change-related

topics and adaptation methods. 

The adaptation strategies and approaches do not: 

•	 Make recommendations or set guidelines for

management decisions. It is up to the producer to 

decide how this information is used. 

•	 Express preference for any strategies or approaches

within a particular agricultural system, location, or 

situation. Rather, a combination of location-specific 

factors and professional/landowner expertise informs 

the selection of any strategy or approach. 

18 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

approaches, and adjust and refine these to develop their 

own prescriptive tactics to achieve a specific management 

objective in a specific location. Examples of tactics are 

provided in order to convey a sense of the diverse ways 

in which the adaptation strategies and approaches may 

be implemented, with an emphasis on actions relevant to 

farms and expected climate change in the Midwest and 

Northeast. 

A Menu of Adaptation Responses 

Information on how to increase resilience to or take 

advantage of the anticipated effects of climate change 

in agricultural systems is rapidly growing (Howden et 

al. 2007). Much of this information, however, remains 

broad and generic, providing insufficient detail to enable 

producers to identify specific actions that facilitate 

adaptation while meeting production goals and objectives. 

Because agriculture encompasses an immense diversity 

of commodities, crops, and practices across even more 

diverse geographic and environmental conditions, potential 

adaptation responses are equally numerous (Howden et al. 

2007). 

Adaptation responses vary in specificity, from general 

concepts to specific actions (Janowiak et al. 2011) (Figure 

3.1). Adaptation strategies are abundant in recent literature 

and can be broadly applied in many ways across a number 

of landscapes and systems. Approaches are more specific, 

describing how strategies can be employed. Differences 

in application among different agricultural systems and 

landowner goals start to become evident. Ultimately, 

tactics are the most specific adaptation responses, 

providing prescriptive direction about what actions can 

be applied on the ground, and how, where, and when. We 

have provided examples of tactics for each approach, but 

we do not intend that they be implemented without due 

consideration of all relevant factors. Tactics are developed 

in relation to the particular system or crop, site conditions, 

landowner goals, markets, and other factors. 

Managing fields and farms at the landscape scale. 

This set of adaptation strategies and approaches serves 

as a menu of potential adaptation responses derived 

from the literature and expert feedback (Box 3.2). It helps 

producers identify their adaptation intentions and supports 

them in developing and implementing their own specific 

adaptation actions that are most suitable to their particular 

situation. Although menu items can be applied in various 

combinations to achieve desired outcomes, not all items 

on the menu will work together. Furthermore, actions 

that work well in one location or with a particular crop 

or system type may not work in another; it is up to the 

producer to decide what actions will work best for them. 

Importantly, the adaptation strategies and approaches 

included in this resource build upon current farm practices 

and conservation actions that work to sustain and conserve 

working lands over the long term. Many conservation 

activities already promote system health and resilience. 

Likewise, many adaptation actions are consistent with 

sustainable management and efforts to restore system 

function and integrity. A changing climate may compel 

some producers to enhance existing practices or adopt 

new ones, but it can also underscore the importance of 

sustainable practices that may already be in use. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 19 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Box 3.2: 

Menu of Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

Strategy 1: Sustain fundamental functions of soil and water. 

Approach 1.1: Maintain and improve soil health. 

Approach 1.2: Protect water quality. 

Approach 1.3: Match practices to water supply and demand. 

Strategy 2: Reduce existing stressors of crops and livestock. 

Approach 2.1: Reduce the impacts of pests and pathogens on crops. 

Approach 2.2: Reduce competition from weedy and invasive species. 

Approach 2.3: Maintain livestock health and performance. 

Strategy 3: Reduce risks from warmer and drier conditions. 

Approach 3.1: Adjust the timing or location of on-farm activities. 

Approach 3.2: Manage crops to cope with warmer and drier conditions. 

Approach 3.3: Manage livestock to cope with warmer and drier conditions. 

Strategy 4: Reduce the risk and long-term impacts of extreme weather. 

Approach 4.1: Reduce peak flow, runoff velocity, and soil erosion. 

Approach 4.2: Reduce severity or extent of water-saturated soil and flood damage. 

Approach 4.3: Reduce severity or extent of wind damage to soils and crops. 

Strategy 5: Manage farms and fields as part of a larger landscape. 

Approach 5.1: Maintain or restore natural ecosystems. 

Approach 5.2: Promote biological diversity across the landscape. 

Approach 5.3: Enhance landscape connectivity. 

Strategy 6: Alter management to accommodate expected future conditions. 

Approach 6.1: Diversify crop or livestock species, varieties or breeds, or products. 

Approach 6.2: Diversify existing systems with new combinations of varieties or breeds. 

Approach 6.3: Switch to commodities expected to be better suited to future conditions. 

Strategy 7: Alter agricultural systems or lands to new climate conditions. 

Approach 7.1: Minimize potential impacts following disturbance. 

Approach 7.2: Realign severely altered systems toward future conditions. 

Approach 7.3: Alter lands in agricultural production. 

Strategy 8: Alter infrastructure to match new and expected conditions. 

Approach 8.1: Expand or improve water systems to match water demand and supply. 

Approach 8.2: Use structures to increase environmental control for plant crops. 

Approach 8.3: Improve or develop structures to reduce animal heat stress. 

Approach 8.4: Match infrastructure and equipment to new and expected conditions. 

20 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Strategy 1: 

Sustain fundamental functions of soil 

and water. 

Climate has the potential to disrupt critical functions of 

soil and water, and many management actions will be 

needed to work both directly and indirectly to maintain 

the integrity of agricultural systems in the face of climate 

change. Many existing guidelines and conservation 

practices describe actions to reduce impacts to soil and 

water; many of these actions are also likely to be beneficial 

in the context of adaptation, either in their current form 

or with modifications to address potential climate change 

impacts. 

Approach 1.1: Maintain and improve soil health. 

Healthy soils are necessary to ensure the productivity and 

profitability of diverse agricultural enterprises. Healthy 

soils provide for many functions (Freidman et al. 2001) 

and ecosystem services (Palm et al. 2014), including: 

sustaining biological activity and diversity, regulation of 

water quality and quantity, provision of nutrients, and 

carbon sequestration. These functions and services depend 

on the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics 

or properties of the soil, some of which are dynamic 

and easily altered, while others are inherent and more 

resistant to change. Climate change creates multiple direct 

and indirect threats on soil health, which in turn creates 

challenges for agricultural productivity. Practices that 

improve soil health help to buffer many of these impacts. 

For example, crop residues and soil organic matter can help 

protect against both dry and wet precipitation extremes; 

increased organic matter can improve water infiltration and 

reduce nutrient losses during extreme precipitation events 

as well as retain moisture in the soil during dry conditions 

(Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 

2007; Anwar et al. 2013). Altering the land use production 

system or infrastructure may also maintain and improve 

either dynamic or inherent soil properties. Approaches 

for Strategy 7 (Alter agriculture systems or lands) and 

Strategy 8 (Alter infrastructure to match new and expected 

conditions) provide examples of these types of adaptation 

tactics. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For all farming activities at risk of causing soil 

disturbance, usually typical of annual field, forage, 

vegetable, and small fruit production, as well as during 

establishment of pastures, orchards, vineyards, or 

plantations: 

•	Minimize soil disturbance by avoiding or 

reducing tillage for planting, weed control, or 

other purposes 

•	Provide nearly year-round ground cover of 

residue or plants to reduce soil exposure to 

erosive forces of water and wind (Derner et al. 

2015) 

•	Increase soil organic matter to improve soil 

water-holding capacity, soil structure, and water 

infiltration, and to reduce erosion (use cover 

crops and mixes, crop or livestock residues, 

compost, mulch, biochar, or other organic 

amendments) (Shea 2014) 

•	Diversify crop rotations to include plant species 

of different functional groups for improving 

below-ground conditions for soil life and 

address threats from disease, weed, and insect 

pests. 

•	Shift planting dates to avoid field operations 

during wet conditions (Wolfe et al. 2011) 

•	Control vehicle traffic to minimize soil 

compaction by equipment 

•	Integrate grazing to further improve soil biology 

•	Consider windbreaks where soil erosion by wind 

is a concern 

•	Consider land leveling or subsurface drainage 

under the Approaches listed for Strategy 8: 

Alter infrastructure if altering inherent soil 

properties like soil surface topography and 

drainage are feasible. 

Additional example tactics for established pastures or 

other perennial crop land use systems: 

•	Manage grazing rest periods, stocking densities, 

and rotational intensity 

•	Manage rates and timing of harvesting hay, 

biomass, or other similar herbaceous perennial 

crops 

Approach 1.2: Protect water quality. 

Fresh clean water is vital to all living things. Because 

agricultural practices can affect aquifers and water 

sources, on-farm as well as downstream from the farm, it 

is important that practices protect water quality through 

the entire cycle. Anticipated alterations of the water cycle 

due to climate change will have wide-ranging effects on 

agricultural production, depending on the farm location, 

the type of agricultural system, and the type of change. 

For example, increases in precipitation during some times 

of the year could increase runoff of fertilizers or effluents, 

increasing issues with excess nitrogen or other nutrients 

in downstream water bodies. This approach focuses on 

additional agricultural practices needed in the field beyond 

those listed in Approach 1.1 (Maintain and improve soil 

health). Strategy 4 (Reduce the risk and long-term impacts 

of extreme weather) suggests responses specifically for 

extreme precipitation events. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 21 
Example Adaptation Tactics 

For all cropping activities at risk of causing water 

pollution, usually typical of nutrient and pesticide 

applications in annual and perennial field and forage 

crop, vegetable, tree, berry, and vine fruit production: 

•	Reassess nutrient applications and ensure 

that use of organic materials, fertilizers, 

amendments, and all sources of nutrients 

is matched to changing climate conditions 

(Howden et al. 2007) 

•	Reassess pesticide risk and ensure that all 

pesticide applications consider changing climate 

conditions (Donald et al. 2005) 

•	Manage water to prevent ponding, running, 

erosion, and nutrient leaching where rainfall 

increases (Howden et al. 2007). Typical water 

management practices include diversions, 

terraces, waterways, grade stabilization 

structures, etc. 

Confined animal agriculture, greenhouse, nursery, and 

mushroom production: 

•	Divert clean water from areas at risk for 

contamination 

•	Minimize the effects of agricultural waste on 

surface and ground water resources 

Approach 1.3: Match management practices to water 

supply and demand. 

The agriculture sector uses a substantial amount of 

ground and surface water resources in the United States. 

Agriculture also sometimes competes for the same water 

resources as urban and industrial demands, and climate 

change has the potential to alter both water availability 

and demand (Elliott et al. 2014; Taylor et al. 2013). Warmer 

temperatures increase water loss through evaporation 

and plant transpiration such that more water is generally 

needed to maintain productivity under warmed conditions. 

Further, altered precipitation patterns have the potential to 

increase water demand where the amount of precipitation 

decreases or where precipitation is concentrated into 

fewer, more intense events. On-farm water stewardship 

can extend the availability of water under changed climate 

conditions. (Ames and Dufour 2014 ). To be effective, this 

approach must build upon the practices used in the field 

to improve the water infiltration function of the soil as 

listed in Approach 1.1 (Maintain and improve soil health.). 

This approach emphasizes practices and technologies for 

on-farm water management to improve the efficiency of 

water use in order to sustain water supplies over the long 

term. More substantial changes may require investments 

in new infrastructure, which are described in Strategy 8 

(Alter infrastructure to accommodate new and expected 

conditions). 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For all cropping activities using substantial water 

quantities, typical of irrigated cropping systems: 

•	Where soils have adequate infiltration rates 

and evaporation rates are minimized, increase 

irrigation capacity, particularly for high-value 

crops (Wolfe et al. 2011) 

•	Improve irrigation efficiency for water 

conveyance and application with latest 

technology such as micro or drip irrigation 

(Ames and Dufour 2014, Derner et al. 2015) 

•	 “Water-bank” by using less irrigation in nondrought years, saving water for use in drought 

years, and creating markets to lease conserved 

water to municipalities to balance agricultural 

and municipal water needs. (Derner et al. 2015, 

Schwabe and Connor 2012) 

•	Increase planting density with irrigation and 

improved soil fertility management (Blanc and 

Reilly 2015) 

•	Wider use of technologies to ‘‘harvest’’ water, 

conserve soil moisture (e.g., crop residue 

retention), and use and transport water more 

effectively where rainfall decreases (Howden et 

al. 2007) 

•	Use new technology for subsurface irrigation, 

and irrigate with gray or reclaimed water to 

reduce water use. (Derner et al. 2015) 

Strategy 2: 

Reduce existing stressors of crops 

and livestock. 

Climate change is likely to increase stress on agricultural 

systems through a variety of direct and indirect effects 

(Walthall et al. 2012). Changes in temperature and other 

climatic conditions will have numerous impacts on 

agricultural systems (Pryor et al. 2014; Horton et al. 2014). 

Systems may already be performing poorly because 

of stressors like insect pests, pathogens, or competing 

species, which can make agricultural commodities more 

susceptible to impacts from climate change. Reducing 

stressors of agricultural commodities that are presently 

unaffected or indirectly affected by climatic stressors will 

often increase the ability of the system to cope with future 

changes in climate. 

Approach 2.1: Reduce the impacts of insect pests and 

pathogens on crops. 

Even modest changes in climate may cause substantial 

increases in the distribution and abundance of many insect 

pests and pathogens (Hatfield et al. 2015; Tobin et al. 2015), 

potentially leading to reduced productivity or increased 

22 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

plant stress and mortality. Climate change impacts 

may exacerbate other stressors, site conditions, and 

interactions among these factors and increase vulnerability 

to these agents. This approach emphasizes actions to be 

taken on site within the field, while Strategy 5 (Manage 

farms and fields as part of a larger landscape) suggests 

complementary tactics needed across the landscape. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For all cropping activities at risk to adverse impacts from 

insect pests and pathogens: 

•	Increased scouting for pests and pathogens 

(Schmidt et al. 2014) 

•	Enhanced use of integrated pest management 

(IPM) (Wolfe et al. 2011, Tobin et al. 2015) 

•	Improved rapid response plans and regional 

monitoring efforts to allow for targeted control 

of new pests before they become established 

(Wolfe et al. 2011) 

•	Use of varieties and species resistant to pests 

and diseases (Howden et al. 2007) 

•	Altering crop rotations (Shea 2014; Schmidt et 

al. 2014) 

•	Longer cropping systems (greater diversity and 

longer rotations) 

Approach 2.2: Reduce competition from weedy and 

invasive species. 

Climate change is expected to increase the potential 

habitat for many weedy and invasive plant species 

(Hatfield et al. 2015; Tobin et al. 2015), which may increase 

competition among plants for light, water, and nutrients. 

Although plant productivity may increase because of the 

positive effects of carbon dioxide fertilization and longer 

growing seasons, not all species will be able to take equal 

advantage of these positive impacts (Rosenzweig et al. 

2014; Ziska et al. 2012), and the competitive relationships 

between weeds and crops may change with some weeds 

gaining an advantage (Ziska and Bunce 1997; Valerio et al. 

2013). Reducing competition for resources can enhance 

the persistence of desired species and increase the ability 

of systems to cope with the direct and indirect effects of 

climate change. Management of highly mobile invasive 

species may require increased scouting and coordination 

across property boundaries, and it will likely require an 

increasing budget for control efforts. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For all crop production activities (field, forage, small 

fruit and vegetables, orchards, etc.) at risk for increased 

competition from weeds and invasive species: 

•	Increased scouting for weedy species 

•	Increased use of integrated pest management 

(IPM) strategies (prevention, avoidance, 

monitoring, and suppression) to prevent 

economic crop damage from weeds, minimize 

resistance in weeds, and prevent or mitigate 

unnecessary risks to natural resources and 

humans 

•	Eradication of noxious weeds 

•	Control or eradication of other invasive plant 

species adversely impacting desired plant 

community 

Approach 2.3: Maintain livestock health and performance. 

Climate change is expected to affect livestock production 

by increasing animal stress from diverse changes that 

include higher temperatures, changes in forage quality and 

quantity, and increases in pest and pathogen incidence 

(Walthall et al. 2012). This approach works to reduce the 

risks associated with livestock production systems by 

maintaining animal performance levels and reducing the 

negative impacts of environmental changes that increase 

animal vulnerability. The risks to livestock systems increase 

when performance levels drop, for any reason, making 

them more vulnerable to other changes in environmental 

parameters (Hahn et al. 2005). Maintaining adequate 

livestock health and performance prepares animals to cope 

better with changing and extreme conditions. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For animal production activities (dairy, beef, poultry, 

swine, other) vulnerable to normal environmental 

parameters and as applicable to the species: 

•	Maintain adequate nutrition and access to 

adequate exercise, clean housing, water, and 

feed supplies. 

•	Prevent infectious disease and control parasites 

by preventing contact with wildlife. 

•	Follow recommended veterinary practices and 

biosecurity procedures. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 23 
Strategy 3: 

Reduce risks from warmer and drier 

conditions. 

Many of the key climate variables affecting agricultural 

productivity are directly tied to increases in temperature 

(Hatfield et al. 2014). A longer growing season, warmer 

daytime and nighttime temperatures, and drier conditions 

are all expected to have important effects on agricultural 

crops and livestock, and in many areas of the Midwest, 

effects are already being observed (Hatfield et al. 2014). 

Increasingly, producers will need to consider and address 

the unique effects of higher temperatures on individual 

commodities. In some locations, drier conditions will have 

greater impacts. 

Approach 3.1: Adjust the timing or location of on-farm 

activities. 

