Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies: An Analysis of Plans and Issues for Congress
Congressional research reportFeb 23, 2015
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Climate Change Adaptation
by Federal Agencies: An Analysis
of Plans and Issues for Congress
(name redacted), Coordinator
Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy
February 23, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R43915
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Summary
Though Congress has debated the significance of global climate change and what federal policies,
if any, should address them, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) since 2013 has
identified the changing climate as one of the 30 most significant risks facing the federal
government. President Obama established adaptation as a prominent part of his Climate Action
Plan in June 2013. The November 2013 Executive Order 13653, Preparing the United States for
the Impacts of Climate Change, directed agencies to undertake vulnerability assessments and
planning for adaptation. The Administration aimed efforts at reducing agencies’ own risks, taking
advantage of “no-regrets” adaptation opportunities, and actions that promote resilience to climate
changes.
Scope of Report
This report reviews current actions (as of January 2015) of selected federal departments and
agencies to adapt their own missions, infrastructure, operations, and personnel to projected
climate change. (It does not address federal programs meant primarily to assist others to adapt,
although the boundary is often hard to delineate.) This synthesis is not comprehensive. It
identifies common approaches among agencies, examples of specific actions, and notable barriers
the federal government faces.
As of December 2014, almost 40 federal departments and agencies had, to varying degrees,
produced climate change adaptation plans, climate change vulnerability assessments, adaptation
milestones, and/or metrics to evaluate adaptation performance. These efforts have identified
wide-ranging vulnerabilities to potential climate changes, as well as some opportunities.
Most agencies are in formative stages of their assessments and strategic planning. Some agencies
are embarking on more detailed analyses and limited implementation actions. Overall, few
examples are apparent of day-to-day agency decisions or actions that are different as a result of
their adaptation efforts. Numerous challenges face federal officials in their efforts, including
constrained resources, data gaps regarding location-specific climate changes or existing facilities,
insufficient personnel training, and—sometimes—low priority among priorities. CRS identified
few on-the-ground adaptations and few evaluations, as yet, of the effectiveness and efficiency of
alternative adaptation approaches and actions.
It may not be possible to tally budgetary resources associated with federal adaptation efforts.
While some are reported in the President’s budget proposals, many are indivisible from the
activities with which they are associated, reflecting more of a change in how efforts are
undertaken than a change in level of effort.
Role of Congress
In light of agencies’ risk assessments and adaptation planning, Congress may consider whether
agencies have appropriate statutory authorities to take various climate change adaptation actions;
how to make data pertinent to adaptation more accessible and usable by federal agencies and the
public; the appropriate priority for federal adaptation efforts in the context of agency missions
and budgetary constraints; and timeliness of activities. Congress may provide federal agencies
direction on how they should organize and fund their adaptation efforts; whether and how to
measure and evaluate program performance (e.g., effectiveness at reducing risks to property,
Congressional Research Service
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
lives, and habitats relative to the federal and private investment of an adaptation measure); and
desirable reporting and accountability to Congress and the public. Congress also may assess the
role, costs, benefits, and timing of adaptation in the context of discussions regarding climate
change mitigation and other broad policy fields such as natural disaster, infrastructure, energy,
environmental, agricultural, federal lands, defense, health, tax, and budget policies.
The President’s FY2016 budget request and other related administrative announcements roughly
concurrent with its release on February 2, 2015, are not addressed in this report. While the
President’s FY2016 budget request and other recent announcements (e.g., executive order on
flooding and proposed FEMA rules) may mention adaptation (or “resilience”) to climate change,
most pertain to programs outside the narrow scope of this report: assessments and actions that
agencies may be undertaking to address potential risks to their missions, property, operations,
and personnel. For further detail or updates on climate change adaptation plans by individual
agencies, the report provides contact information for CRS analysts at the end of each agency
section in Part II.