As the climate changes, consider adjusting farm practices 

to take into account altered seasonality. Producers have 

always made adjustments to cope with variable weather 

conditions by changing the timing or field operations 

(Hatfield et al. 2014), and many of these types of changes 

are already occurring autonomously as conditions change 

and without specific consideration of longer term climate 

trends (Smit and Skinner 2002). In fact, evidence suggests 

that decisions about the timing of many agricultural 

practices are more likely to be based upon recent years’ 

weather than the longer term trend for a particular place 

(Smit et al. 1996). This approach emphasizes alterations in 

the timing and location of on-farm activities that take into 

account long-term trends and projections in climate, as 

well as inter-annual variation of weather. Although broader 

scale changes in location and timing will also be needed, 

such as northward shifts of crops to new landscapes 

(Ainsworth and Ort 2010), these are beyond the scope of 

this approach. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Field and forage crops and vegetables, nursery, tree, 

berry and vine fruit production as applicable: 

•	Adjust timing of planting, such as earlier 

planting dates to take account of longer 

growing season (Anwar et al. 2013, 

Wolfe et al. 2011, Tobin et al. 2015, European 

Commission 2009) 

•	Adjust timing or sequencing of cropping 

operations, such as altering amount of timing of 

irrigation or fertilizer application 

(Howden et al. 2007) 

•	Match crops to local conditions, such as on 

slope, aspect, or microsite (Ames and 

Dufour 2014) 

•	Plant two successive crops to take advantage of 

a single growing season (double-cropping) and 

increase annual production 

•	Adjust synchronization of crop nitrogen (N) 

needs and application for improved nitrogen use 

efficiency (Kanter et al. 2015) 

Animal agriculture: 

•	Adjust the timing of grazing and pasture use to 

forage availability for livestock (Howden et al. 

2007, Derner et al. 2015) 

•	Alter the timing of animal reproduction to match 

suitable temperatures and feed availability 

(Howden et al. 2007, Derner et al. 2015) 

Vegetables, nursery crops, tree, berry, and vine fruits: 

•	Implement techniques to prevent frosting, 

recognizing that cold temperatures and 

extremes will still occur (Tobin et al. 2015) 

Approach 3.2: Manage crops to cope with warmer and 

drier conditions. 

Since the Midwest and Northeast regions of the United 

States can expect to see warmer temperatures and 

seasonal changes in precipitation, it is reasonable to expect 

that soil moisture regimes will also shift. Although there 

is substantial variation among model projections, longer 

growing seasons and warmer temperatures are generally 

expected to result in greater evapotranspiration losses and 

lower soil-water availability later in the growing season 

(Hayhoe et al. 2007; Gutowski et al. 2008; Kunkel et al. 

2013b; Kunkel et al. 2013a). Further, increases in extreme 

rain events suggest that greater amounts of precipitation 

may occur during fewer precipitation events, resulting 

in longer periods between rainfall (Karl et al. 2008). 

The effects of warmer temperatures on photosynthesis 

is one of the biggest determinants of crop yields, and 

temperatures only slightly above optimum can cause mild 

heat stress and begin to inhibit photosynthesis (Ainsworth 

and Ort 2010). This approach emphasizes the management 

of existing crops while Strategy 6 (Alter management to 

accommodate new and expected conditions) presents 

example actions to diversify crops or switch to new crops. 

The effectiveness of actions under this approach are highly 

interrelated and dependent on adequately functioning soil 

and water crop resources addressed by actions in Strategy 

1 (Sustain fundamental functions of soil and water). 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For cropping activities : 

•	Select longer growing-season, heat-resistant, or 

drought-resistant varieties of crops 

(Wolfe et al. 2011) 

•	Adjust timing of planting, such as earlier 

planting dates, to avoid heat stress during 

critical periods of plant development (Anwar et 

al. 2013, Wolfe et al. 2015) 

•	Alter plant population density to reduce crop 

demands for water or nutrients 

24 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

 

•	Increase the efficiency of irrigation systems 

and water transportation (Derner et al, 2015, 

Howden et al. 2007) 

•	Increase soil cover (mulch, cover crop) 

to conserve soil moisture and reduce soil 

temperatures (Ames and Dufour 2014, Howden 

et al. 2007) 

•	Improve use of seasonal and short-term weather 

forecasts (World Meteorological Organization 

(WMO) and Global Water Partnership (GWP) 

2014) 

Approach 3.3: Manage livestock to cope with warmer and 

drier conditions. 

As with crops, altered climate conditions will affect 

livestock production. Climate can affect animal agriculture 

through changes in feed grain production, pasture and 

forage crop production, animal productivity, and disease 

and pest issues (Hatfield et al. 2014). In particular, livestock 

respond to changes in temperature by altering their core 

body temperature, metabolic rates, or behavior, all of which 

can lead to increased stress and disrupt their growth, 

production, or reproduction. (Hatfield et al. 2014). This 

approach emphasizes actions that manage the current 

livestock systems. Strategy 6 (Alter management to 

accommodate new and expected conditions) describes 

actions to transition to new breeds or systems while 

Strategy 8 (Alter infrastructure to accommodate new and 

expected conditions) describes the use of infrastructure 

such as fans or misters to cool animals. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For animal agriculture: 

•	Provide partial to total shelter to reduce heat 

stress associated with extreme heat. (Derner et 

al. 2015) 

•	Increase available shade for pastured animals 

(25x’25 Alliance Adaptation Work Group 2013) 

•	Alter grazing management practices or 

rotations to match stock rates to forage 

production, such as by moving cattle to fresh 

pasture at night (Derner et al. 2015, Tobin et al. 

2015, Howden et al. 2007) 

•	Use grass or fodder banks (resting of pastures 

for >1 year) to provide forage during dry periods 

(Derner et al. 2015, Anwar et al. 2012) 

•	Alter the timing or placement of feeder animals 

and subsequent finishing time of these animals 

to reduce stress associated with heat waves 

(Derner et al. 2015) 

•	Alter livestock stocking rates (Anwar et al. 2012) 

•	Select more heat-tolerant breeds (25x’25 

Alliance Adaptation Work Group 2013) 

•	Increase herd disease surveillance in livestock 

(25x’25 Alliance Adaptation Work Group 2013) 

•	Make additional fresh, clean water available 

(25x’25 Alliance Adaptation Work Group 2013) 

•	Alter animal diets, such as by switching rations 

from forage to other feed, use of supplementary 

feeds and concentrates, or feed conservation 

(25x’25 Alliance Adaptation Work Group 2013, 

Anwar et al. 2013, Howden et al. 2007) 

•	Monitor animal temperatures to provide early 

warning of stress 

Strategy 4: 

Reduce the risk and long-term impacts of 

extreme weather. 

Climate change increases overall climate variability 

(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2012; 

Kunkel et al. 2012; Peterson et al. 2013). In addition, climate 

change is expected to increase the likelihood of extreme 

weather including extreme precipitation and storms, which 

will increasingly challenge agricultural activity (Walthall 

et al. 2012). Further, extreme cold, snow, and other winter 

conditions will continue to persist—or even increase, 

such as with mid-latitude snow in some areas—for many 

decades into the future. Even as trends continue to emerge, 

responses will need to adjust appropriately to the changes 

in extreme weather. Adaptation actions that improve the 

capacity to adapt to enhanced weather variability, and 

extreme events in particular, will generally improve overall 

climate change preparedness (Bradshaw et al. 2004). 

Approach 4.1: Reduce peak flow, runoff velocity, and soil 

erosion. 

The number of weather- or climate-related disasters 

costing more than $1 billion is increasing nationwide, and 

many of these disasters involve extreme precipitation 

or resulting floods. An increase of extreme precipitation 

events increases risk of damage to soils, crops, and 

infrastructure. Increases in runoff flow volume and velocity 

following severe precipitation events can lead to an 

increase in soil erosion, although the risk of soil erosion, 

nutrient runoff and other impacts on a specific site 

ultimately depend on local soil and landscape conditions. 

To reduce impacts of extreme precipitation events on soil 

and water resources, take actions to reduce their flashiness 

and slow the flow of water across the landscape. This 

approach builds on actions developed under Strategy 1 

(Sustain fundamental functions of soil and water) in order 

to maintain and improve soil health and protect water 

quality in response to higher peak flows, runoff velocities, 

and soil erosion resulting from increasingly severe storm 

events. If the cost of these enhancements or risks of failure 

become prohibitive, actions to alter management, systems, 

or infrastructure (Strategies 6, 7, and 8) may also be 

suitable. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 25 
 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

For annual cropping activities: 

•	Diversify existing annual cropping systems with 

new combinations of annual crop species or 

varieties more resistant to higher peak flows, 

runoff velocities, and erosion. 

•	Convert in-field areas at high risk of flow erosion 

and pollution transport to perennial crops 

(grass, shrub, or tree crops); pasture/grazing 

lands, forest cover, or conservation buffers 

suitable to conveying water. 

Animal agriculture and associated agriculture lands: 

•	Diversify existing forage crops with new 

combinations of forage species or varieties 

more resistant to higher peak flows, runoff 

velocities, and erosion. 

•	Use wetlands, buffer strips, swales, and other 

landscape features to buffer against hydrologic 

variability and increase infiltration after extreme 

precipitation events (Ames and Dufour 2014; 

25x’25 Alliance Adaptation Work Group 2013). 

•	Maintain or improve infrastructure (water 

conveyances, lanes, roads, culverts, ponds, 

waste storage facilities, rooves and covers, 

roof runoff structures, heavy use areas, etc.) 

to accommodate more intense precipitation 

events. 

Approach 4.2: Reduce severity or extent of watersaturated soil and flood damage. 

More extreme precipitation events also increase the 

frequency for flooding or standing water in low-lying and 

susceptible areas (Walsh et al. 2014). Extended periods of 

excess water during the growing period can lead to yield 

declines or crop losses. Wet soils can also hinder field 

operations and animal agriculture activities like grazing 

or exercise. This approach builds on actions developed 

in Strategy 1 (Sustain fundamental functions of soil and 

water) in order to maintain and improve the soil’s function 

to infiltrate water and protect water quality in response 

to higher peak flows, runoff velocities, and soil erosion 

resulting from increasingly severe storm events. If the 

cost of these enhancements or risks of failure become 

prohibitive, actions to alter management, systems, or 

infrastructure (Strategies 6, 7, and 8) may also be suitable. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Cropping and animal agriculture activities: 

•	Shift production zones away from flood-prone 

areas (Tobin et al. 2015) 

•	Shift to more flood-tolerant varieties or crops 

(Wolfe et al. 2011) 

•	Use new field drainage practices to reduce 

excess seasonal soil water conditions, such as 

tile drainage or flashboard risers, to adjust water 

drainage outlets (Derner et al. 2015, Wolfe et al. 

2011, 25 by ’25 Alliance, Morton et al. 2015) 

Approach 4.3: Reduce severity or extent of wind damage 

to soils and crops. 

While wind events and the ensuing effects on agricultural 

crops and systems may become more frequent and 

severe under climate change, there are many challenges in 

predicting the size, frequency, and intensity of these events 

(Kunkel et al. 2012; Peterson et al. 2013). Some lands may 

be particularly susceptible to projected increases in storm 

intensity. Conservation techniques exist to reduce the 

exposure of sensitive crops to wind. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Cropping activities: 

•	Maintain crop residues to reduce exposure of 

young sensitive crops to damaging winds 

•	Cover the soil with crop residues or cover crops 

to protect it from erosive winds 

•	Install windbreaks, hedgerows, or vegetative 

wind barriers to reduce wind exposure for 

sensitive crops 

Strategy 5: 

Manage farms and fields as part of a 

larger landscape. 

Individual farms, fields pastures, and grazing lands are part 

of a larger, landscape-level agroecosystem that provides 

critical ecosystem services and non-commodity goods 

in addition to agricultural products (McGranahan 2014). 

Because of the global nature of climate change, impacts 

will be observed across landscapes and regions. Actions to 

increase landscape diversity and connectivity can increase 

the ability of systems to adapt to changing environmental 

conditions and stresses (Food and Agriculture Organization 

of the United Nations 2007; Liebman and Schulte 

2015; McGranahan 2014). While the ability of individual 

producers to affect landscape-level change will vary widely, 

the integration of landscape considerations into farm 

management may help to increase adaptive capacity of the 

agriculture sector in the long term. 

26 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

 

Approach 5.1: Maintain or restore natural ecosystems. 

In the context of climate change, actions to maintain 

and restore natural ecosystems can help to protect key 

ecosystem features on the landscape, fostering a diversity 

of species and ecological functions (Stein et al. 2014). While 

land that is maintained in natural systems is not available 

for farm production, there is evidence that the integration 

of natural ecosystems with agricultural production lands 

can have notable benefits to soil and water quality without 

substantially reducing agricultural production (Schulte 

Moore 2014). Farm operations often include incidental 

areas, such as idle center pivot corners, odd areas, ditches 

and watercourses, riparian areas, field edges, seasonal 

and permanent wetlands, and other similar areas not 

purposefully managed for food, forage, or fiber production. 

These incidental areas are typically near to and associated 

with agriculture production or conservation lands. They 

may be functional natural ecosystems, but more typically 

are degraded and have substantial opportunity to diversify 

and improve ecosystem services. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Nearby non-agricultural lands: 

•	Maintain or restore riparian areas, wetlands, 

bottomlands, and floodplains 

•	Maintain and enhance species and structural 

diversity by promoting diverse vegetation types 

and retaining natural ecosystems and biological 

legacies (Swanston and Janowiak 2012) 

•	Restore or maintain fire in fire-adapted 

ecosystems. (Swanston and Janowiak 2012) 

Approach 5.2: Promote biological diversity across the 

landscape. 

A diversity of species and structures across a landscape 

may help to reduce the susceptibility of its individual 

components to climate change, as well as other changing 

environmental conditions and stressors (Peterson et al. 

1998; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United 

Nations 2007; Liebman and Schulte 2015; McGranahan 

2014). Although many agricultural systems are inherently 

low in diversity to maximize production, risk can be 

reduced by fostering diversity across landscapes (Liebman 

and Schulte 2015; Schulte Moore 2014). At a landscape 

level, natural ecosystems and naturalized settings (e.g., field 

borders, native plantings, etc.) can increase environmental 

services such as water quality, wildlife abundance, 

pollinator habitat, and carbon sequestration (Liebman 

and Schulte 2015). Trade-offs to consider include good 

agricultural practices (GAP) required to prevent bird and 

similar wildlife disease vectors and as required for food 

safety inspections. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Nearby non-agricultural lands: 

•	Increase managed habitats across a range of 

landscapes (Swanston and Janowiak 2012b, 

Stein et al. 2014) 

•	Protect at-risk species and habitats (Swanston 

and Janowiak 2012b, Stein et al. 2014) 

•	Maintain or create refugia (Swanston and 

Janowiak 2012b, Stein et al. 2014) 

•	Create habitat for pollinators or other beneficial 

organisms 

Approach 5.3: Enhance landscape connectivity. 

Connections across natural ecosystems also enable 

large-scale adaptation by creating a mosaic of habitats 

to support natural and facilitated migrations of plants, 

animals, and other organisms across the landscape (Stein 

et al. 2014). While species migration is a critical factor 

in the maintenance of natural ecosystem function in a 

changing climate, the fragmentation of landscapes and loss 

of habitat may restrict species movements and gene flow 

(Davis and Shaw 2001; Iverson et al. 2004a). Many species 

are not expected to be able to migrate at a rate sufficient 

to keep up with climate change and associated range shifts 

(Davis and Shaw 2001; Iverson et al. 2004a). Increasing 

landscape connectivity may help species to migrate 

without additional assistance by allowing for easier species 

movement, reducing lags in migration, and enhancing the 

flow of genetic material (Heller and Zavaleta 2009; Stein et 

al. 2014). 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Nearby non-agricultural lands: 

•	Use landscape-scale planning and partnerships 

to reduce fragmentation and enhance 

connectivity (Swanston and Janowiak 2012b) 

•	Maintain and create naturalized habitat corridors 

Strategy 6: 

Alter management to accommodate 

expected future conditions. 

As climate change impacts and risks increase, there will 

be a greater need to move from short-term, reactive 

adjustments toward more intentional, planned adaptation 

responses that are likely to create significant shifts in 

management (Smit and Skinner 2002). While adaptation 

actions vary widely in intent, timing, and scale, this strategy 

emphasizes a clear shift toward more substantial changes 

that ultimately transform the activities for a particular farm 

or producer. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 27 
Approach 6.1: Diversify crop or livestock species, varieties 

or breeds, or products. 

Farm-level diversification can reduce the risk of climate 

change impacts on a farm, thereby lowering the economic 

risks associated with lower yields or market fluctuations 

(Bradshaw et al. 2004; Ames and Dufour 2014). At 

the same time, there can be costs to diversification, 

especially in the near term, due to the start-up costs and 

learning needed to initiate a new crop, as well as reduced 

economies of scale (Bradshaw et al. 2004). This approach 

may be used by diversifying commodities that are 

currently used within a current geographic area, or used in 

conjunction with the approaches below to diversify farms 

using plants and animals that are to be better adapted to 

future conditions. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

All agriculture as applicable: 

•	Add additional farming activities or new 

commodities to diversify farm products and 

revenue 

•	Increase the representation of varieties, breeds, 

genetic sources, or species among commodities 

(Derner et al 2015) 

•	Diversity animal products or ages, such as 

including both cow-calves and yearlings (Derner 

et al 2015) 

•	Diversify varieties or breeds for different 

tolerances of cold hardiness, drought and heat 

tolerance, or other attributes (Ames and Dufour 

2014, Anwar et al. 2015) 

Approach 6.2: Diversify existing systems with new 

combinations of varieties or breeds. 

Along with diversification of crop varieties and livestock 

breeds themselves (see previous approach), it may also be 

useful to diversify systems to include new combinations 

of varieties or breeds. For example, a pasture system that 

includes a combination of both currently common and 

potentially future-adapted varieties and breeds can reduce 

the risk associated with one variety or breed performing 

poorly and provide time to gain experience with using new, 

future-adapted varieties and breeds. At the same time, 

there is risk in anticipating which combinations may be 

future-adapted, as climate variability can have a greater 

impact on production than the long-term trend. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Field and forage crops: 

•	Plant multi-species cover crop mixtures 

including species currently adapted to warmer 

or drier climates 

•	Integrate livestock into cropping enterprises to 

utilize aftermath grazing on crop residues and 

cover crop grazing (Derner et al 2015) 

Animal agriculture: 

•	Integrate livestock into cropping enterprises 

to access additional forage, reduce feed costs, 

eliminate manure concentration areas, or 

improve overall farm efficiency 

•	Alter mix of grazing species (Anwar et al. 2012) 

•	Plant multi-species pasture mixtures including 

species currently adapted to warmer or drier 

climates 

Integrated agricultural systems: 

•	Diversify and expand farm production to include 

a greater number of annual crops, perennial 

fruits or nuts, timber or other forest products, 

livestock, or other commodities (may or may 

not include agroforestry approaches) 

•	Use excess heat from methane digestion to 

provide heat for other enterprises associated 

with the livestock operation such as greenhouse 

plants or aquaculture production (25 by ’25) 

Approach 6.3: Switch to commodities expected to be 

better suited to future conditions. 

As climate conditions change, it may become necessary 

to switch to new plants, animals, or systems in order to 

maintain a viable farm under new conditions. This is not a 

new idea, and agricultural producers have a long history 

of changing practices in response to changing markets, 

technologies, and environmental conditions (Olmstead 

and Rhode 2011; Walthall et al. 2012). The degree of 

anticipated climate change, however, may require greater 

investment and experimentation of new plants, animals, 

and other commodities and at a much larger scale, and 

farms may need to change to different systems altogether. 

For agricultural producers to successfully shift to new 

commodities and systems, it will also be important that 

accompanying advances in technologies (e.g., alternative 

crops/livestock, decision-support tools, etc.) and markets 

be made as well (Walthall et al. 2012). 

28 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Cropping systems: 

•	Use new cultivars and new species that seem 

to match a changing climate (Ames and Dufour 

2014) 

•	Shift to more water-efficient crops or cropping 

systems (Derner et al 2015)(Ames and Dufour 

2014) 

•	Preserve genetic resources by relocating atrisk varieties to locations that are expected to 

provide future habitat or reserving seed for 

future use 

•	Shift crops to types that can be grown in a 

controlled environment, using hoop and high 

tunnel houses or greenhouses 

Animal agriculture: 

•	Switch to alternative livestock breeds, class, 

or species, especially those with a higher heat, 

drought, and parasite tolerance (Derner et al 

2015) 

•	Preserve genetic resources by relocating at-risk 

breeds to locations that are expected to provide 

future habitat or reserving seed for future use 

Strategy 7: 

Alter agricultural systems or lands to new 

climate conditions. 

Beyond deliberate changes in farm commodities and 

practices, there may be a need for wholesale change 

within agricultural systems due to the degree of change 

observed in a particular place. While agriculture has 

been able to largely adapt to recent changes in climate, 

substantial pressures from climate change and associated 

socioeconomic changes will create substantial challenges 

in coming decades (Hatfield et al. 2014). This strategy 

touches on actions to respond to severely changed 

conditions in a way that anticipates continued change and 

uncertainty in the future. 

Approach 7.1: Minimize potential impacts following 

disturbance. 

Potential increases in the frequency, intensity, and extent 

of large and severe disturbances, such as extreme 

precipitation or storm events, may disrupt vegetation 

and result in the loss of plant cover, productivity, or 

function. Changing conditions are expected to increase 

the risk of crop losses and failures. Prompt remediation 

and revegetation of sites following disturbance helps to 

reduce soil loss and erosion, maintain water quality, and 

discourage weedy species in the newly exposed areas. 

Because many of the best opportunities for addressing 

disturbance-related impacts are likely to occur immediately 

after the disturbance event, having a suite of pre-planned 

options in place may facilitate an earlier and more 

flexible response. Where a particular event exceeds the 

resilience of a particular location or system and a return 

to previous conditions is no longer feasible, this approach 

complements Approach 7.2 (Realign severely altered 

systems toward future conditions) that follows. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Cropping systems: 

•	Seed short-term cover crops to protect and 

stabilize soils 

•	Remove or prevent establishment of invasive 

plants and other competitors following 

disturbance through the use of herbicides, 

tilling, or other control measures 

•	Convert severely impacted areas or areas at risk 

of repeat disturbances to plants that are less 

susceptible to disturbance, such as other crops, 

perennial forage, or native plantings. 

•	Reshape damaged areas prior to replanting
 

Associated agriculture lands:
 

•	Ensure that emergency response actions do 

not do more damage to resources than the 

emergency itself 

Approach 7.2: Realign severely altered systems toward 

future conditions. 

Agricultural lands may face significant impacts because 

of climate change-related disruptions, including drought, 

severe weather events, and invasive species (Hatfield 

et al. 2014; Walthall et al. 2012). Some systems may 

experience significant disruption and decline such that 

even intensive management may be insufficient to maintain 

desired conditions or achieve intended goals (Millar et 

al. 2007). This approach fundamentally allows producers 

to “reset” their management to select new commodities 

or production systems that are expected to be better 

matched to current and anticipated conditions. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

All agricultural systems: 

•	Convert affected areas to plants or animal 

commodities that are expected to be suitable to 

future conditions 

•	Shift agricultural production spatially, matching 

commodities to areas with better climate 

conditions or water availability 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 29 
 

Approach 7.3: Alter lands in agricultural production. 

Ultimately, lands may become more or less suitable for 

agricultural production in the future. Some lands may 

become unsuitable for agriculture, particularly in areas 

that become substantially hotter or drier, necessitating a 

change to other land uses (Rosenzweig et al. 2014). At the 

same time, warmer conditions may increase the viability of 

agricultural commodities in other areas, particularly farther 

north, and allow for expanded production (Rosenzweig 

et al. 2014). While many of these changes will occur at 

large spatial scales and be affected by national and global 

policies, individual producers and landowners will make the 

decisions about site-level production (Smit et al. 1999; Neil 

Adger et al. 2005). 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

All agricultural systems: 

•	Shift agricultural production spatially, matching 

commodities to areas with better climate 

conditions or water availability 

•	Convert agricultural lands to new commodities 

based upon altered climatic conditions, such as 

converting row crops to perennial forage where 

water availability decreases 

•	Remove lands from agricultural production 

•	Add lands to agricultural production, 

recognizing the potential of negative impacts on 

natural ecosystems or environmental benefits. 

Strategy 8: 

Alter infrastructure to match new and 

expected conditions. 

Altering infrastructure is a strategy that supports the entire 

menu of adaptation responses. Because infrastructure 

generally has a high cost and long life span relative to other 

farm practices and activities, there is a greater need to 

consider the long-term implications of these investments. 

Changes and upgrades in farm infrastructure represent a 

specific opportunity for agricultural producers to consider 

deliberately expected future climate conditions, risks, 

and opportunities that could affect farm productivity and 

sustainability. Changes in infrastructure can be used to 

resist the effects of climate change and maintain current 

practices in place for a longer period of time, such as 

through the use of increased irrigation to offset reductions 

in precipitation. On the other end of the spectrum, altering 

infrastructure may facilitate a transition to entirely new 

systems, such as through the purchase of new facilities or 

equipment necessary for the production of a new, futureadapted commodity. 

Approach 8.1: Expand or improve water systems to match 

water demand and supply. 

Increasing temperatures will likely increase water 

demand through enhanced evaporation from soils and 

transpiration from plants. Agriculture in the Midwest is 

likely to be affected where increased temperatures are 

not offset by a corresponding increase in precipitation, 

causing moisture stress, dry spells, and drought (Hatfield 

et al. 2014). In addition to practices to increase soil 

water retention and adjust plant crops or animal breeds 

to match drier conditions (described earlier), it may be 

necessary to expand infrastructure to increase the amount 

of water available to plants and animals. Because of the 

cost associated with many of these practices, efforts to 

increase the extent, capacity, or efficiency of water systems 

may be best suited to high-value or less water-intensive 

commodities (Wolfe et al. 2011; Blanc and Reilly 2015). 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Animal agriculture: 

•	Construct ponds and swales, dig wells, collect 

rainwater {Ames, 2014 #38}
 

Cropping systems:
 

•	Increase irrigation capacity or land under 

irrigation, particularly for high-value crops 

(Wolfe et al. 2011, Walthall et al, 2012, Blanc and 

Reilly 2015) 

•	Improve irrigation efficiency with latest 

technology such as micro or drip irrigation or 

using subsurface irrigation or irrigation with 

gray or reclaimed water (Ames and Dufour 2014, 

Derner et al. 2015) 

•	Expand water storage, irrigation, and drainage 

using deeper wells, cisterns, farm ponds, and 

more efficient irrigation (Ames and Dufour 2014, 

Tobin et al. 2015) 

•	Construct ponds and swales, dig wells, collect 

rainwater to maintain water on the landscape 

(Ames and Dufour 2014) 

•	Install or enhance drainage systems (Morton et 

al. 2015) 

•	Dig deeper wells and install more cisterns, 

farm ponds, and more efficient irrigation to 

accommodate hydrologic change (Ames and 

Dufour 2014) 

30 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Approach 8.2: Use structures to increase environmental 

control for crops. 

Excess precipitation, heat stress, and other changes in 

climate pose substantial challenges for crops. Previously, 

Approach 3.2 (Manage crops to cope with warmer and 

drier conditions) describes actions to manage current crop 

systems for reduced heat stress by modifying plant density, 

soil moisture availability, or plant genetics or variety. This 

approach focuses on changes to infrastructure that reduce 

the effects of altered climate on crops, including heat 

stress and extreme weather events. In some instances, 

technological solutions may help transition to a new, 

future-adapted commodity in anticipation of future climate 

changes; for example, hoop or high tunnel houses may 

create warmer conditions at northern sites for crops that 

currently grow in southern locations but which may grow 

locally without protection in the future. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Cropping systems: 

•	Move crops into a controlled environment, such 

as hoop and high tunnel houses or greenhouses 

(Tobin et al. 2015) 

•	Enhance energy efficiency in greenhouses to 

reduce heat loads and heat stress (Tobin et al. 

2015) 

•	Use technologies to protect orchards from frost, 

such as sprinklers, heaters, and wind machines, 

to allow for more cold-sensitive varieties to 

be grown 

Approach 8.3: Improve or develop structures to reduce 

animal heat stress. 

Heat stress poses substantial challenges for animal 

agriculture. Approach 3.3 (Manage livestock to cope 

with warmer and drier conditions) described earlier 

outlined actions to manage current livestock systems for 

reduced heat stress by modifying stocking density, forage 

availability and type, and animal genetics or breed. This 

approach focuses on changes to infrastructure that reduce 

heat stress on animals. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

Animal agriculture: 

•	Build new barns with adequate cooling capacity 

for future heat loads (Wolfe et al. 2015) 

•	Improve climate control in facilities using fans, 

misters, soakers, and other features (25 by ’25) 

•	Enhance energy efficiency in facilities using 

light-emitting diode (LED) lights and other 

features to reduce additional heat sources 

•	Design and implement new housing for animal 

agriculture with consideration for extreme 

weather events and future climate 

Approach 8.4: Match infrastructure and equipment to new 

and expected conditions. 

Beyond water conveyance structures, irrigation, and 

watering systems, alter other farm infrastructure to 

operate under new and expected conditions or to match 

other changes in management practices. Tactics under 

this approach may vary widely depending upon the farm 

operation, and could include adding new machinery to 

implement new practices or grow new commodities, or 

upgrading buildings and facilities to handle increased snow 

or wind loads. 

Example Adaptation Tactics 

All agricultural systems: 

•	Update farm machinery to match new and 

future farm practices and commodities 

•	Consider precision nutrient and pesticide 

application systems 

•	Upgrade to more energy efficient equipment or 

integrate on-farm renewable energy generation 

(e.g., manure and biomass conversion and 

combustion, wind, solar) enterprises 

•	Upgrade building facilities to handle expected 

increased snow or wind loads 

Conservation cover improves soil and water functioning 

in an orchard. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 31 
CHAPteR 4: 

Adaptation Workbook 

Climate change is becoming an increasingly important 

consideration in land management planning and 

decisionmaking at a variety of spatial scales. The 

Adaptation Workbook outlines a flexible five-step process 

to help agricultural producers, service providers, or 

educators consider the potential impacts of increasing 

climate variability and change and identify actions that 

facilitate adaptation to changing conditions (Box 4.1). 

The process of adapting to climate change begins with 

defining current goals and objectives for agricultural 

production, profitability, and natural resource stewardship 

in a particular location (Figure 4.1). The next step 

assesses potential climate change impacts to the region 

and incorporates them as an additional consideration 

“filter” through which to evaluate critically the goals and 

objectives. Once appropriate adaptation actions are 

identified, monitoring and evaluation is used to determine 

if expected outcomes are being achieved. This flexible 

process draws upon locally relevant information resources 

about anticipated climate change impacts, such as the 

national, regional, and State-level assessments as well as 

the Adaptation Strategies and Approaches described in 

Chapter 3. 

Figure 4.1. Use the process of adapting to climate change to incorporate considerations into long-range and annual operation plans. 

Climate change-related informational resources and tools support the adaptation decisionmaking process. Adapted from Janowiak 

et al. (2014). 

32 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Box 4.1: 

Using the Adaptation Workbook 

The Adaptation Workbook can help producers, service 

providers, and educators: 

•	 Incorporate climate change considerations into 

long-range and annual operations planning and 

decisionmaking based on experience and expertise. 

•	 Incorporate adaptation responses into revision or 

development of farm or project plans. 

•	 Discuss climate change-related topics with project 

stakeholders. 

•	 Continuously learn by doing and evaluating 

incremental changes that inform longer term 

strategies. 

•	 Document considerations, decisions, and outcomes 

regarding climate change adaptation. 

The Adaptation Workbook does not: 

•	 Make recommendations or set criteria for making 

decisions. 

•	 Provide specifications for implementing response 

actions. 

•	 Establish a plan for implementation of the selected 

actions and monitoring efforts. 

Getting Prepared: 

•	 Before you begin, it will be helpful to review 

information about your farm or project area such as 

business or project plans, conservation plans, maps, 

and production and land management records from 

the last 5 years. 

•	 It may take several hours to move through all the 

steps of the Adaptation Workbook, especially if 

you are just getting familiar with climate change 

information or if you have a complex operation. 

•	 Print the blank worksheets provided at the end of this 

workbook for use alongside step-by-step instructions. 

You may want to use this workbook in facilitated small 

group settings or with an advisor to help identify and 

access additional resources needed to complete the 

worksheets. 

Step-by-Step Instructions: 

•	 Follow the five steps in order, although you can 

always go back to add or clarify earlier responses. 

Review workbook items and key questions for each 

step and then fill out each item in the worksheet. 

Some steps have additional details. 

•	 Where applicable, see additional guidance under the 

heading Slow Down To Consider . . . . 

•	 When you have completed all the steps in the 

Adaptation Workbook, you will have a set of 

worksheets to combine with or add to your existing 

plans for the farm or project. 

•	 You can work toward implementing adjustments 

or transformations through time, either on your 

own or with your trusted financial, production, and 

conservation advisors and service providers. 

Vegetable grower getting help from a trusted advisor. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 33 
Step 1: 

DEFINE management goals and objectives. 

About This Step 

This step records fundamental information about the 

farm or project area. Because it serves as a starting 

point for the subsequent steps, it is very important to 

define clearly the current farm management goals and 

objectives. This information may already be available as 

part of management plan or other planning document. 

If you will be going through the workbook as part of a 

group, it may be most efficient for one or two people to 

compile information for this step in advance of any group 

discussions. 

Key Questions: 

•	 Where are you located? 

•	 What do you care about? 

Description of Workbook Items 

Farm or Project Area – Name of the farm or the project 

area. Projects can be individual farms and properties or a 

group of multiple lands in a geographical area such as a 

watershed, landscape feature, or community. 

Location – Describe the geographic location of the farm or 

project area (e.g., county, township, or watershed). 

Management Unit – List any management units (e.g., 

properties, fields, or groups of fields) that are relevant to 

your farm or project area. 

Management Goals – List the management goals for the 

farm or project area (Box 4.2). These may include short and 

long-term goals for products or services provided from the 

land, business profitability, and or stewardship of natural 

resources. 

Management Objectives – List any management objectives 

for the farm or project area (Box 4.2). These will explain 

how to achieve management goals. There may be multiple 

objectives for a single management goal. 

Timeframes – List approximate periods for achieving farm 

or project goals and objectives. As a default, identify the 

point in both the short term (within the next 5 years) and 

the long term (5 to 20 or more years) that you can use to 

consider and monitor how things may change over time. 

Climate variability and change are likely to adversely impact dairy livestock and crop production and may also provide opportunities. 

34 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Box 4.2: 

Goals and Objectives 

management Goals 

Management goals are broad, general statements, 

usually not quantifiable, that express a desired state or 

outcome to achieve. They are often not attainable in the 

short term and provide the context for more specific 

objectives. 

management Objectives 

Management objectives define specific, measurable, 

achievable, results-oriented, and time bound actions 

needed to achieve desired outcomes expressed by the 

broad management goals. Objectives commonly include 

information on resources or methods to use, and they 

form the basis for further planning to define the precise 

steps to take. 

Table 5.3—Examples of a management goal and its corresponding management objectives. 

Management Goal Management Objectives 

Maintain and improve farm production and 

revenue 

•	 Monitor herd health through annual veterinary check ups 

•	 Expand herd from 800 to 950 animals over next 5 years 

Protect water quality and quantity of water 

in local streams, groundwater sources, and 

other water bodies. 

•	 Reduce annual nitrogen load in runoff by 10 percent 

•	 Prevent annual soil erosion rates from exceeding tolerable loss on all cropland 

•	 Convert all highly erodible lands to perennial crops within 5 years 

•	 Improve water infiltration and soil moisture retention by increasing soil organic 

matter to 5 percent within 10 years. 

Mitigate greenhouse gases •	 Increase carbon sequestration in plants and soil organic matter by fertilizing 

perennial crops annually 

•	 Reduce annual nitrogen fertilizer use and associated nitrous oxide emissions by 

avoiding applications on wet soils and applying them as close to the period of crop 

uptake as possible 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 35 
Step 2: 

ASSESS site-specific climate change 

impacts and vulnerabilities. 

About This Step 

Climate change will have a wide variety of impacts, 

both potentially negative and positive, on agricultural 

production. For this reason, it is critical to not only think 

about the general (e.g., regional or statewide) effects 

and potential impacts of a changing climate, but also to 

consider how your farm and agricultural production system 

may be uniquely affected. 

Key Question: 

•	 How might the area be uniquely affected by 

climate change? 