Congressional Research Service
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Contents
Purpose, Scope, Method, and Structure ........................................................................................... 1
Part I: Synthesis and Possible Issues for Congress .......................................................................... 4
Background on Climate Change ................................................................................................ 7
Overarching Federal Policy and Processes .............................................................................. 12
Executive Orders and High-Level Bodies ......................................................................... 12
Executive Guidance to Agencies ....................................................................................... 14
Interagency Coordination .................................................................................................. 15
Mainstreaming Climate Change Considerations into Line Operations of Agencies ......... 16
The Climate Data Initiative ............................................................................................... 17
Synthesis of Agency Adaptation Plans and Example Actions ................................................. 17
Almost 40 Federal Agencies Have Identified Adaptation Efforts ..................................... 17
Agencies Are Adopting Common Approaches .................................................................. 18
Some Agencies Are Mainstreaming Consideration of Climate Change Risks .................. 19
Many Agencies Have Identified Climate Change Risks to Their Operations ................... 21
Agencies Have Identified Some Specific Benefits of Adaptation ..................................... 25
Agencies Face Adaptation Challenges .............................................................................. 26
Issues for Congress .................................................................................................................. 31
Part II: Summaries of Adaptation Plans in Some Federal Departments and Agencies .................. 32
Department of Agriculture ....................................................................................................... 34
Department of Commerce ....................................................................................................... 43
Department of Defense ............................................................................................................ 48
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Civil Works) ................................................................... 59
Environmental Protection Agency ........................................................................................... 62
Federal Emergency Management Agency ............................................................................... 69
Department of Health and Human Services ............................................................................ 73
Department of the Interior ....................................................................................................... 75
Bureau of Land Management ............................................................................................ 81
Bureau of Reclamation ...................................................................................................... 84
National Park Service ........................................................................................................ 86
Fish and Wildlife Service .................................................................................................. 90
U.S. Geological Survey ..................................................................................................... 92
Department of State ................................................................................................................. 95
Figures
Figure 1. Range of Projected Mid-Century Surface Air Temperature Changes for the
Continental United States ............................................................................................................. 8
Figure 2. Range of Projected Late-Century Surface Air Temperature Changes for the
Continental United States ............................................................................................................. 9
Figure 3. Range of Projected Mid-Century Precipitation Changes for the
Continental United States ........................................................................................................... 10
Figure 4. Range of Projected Late-Century Precipitation Changes for the Continental
United States ............................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 5. NASA’s Wallops Island Facilities Near Current Sea Level ............................................ 23
Congressional Research Service
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Figure 6. Federal Agencies Use Different Regional Definitions for Climate Adaptation
Work ........................................................................................................................................... 25
Figure 7. USDA Climate Hubs for Risk Adaptation and Mitigation to Climate Change .............. 36
Figure 8. Example Results of One Assessment of
Vulnerability of Coastal Military Installations ........................................................................... 57
Figure 9. Department of the Interior and Indian Lands ................................................................. 76
Figure 10. Department of the Interior’s Climate Science Centers ................................................. 79
Figure 11. Location of BLM’s Rapid Ecoregional Assessments (REAs) ...................................... 83
Figure 12. Landscape Conservation Cooperatives......................................................................... 90
Tables
Table 1. Selected Departments and Agencies with Adaptation Plans ............................................ 33
Table 2. Selected SERDP Research Relevant to Climate Change DOD Adaptation ..................... 55
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 99
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................... 99
Congressional Research Service
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Purpose, Scope, Method, and Structure1
For many years, Congress has debated the risks of projected climate change and what, if any,
federal action might be appropriate to address those risks.
In 2013, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) identified the changing climate (see Text
Box below) as one of the 30 most significant risks facing the federal government.2 The purpose of
this report is to provide background to Congress regarding efforts under way to identify and
address through adaptation potential vulnerabilities of federal agencies’ resources (lands,
facilities, operations, personnel) to projected climate change.3
To date, the executive branch has guided federal agency climate change adaptation planning,
although some Members of Congress have introduced bills to promote adaptation.4 President
Obama established adaptation as a prominent part of his Climate Action Plan, released in June
2013. The November 2013 Executive Order 13653, Preparing the United States for the Impacts
of Climate Change, continued the Administration’s focus on federal climate change preparedness
through agency and department adaptation planning. As of December 2014, more than 30 federal
departments and agencies had, to varying degrees, produced climate change adaptation plans,
vulnerability assessments, adaptation milestones, or adaptation performance metrics to address
the potential vulnerabilities of their missions, property, operations, and/or personnel to climate
change.5 Agency efforts identified wide-ranging vulnerabilities that could result from climate
changes, as well as some opportunities.