In this step, you will consider broad-scale scientific 

information about the expected effects of climate change 

in your region using vulnerability assessments or other 

published sources. After identifying these relatively general 

impacts, you will use your expertise and experience to 

evaluate how your farm or project area may be affected 

by climate change. Because there is a great deal of 

variation among different locations, your understanding 

of specific local conditions will help you identify the more 

relevant response actions in later steps. Some of the 

things you will want to consider include soils, topography, 

past management, current infrastructure and equipment, 

current access to technology or markets, or other factors 

that increase or reduce the ability of the farm or project 

area to cope with change. Importantly, this step focuses on 

the effects of climate change on the farm or project area, 

while Step 3 considers how management objectives may 

be affected. 

Description of Workbook Items 

Management Unit – Insert the management unit that you 

identified in Step 1. 

Regional Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities– 

Begin by creating a list of relevant climate change impacts 

and vulnerabilities for the region or area that you are 

working in. You may also want to identify the source of 

this information. Some of it may be relevant to the entire 

project area, while other information may only apply to 

specific locations on the farm as identified in Step 1. 

Many resources on climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities exist, such as reports and peer-reviewed 

papers on climate change. Several regions and States have 

vulnerability assessments that provide this information for 

an entire area, as well as by sector. 

Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities for the Farm 

or Project area– As you consider the regional impacts and 

vulnerabilities (above), draw upon your experience and 

knowledge to define the specific ways that your farm or 

project area may be affected by a changing climate (Box 

4.3). For example, a field may have greater vulnerability 

to anticipated increases in the frequency and intensity of 

storm events because of steeper slopes or less vegetative 

cover. 

Box 4.3: 

Climate Change and Your Farm or Project Area 

Most of the available information on the potential effects 

of climate change has likely been developed for spatial 

scales that are larger than your farm or project area. It is 

important to consider not only this broad-scale information, but also how your particular location may be 

uniquely susceptible to these effects. Factors that may 

influence the risk to a specific location include: 

•	 Landscape pattern, such as topographic position,

slope, or aspect 

•	 Soil characteristics, including texture, nutrient levels,

and organic matter content 

•	 Management history

•	 Current management, land cover, or land use

•	 Presence of or susceptibility to pests, disease,

or nonnative species that may become more 

problematic under future climate conditions. 

36 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Step 3: 

EVALUATE management objectives given 

projected impacts and vulnerabilities. 

About This Step 

In earlier steps, you defined management goals and 

objectives for your farm or project area (Step 1) and 

considered climate change impacts and vulnerabilities 

for this area (Step 2). In this step, you will identify 

management challenges and opportunities associated 

with climate change. You will also evaluate the feasibility 

of meeting your management objectives under current 

management and consider altering or refining them to 

account better for changes in climate. 

Key Questions: 

•	 What management challenges or opportunities 

does climate change present? 

•	 Can current management goals and objectives be 

met? Or do they need to change? 

•	 What other considerations affect your decision? 

Note: It is inevitable that discussion will jump ahead at 

times to identifying approaches or developing tactics that 

can help agriculture cope with the anticipated impacts; 

rather than lose these ideas or skip critical steps in the 

process, be sure to record any ideas that will be useful in 

later steps. 

Description of Workbook Items 

Management Unit – Insert the management unit(s) that 

you identified in Step 1. 

Management Objectives – Insert the management 

objectives that you identified in Step 1. 

Challenges To Meeting Management Objective With 

Climate Change – List ways in which climate change 

impacts and associated site-specific vulnerabilities may 

make it more difficult to achieve each management 

objective. For example, warmer temperatures and drier 

conditions may limit the ability to bring a specific product 

to market economically. Focus on concerns related to onfarm challenges, since other considerations (e.g., insurance, 

government programs) will be included later in this step. 

Opportunities for Meeting Management Objective With 

Climate Change – List ways in which climate change 

impacts and associated vulnerabilities may make it easier 

to achieve each management objective or create new 

management opportunities. For example, longer growing 

seasons may increase the opportunity for more production. 

Focus on farm challenges, since other considerations (e.g., 

insurance, government programs) will be included later in 

this step. 

Feasibility of Meeting Management Objective, Under 

Current Management – Consider how the challenges and 

opportunities that you have identified may affect the 

feasibility of meeting objectives using actions within the 

current management trajectory (i.e., without intentional 

climate change adaptation). Feasibility can be determined 

for individual or multiple timeframes (e.g., short-term 

versus long-term). 

•	 High – Existing management options can be used to 

overcome the challenges for meeting management 

objectives under climate change. Opportunities likely 

outweigh challenges. 

•	 Moderate – Some challenges to meeting management 

objectives under climate change have been identified, 

but these can likely be overcome using existing 

management options. Additional resources or enhanced 

efforts may be necessary to counteract key challenges 

or promote new opportunities. 

•	 Low – Existing management options may not 

be sufficient to overcome challenges to meeting 

management objectives under climate change. 

Additional resources or enhanced efforts will be 

necessary to counteract key challenges or promote new 

opportunities. 

Other Considerations – List any other considerations that 

you may have, such as social, financial, administrative, or 

other factors that are part of your decision to pursue or 

change your management objectives but that may not be 

within the purview of farm-level decisionmaking. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 37 
Slow Down To Consider... 

Climate change may make some management goals and 

objectives more difficult to achieve in the future, and there 

may be situations in which they need to be altered or 

refined to better account for anticipated climate change 

impacts. After completing Step 3, you should have a much 

better idea about whether your management objectives are 

feasible, given the current management options that are 

available to you. You have also identified social, economic, 

or other considerations that may affect your decision to 

pursue certain management objectives. 

Are you going to continue with the management 

objectives you have identified? 

If you have high feasibility of meeting your management 

objectives and these objectives are still sound, given 

projected climate change impacts, you can proceed to Step 

4 to explore adaptation actions. 

If some or all of your management objectives have 

moderate or low feasibility, or if they no longer seem 

sensible under climate change (e.g., managing a crop that 

may not be viable in the long term), you may reconsider 

your management objectives or your broader management 

goals. You can record any potential issues or changes in 

the “Other Considerations” section of Step 3 or return to 

Step 1 to alter your management goals and objectives. Use 

the information that you have gathered up to this point to 

create goals and objectives that are more likely to succeed, 

given projected impacts from climate change. 

38 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Step 4: 

IDENTIFY adaptation approaches and 

tactics for implementation. 

About This Step 

In order to address the challenges or opportunities brought 

about by climate change, it may be necessary to adjust 

existing practices, try out completely new ones, or start a 

new system. The Adaptation Workbook helps you identify 

and evaluate specific actions that can help prepare for 

changing conditions given the challenges and opportunities 

that were identified in Step 3. In doing this you will 

generate a custom set of adaptation tactics—prescriptive 

actions specifically designed for your farm or project area 

and your unique management objectives. 

Key Question: 

•	 What actions can enhance the ability of your 


property or project area to adapt to anticipated 


changes and meet management goals?
 

The step also helps you create a clear rationale for 

your suggested tactics by connecting them to broader 

adaptation ideas. Chapter 3 of this publication contains 

a menu of Adaptation Strategies and Approaches (Box 

3.2) for agriculture. As you brainstorm and evaluate ideas 

for adaptation tactics, you will also link these specific 

ideas to the list of more general adaptation strategies and 

approaches. These links will provide important context and 

rationale to justify your adaptation tactics. If you need help 

brainstorming specific adaptation tactics, you can use the 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches as a springboard 

to develop specific tactics that can help achieve your 

management objectives. 

Description of Workbook Items 

Management Unit – Insert the management unit(s) that 

you identified in Step 1. 

Adaptation Actions 

•	 Adaptation Strategies and Approaches – Review the 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches (Chapter 3) and 

select any strategies and approaches that you think may 

be applicable. Also, include any additional approaches 

that you devise. 

•	 Adaptation Tactics – Describe specific actions that you 

can take on your farm or project area using your own or 

your advisor’s experience and expertise. 

Because adaptation strategies and approaches provide 

long-range context for specific tactics that will be 

implemented, we encourage you to identify both; however, 

you may find it easier to list tactics first and then go back 

to identify the corresponding strategies and approaches. 

This sequence is flexible. Start with Approaches or Tactics, but be 

sure to relate them to each other. 

Timeframe(s) – List the approximate timeframe(s) in which 

the new tactics would be implemented. The nature of the 

action can help determine an appropriate timeframe. Some 

actions may occur in the short term (i.e., next 5 years), 

while others may not occur for several decades or will 

occur only in certain situations (such as after a large storm 

event). 

Benefits – For each tactic, list any benefits associated with 

using this tactic. For example, note if a tactic addresses 

your biggest challenge, addresses multiple challenges, or 

has a side benefit, such as improving overall ecosystem 

health. 

Drawbacks and Barriers – For each tactic, list any 

drawbacks that may arise, such as negative ecosystem 

impacts, or any barriers to implementing the tactic, 

including legal, financial, infrastructural, social, or physical 

barriers. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 39 
Effectiveness and Feasibility of Tactic – An adaptation 

tactic is practicable if it is both effective (it will meet 

the desired intent) and feasible (it is capable of being 

implemented). Both of these characteristics increase the 

likelihood of success. Consider the benefits, drawbacks, and 

barriers associated with each tactic in order to determine 

the practicability of meeting your management goals and 

objectives using that tactic. 

•	 High – The tactic is expected to be both effective 

and feasible. Benefits of the tactic clearly outweigh 

drawbacks and barriers. 

•	 Moderate – There are drawbacks or barriers that 

could reduce the effectiveness or feasibility of the 

tactic. Some drawbacks or barriers may be able to be 

overcome through the use of other adaptation tactics or 

management actions. 

•	 Low – The tactic does not appear to be effective or 

feasible. The drawbacks and barriers are insurmountable 

or the benefits are too small relative to the required 

effort. The tactic may need adjustment to be made 

more effective or feasible. 

Recommend Tactic? – For service providers and educators, 

consider the timeframe, benefits, drawbacks, barriers, and 

practicability for each tactic and select the tactics that 

you recommend for consideration in future management 

decisions. Identify tactics that overcome or avoid 

challenges, have high practicability, or have major benefits. 

For each tactic, determine whether you would recommend 

it for consideration in future management decisions: 

•	 Yes – This tactic will likely be helpful in overcoming 

management challenges from climate change and 

meeting management objectives, and it should be 

considered in future management decisions. If needed, 

note any barriers that need to be overcome to use this 

tactic. 

•	 No – This tactic is not helpful, and it is not 

recommended for current consideration in future 

management activities. 

As you identify recommended tactics, consider how they 

work together as a set of actions. The goal is to identify 

a set of actions that are complementary and help to 

overcome the barriers identified in the previous step in 

order to achieve your management goals and objectives. 

40 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Step 5: 

MONITOR and evaluate effectiveness of 

implemented actions. 

About This Step 

Monitoring is critical for understanding what changes are 

occurring as a result of climate change as well as whether 

selected actions were effective in meeting management 

goals and adapting your farm to future conditions. 

This step helps to identify metrics that will be used to 

monitor whether management goals are achieved in 

the future and to determine whether the recommended 

management tactics were effective. The outcome of this 

step is a realistic and feasible monitoring scheme that can 

be used to help determine whether management should 

be altered in the future to account for new information and 

observations. 

Key Questions: 

•	 How will you know if the selected actions were 


effective?
 

•	 What can we learn from these actions to inform 

future management? 

Consider what existing monitoring information is available 

(such as farm records) and if it needs to be modified to 

better monitor the results of your adaptation actions. Also, 

consider what new monitoring items may be needed to 

evaluate whether you have met your management goals. 

Description of Workbook Items 

Management Unit– Insert the management unit(s) that you 

identified in Step 1. 

Adaptation Monitoring Variable – Identify monitoring 

items that will be used to evaluate whether you have 

achieved your management objectives and goals, or 

whether you have achieved a milestone that indicates that 

you are working toward your goal. When possible, select 

monitoring items that will also help you to understand 

whether the adaptation tactics recommended in the 

previous step were effective in working toward your 

management goals under climate change. 

Criteria for Evaluation – Identify a value or threshold that is 

meaningful for this monitoring item. 

Monitoring Implementation – Describe how and when this 

information will be gathered. 

Next Steps 

By using this Adaptation Workbook, you have considered 

the effects of climate change on your farm or project 

area. You have also identified management tactics and 

monitoring efforts to help you meet your management 

objectives under a changing climate. Now that you have 

completed this step toward improving the ability of your 

farm or project area to adapt to the anticipated effects of 

climate change, you can work to integrate the information 

from the workbook, especially Step 4 and Step 5, into 

existing management plans and decisionmaking processes. 

As you work toward this integration, it is important to keep 

in mind that the tactics you developed by completing 

the Adaptation Workbook have been recommended 

for further consideration (Step 4). Taking this step does 

not necessarily mean, however, that the tactics must be 

implemented or that the recommendations must supersede 

other considerations. The workbook is designed to lead you 

through a process for considering climate change, and it 

is up to you and your organization to determine the ways 

in which you will use the information and ideas you have 

developed. 

Finally, the workbook is designed as part of an adaptive 

management process, which, by definition, needs to 

be able to incorporate new information as it becomes 

available. When developing a plan to implement your 

adaptation tactics and then monitor the results, also 

make plans to revisit this workbook as often as necessary 

to evaluate whether any changes are needed to your 

management strategy. Consult with experts whenever 

possible to gather new information and further refine your 

management decisions. As new information becomes 

available through scientific research, monitoring activities, 

or other avenues, use that information to consider how it 

may change your expectations regarding future conditions 

and whether it is appropriate to adjust your management 

or monitoring to help the systems adapt to a changing 

climate. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 41 
CHAPteR 5: 

Adaptation Workbook examples 

The purpose of this publication is to assist agricultural 

producers with integrating climate change 

considerations into their plans and activities rather 

than providing specific recommendations. This chapter 

illustrates how the Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

(Chapter 3) and the Adaptation Workbook (Chapter 4) 

can be used together to translate broad-scale climate 

change information into specific actions to adapt to 

changing conditions while meeting goals for productivity, 

profitability, and stewardship. Examples of real-world farms 

in the Midwest and Northeast regions of the United States. 

describe some of the diverse ways in which producers 

adapt to climate change. 

Dryland Farming in Nebraska 

Step 1: 

Define management goals and objectives. 

The five-step adaptation workbook process (Chapter 4) 

was tested for an agricultural setting using a portion of 

a 160-acre farm outside the town of Lawrence, in southcentral Nebraska. The farm is owned by Mike Kucera, 

agronomist with the USDA Natural Resources Conservation 

Service. Kucera and representatives from USDA’s Northeast, 

Midwest, and Northern Forest Climate Hubs worked 

together to evaluate the process and consider how climate 

change might affect the activities occurring on the farm 

over the next several decades and beyond. 

Figure 5.1. Left: Location of the Kucera farm in Nuckolls County, Nebraska. Right: Aerial photo of the Kucera farm with outlined soil types. 

Images courtesy of Mike Kucera. 

42 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Mike Kucera has owned the farm for 25 years, 

implementing a wide variety of conservation activities. 

The overall goals for the Kucera Farm are to (1) maintain 

agricultural productivity, and (2) protect wildlife habitat 

(Table 5.1). The adaptation analysis focused on the 61 acres 

of cropland on the farm, which has been in continuous 

no-till (no cultivation) for the past 25 years. The farm uses 

dryland management techniques because the geology 

of the aquifer under the farm is unsuitable to irrigation 

Table 5.1. Farm management goals and objectives for the Kucera Farm. 

development, a common practice across other parts of 

Nebraska. The cropland is currently in continuous no-till 

with a crop rotation of corn, soybean, and wheat (1 year 

each). Some of the cropland is enrolled in the Conservation 

Reserve Program, which includes small areas of grassed 

waterways, quail buffers, and about 13 acres of restored 

prairie. Additionally, another family member utilizes 90 

acres of pasture for grazing 18 beef cow-calf pairs in a fourpasture rotational grazing system, for which the Adaptation 

Workbook was not used. 

Farm or Project Area: Kucera Farm 

Location: ~2.5 miles northeast of Lawrence, Nebraska 

Management Unit Management Goals Management Objectives Timeframes 

Entire 

Property 

Maintain productivity of agricultural 

systems (yields) 

Wildlife habitat (hunting, 

recreation) 

Maintain diverse land use including 

pasture, cropland, and Conservation 

Reserve Program 

Cropland Conserve soil moisture by reducing 

(61 ac) evaporation and increasing 

Continuous infiltration, especially from highno-till corn-soybean­ intensity rainfall events 

wheat (1/1/1) Improve soil health 

Includes CRP lands: 

grassed waterways, quail 

buffers, prairie restoration 

Maintain or even increase crop yields 

Utilize a residue and cropping 

management system that maximizes 

ground cover to reduce soil temperature 

during droughts 

Maintain high organic matter levels 

and soil life to protect and enhance soil 

structure for optimum water infiltration 

Maintain lands in CRP programs for 

conservation (if possible to reenroll) 

Transition to a wellfunctioning management 

system took 7 years 

(improved soil structure, 

aggregate stability, and 

infiltration); 

Future soil improvements 

will be gradual and may take 

10 years or more. 

Pasture 

(90 ac) 

Four-pasture rotation – 

beef cow/calf herd 

Maintain productivity of cows and 

calves 

Maintain and increase plant vigor of 

pasture grasses 

Maintain productive cow herd while 

maintaining good vegetation 

Reduce negative impacts to vegetation 

from hot/dry periods during the grazing 

Annually 

season 

Adjust the size of foraging herd to match 

vegetation conditions based on moisture 

availability 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 43 
Step 2: 

Assess site-specific climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities. 

Vulnerability assessments provide useful information 

about the anticipated effects of climate change for a 

region. A vulnerability assessment for Nebraska (Bathke 

et al. 2014) was used to identify potential climate change 

effects across the region (Table 5.2). This information was 

combined with knowledge of the local landscape, including 

actual impacts from extreme heat and precipitation in 

recent years, to identify attributes of the property that 

would make it more or less vulnerable to climate change 

than the region as a whole. 

Across the Northern Plains, climate change is expected 

to have substantial effects on agricultural production 

as a result of longer, hotter growing seasons, increased 

drought, and extreme weather events (Derner et al. 2015). 

Evidence of enhanced climate variability is already visible 

in increased extreme weather events that have been seen 

across the region, such as the extreme drought of 2012 

(Derner et al. 2015). 

The projected impacts across Nebraska and the Northern 

Plains were largely applicable to the Kucera Farm (Table 

5.2). At the same time, several factors associated with the 

local site conditions and past management history were 

identified that may reduce the vulnerability of the farm to 

climate change. Most notably, the practice of no-till farming 

and other conservation-oriented techniques to increase 

soil organic matter have greatly improved soil quality and 

made the site more resilient to hydrological extremes— 

both drought and extreme precipitation. Maintaining crop 

residues on the surface conserved moisture and reduced 

soil temperature during the severe drought of 2012 and 

during a dry spring and early summer in 2013. This system 

also paid dividends by reducing runoff, especially during 

an extreme 5-inch rain event in September 2012 and 4.5­

inch rainfall event in June 2015 (Figure 5.2). Maximizing the 

amount of infiltration from these extreme events is crucial 

to capture rainfall in order to maintain yields when soil 

moisture is lacking later in the growing season. While these 

rainfall events had extensive runoff losses in the area, the 

adverse impacts were less on the Kucera farm because of 

increased infiltration due to the use of a continuous no-till 

management system. 

Figure 5.2. Left: Corn planted into wheat stubble during the severe drought of 2012. Right: Evidence of an extreme precipitation event in 

September 2012. Photos courtesy of Mike Kucera. 

44 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Table 5.2. Site-specific climate change impacts and vulnerabilities for cropland on the Kucera Farm. Regional climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities were derived from a statewide assessment of climate change impacts in Nebraska (Bathke et al. 2014). 

Regional Climate Change 

Impacts and Vulnerabilities 

Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities 

for the Farm or Project Area 

Warmer temperatures: Nebraska temperatures have warmed about 

1°F since 1895 and are projected to increase another 4–5°F to 8–9°F by 

2071–99. More extreme heat days & waves are also expected. 

Longer/warmer growing seasons: two more weeks by mid-century 

Increased potential for drought: due to higher temperature and 

increased temp variability 

Altered precipitation: Little change in winter/spring; Potential for 

drier summer 

Increased extreme precipitation events resulting in increased runoff 

Reduced soil moisture: Across NE projected to decrease from 1-5 

percent to 5-15 percent by end of century due to warmer temperatures 

and altered precipitation 

Altered streamflow: reduction in snowpack or altered precipitation 

may greatly reduce flows on Platte and Missouri rivers 

Flood magnitude: Expected to increase with extreme rain events 

Warmer temperatures: Big impact in 2012. Warmer temperatures 

and reduced soil moisture killed cover crop; reduced yields. 

Cropland is most affected by changes in precipitation: 

• drought 

• extreme precipitation events 

The Kucera property is less vulnerable to both drought and 

runoff than the local average because of the no-till system and 

work done to date to improve soil quality and infiltration and 

reduce evaporation 

Crops are each affected differently based on their biology— 

influenced by annual rainfall patterns 

Site is relatively flat, but erosion can still occur on slightly sloping 

areas or on field borders where soil is compacted from traffic 

particularly during severe rain 

Field borders prone to erosion and runoff were placed in CRP CP33 

quail buffer program 

Wind, heavy rains, and hail have the potential to impact crops. 

Hail damage severe enough to collect on crop insurance has only 

occurred once in the last 25 years. 

Increased soil erosion potential: from extreme rainfall events 

Not applicable here 

Severe storms and tornadoes: high uncertainty about future change 

Corn loss due to drought. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 45 
Step 3: 

Evaluate management objectives given projected 

impacts and vulnerabilities. 

Climate change is expected to create numerous challenges 

to maintaining productivity of cropland on the Kucera 

Farm (Figure 5.3). These challenges generally reflected 

the greatest anticipated changes in climate, and the 

greatest challenges were associated with increasing 

variability in rainfall patterns (Table 5.3). Drier conditions 

due to warmer temperatures and/or reduced precipitation 

have direct negative effects on crop productivity and 

yields by reducing soil moisture. Additionally, lower plant 

productivity or enhanced decomposition can reduce the 

amount of residue cover increasing soil moisture loss and 

soil temperature while reducing long-term accumulation 

of soil organic matter. Conversely, extreme precipitation, 

wind, and hail events could cause increased crop damage. 

Moreover, the specific effects from either drought or 

extreme precipitation are impossible to predict in advance 

because the outcome will vary greatly depending upon 

the severity of the event, when during the year the event 

occurs, and the timing of the event relative to the 3-year 

crop rotation of corn-soybean-winter wheat. 

Cropland at the Kucera Farm planted to switchgrass forage. Photo courtesy of Mike Kucera. 

46 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Table 5.3. Challenges, opportunities and feasibility of meeting current management objectives given projected impacts and risks for 

cropland on the Kucera Farm. 

Management 

Objective 

(from Step #1) 

Challenges To 

Meeting Objective With 

Climate Change 

Opportunities For Meeting Objective 

With Climate Change 

Feasibility 

Under 

Current 

Management 

Other 

Considerations 

Maintain or increase 

crop yields 

Increasing variability of 

rainfall: probably too little or 

at the wrong time 

Very extreme rainfall could 

cause crop damage 

Increases in pests and 

diseases 

More rainfall infiltration could increase 

groundwater recharge (as long as not too 

great) 

Utilize high carbon-nitrogen ratio cover 

crops following wheat harvest to increase 

the amount of residue cover during hot dry 

summer months 

High 

Increase residue 

cover and soil 

organic matter in 

order to maximize 

soil moisture in 

order to maintain 

reasonable levels of 

productivity during 

drought periods 

Warmer temps result in 

greater respiration, which 

could impair yields reducing 

the ability to increase OM 

Multi-year impacts: low 

productivity one year could 

impact next year (residue on 

surface affects yield) 

Utilize a stripper header machine for small 

grain harvest that maximizes standing cover 

and residue retention, or utilize high-carbon 

cover crops following wheat harvest to capture 

snowfall, increase infiltration, and reduce soil 

moisture loss. 

Possibly utilize cool season cover crops due to 

warmer winters 

Utilize a controlled traffic system to reduce soil 

compaction by confining wheel traffic to the 

same rows. 

Maintain: high 

Increase: more 

difficult 

Maintain and 

improve soil 

structure, aggregate 

stability and 

porosity in order to 

continue improving 

water infiltration 

Increased number of 

earthworms can increase the 

decomposition of residue, 

leading to less ground cover, 

which exposes soils to hot 

weather, degradation, and 

reduced yields 

Plant high-carbon cover crops following 

wheat harvest such as sorghum Sudangrass or 

millet, or use high-carbon crops such as corn, 

sorghum, or wheat in rotation to maximize 

residue cover and retention 

Maintain: high 

Increase: a bit 

harder... 

Maintain lands in 

CRP programs for 

conservation and 

wildlife benefits (if 

possible to reenroll) 

Eligibility for program funding 

or re-enrollment in CRP 

Plan to re-enroll 

quail buffers in 

fiscal year 2016 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 47 
Step 4: 

Identify adaptation approaches and tactics for 

implementation. 

Within the challenges and opportunities identified in Step 

3, a number of potential adaptation actions were identified 

with the overarching intent to maintain crop productivity 

and soil organic matter over the long term, while also 

addressing the potential impacts from climate change 

(Table 5.4). Given the limited nature of this exercise, only 

a few potential adaptation tactics were evaluated fully; 

several other adaptation responses were identified but 

not evaluated. These tactics are associated with the list of 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches (Chapter 3). 

It is important to note that many of the practices currently 

being implemented on the farm increase resilience to 

climate change, even though climate change was not a 

factor in the decision to implement these actions. For 

example, long-term efforts to increase soil organic matter 

through crop rotation, no-till farming, residue retention, 

and other practices have increased the farm’s resilience 

to both drought and extreme precipitation. This illustrates 

how existing soil and water conservation efforts can have 

important climate adaptation benefits. Another example 

is the use of varieties of flex-ear corn, which produce a 

second ear of corn and increase production in favorable 

conditions. 

While many current practices increase the farm’s resilience 

to climate change, particularly in the near term, several 

additional actions were developed to enhance the ability of 

the farm to cope with changing conditions. These ranged 

from “small tweaks” of current practices to major changes 

in crops and systems. One example of a small adjustment 

is to utilize varieties to better match the current year’s 

rainfall and temperature or anticipated longer term climate 

changes. This is a relatively easy action to implement, 

although it can be hard to get seed later in the year. 

Additional adaptation actions were considered, some of 

which would be a more substantial departure, including: 

•	 Change plant population – Adjust the density of plants 

to match water availability 

•	 Utilize controlled traffic patterns – reduce soil 

compaction by confining it to the same row 

•	 Utilize a stripper header to leave taller wheat stubble 

– maintain residue longer to reduce moisture losses and 

capture more infiltration and snow 

•	 Utilize high-carbon cover crops following wheat 

harvest – to increase soil organic matter and residue 

retention 

•	 Diversify crops – A bigger farm could reduce the risk 

of production losses by planting multiple crops with 

varying seasons of growth; it is not as practical on 

smaller farms in many cases. 

•	 Substitute crops – As the climate changes, other crops 

or rotations might be suitable. For example, sorghum 

could replace corn in the rotation under warmer and 

drier conditions. 

•	 Irrigation – Developing irrigation could provide more 

options than dryland farming, but it is not a viable 

option for the Kucera Farm given the local aquifer 

geology and landforms. 

•	 Utilize grain sorghum in rotation – Sorghum is more 

drought tolerant and adapted to higher temperatures. 

•	 Utilize low-water-use crops – Crops such as field peas 

or canola (not currently economically viable) could be 

used if precipitation is consistently lower. Examples of 

other crop rotations that could be adopted to replace 

the wheat-fallow system include: winter canola/wheat 

with continuous no-till (used in Oklahoma) and wheat/ 

spring canola or wheat/field peas/millet (used in 

western Nebraska, the Dakotas, and eastern Montana). 

48 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Table 5.4. Adaptation approaches and tactics for implementation on cropland of Kucera Farm. 

Adaptation Actions 

Timeframes Benefits Drawbacks & 

Barriers 

Effectiveness 

and Feasibility 

of Tactic 

Recommend 

Approach Tactic Tactic? 

1.1: Maintain and 

improve soil health. 

Use legume 

cover crops 

after wheat 

in years 

that are 

projected to 

have wetter 

conditions 

to retain soil 

moisture 

Any • Provides ground 

cover and forage 

for grazing animals 

• Improves soil food 

web 

• Can provide 

nitrogen 

• Increase soil 

organic matter 

• Improves soil 

properties 

• Getting sufficient 

soil water for 

germination 

• Can draw water from 

subsequent crops 

• More cost—does it 

maintain/ improve 

productivity 

• Curl mites and 

green bridge for 

wheat-streak mosaic 

disease might get 

worse 

Moderate-High Yes 

3.1: Adjust the timing 

or location of onfarm activities 

6.2: Diversify existing 

systems with new 

combinations of 

varieties or breeds. 

6.3: Switch to 

commodities 

expected to be better 

suited to future 

conditions. 

Plant 

sorghum 

instead of 

corn during 

the spring 

when soil 

moisture is 

low 

Under 

warmer 

and drier 

conditions 

• Better adapted 

to higher 

temperatures 

• Responds well to 

late Aug. rainfall (if 

they come) 

• Sorghum will use 

soil moisture during 

the late fall and will 

not die until the first 

frost, leaving less 

moisture for next 

year; might need 

to terminate with a 

burn-down herbicide 

High Yes 

Alternative 

rotations, 

such as 

winter canola 

and wheat 

(used in 

Oklahoma) 

Under 

warmer 

and drier 

conditions 

• Works in very dry 

locations 

• Not currently 

economically viable 

6.1: Diversify crop 

or livestock species, 

varieties or breeds, or 

products. 

Diversify 

crops 

Any • Would spread risk 

across multiple 

crops 

• Not viable given the 

small size of this 

farm 

Low No 

3.2: Manage crops to 

cope with hotter and 

drier conditions. 

Switch to 

irrigated 

systems 

Under 

warmer 

and drier 

conditions 

• Not viable given 

aquifer geology 

Low No 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 49 
Step 5: 

Monitor and evaluate effectiveness of implemented 

actions. 

As adaptation tactics are implemented, it will be critical 

to evaluate whether they had their intended effect and do 

in fact help meet farm objectives in a changing climate 

(Table 5.5). In many situations, the current system of 

recording farm activities and production can be used 

to provide information about the effectiveness of the 

adaptation actions. For example, as management changes, 

crop yields can be compared to past yields (10-year or 

longer timeframe) to see if they stay the same or increase. 

Likewise, compare on-farm crop yields to county or local 

averages to evaluate the performance of the farm relative 

to neighboring farms, particularly those with similar soils 

and management history. Also record and informally 

monitor management adjustments such as the severity 

or extent of soil erosion or runoff occurring after a highintensity rainfall event (e.g., 2-inch) rain event. 

Evaluate soil health to determine the effectiveness of 

adaptive management. 

Table 5.5. Potential monitoring items to evaluate the effectiveness of implemented actions for cropland on the Kucera Farm. 

Monitoring Item Criteria for Evaluation Monitoring Implementation 

Crop productivity 

(bushels per acre per year) 

• Similar or better yields over a 10-year period Continue current recordkeeping 

Runoff after heavy storms, such as the 

degree of erosion or runoff after a 2-inch 

or higher precipitation event 

• Times erosion or runoff is observed per season 

• Severity or extent of erosion and runoff in 

susceptible locations 

• Gullies or ephemeral gully erosion 

Need to record 

50 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Beef Grazing in Missouri 

Step 1: 

Define management goals and objectives. 

Missouri has the second highest beef cattle population in 

the Nation, with 1.8 million head of cattle (USDA, National 

Agricultural Statistics Service 2016). This example describes 

a small, 100-acre beef farm operation located in the 

Ozarks region of Missouri. The operation includes a mix 

of grassland in hay and pasture used for beef production, 

cropland, and forest used for timber management, to 

provide supplemental income to a family with off-farm 

work (Table 5.6). 

Step 2: 

Assess site-specific climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities. 

Climate change and variability is expected to adversely 

affect beef production in Missouri and across the Ozarks 

although some positive effects are possible (Hatfield et al. 

2015). Annual temperatures are projected to increase an 

additional 2 °F to 7 °F through the end of the century in 

the Missouri Ozarks region (Brandt et al. 2014). Increased 

temperatures will result in longer growing seasons but 

also a greater number of hot days and warm nights during 

summer. Precipitation patterns are also expected to 

change, with increased precipitation in winter and spring 

and potential declines in summer (Brandt et al. 2014). 

Altered precipitation patterns will increase the potential for 

both extreme precipitation events and drought. There are 

few site-specific variables that make this farm more or less 

vulnerable to climate change relative to other farms in the 

same part of Missouri, except that bottomland areas may 

be susceptible to streambank erosion from extreme rain 

events. 

Adaptive grazing reduces risks from warmer and drier conditions. 

Table 5.6. Existing management goals and objectives for a small farm in the Ozarks region of Missouri. 

Management Unit Management Goals Management Objectives Timeframes 

Beef production: 

pasture and livestock 

(35 acres) 

Supplement family income 

Maintain land and bequeath to family 

Minimize labor requirements 

Maintain forest productivity 

Improve recreational opportunities in 

forest land 

Increase net revenue 

Increase livestock weight gain through dietary 

improvement 

Short 

Maintain reliability of forage supply Short 

Increase efficiency of feeding Short 

Cropland: alfalfa or annual 

forage 

(10 acres) 

Enhance soil resource on bottomland Short to Long 

Enhance riparian management Short to Long 

Forest: timber and wildlife 

management 

(55 acres) 

Harvest hardwoods for sustained income Short 

Manage riparian areas in bottomlands Long 

Manage forest for wildlife Long 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 51 
Step 3: 

Evaluate management objectives given projected 

impacts and vulnerabilities. 

Several management challenges and opportunities were 

identified as a result of anticipated changes in climate 

(Table 5.7). For example, more days with extreme heat 

and warmer nighttime temperatures could increase 

the heat stress on animals or on forage, or even create 

challenges with pollination of important forage plants. 

Warmer temperatures and changes in annual precipitation, 

especially potential decreases in available moisture during 

the growing season, have the potential to decrease forage 

quality and quantity. Some potential changes in climate, 

however, such as longer growing seasons and fewer cold 

days and nights, were identified as potentially beneficial 

for plant growth, calving, and winter feed efficiency. 

Management objectives related to the beef pasture, 

livestock, and cropland are rated as having low feasibility 

under current management because the potential positive 

impacts of climate change (e.g., longer growing seasons, 

ability to plant cover crops in cropland) are not likely to 

offset the negative impacts. The feasibility of managing 

forest health and productivity is rated as moderate because 

the impacts from reduced precipitation, drought, and pests 

are expected to be less than on annual crops. An additional 

consideration is limited time available for farming due to 

the family having full-time jobs away from the farm. 

Step 4: 

Identify adaptation approaches and develop tactics 

for implementation. 

Several adaptation strategies, approaches, and tactics 

can help this farm respond to identified adverse climate 

change impacts and achieve its current goals as well as 

take advantage of potential opportunities (Table 5.8). 

Climate change considerations became another driver 

to better manage natural resources and improve the 

overall functioning of the agroecosystem. Adaptation 

tactics for forest management were identified using a 

list of adaptation strategies and approaches for forest 

ecosystems (Swanston and Janowiak 2012). 

Table 5.7. Selected climate change-related management challenges and opportunities for a beef grazing operation in Missouri. 