For Congress, federal adaptation efforts may raise questions of authorization, appropriations, and
oversight. For example, some Members of Congress may be concerned that federal agency
climate change adaptation planning may divert resources and attention from other, more near1
CRS expresses its appreciation to the research and other contributions to this report of Emily Ann Bruner, a Research
Fellow in the Resources, Science, and Industry Division in 2013. Ms. Bruner was an original coauthor of this report.
2
Government Accountability Office (GAO), “Limiting the Federal Government’s Fiscal Exposure by Better Managing
Climate Change Risks,” in High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-13-283 (Washington, DC, 2013), http://www.gao.gov/
highrisk/limiting_federal_government_fiscal_exposure/why_did_study. The most recent GAO list of the most
significant risks facing the federal government continued to include climate change. See Government Accountability
Office (GAO), “Limiting the Federal Government’s Fiscal Exposure by Better Managing Climate Change Risks,” in
High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-15-290 (Washington, DC, 2015), http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-290.
3
This report also does not address the variety of other executive branch actions on climate change, which were outlined
in a June 2013 speech by President Obama. See CRS Report R43120, President Obama’s Climate Action Plan,
coordinated by (name redacted). For example, the EPA proposal to control greenhouse gases is not addressed in this
report, but discussed in a separate report, CRS Report R43572, EPA’s Proposed Greenhouse Gas Regulations for
Existing Power Plants: Frequently Asked Questions, by (name redacted) et al. Also, for information on EPA
funding devoted to climate change activities, see CRS Report R43709, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):
FY2015 Appropriations, by (name redacted). For a broader overview of federal climate change funding, see CRS
Report R43227, Federal Climate Change Funding from FY2008 to FY2014, by (name redacted), (name redacted),
and (name redacted).
4
In the 113th Congress, see, as examples, the Coastal State Climate Change Planning Act (H.R. 764); Recognizing the
disparate impact of climate change on women and the efforts of women globally to address climate change (H.Con.Res.
36); the Climate Protection Act of 2013 (S. 322); the SAFE Act (S. 1202); and the WaterSense Efficiency,
Conservation, and Adaptation Act of 2014 (S. 2226).
5
Agency adaptation plans are available from many agencies via the following web page at performance.gov
(http://www.performance.gov/node/3406?view=public#supporting-info). Links to agencies’ adaptation web pages are
also available in Table 1.
Congressional Research Service
1
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
term asset management and mission challenges. In contrast, other Members may believe that
current federal action to adapt to climate change is insufficient. Key policy issues include
determining the level, nature, and mechanisms for investment in federal agency adaptation.
This report aims to synthesize information on the federal government’s efforts to adapt itself to a
changing climate. It is largely based on a CRS review of the adaptation planning documents
released by selected federal departments and agencies as of late 2014, as well as several reviews
by other organizations. Part I of the report provides an introduction to federal adaptation efforts
and challenges and a synthesis of these efforts. Part II provides summaries of these efforts at the
department and/or agency levels.
The report’s focus is the state of climate change knowledge and planning by federal agencies
addressing the potential vulnerabilities of their missions, property, operations, and/or personnel
related to projected climate change. The review is not intended to address how agencies and their
programs may help or hinder nonfederal entities in adapting to climate change, although the lines
between these topics are sometimes blurry. For example, agencies may consider that achieving
their core missions may be at risk unless they assist nonfederal entities in addressing climate
change-related risks. Programs within the Department of Agriculture (USDA) may consider that
they must assist agricultural producers in anticipating and preparing for climate change in order to
maintain productivity. Or the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has a mission to
help communities finance drinking water infrastructure, may consider that expanding the water
utility sector’s understanding of climate change risks is important to delivering future water
services.
This report is not comprehensive.6 Instead, it reviews adaptation plans of selected agencies, aims
to illustrate federal actions to prepare and adapt the government to projected climate change, and
offers emergent issues and questions for Congress.
6
Departments and agencies in Part II have been selected according to availability of CRS resources. The report may be
updated, or summaries of additional agencies may be added, depending on congressional interest and as issues evolve.