Management 

Unit 

Management 

Objectives 

Challenges To Meeting 

Management Objective With 

Climate Change 

Opportunities For 

Meeting Management 

Objective With Climate 

Change 

Feasibility of 

Objectives 

Under Current 

Management 

Beef production: 

pasture and 

livestock 

(35 acres) 

Increase livestock weight 

gain through dietary 

improvement 

Heat stress and lack of moisture will 

reduce summer forage quality and yield 

Day and nighttime heat stress will 

decrease feed intake 

More pests may slow weight gain 

Warmer winters could 

increase winter forage 

supply and feed efficiency 

Low 

Maintain reliability of 

forage supply 

Low 

Increase efficiency of 

feeding 

Low 

Cropland: alfalfa 

or annual forage 

(10 acres) 

Enhance soil resource on 

bottomland 

Streambank erosion and flooding may 

damage crops and decrease cropland 

extent 

Opportunities to plant cover 

crops may increase 

Low 

Enhance riparian 

management 

Low 

Forest: timber 

and wildlife 

management 

(55 acres) 

Harvest hardwoods for 

sustained income 

Drier weather could 

increase timber harvest 

windows 

Moderate 

Manage riparian areas in 

bottomlands 

Moderate 

Manage forest for 

wildlife and hunting 

Moderate 

Drought could decrease growth rate, 

stress trees, and increase susceptibility 

to pests or fire. Intense storms could 

reduce quality 

Extreme precipitation and stream flow 

will increase risk of streambank erosion 

Drought could decrease mast 

production 

Pests may increase 

52 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Table 5.8. Selected adaptation tactics identified for a beef grazing operation in Missouri. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 53 

Adaptation 

Timeframes Benefits Drawbacks & 

Barriers 

Effectiveness 

and Feasibility of 

Approach Tactic Tactic 

Management Unit: Pasture 

1.1: Maintain and improve soil health. 

6.1: Diversify crop or livestock 

species, varieties or breeds, or 

products. 

Interseed legumes in 

pasture. Use limestone to 

neutralize soils, optimize 

phosphorus and potassium 

applications 

1-2 yrs. Higher forage 

quantity and 

quality 

Risk of seeding 

failure 

Cost of soil 

analysis and 

amendments 

High 

3.1: Adjust the timing or location of 

on-farm activities. 

3.2: Manage crops to cope with 

warmer and drier conditions. 

8.1: Expand or improve water 

systems to match water demand 

and supply. 

Improve grazing system 

by increasing from 4 to 8 

paddocks 

1-2 yrs. Increased forage 

availability, 

utilization, and 

quality 

Expense of 

additional fence 

and water 

distribution 

High 

3.3: Manage livestock to cope with 

warmer and drier conditions. 

8.1: Expand or improve water 

systems to match water demand 

and supply. 

Water distribution to all 

paddocks 

5-10 yrs. Reduce winter 

hay needs 

and labor by 

extending 

grazing season 

(stockpiling) 

High 

6.1: Diversify crop or livestock 

species, varieties or breeds, or 

products. 

6.2: Diversify existing systems with 

new combinations of varieties or 

breeds. 

Establish warm season 

grass paddock 

1-2 yrs. Increased forage 

available under 

warm and dry 

conditions 

Expense of 

establishment; 

initial yield 

drag during 

establishment 

Medium 

Management Unit: Cropland 

1.2: Protect water quality. 

5.1: Maintain or restore natural 

ecosystems. 

5.2: Promote biological diversity 

across the landscape. 

Convert cropland to 

riparian buffer 

3-5 yrs. Improve stream 

quality; reduce 

streambank 

erosion; provide 

emergency forage 

source; reduce 

labor 

Takes some 

land out of 

production 

High 

6.3: Switch to commodities 

expected to be better suited to 

future conditions. 

7.3: Alter lands in agricultural 

production. 

Convert cropland to 

perennial pasture 

1-2 yrs. Improve stream 

quality; reduce 

streambank 

erosion; provide 

emergency forage 

source reduce 

labor 

Time to establish 

vegetation; cost 

for fence 

High 

Management Unit : Forestland 

Maintain or improve the ability 

of forests to resist pests and 

pathogens. 

Promote diverse age classes. 

Maintain and restore diversity of 

native tree species. 

Get a forest management 

plan, follow the 

recommendations of a 

professional forester 

5-10 yrs. Increase income 

opportunity 

Delayed income, 

labor required to 

thin timber 

Medium 

Improve upland wildlife 

habitat through thinning or 

timber stand improvement 

5-10 yrs. Enhanced 

recreation 

opportunity 

from viewing or 

hunting wildlife 

Time and 

expense 

associated with 

actions 

Medium 
 

Step 5: 

Monitor and evaluate effectiveness of implemented 

actions. 

Several monitoring items can help to determine if the 

adaptation actions actually implemented are effective at 

overcoming management challenges or taking advantage 

of opportunities. In the beef pasture, adaptation monitoring 

focuses on forage quality and production by recording the 

number of days of feeding livestock hay in the winter and 

the weight gain of calves. Better forage production and 

utilization should reduce the number of days of feeding hay 

in the winter, while better forage quality should increase the 

rate of weight gain. In areas designated as riparian buffers, 

monitoring of streambank erosion consists of comparing 

future locations of vegetation and soil loss or deposition 

with pins inserted in the streambank and marked on aerial 

photographs indicating the baseline location. 

The risk of more erosion rises with an expected increase of extreme 

precipitation events. 

Corn and Soybean Production in Iowa 

Step 1: 

Define management goals and objectives. 

More than 26 million acres of farmland were in corn and 

soybean production in Iowa in 2009, serving as a mainstay 

of the State’s economy (USDA, National Agricultural 

Statistics Service 2016). This example broadly illustrates 

how to integrate climate variability and change into the 

planning and activities of corn-soybean operations typical 

across Iowa and other Midwestern States (Table 5.9). 

Step 2: 

Assess site-specific climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities. 

Climate change and variability is likely to adversely affect 

crop operations in Iowa and across the Midwest, although 

some positive effects are possible (Hatfield et al. 2015). 

Increased temperatures will result in longer growing 

seasons but also a greater number of hot days and 

warm nights. Altered precipitation patterns will increase 

the potential for both extreme precipitation events and 

drought. This particular farm is likely to experience impacts 

similar to those projected to occur across the region, as 

no site-specific factors increase or reduce its vulnerability 

relative to other farms in the same part of Iowa. 

Step 3: 

Evaluate management objectives given projected 

impacts and vulnerabilities. 

Identified challenges and opportunities reflect projected 

climate change impacts and vulnerabilities for this corn 

and soybean crop operation (Table 5.10). Several key 

management objectives have a low feasibility because 

substantial challenges expected from adverse climate 

change impacts are not likely to be offset by positive 

impacts (e.g., longer growing seasons, ability to plant cover 

crops in cropland). 

54 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Table 5.9. Management goals and objectives for a 320-acre farm near Ames, Iowa, focused on corn and soybean production. 

Management 

Unit Management Goals Management Objectives Timeframes 

Cropland 

(320-acre farm) 

Increase productivity Increase corn and soybean yields Short 

Increase profitability Decrease nitrogen use 

Improve water use efficiency 

Short 

Improve soil health Use cover crops 

Increase soil organic matter from current levels (1-2%) to 4% 

Short 

Decrease profit volatility Reduce soil erosion 

Improve nitrogen use efficiency 

Improve water use efficiency 

Short 

Decrease environmental footprint Become carbon neutral 

Minimize nitrogen loss 

Long 

Table 5.10. Selected climate change-related management challenges and opportunities for a farm producing corn and soybeans in Iowa. 

Management Objectives 

Challenges To Meeting Management 

Objective With Climate Change 

Opportunities For 

Meeting Management 

Objective With Climate 

Change 

Feasibility of 

Objectives 

Under Current 

Management 

Increase corn and soybean yields Variable summer precipitation, excessive summer 

precipitation, extreme heat, and warm summer 

nights likely to reduce yields 

Beneficial effect from 

carbon dioxide fertilization 

Moderate 

Decrease nitrogen use 

Improve water use efficiency 

Variable spring and summer precipitation likely to 

leach nitrogen and slow crop growth. 

Low 

Use cover crops 

Increase soil organic matter 

Extreme precipitation increasing risk of erosion and 

crop damage 

Longer growing season for 

cover crops 

High 

Reduce soil erosion 

Improve nitrogen use efficiency 

Improve water use efficiency 

Variability in summer precipitation will enhance 

nitrogen volatility 

Excess rain could be 

captured in soil or reservoirs 

Low 

Become carbon neutral 

Minimize nitrogen loss 

Increased pests will require more chemicals. 

Extreme precipitation increases risk of nitrogen loss 

Carbon dioxide fertilization 

will increase carbon 

sequestration 

Low 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 55 
Step 4: 

Identify adaptation approaches and develop tactics 

for implementation. 

Several adaptation strategies, approaches, and tactics 

identified in the table below enable this corn and soybeancropping system to respond to potential adverse climate 

change impacts and persist in achieving its current goals 

as well as take advantage of opportunities (Table 5.11). 

Climate change considerations became another driver to 

better manage natural resources and improve the overall 

functioning of the agroecosystem. 

Step 5: 

Monitor and evaluate effectiveness of implemented 

actions. 

Several monitoring items were identified that could inform 

the producer about whether the implemented adaptation 

actions were effective in helping to overcome management 

challenges or take advantage of opportunities (Table 5.12). 

Table 5.11. Selected adaptation tactics for a farm producing corn and soybeans in Iowa. 

Adaptation 

Timeframes Benefits Drawbacks 

& Barriers 

Effectiveness 

and Feasibility of 

Approach Tactic Tactic 

1.1: Maintain and improve soil health. Mixed cover crop 1 yr. Increases soil health Water availability High 

1.3: Match practices to water supply and 

demand. 

4.1: Reduce peak flow, runoff velocity, 

and soil erosion. 

Improve water use 

via cover crop and 

strip till 

1 yr. Reduce production 

volatility 

Variable water supply High 

3.2: Manage crops to cope with warmer 

and drier conditions. 

8.1: Expand or improve water systems to 

match water demand and supply. 

Increase water 

storage with either 

increased soil waterholding capacity or 

farm reservoir 

5 – 10 yr. Reduce production 

volatility 

Expensive Low 

6.3: Switch to commodities expected to 

be better suited to future conditions. 

8.4: Match infrastructure and equipment 

to new and expected conditions. 

Switch commodity, 

potentially to niche 

crop 

As market 

opportunities 

emerge 

Increase diversity; 

mitigate volatility 

Market 

uncertainty, 

cost, new 

equipment 

Low 

1.1: Maintain and improve soil health. Add manure 1-3 yr. Improve soil; add 

nitrogen and 

phosphorus in short 

term; increase carbon in long term. 

Affects 1.2 Moderate 

1.1: Maintain and improve soil health. Split application of 

nitrogen 

1 year Enhanced nutrient 

utilization 

High 

1.1: Maintain and improve soil health. Incorporate biochar 1-5 yr. Improve soil Moderate 

Table 5.12. Selected adaptation actions for a farm producing corn and soybeans in Iowa. 

Adaptation Monitoring Variable Criteria for Evaluation 

Crop yields Increase above statewide average 

Protein content Increase above current levels 

Soil organic matter Increase above current levels 

Water runoff Examine after heavy rain (Is erosion present?) 

Nitrogen runoff Reduce from current levels 

Environmental footprint Reach negative carbon balance 

56 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

 

Confined Dairy in Pennsylvania 

Step 1: 

Define management goals and objectives. 

In 2012, sales of milk from cows in the United States totaled 

$35.5 billion, over one-third of which was from five States in 

the region: Wisconsin, New York, Pennsylvania, Minnesota 

and Michigan (USDA, National Agricultural Statistics 

Service 2016). This example shows how a confined dairy 

animal feeding operation in the Ridge and Valley province 

of Pennsylvania could respond to the effects of actual 

or expected changes in climate (Table 5.13). The overall 

strategic objectives of the enterprise are to maintain 

profitability and the family farm legacy. In order to produce 

a steady supply of high-quality whole milk, farmstead 

facilities house a herd of 800 dairy cows, store feed, and 

handle wastes. Approximately 2,000 acres of crop fields 

produce corn for grain and silage as well as alfalfa grass for 

haylage and dry hay. 

Step 2: 

Assess site-specific climate change impacts and 

vulnerabilities. 

Climate change and variability are likely to adversely affect 

dairy production in Pennsylvania and across the Northeast, 

although some positive impacts are also possible (Tobin et 

al. 2015). Most dairies in the region manage both livestock 

and crop production. Increased summer temperatures 

may cause more heat stress on dairy cattle. Earlier 

springs and warmer winters allow for greater proliferation 

and survivability of pathogens and parasites. Extreme 

precipitation increases the risk of gully erosion and waste 

runoff from overtopping storage facilities. More severe 

winter storms may impede feeding and waste removal 

activities, while more severe summer storms increase the 

risk of damage to structures and injured livestock. This 

particular dairy is typical of confinement operations, and 

impacts are not likely to be greater than at others in the 

region. 

Dairy crop production in the region typically includes 

corn silage and alfalfa grass, both likely to experience 

adverse impacts as well as opportunities from climate 

change and variability. More hot summer days and 

warmer nights, declining soil moisture, and drought are 

likely. Winter and spring precipitation patterns may limit 

the number of days with suitable field conditions, while 

severe storms in late summer and fall may limit harvest 

conditions (Tobin et al. 2015). Wetter soils for longer 

periods are also more susceptible to compaction. Bare or 

poorly covered soil, fields with recent nutrient application, 

and water conveyance structures are sensitive to intense 

storms and excessive rain. Increasing risk from increased 

weed pressure, higher levels of insect pest populations 

overwintering or arriving earlier in the spring, and increased 

winter survival rates of diseases are also concerns in the 

region. A potential opportunity to grow more forage may 

exist due to expected higher annual average rainfall, milder 

winters, and longer growing seasons. 

This particular dairy operates lands with site-specific 

conditions that may make it more vulnerable than other 

dairies operating in the region. Over half of the fields have 

a south facing exposure, making corn and alfalfa more 

vulnerable to extreme heat stress. Many fields in valley 

areas have poor soil structure while fields on the ridges 

have well-drained soils, both conditions that increase 

the risk of crop damage from drought. Fields on steep 

hillslopes and on soils with a silt loam texture are more 

vulnerable to increasingly intense rainstorms, while those in 

the valley next to the stream are more vulnerable to flood 

damage. However, the farm has a few fields with a northfacing exposure and better soil structure, which are able to 

absorb water and cope with extreme heat. 

Table 5.13. Management goals and objectives for a confined dairy operation in the Ridge and Valley province of Pennsylvania. 

Management Unit Management Goals Management Objectives Timeframes 

Farmstead: 

Livestock facilities 

Dairy facilities 

Waste management 

facilities 

Maintain family net income and farm 

legacy 

Minimize energy costs 

Maintain herd health and milk productivity 

Maintain or improve crop productivity 

Comply with concentrated animal feeding 

operation (CAFO) regulations 

Maintain friendly neighbor relations and 

positive community image 

Minimize overall expenses Short- Long 

Prevent water leaks and unnecessary lighting and 

ventilation, minimize fuel use 

Short 

Prevent stress in dairy herd Short 

Croplands: 

Corn for grain 

Corn for silage 

Alfalfa grass for hay 

and haylage 

Minimize erosion and prevent soil compaction 

from heavy equipment 

Short- Long 

Apply nutrients not to exceed annual crop need 

and soil test recommendations. Follow nutrient 

management plan to prevent non-point source 

pollution. 

Short 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 57 
 

 

Step 3: 


Evaluate management objectives given projected 


impacts and vulnerabilities.
 

An evaluation of the dairy’s existing management 

objectives for the farmstead found a few challenges, but 

no opportunities presented by climate change. In general, 

most of the current management objectives for the 

livestock, dairy, and waste management facilities were rated 

as having a slightly declining feasibility. Negative impacts 

from climate change (e.g., incrementally increasing costs of 

ventilation, veterinary services, and repairing infrastructure) 

were not expected to be offset by any positive impacts but 

were also not substantial enough to prevent achievement 

of farm profitability goals. However, impacts from increased 

waste spills from overtopped storage facilities, (e.g., costs, 

poor community image, and regulator inspection hassles) 

do present substantial challenges especially to the farm’s 

stewardship goals. 

Additional climate change-related considerations for this 

farm are rising costs of purchased supplemental feed or 

fertilizers due to negative climate change-related impacts 

in the region where the purchased feed is produced or 

increased cost of utilities rising due to weather disruptions 

of electricity. At the same time, the farm may be able to 

take advantage of market opportunities if climate change 

impacts increase production costs in other places, such as 

a long-term drought in California, and the farm is able to 

sell its milk at a higher price. 

When taken together, the adverse climate change impacts 

on this dairy farm are not significant enough to necessitate 

a change in long-range goals and objectives. Instead, an 

adjustment of management tactics to maintain the current 

farming system would be adequate. To increase the farm’s 

adaptive capacity to prepare and recover from expected 

adverse impacts, management objectives for the crop 

fields are being refined to improve soil functioning, nutrient 

stewardship, and fuel use efficiency, while on the farmstead 

more transformative changes are needed to improve 

nutrient stewardship. 

Step 4: 

Identify adaptation approaches and develop tactics 

for implementation. 

A review of the menu of adaptation strategies and 

approaches found a number of approaches that enable this 

dairy enterprise to respond to identified adverse climate 

change impacts and achieve the management objectives 

of improving soil functioning and nutrient stewardship, 

reducing fuel use, and reducing risks of adverse impacts 

from extreme weather. (Table 5.14). Climate change 

considerations became another driver to better manage 

natural resources and improve the overall functioning of the 

agroecosystem. 

The most transformative change occurs at the farmstead 

where the waste storage facility can be covered to prevent 

accumulation of rainfall and the risk of spills. In support 

of the nutrient stewardship objective for crop fields, the 

manure collection and handling system can be improved to 

separate liquids from solids to increase pumping efficiency, 

reduce costs, and apply nutrient sources near the time 

of crop nutrient uptake in locations best suited to utilize 

the source. Liquid fractions with more available nitrogen 

can be surface applied to fields with higher infiltration 

rates, higher organic matter, and low risk for phosphorous 

transport, while solid fractions will be applied to fields low 

in organic matter to stimulate soil biology. Another cobenefit of solid-liquid separation is the use of manure solids 

for livestock bedding to offset expensive wood shavings. At 

this time, methane capture from the covered waste storage 

facility for electricity generation is not feasible. 

Step 5: 

Monitor and evaluate effectiveness of actions. 

Monitoring activities and evaluation criteria were identified 

for this dairy to determine whether the adaptation tactics 

described above, if implemented, would be effective 

actions to overcome the challenges of a changing climate 

and meet the farm’s long-range goals and objectives. 

On the farmstead, climate adaptation monitoring and 

evaluation criteria focus on maintaining the cover of 

the waste storage facility. A cover in proper condition 

eliminates the risk of waste runoff overtopping the facility 

during a rainstorm. 

To monitor progress towards achieving new objectives 

and evaluate outcomes on crop fields, recordkeeping can 

be improved to include tracking of application rates and 

costs of fertilizer and soil amendments, the soil’s infiltration 

capacity and organic matter percentages within fields, 

and gallons of fuel saved by pumping liquids compared 

to hauling slurries. To supplement data collected, the farm 

visually monitors storm water runoff at the edge of highrisk fields, taking photographic evidence during and shortly 

following severe weather. At the end of the installation of 

the waste storage facility cover and solid liquid separation 

system and other supporting practices, all costs and 

benefits will be evaluated compared to the businessas-usual scenario to determine if the actions mitigated 

expected economic losses from climate change. 

58 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Table 5.14. Selected adaptation tactics for a confined dairy operation in the Ridge and Valley province of Pennsylvania. 

Adaptation Actions 

Timeframes Benefits Drawbacks & 

Barriers 

Effectiveness 

and Feasibility 

Approach Tactic of Tactic 

Management Unit : Croplands 

1.1: Maintain and 

improve soil health 

Follow corn silage 

harvest with planting 

small grains on 

fields with few 

environmentally 

sensitive areas 

1-2 yrs. Protects soil from raindrop 

impact 

Adds organic matter for soil 

biology to more efficiently 

cycle water and nutrients 

Living roots over the winter 

improve soil structure, 

biology, and water infiltration 

Provides another source of 

forage 

Requires more 

management and labor 

during busy fall harvest 

season 

Feed ration needs 

adjustment to 

effectively use different 

source of forage 

Moderately High 

4.1: Reduce peak flow, 

runoff velocity, and soil 

erosion 

4.2: Reduce severity 

or extent of watersaturated soil and 

flood damage. 

Plant earlier maturing 

corn grain varieties in 

increasingly floodprone areas to allow 

time for planting 

small grains or cover 

crop mixes 

1-2 yrs. Living cover tolerates flooding 

near streams or high-velocity 

water runoff better than 

residue from corn grain 

Corn grain residue may be 

harvested for use as fodder, 

bedding, or fuel 

Small areas removed 

from corn grain 

production reduce field 

operation efficiency 

and may require more 

precision technology 

Moderately High 

1.2: Protect water 

quality 

See same tactic 

described for the 

Farmstead Unit 

Management Unit : Farmstead 

1.2: Protect water 

quality 

Cover waste storage 

facility and flare 

methane 

3-5 yrs. Risk of overtopping 

eliminated and community 

image protected 

Less rainwater collected and 

hauled 

Gas emissions prevented 

from release 

Maintenance cost of 

cover and methane 

flaring 

Purchase costs 

Moderately Low 

without financial 

assistance 

or increased 

consumer prices. 

1.2: Protect water 

quality 

Convert to solid 

liquid separation and 

manure injection 

nutrient application 

system 

3-5 yrs. Increased pumping efficiency 

Reduced hauling costs 

More manure nutrients 

Purchase costs 

Requires more 

management all year, 

possibly during busy 

Moderately Low 

without financial 

assistance 

or increased 

consumer prices 

available to crop spring planting season 

Use of manure solids for Risk of equipment 

livestock bedding offsets failure and associated 

expensive wood shavings messes 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 59 
Glossary 

Action—Something that is done or accomplished. 

Adaptation (to climate change)—Adjustment in natural 

or human systems in response to actual or expected 

climatic stimuli or their effects, which reduces vulnerability, 

moderates harm, or exploits beneficial opportunities. 

Various types of adaptation can be distinguished, including 

anticipatory and reactive adaptation, private and public 

adaptation, and autonomous and planned adaptation 

(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007). 

Adaptive capacity—The ability of a system to adjust to 

climate change (including climate variability and extremes) 

to moderate potential damages, to take advantage 

of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences 

(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007). This 

concept may be applied to natural or human systems and 

is synonymous with the concept of resilience (Smit and 

Wandel 2006). 

Adaptive management—A decision process that promotes 

flexible decisionmaking that can be adjusted in the face 

of uncertainties as outcomes from management actions 

and other events become better understood. Careful 

monitoring of these outcomes both advances scientific 

understanding and helps adjust policies or operations as 

part of an iterative learning process (Walthall et al. 2012). 

Climate—Average weather conditions in given locations 

over time. The classical period for averaging climatic 

variables as defined by the World Meteorological 

Organization is 30 years. Climate influences a wide range of 

long-term activities and strategic decisions, from the types 

of crops grown to the design and construction of buildings, 

water delivery systems, and other infrastructure (Walthall 

et al. 2012). 

Climate change—Statistically relevant changes in the mean 

state of climate or in its variability and that persist over 

extended periods of time, typically decades, centuries 

or longer. Changes may occur due to natural variations 

or a combination of natural variation and humaninduced variation (National Atmospheric and Oceanic 

Administration 2016). 

Climate variability—The inherent fluctuations or cyclical 

changes within the climate system beyond that of 

individual weather events. Variability may be due to 

natural internal processes within the climate system or 

to variations in natural or anthropogenic external forcing 

(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007). 

Effects (of climate change)—A change that is a result or 

consequence of climate change. The effects of climate 

change on agricultural production can be classified as 

either direct, indirect, or cumulative. Direct effects refer 

to the biophysical effects of changing abiotic climate 

conditions on crop and livestock growth, development, and 

conditions (Walthall et al. 2012). Indirect effects include 

biotic effects, such as those related to insect, disease, 

and weed pressure, as well as induced effects on input 

resources (land, water, soil) and market-mediated effects 

on input and output prices. Indirect effects of climate 

change may amplify or counteract the direct effects of 

climate change. 

Impacts (of climate change)—Synonymous with “climate 

change effects” and refers to the positive and negative 

ways in which climate change will affect different systems. 

Mitigation—With respect to climate change, an intervention 

to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse 

gases. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007). 

Resilience—Resilience is the capacity of a system to absorb 

disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change so 

as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, 

identity, and feedbacks (Walker et al. 2002). 

Risk—The potential for adverse consequences where 

something of value is at stake and where the outcome 

is uncertain, recognizing the diversity of values 

(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007). 

Social-ecological systems—A linked system of humans 

and nature in which the flow and use of resources 

(ecological, socioeconomic, and cultural) are regulated 

by the interaction of ecological and social systems. 

Agricultural social-ecological systems are ecosystems 

managed by humans to produce food and fiber for a set of 

interconnected markets (Walthall et al. 2012). 

Uncertainty—A state of having limited knowledge where it 

is impossible to exactly describe the existing state, a future 

outcome, or more than one possible outcome (Walthall et 

al. 2012). 

Vulnerability—The degree to which a system is susceptible 

to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate 

change, including climate variability and extremes. 

Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude, and 

rate of climate variation to which a system is exposed, its 

sensitivity, and its adaptive capacity (Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change 2007). 

Weather—The specific condition of the atmosphere 

at a particular place and time. It is measured in terms 

of parameters such as wind, temperature, humidity, 

atmospheric pressure, cloudiness, and precipitation 

(Walthall et al. 2012). Weather influences short-term 

activities and tactical decisions like crop planting, 

grazing, irrigation management, timing of manure and 

other nutrient applications, timing of pest suppression, 

harvesting, etc. 

60 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Literature Cited 

25x’25 Alliance Adaptation Work Group. 2013. Agriculture 

and Forestry in a Changing Climate: Adaptation 

Recommendations. 25x’25 Alliance. 49 p. Available 

at http://www.25x25.org/storage/25x25/documents/ 

Adaptation/agriculture_and_forestry_in_a_changing_ 

climate_-_adaptation_recommendations.pdf 

Ahmed, M.T. 2002. Millennium ecosystem assessment. 

Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 9(4): 219­

220. 

Ainsworth, E.A., D.R. Ort. 2010. How do we improve crop 

production in a warming world? Plant Physiology. 154(2): 

526-530. 

Ames, G.K., R. Dufour. 2014. Climate Change and Perennial 

Fruit and Nut Production: Investing in Resilience in 

Uncertain Times. In. ATTRA Sustainable Agriculture. 

Butte, MT: National Center for Appropriate Technology 

ATTRA. Available at https://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/ 

summaries/summary.php?pub=478. (Accessed July 28, 

2015). 

Anwar, M., D. Liu, I. Macadam, G. Kelly. 2013. Adapting 

agriculture to climate change: a review. Theoretical and 

Applied Climatology. 113(1-2): 225-245. 

Bathke, D.J., R. Oglesby, C. Rowe, D.A. Wilhite. 2014. 

Understanding and Assessing Climate Change: 

Implications for Nebraska. University of LincolnNebraska. 72 p. Available at http://snr.unl.edu/download/ 

research/projects/climateimpacts/2014ClimateChange. 

pdf 

Blanc, E., R. Reilly. 2015. Climate ihange impacts on US 

crops. Choices. 30(2): 1-4. 

Bradshaw, B., H. Dolan, B. Smit. 2004. Farm-level 

adaptation to climatic variability and change: crop 

diversification in the Canadian prairies. Climatic Change. 

67(1): 119-141. 

Brandt, L., H. He, L. Iverson, F.R. Thompson, P. Butler, 

S. Handler, M. Janowiak, P.D. Shannon, C. Swanston, 

M. Albrecht, R. Blume-Weaver, P. Deizman, J. DePuy, 

W.D. Dijak, G. Dinkel, S. Fei, D.T. Jones-Farrand, M. 

Leahy, S. Matthews, P. Nelson, B. Oberle, J. Perez, M. 

Peters, A. Prasad, J.E. Schneiderman, J. Shuey, A.B. 

Smith, C. Studyvin, J.M. Tirpak, J.W. Walk, W.J. Wang, L. 

Watts, D. Weigel, S. Westin. 2014. Central Hardwoods 

ecosystem vulnerability assessment and synthesis: a 

report from the Central Hardwoods Climate Change 

Response Framework project. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern 

Research Station. 254 

Bryan, A.M., A. Karmalkar, E. Coffel, L. Ning, R. Horton, E. 

Demaria, F. Fan, R.S. Bradley, R. Palmer. 2015. Chapter 

1: Climate Change in the Northeast and Midwest 

United States. In: M.D. Staudinger, T.L. Morelli and A.M. 

Bryan, eds. Integrating Climate Change into Northeast 

and Midwest State Wildlife Action Plans. Amherst, 

Massachusetts.: U.S. Department of Interior, Northeast 

Climate Science Center 

Davis, M.B., R.G. Shaw. 2001. Range shifts and adaptive 

responses to quaternary climate change. Science. 

292(5517): 673-679. 

Derner, J., L. Joyce, R. Guerrero, R. Steele. 2015. Northern 

Plains Regional Climate Hub Assessment of Climate 

Change Vulnerability and Adaptation and Mitigation 

Strategies. In: T. Anderson, ed: United States Department 

of Agriculture. 57 p. Available at http://climatehubs.oce. 

usda.gov/sites/default/files/Northern%20Plains%20 

Vulnerability%20Assessment%205_1_2015_Compressed. 

pdf 

Donald, D.B., F.G. Hunter, E. Sverko, B.D. Hill, J. Syrgiannis. 

2005. Mobilization of pesticides on an agricultural 

landscape flooded by a torrential storm. Environmental 

Toxicology and Chemistry. 24(1): 2-10. 

Easterling, W.E. 1996. Adapting North American agriculture 

to climate change in review. Agricultural and Forest 

Meteorology. 80(1): 1-53. 

Elad, Y., I. Pertot. 2014. Climate change impacts on 

plant pathogens and plant diseases. Journal of Crop 

Improvement. 28(1): 99-139. 

Elliott, J., D. Deryng, C. Müller, K. Frieler, M. Konzmann, D. 

Gerten, M. Glotter, M. Flörke, Y. Wada, N. Best. 2014. 

Constraints and potentials of future irrigation water 

availability on agricultural production under climate 

change. Proceedings of the National Academy of 

Sciences. 111(9): 3239-3244. 

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 

2007. Adaptation to climate change in agriculture, 

forestry, and fisheries: perspective, framework and 

priorities. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization 

of the United Nations (FAO), Interdepartmental Working 

Group on Climate Change. 32 

Freidman, D., M. Hubbs, A. Tugel, C. Seybold, M. Sucik. 2001. 

Guidelines for soil quality assessment in conservation 

planning. Washington, DC: US Government Printing 

Office. 

Fuhrer, J. 2003. Agroecosystem responses to combinations 

of elevated CO 2, ozone, and global climate change. 

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 97(1): 1-20. 

Gaughan, J., N. Lacetera, S. Valtorta, H. Khalifa, L. Hahn, T. 

Mader. 2009. Response of domestic animals to animal 

challenges. In: K. Ebi, I. Burton, G. McGregor and (eds), 

eds. Biometeorology for adaptation to climate variability 

and change. Dordrecht; London.: Springer 

Gordon, K., M. Lewis, J. Rogers, F. Kinniburgh. 2015. Heat 

in the Heartland: Climate change and economic risk 

in the Midwest. Risky Business: The economic risks of 

climate change in the United States: Risky Business. 53 p. 

Available at http://riskybusiness.org/uploads/files/RBPMidwest-Report-WEB-1-26-15.pdf 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 61 
Gutowski, W.J., G.C. Hegerl, G.J. Holland, T.R. Knutson, 

L.O. Mearns, R.J. Stouffer, P.J. Webster, M.F. Wehner, 

F.W. Zwiers. 2008. Causes of observed changes in 

extremes and projections of future changes. In: Thomas 

R. Karl, Gerald A. Meehl, Christopher D. Miller, Susan J. 

Hassol, Anne M. Waple and W.L. Murray, eds. Weather 

and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate. Regions 

of Focus: North America, Hawaii, Caribbean, and U.S. 

Pacific Islands. Washington, DC: U.S. Climate Change 

Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global 

Change Research 

Hahn, G., T. Brown-Brandl, R. Eigenberg, J. Gaughan, T. 

Mader, J. Nienaber. 2005. Climate change and livestock: 

challenges and adaptive responses of animals and 

production systems. 17th International Congress of 

Biometeorology; Bavaria, Germany. 

Hatfield, J., C. Swanston, M. Janowiak, R. Steele, J. Hempel, 

J. Bochicchio, W. Hall, M. Cole, S. Hestvik, J. Whitaker. 

2015. Midwest and Northern Forests Regional Climate 

Hub Assessment of Climate Change Vulnerability and 

Adaptation and Mitigation Strategies. In: T. Anderson, ed: 

United States Department of Agriculture. 55 p. Available 

at http://climatehubs.oce.usda.gov/sites/default/ 

files/pdf/Midwest%20Region%20Vulnerability%20 

Assessment%203_20_2015.pdf 

Hatfield, J., G. Takle, R. Grotjahn, P. Holden, R.C. Izaurralde, 

T. Mader, E. Marshall, D. Liverman. 2014. Chapter 6: 

Agriculture. In: J.M. Melillo, T.C. Richmond, G.W. Yohe and 

(eds.), eds. Climate change impacts in the United States: 

the third National Climate Assessment: U.S. Global 

Change Research Program: 150-174. Available at http:// 

nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads 

Hayhoe, K., C.P. Wake, T.G. Huntington, L.F. Luo, M.D. 

Schwartz, J. Sheffield, E. Wood, B. Anderson, J. 

Bradbury, A. DeGaetano, T.J. Troy, D. Wolfe. 2007. 

Past and future changes in climate and hydrological 

indicators in the US Northeast. Climate Dynamics. 28(4): 

381-407. 

Heller, N.E., E.S. Zavaleta. 2009. Biodiversity management 

in the face of climate change: A review of 22 years of 

recommendations. Biological Conservation. 142(1): 14-32. 

Horton, R., G. Yohe, W. Easterling, R. Kates, M. Ruth, E. 

Sussman, A. Whelchel, D. Wolfe, F. Lipschultz. 2014. 

Chapter 16: Northeast. In: J.M. Melillo, T.C. Richmond, 

G.W. Yohe and (eds.), eds. Climate change impacts in the 

United States: the third National Climate Assessment: 

U.S. Global Change Research Program: 371-395. Available 

at http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/downloads 

Howden, S.M., J.-F. Soussana, F.N. Tubiello, N. Chhetri, 

M. Dunlop, H. Meinke. 2007. Adapting agriculture to 

climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of 

Sciences. 104(50): 19691-19696. 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2012. 

Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to 

Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report 

of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental 


Panel on Climate Change. In. Cambridge, UK, and 


New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. 582. 


Available at http://ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/images/uploads/
 

SREX-All_FINAL.pdfID - 722.
 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, I. 2007. 

Glossary of Terms used in the IPCC Fourth Assessment 

Report. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC Secretariat Geneva. 

Available at https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ 

publications_and_data_glossary.shtml 

Iverson, L.R., M.W. Schwartz, A.M. Prasad. 2004a. How fast 

and far might tree species migrate in the eastern United 

States due to climate change? Global Ecology and 

Biogeography. 13(3): 209-219. 

Janowiak, M.K., C.W. Swanston, L.M. Nagel, L.A. Brandt, 

P.R. Butler, P.D. Shannon, L.R. Iverson, S.N. Matthews, 

A. Prasad, M.P. Peters. 2014. A Practical Approach for 

Translating Climate Change Adaptation Principles into 

Forest Management Actions. Journal of Forestry. 112(5): 

424-433. 

Janowiak, M.K., C.W. Swanston, L.M. Nagel, C.R. Webster, 

B.J. Palik, M.J. Twery, J.B. Bradford, L.R. Parker, A.T. Hille, 

S.M. Johnson. 2011. Silvicultural decisionmaking in an 

uncertain climate future: a workshop-based exploration 

of considerations, strategies, and approaches. Gen. Tech. 