For further information, CRS experts are identified for each selected agency.
Congressional Research Service
2
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
What Is the Difference Between Climate and Weather?
“It’s really hot this week; the climate must be warming!” “There haven’t been any major land-falling hurricanes in two
years. I guess the climate isn’t changing.” What is flawed in these statements? They, like many people, confuse “weather”
with “climate.” Keeping in mind the difference can help decipher meaningful data and statements from misinformation.
“Climate” is the average and variability of meteorological and related conditions in a specific location over a long period
of time—typically 30 years, but sometimes measured over a century or even thousands of years. “Weather” is the
conditions day to day, or week to week. Compiling and analyzing weather data give a climate measurement. But no day or
week may be just like the defined climate. Some people say, “Climate is what you expect; weather is what you get.”
Unusual weather may or may not be an indicator of a changing climate. It takes decades to make a definitive
determination. “Normal” weather may occur even when the climate is shifting. Conversely, extreme weather events may
within the long-term normal.
Quiz: Which of the following true statements would be good indicators of the climate?
1. The years 2001-2010 were the hottest decade globally since 1891.
2. The global average temperature has not increased since 1998.7
3. The trend since 1979 in tropospheric temperatures measured by satellite data is +0.14 + 0.02o Celsius per
decade.
4. The cumulative loss since 1980 of the mass balance of glaciers globally has been 15.7 meters water equivalent.
“The decadal mean annual mass balance was -198 mm w.e. in the 1980s, -382 mm w.e. in the 1990s, and -740 mm
w.e. for 2000–10.”8
Answer: All of the above are true statements, but only numbers 3 and 4 are indicative of climate and climate change;
they describe changes over multidecadal periods. Statements 1 and 2 are about weather, as the time periods are too
short to provide definitive information about the climate.
7
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Climate Data Center (NCDC), “Climate at a
Glance—Time Series,” global annual temperature data from 1998 to 2013, extracted June 26, 2014.
8
Blunden, Jessica, and Derek S. Arndt, “State of the Climate in 2012,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological
Society 94, no. 8, August 1, 2013, S1-S258, doi:10.1175/2013BAMSStateoftheClimate.1.
Congressional Research Service
3
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Part I: Synthesis and Possible Issues for Congress
Irrespective of driving causes, strong evidence shows that the United States’ climate has been
changing in recent decades.9 Most scientific theory and modeling forecast that climatic variables,
such as temperature, precipitation, lengths of seasons, and permafrost patterns, will continue
changing and may become less predictable.
GAO concluded that the federal government faces multiple fiscal exposures to climate change
including, but not limited to its role as (1) the owner or operator of extensive infrastructure
such as defense facilities and federal property vulnerable to climate impacts, (2) the insurer
of property and crops vulnerable to climate impacts, (3) the provider of data and technical
assistance to state and local governments responsible for managing the impacts of climate
change on their activities, and (4) the provider of aid in response to disasters.10
Many federal agencies have identified specific ways in which climate change factors, such as
altered precipitation patterns, soil moisture, or ocean conditions, bring risks and opportunities. As
examples, numerous federally owned and federally supported assets may face increasing flood
risk as a result of projected sea-level rise.11 The opening of Arctic waters with less summer sea ice
increases opportunities for resource development, tourism, and shipping, while also raising
concerns for security, safety, and protection of natural and cultural resources. Similarly, while
many factors contribute to the incidence of wildfires, some researchers expect further warming
and, in some areas, precipitation changes to increase risks of wildfires on federally owned lands.12
Additional researchers have identified highways, railways, and aviation facilities that have
experienced failures in recent years due to high temperatures and other extreme weather, which
are expected to increase with climate change.13 The Department of Defense (DOD) expects that
thawing permafrost and rising sea levels will affect military training, installations, and land
management in some locations.14 The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
considers that climate change will affect the department’s mission and strategic goals. USDA’s
9
This report does not address the causes of multidecadal climate change. For a discussion of climate change science,
see National Research Council, Advancing the Science of Climate Change, Washington, DC, 2010; and CRS Report
R43229, Climate Change Science: Key Points, by (name redacted).
10
GAO, 2013, op. cit.
11
Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), “Key Findings for Transit
Agencies from FHWA Climate Vulnerability Pilots” (no date), http://www.fta.dot.gov/12347_14013.html; Chadwick,
Bart, Pei F. Wang, Marrisa Brand, Reinhard Flick, Adam Young, William O’Reilly, Peter Bromirski, Walter Crampton,
Robert Guza, and John Helly, A Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Sea Level Rise on Representative Military
Installations in the Southwestern United States (RC-1703) (San Diego: Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center
Pacific, March 3, 2014).
12
Westerling, A.L., H.G. Hidalgo, D.R. Cayan, and T.W. Swetnam, “Warming and Earlier Spring Increase Western
U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity,” Science 313, Research Articles, August 18, 2006, pp. 940-943. See also U.S. Global
Change Research Program, Climate Change Impacts in the United States, U.S. National Climate Assessment, 2014,
“Overview,” p. 10.
13
Meyer, Michael, Emily Rowan, Michael J. Savonis, and Anne Choate, Integrating Extreme Weather Risk into
Transportation Asset Management, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, November 1,
2012.
14
See a variety of Department of Defense (DOD) research projects at http://www.serdp.org/Program-Areas/ResourceConservation-and-Climate-Change/Climate-Change/Vulnerability-and-Impact-Assessment/%28active%29/no. Various
services within DOD have conducted numerous studies concerning potential climate change impacts.
Congressional Research Service
4
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) expects that changing climate conditions
will increase demand for genetically engineered crops, resulting in a corresponding increase in
numbers of permits, field trials, inspections, and other demands on APHIS resources.15
Numerous resource managers, engineers, economists, and others have identified benefits of
anticipating and preparing for climate change. For example, some analysis suggests that every
dollar spent on certain risk mitigation projects to reduce the consequences of natural disasters can
generate several times more in monetary benefits.16 Based on such findings, many researchers and
observers believe that anticipating the wide array of likely impacts and reducing risks through
adaptation measures would be more efficient than incurring damage, responding to the immediate
event, and then adapting reactively. The benefits of adaptation are expected to increase as the
climate system moves further and further from historical “climate normals,”17 and as man-made
and natural systems increasingly exceed their thresholds of tolerance and resilience. A range of
stakeholders has recommended that federal agencies begin the adaptation process.18
15
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Climate Change Adaptation
Plan, May 31, 2012, p. 25.
16
Multihazard Mitigation Council, Natural Mitigation Saves: An Independent Study to Assess Future Savings from
Mitigation Activities, National Institute of Building Sciences, 2005, http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.nibs.org/resource/
resmgr/MMC/hms_vol1.pdf.
17
A “climate normal” is a description of the historical climate over a prescribed area—typically 30 years. The current
“climate normal” defined by the National Climate Data Center, for example, describes averages and variability of
climate parameters from 1981 to 2010. See http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/normals/usnormals.html.
18
Government Accountability Office, Climate Change Adaptation: Strategic Federal Planning Could Help
Government Officials Make More Informed Decisions, Washington, DC, October 7, 2009, http://www.gao.gov/
products/GAO-10-113. See also National Research Council, Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change: America’s
Climate Choices: Panel on Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change, Washington, DC, National Academies Press,
2010; and Smith, Joel B., Jason M. Vogel, Terri L. Cruce, Stephen Seidel, and Heather A. Holsinger, Adapting to
Climate Change: A Call for Federal Leadership, Arlington VA, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, April 2010;
among others.
Congressional Research Service
5
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Key Definitions Relevant to Adaptation to Climate Change
The terminology used herein is intended to be consistent with the 2014 Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerabilities report
of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC):
Adaptation: The process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects. In human systems, adaptation
seeks to moderate or avoid harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. In some natural systems, human intervention
may facilitate adjustment to expected climate and its effects
Climate change: “Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified (e.g., by using
statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an extended
period, typically decades or longer. Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings such
as modulations of the solar cycles, volcanic eruptions, and persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the
atmosphere or in land use. Note that the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), in its Article 1,
defines climate change as: ‘a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters
the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over
comparable time periods.’ The UNFCCC thus makes a distinction between climate change attributable to human
activities altering the atmospheric composition, and climate variability attributable to natural causes.”