Rep. NRS-81. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 

14 

Jarvis, A., C. Lau, S. Cook, E. Wollenberg, J. Hansen, O. 

Bonilla, A. Challinor. 2011. An integrated adaptation 

and mitigation framework for developing agricultural 

research: synergies and trade-offs. Experimental 

Agriculture. 47(02): 185-203. 

Kanter, D.R., X. Zhang, D.L. Mauzerall. 2015. Reducing 

nitrogen pollution while decreasing farmers’ costs 

and increasing fertilizer industry profits. Journal of 

Environmental Quality. 44(2): 325-335. 

Karl, T.R., G.A. Meehl, C.D. Miller, S.J. Hassol, A.M. Waple, 

W.L. Murray. Weather and Climate Extremes in a 

Changing Climate. Regions of Focus: North America, 

Hawaii, Caribbean, and U. S. Pacific Islands. A report 

by the U. S. Climate Change Science Program and the 

Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Available at 

http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap3-3/finalreport/. 

Kunkel, K.E., T.R. Karl, H. Brooks, J. Kossin, J.H. Lawrimore, 

D. Arndt, L. Bosart, D. Changnon, S.L. Cutter, N. 

Doesken, K. Emanuel, P.Y. Groisman, R.W. Katz, T. 

Knutson, J. O’Brien, C.J. Paciorek, T.C. Peterson, K. 

Redmond, D. Robinson, J. Trapp, R. Vose, S. Weaver, 

M. Wehner, K. Wolter, D. Wuebbles. 2012. Monitoring 

and Understanding Trends in Extreme Storms: State 

of Knowledge. Bulletin of the American Meteorological 

society. 94(4): 499-514. 

62 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Kunkel, K.E., L.E. Stevens, S.E. Stevens, L. Sun, E. Janssen, 

D. Wuebbles, S.D. Hilberg, M.S. Timlin, L. Stoeck, N.E. 

Westcott, J.G. Dobson. 2013a. Regional Climate Trends 

and Scenarios for the US National Climate Assessment. 

Part 3. Climate of the Midwest U.S. Washington, DC: 

US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration. 103 

Kunkel, K.E., L.E. Stevens, S.E. Stevens, L. Sun, E. Janssen, 

D. Wuebbles, J. Rennells, A. DaGaetano, J.G. Dobson. 

2013b. Regional climate trends and scenarios for the 

U.S. National Climate Assessment. Part 1. Climate of 

the Northeast U.S. Washington, DC: US Department 

of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration. 87 p. Available at http://www.nesdis. 

noaa.gov/technical_reports/NOAA_NESDIS_Tech_ 

Report_142-1-Climate_of_the_Northeast_U.S.pdf 

Liebman, M., L.A. Schulte. 2015. Enhancing agroecosystem 

performance and resilience through increased 

diversification of landscapes and cropping systems. 

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene. 3(1): 000041. 

McGranahan, D.A. 2014. Ecologies of scale: 

multifunctionality connects conservation and agriculture 

across fields, farms, and landscapes. Land. 3(3): 739-769. 

Melillo, J.M., T.C. Richmond, G.W. Yohe, (eds.). 2014. 

Climate change impacts in the United States: the third 

National Climate Assessment. U.S. Global Change 

Research Program. 841 p. Available at http://nca2014. 

globalchange.gov/downloads 

Millar, C.I., N.L. Stephenson, S.L. Stephens. 2007. Climate 

change and forests of the future: Managing in the face of 

uncertainty. Ecological Applications. 17(8): 2145-2151. 

Moebius-Clune, B., H. van Es, J. Melkonian, B. Schindelbeck. 

2010. Mitigating and Adapting to Climate Change 

through Adaptive Nitrogen and Soil Health Management 

Ithaca, NY: Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, 

Cornell University. Available at http://adapt-n.cals. 

cornell.edu/pubs/pdfs/Moebius-Clune_mitigating_and_ 

adapting.pdf.(Accessed October 12, 2015). 

Neil Adger, W., N.W. Arnell, E.L. Tompkins. 2005. Successful 

adaptation to climate change across scales. Global 

Environmental Change. 15(2): 77-86. 

Olmstead, A.L., P.W. Rhode. 2011. Adapting North American 

wheat production to climatic challenges, 1839–2009. 

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 

108(2): 480-485. 

Palm, C., H. Blanco-Canqui, F. DeClerck, L. Gatere, P. Grace. 

2014. Conservation agriculture and ecosystem services: 

an overview. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 187: 

87-105. 

Parry, M.L., O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof. 2007. Climate 

Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. 

Technical Summary. Cambridge, UK: Intergovernmental 

Panel on Climate Change. 23-78 p. Available at http:// 

www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg2.htm 

Peterson, G.C., R. Allen, C.S.Holling. 1998. Ecological 

resilience, biodiversity, and scale. Ecosystems. 1(1): 6-18. 

Peterson, T.C., R.R. Heim, R. Hirsch, D.P. Kaiser, H. Brooks, 

N.S. Diffenbaugh, R.M. Dole, J.P. Giovannettone, K. 

Guirguis, T.R. Karl, R.W. Katz, K. Kunkel, D. Lettenmaier, 

G.J. McCabe, C.J. Paciorek, K.R. Ryberg, S. Schubert, 

V.B.S. Silva, B.C. Stewart, A.V. Vecchia, G. Villarini, 

R.S. Vose, J. Walsh, M. Wehner, D. Wolock, K. Wolter, 

C.A. Woodhouse, D. Wuebbles. 2013. Monitoring and 

Understanding Changes in Heat Waves, Cold Waves, 

Floods, and Droughts in the United States: State of 

Knowledge. Bulletin of the American Meteorological 

society. 94(6): 821-834. 

Pryor, S., D. Scavia, C. Downer, M. Gaden, L. Iverson, R. 

Nordstrom, J. Patz, G. Robertson, J. Melillo, T. Richmond. 

2014. Chapter 18: Midwest. Climate Change Impacts 

in the United States: The Third National Climate 

Assessment. US Global Change Research Program, 

Washington, DC http://nca2014. globalchange. gov/ 

report/regions/midwest. 

Rosenzweig, C., J. Elliott, D. Deryng, A.C. Ruane, C. 

Müller, A. Arneth, K.J. Boote, C. Folberth, M. Glotter, 

N. Khabarov, K. Neumann, F. Piontek, T.A.M. Pugh, E. 

Schmid, E. Stehfest, H. Yang, J.W. Jones. 2014. Assessing 

agricultural risks of climate change in the 21st century 

in a global gridded crop model intercomparison. 

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 111(9): 

3268-3273. 

Schmidt, D., E. Whitefield, D. Smith. 2014. Adapting 

to a Changing Climate: A planning guide. Animal 

Agriculture in a Changing Climate. 19 p. Available at 

http://animalagclimatechange.org/wp-content/uploads/ 

Adapting-to-a-Changing-Climate1.pdf 

Schoeneberger, M., G. Bentrup, H. de Gooijer, R. 

Soolanayakanahally, T. Sauer, J. Brandle, X. Zhou, D. 

Current. 2012. Branching out: agroforestry as a climate 

change mitigation and adaptation tool for agriculture. 

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 67(5): 

128A-136A. 

Schulte Moore, L.A. 2014. Prairie Strips: Bringing 

Biodiversity, Improved Water Quality, and Soil Protection 

to Agriculture. Missouri Prairie Journal. 35(1): 12-15. 

Shea, E.C. 2014. Adaptive management: The cornerstone 

of climate-smart agriculture. Journal of Soil and Water 

Conservation. 69(6): 198A-199A. 

Smit, B., I. Burton, R.J.T. Klein, R. Street. 1999. The Science 

of Adaptation: A Framework for Assessment. Mitigation 

and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change. 4(3-4): 

199-213. 

Smit, B., D. McNabb, J. Smithers. 1996. Agricultural 

adaptation to climatic variation. Climatic Change. 33(1): 

7-29. 

Smit, B., M. Skinner. 2002. Adaptation options in agriculture 

to climate change: a typology. Mitigation and Adaptation 

Strategies for Global Change. 7(1): 85-114. 

Smit, B., J. Wandel. 2006. Adaptation, adaptive capacity 

and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change. 16(3): 

282-292. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 63 
Stein, B.A., P. Glick, N. Edelson, A. Staudt, (eds.). 2014. 

Climate-smart conservation: putting adaptation 

principles into practice. Washington, D.C.: National 

Wildlife Federation. 262 

Stokes, C., M. Howden. 2010. Adapting agriculture to 

climate change: preparing Australian agriculture, forestry 

and fisheries for the future. CSIRO publishing 

Swanston, C.W., M.K. Janowiak. 2012. Forest Adaptation 

Resources: Climate change tools and approaches for 

land managers Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-87. Newtown 

Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Northern Research Station p. Available at http:// 

www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/40543 

Takle, E.S., C.J. Anderson, J. Andresen, J. Angel, R.W. 

Elmore, B.M. Gramig, P. Guinan, S. Hilberg, D. Kluck, R. 

Massey, D. Niyogi, J.M. Schneider, M.D. Shulski, D. Todey, 

M. Widhalm. 2014. Climate Forecasts for Corn Producer 

Decisionmaking. Earth Interactions. 18(5): 1-8. 

Taylor, R.G., B. Scanlon, P. Doll, M. Rodell, R. van Beek, Y. 

Wada, L. Longuevergne, M. Leblanc, J.S. Famiglietti, M. 

Edmunds, L. Konikow, T.R. Green, J. Chen, M. Taniguchi, 

M.F.P. Bierkens, A. MacDonald, Y. Fan, R.M. Maxwell, Y. 

Yechieli, J.J. Gurdak, D.M. Allen, M. Shamsudduha, K. 

Hiscock, P.J.F. Yeh, I. Holman, H. Treidel. 2013. Ground 

water and climate change. Nature Clim. Change. 3(4): 

322-329. 

Tobin, D., M. Janowiak, D. Hollinger, R.H. Skinner, C. 

Swanston, R. Steele, R. Radhakrishna, A. Chatrchyan. 

2015. Northeast Regional Climate Hub Assessment 

of Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation and 

Mitigation Strategies. In: T. Anderson, ed: United 

States Department of Agriculture. 65 p. Available at 

http://climatehubs.oce.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ 

Northeast%20Regional%20Hub%20Vulnerability%20 

Assessment%20Final.pdf 

U.S. EPA. 2015. Agriculture Sector Emissions. Available at 

http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/ 

sources/agriculture.html (Accessed October 12, 2015). 

USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2016. 

Statistics by Subject. Available at https://www.nass.usda. 

gov/Statistics_by_Subject (Accessed June 29). 

Valerio, M., M. Tomecek, S. Lovelli, L. Ziska. 2013. Assessing 

the impact of increasing carbon dioxide and temperature 

on crop-weed interactions for tomato and a C3 and C4 

weed species. European Journal of Agronomy. 50: 60­

65. 

Walker, B., S. Carpenter, J. Anderies, N. Abel, G. Cumming, 

M. Janssen, L. Lebel, J. Norberg, G.D. Peterson, R. 

Pritchard. 2002. Resilience management in socialecological systems: a working hypothesis for a 

participatory approach. Conservation ecology. 6(1): 14. 

Walsh, J., D. Wuebbles, K. Hayhoe, J. Kossin, K. Kunkel, G. 

Stephens, P. Thorne, R. Vose, M. Wehner, J. Willis. 2014. 

Our changing climate. Climate Change Impacts in the 

United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. 

US Global Change Research Program. 19-67. 

In light of the same challenges and opportunities of increasing 

climate variability, how will these cattle adapt? 

Walthall, C., J. Hatfield, P. Backlund, L. Lengnick, E. Marshall, 

M. Walsh, S. Adkins, M. Aillery, E.A. Ainsworth, C. 

Ammann, C.J. Anderson, I. Bartomeus, L.H. Baumgard, F. 

Booker, B. Bradley, D.M. Blumenthal, J. Bunce, K. Burkey, 

S.M. Dabney, J.A. Delgado, J. Dukes, A. Funk, K. Garrett, 

M. Glenn, D.A. Grantz, D. Goodrich, S. Hu, R.C. Izaurralde, 

R.A.C. Jones, S.-H. Kim, A.D.B. Leaky, K. Lewers, T.L. 

Mader, A. McClung, J. Morgan, D.J. Muth, M. Nearing, 

D.M. Oosterhuis, D. Ort, C. Parmesan, W.T. Pettigrew, W. 

Polley, R. Rader, C. Rice, M. Rivington, E. Rosskopf, W.A. 

Salas, L.E. Sollenberger, R. Srygley, C. Stöckle, E.S. Takle, 

D. Timlin, J.W. White, R. Winfree, L. Wright-Morton, L.H. 

Ziska. 2012. Climate change and agriculture in the United 

States: Effects and adaptation. . Washington, DC.: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. 186 

Wolfe, D., J. Beem-Miller, L. Chambliss, A. Chatrchyan, 

H. Menninger. 2011. Farming Success in an Uncertain 

Climate. In: C.C. Extension, ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell 

University. 4. Available at http://climatechange. 

cornell.edu/farming-success-in-an-uncertain-climate/. 

(Accessed July 28, 2015). 

Ziska, L., J. Bunce. 1997. Influence of increasing carbon 

dioxide concentration on the photosynthetic and 

growth stimulation of selected C4crops and weeds. 

Photosynthesis Research. 54(3): 199-208. 

Ziska, L.H., J.A. Bunce, H. Shimono, D.R. Gealy, J.T. Baker, 

P.C.D. Newton, M.P. Reynolds, K.S.V. Jagadish, C. Zhu, M. 

Howden, L.T. Wilson. 2012. Food security and climate 

change: on the potential to adapt global crop production 

by active selection to rising atmospheric carbon dioxide. 

Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological 

Sciences. 

64 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

APPeNDix 1: 

methods for Developing the Adaptation Strategies and Approaches 

The Adaptation Strategies and Approaches described in 

Chapter 3 of this publication provide a menu of responses 

to help farm enterprises adapt to climate change. These 

serve as stepping stones to enable producers to translate 

broad concepts into targeted and prescriptive tactics for 

implementing adaptation. The methods and processes 

used to develop and refine this menu are described below. 

Synthesis of Adaptation Literature 

The compilation of adaptation strategies, approaches, and 

example tactics presented in Chapter 3 was developed 

using a process originally developed for identifying adaptation actions in forest ecosystems (Swanston and Janowiak 

2012). The first step was to compile adaptation actions 

from a number of sources in both peer-reviewed and gray 

literature. Adaptation actions pertaining to on-farm production practices and infrastructure were included in this 

compilation, while actions related to farm financial management, technological developments (i.e., research and development), and government programs and insurance were 

omitted ((Smit and Skinner 2002; Walthall et al. 2012). The 

adaptation concepts and actions compiled from the literature were organized into a hierarchy of adaptation actions, 

from broad concepts to specific on-the-ground practices 

(see Figure 3.1). Based on expert review (see next section), 

adaptation actions were refined and organized into 8 strategies, 25 approaches, and more than 100 example tactics. 

Expert Comment Process 

We drew upon the experience and expertise of scientists, 

adaptation experts, and producers to provide input on 

how this expanded menu of adaptation strategies and 

approaches relates to a variety of agricultural commodities in the Midwest and Northeast, as well as other parts 

of the United States. We compiled a list of individuals with 

expertise in a variety of agricultural commodities, seeking 

representation from a variety of geographies and a balance of science and management from a range of institutions. Overall, more than 10 experts provided feedback, 

which was collected primarily through web-based survey 

software. For each adaptation strategy, experts were first 

asked a set of questions about the applicability of each 

adaptation approach under that strategy to agricultural 

production in the Midwest and Northeast. Experts were 

then asked to consider how effectively each of the associated approaches helped support the broader strategy. The 

questions were open-ended to allow reviewers to comment 

freely. Experts were asked to evaluate every strategy and 

every approach and to provide additional examples of adaptation actions (i.e., example tactics). This information was 

used to revise the initial list of Adaptation Strategies and 

Approaches. 

Testing With Agricultural Professionals and 

Producers 

A workshop hosted by the USDA Midwest Regional Climate Hub in March 2016 was used to test both the list of 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches and the Adaptation 

Workbook. Following the workshop, changes were made 

to clarify important points and produce the final menu of 

Adaptation Strategies and Approaches presented in this 

publication. 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 65 
ADAPtAtiON WORkbOOk WORkSHeetS 

Worksheet #1: Define management goals and objectives. 

Farm or 

Project Area: 

Location: 

Management 

Unit Management Goals Management Objectives Timeframes 

66 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Worksheet #2: Assess site-specific climate change impacts and vulnerabilities.
 

Management Unit Regional Climate Change Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities 

(from Step #1) Impacts and Vulnerabilities for the Farm or Project Area 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 67 
Worksheet #3: evaluate management objectives given projected impacts and 

vulnerabilities. 

Management 

Unit 

(from Step #1) 

Management 

Objectives 

(from Step #1) 

Challenges To Meeting 

Management Objective 

With Climate Change 

Opportunities for Meeting 

Management Objective 

With Climate Change 

Feasibility of 

Objectives 

Under Current 

Management 

Other 

Considerations 

Slow down to consider... 

68 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
 

Worksheet #4: identify adaptation approaches and tactics for implementation.
 

Management 

Unit Adaptation Actions Timeframes Benefits Drawbacks & 

Barriers 

Effectiveness 

and Feasibility 

of Tactic 

Recommend 

(from Step #1) Approach Tactic Tactic? 

ADAPtAtiON ReSOURCeS FOR AGRiCUltURe 69 
Worksheet #5: monitor and evaluate effectiveness of implemented actions. 


Management Unit 

(from Step #1) Adaptation Monitoring Variable Criteria for Evaluation Monitoring Implementation 

70 USDA ClimAte HUbS 
-

-

-

-

’

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, 

its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating 

in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discrim 

inating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender 

identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, 

age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a 

public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation 

for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted 

or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies 

and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. 

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of commu 

nication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audio 

tape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsi 

ble Agency or USDAs TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice 

and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at 

(800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made 

available in languages other than English. 

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA 

Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at 

How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA 

office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter 

all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of 

the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed 

form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) 

fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov. 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.