In addition, the National Research Council’s report America’s Climate Choices provides additional definitions:
Preparedness: Actions taken to plan, organize, equip, train, and exercise to build, apply, and sustain the capabilities
necessary to prevent, protect against, ameliorate the effects of, respond to, and recover from climate change-related
damages to life, health, property, livelihoods, ecosystems, and national security.
Resilience: A capability to anticipate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from significant multihazard threats with
minimum damage to social well-being, the economy, and the environment.
Risk: A combination of the magnitude of the potential consequence(s) of climate change impact(s) and the likelihood
that the consequence(s) will occur.
Vulnerabilities: The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate
change including climate variability and extremes. EPA, for example, applies this definition to its adaptation planning as
“Challenges resulting from a changing environment due to climate change that may inhibit the Agency’s ability to fulfill
its mission are referred to as vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities can be a physical change in the environment ... or that may
relate to programmatic processes or tools that may need to be adapted as a result of a changing environment.” Every
EPA office examines vulnerabilities of its programs, policies, rules, and operations to ensure they remain effective in
meeting its statutory, regulatory, and programmatic requirements.
Sources: Field, Christopher, et al., “Summary for Policy-Makers,” in Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and
Vulnerability, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, March 2014. Box SPM.2; Interagency Climate Change
Adaptation Task Force, Federal Actions for Climate Resilient Nation: Progress Report of the Interagency Climate Change
Adaptation Task Force, October 28, 2011, p. 2; EPA, Climate Change Adaptation Plan, June 29, 2012, p. 12. See also
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs.html#adaptInteragency.
What is meant by “adaptation” to ongoing and expected climate change varies widely. For some,
adaptation may be development of new varieties of plants that will grow optimally in the
expected climate. For others, it may mean new investments to address opportunities and risks
associated with the opening of sea routes in the Arctic, or to protect or replace infrastructure at
risk (e.g., from flooding with more extreme rainfall or from higher temperatures). For others, it
may entail examining assumptions built into decision-support models—for example, for
projecting electric load demand by consumers for heating and cooling, and then planning future
capacity needs on that basis.
Congressional Research Service
6
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Background on Climate Change
The federal agency climate change adaptation plans discussed in this report aimed to use a
common set of projected changes in temperature and precipitation for the continental United
States. The following four figures illustrate some of the ranges of projections that agencies used
when identifying potential impacts of climate changes and plans to adapt to them. These
projections are no longer the most recent projections, but are provided in this report because they
are those used by most agencies in their existing adaptation plans. They are not dramatically
different from updated modeling.
Source and Note Material for Figures 1 Through 4
Source: The Coupled Model Inter-comparison Project version 3 (CMIP3). Gridded data downloaded in
November 2013 from the U.S. Geological Survey at http://cida.usgs.gov/climate/derivative/; documentation available in
Hayhoe, Katherine, et al., Development and Dissemination of a High-Resolution National Climate Change Dataset, Texas
Tech University, March 22, 2013. A newer version of this inter-comparison project, CMIP5, is available at http://cmippcmdi.llnl.gov/cmip5/.
Notes: The maps show the National Climate Assessment’s climate change scenarios to 2099. According to the
CMIP3 documentation, these maps rely on a statistical “downscaling” method that combines high-resolution
observations of climate with outputs from 16 global climate models, based on four future greenhouse gas scenarios
from the 2001 Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) of the IPCC. The downscaled data sets were qualitycontrolled with observations from more than 10,000 long-term weather stations and projections generated for each
of those stations. The High scenarios rely on greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) associated with the “A2” scenario,
representing a regionalized global economy and high population growth, low economic growth, slower technology
improvements and diffusion, and other factors that contribute to high emissions and lower adaptive capacity (e.g., low
per capita wealth). The Low scenarios uses the IPCC "B1” scenario, with more globalization, lower population
growth, higher incomes, more efficient energy systems used globally, and other conditions that yield slower growth of
GHG emissions and concentrations. See http://scenarios.globalchange.gov/content/scenarios.
These maps overlay congressional districts (in black lines) to help locate projected climate changes.
Congressional Research Service
7
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Figure 1. Range of Projected Mid-Century Surface Air Temperature Changes for the
Continental United States
Change calculated using averages for the period 2040-2069, relative to the period 1971-2000
Congressional Research Service
8
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Figure 2. Range of Projected Late-Century Surface Air Temperature Changes for the
Continental United States
Change calculated using averages for the period 2070-2099, relative to the period 1971-2000
Congressional Research Service
9
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Figure 3. Range of Projected Mid-Century Precipitation Changes for the
Continental United States
Percentage change calculated using averages for the period 2070-2099, relative to the period 1971-2000
Congressional Research Service
10
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Figure 4. Range of Projected Late-Century Precipitation Changes for the
Continental United States
Percentage change calculated using averages for the period 2070-2099, relative to the period 1971-2000
Congressional Research Service
11
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Overarching Federal Policy and Processes
In recent years, the executive branch has increased the federal government’s planning efforts to
adapt to projected impacts of a changing climate. Two recent cross-agency initiatives, the Climate
Data Initiative and the Climate Resilience Fund (both discussed later), may support agencies’ own
efforts as well as the assistance they provide to the public and state and local governments.
For several decades, some agencies have invested in relatively small amounts of research to
support adaptation to climate change.19 However, few if any agencies have comprehensively
assessed how climate change may affect their abilities to achieve their authorized missions and
abilities to safeguard their properties and personnel. Since 2009, Obama Administration
initiatives have generally increased the priority, number of participants, and specificity of
products and actions aimed at federal adaptation to climate change.
Executive Orders and High-Level Bodies
Executive Order (E.O.) 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic
Performance, in October 2009,20 directed agencies to begin a formal process of Strategic
Sustainability Performance Planning that included steps to develop agency climate change
adaptation plans. Section 8(i) of the executive order requires that each federal agency evaluate
agency climate change risks and vulnerabilities to manage both the short- and long-term effects of
climate change on the agency’s mission and operations.
On November 1, 2013, President Obama strengthened existing directives with E.O. 13653,
Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change.21 The executive order reshuffled
and upgraded preceding organizational arrangements. Notably, it sunset and built on the work of
the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force (CCATF), begun in 2009 (discussed
later). In its place, E.O. 13653 established a higher-level coordinating Council on Climate
Preparedness and Resilience (the Council), chaired by the White House and drawing on at least
33 White House offices and federal agencies, to be represented at the Deputy Secretary level. The
Council’s administration was provided by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). The
executive order also added, as a co-chair of the Council, the Assistant to the President for
Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, apparently to improve coordination.
Among the mandates to the Council were preparation of an interagency inventory and assessment
of changes to land- and water-related policies, programs, and regulations necessary to make
watersheds, natural resources, and ecosystems—and the communities and economies that depend
19
For example, from the 1980s or earlier, USDA was researching potential impacts on forestry and food supply; the
Department of Energy (DOE) began looking at impacts on heating and cooling demand; the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) researched sea-level rise, water supply, and other topics; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) examined potential impacts on fisheries and Great Lakes water supplies; among other efforts.
The total research on impacts and adaptation has been a very small share of all research related to climate change.
20
Executive Office of the President, Executive Order 13514: Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and
Economic Performance, October 5, 2009, 74 Federal Register 52117, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2009/10/
08/E9-24518/federal-leadership-in-environmental-energy-and-economic-performance.
21
Executive Office of the President, Executive Order 13653: Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate
Change, November 1, 2013, 78 Federal Register 66817, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/11/06/201326785/preparing-the-united-states-for-the-impacts-of-climate-change.
Congressional Research Service
12
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
on them—more resilient to a changing climate.22 E.O. 13653 also required agencies to track their
implementation of federal high-priority adaptation actions.
E.O. 13653 also created a State, Local, and Tribal Leaders Task Force on Climate Preparedness
and Resilience composed of invited elected officials including 8 governors, 16 county and local
officials, and 2 tribal leaders.23 At its final meeting on July 16, 2014, the Task Force provided
recommendations to the Council. In response, the Administration announced additional efforts to
support nonfederal climate preparedness such as assistance to tribes24 and investing in the rural
electric system. (As these are outside the scope of this report, the announced initiatives are not
discussed further here.)
In October 2014, the Council published “Priority Agenda: Enhancing the Climate Resilience of
America’s Natural Resources.”25 It reports the initial inventory, assessment, and plan called for in
Section 3 of E.O. 13653, compiled by a Climate and Natural Resource Working Group (CNRWG)
composed of the Departments of Defense, Interior, and Agriculture, EPA, NOAA, the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or
the Corps). The report, or “Agenda,” identifies four priority strategies to make U.S. natural
resources more resilient to a changing climate:
1. foster climate-resilient lands and waters;
2. manage and enhance U.S. carbon sinks;
3. enhance community preparedness and resilience by utilizing and sustaining
natural resources; and
4. modernize federal programs, investments, and delivery of services to build
resilience and enhance sequestration of biological carbon.
Under the direction of the interagency Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, the
CNRWG will track the implementation of this Priority Agenda in coordination with the existing
efforts to implement the National Ocean Policy; the National Action Plan: Priorities for Managing
Freshwater Resources in a Changing Climate; and the National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate
Adaptation Strategy. In 2015, federal agencies will conduct a 12-month appraisal of
implementation.
22
Section 3 of E.O. 13653 specifically directs the Departments of Defense, Interior, and Agriculture, EPA, NOAA, the
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or the Corps), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to
complete this inventory assessment of policies and regulations.
23
For a listing of Task Force members, see White House, “FACT SHEET: Executive Order on Climate Preparedness,”
November 1, 2013, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/11/01/fact-sheet-executive-order-climatepreparedness.
24
http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/secretary-jewell-announces-new-tribal-climate-resilience-program.cfm.
25
Climate and Natural Resource Working Group (CNRWG), Priority Agenda: Enhancing the Climate Resilience of
America’s Natural Resources, Washington, DC, Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, October 2014,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/enhancing_climate_resilience_of_americas_natural_resources.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
13
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Executive Guidance to Agencies
Pursuant to E.O. 13514, a set of 2011 Implementing Instructions directed that
[t]hrough adaptation planning, each agency will identify aspects of climate change that are
likely to impact the agency’s ability to achieve its mission and sustain its operations and
respond strategically. Adaptation planning will help an agency reduce the negative effects
and take advantage of new opportunities that climate change may bring. Integration of
climate change adaptation planning into the operations, policies, and programs of the Federal
Government will ensure that resources are invested wisely and that Federal services and
operations remain effective in current and future climate conditions.26
Implementing Instructions relied on common planning steps identified by the CCATF for federal
agencies:
•
set a mandate to adapt with clear objectives and metrics;
•
understand how climate is changing;
•
apply understanding to assess implications for agency mission and operations;
•
develop, prioritize, and implement actions;
•
evaluate and learn; and
•
build awareness and skills.27
Presumably, the magnitudes of each of these steps are not equal. For example, much effort would
be entailed in the step of development, prioritization, and implementation of actions.
The CCATF also offered two guiding principles for agencies’ efforts to build federal resilience to
a changing climate; agencies should ensure that
•
“[f]ederal resources are invested wisely,” and
•
the federal government’s operations and services remain effective in a changing
climate.28
In many cases, government agencies were expected to seek efficient decisions, for example, by
selecting options in which the benefits of adaptation to climate change would exceed the costs. In
practice, formal cost-benefit analyses may be difficult to produce or have wide ranges of
certainty.
The 2013 E.O. 13653 in some ways promoted “mainstreaming” of climate change efforts into
existing processes and operations, rather than establishing adjunct offices and separate sets of
activities. E.O. 13653 Section 2(c) charged a variety of interagency working groups with ensuring
26
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), Federal Agency Climate Change Adaptation Planning: Implementing
Instructions, March 11, 2011, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ceq/
adaptation_final_implementing_instructions_3_3.pdf.
27
See Interagency Adaptation Planning Efforts at FedCenter.gov, https://www.fedcenter.gov/_kd/go.cfm?destination=
Page&Pge_ID=3868.
28
Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force, “Federal Actions for Climate Resilient Nation: Progress Report
of the Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force,” October 28, 2011, p. 1.
Congressional Research Service
14
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
that climate change risk considerations were incorporated into their processes. Those groups
included the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting, the Task Force on Ports,
the Interagency Working Group on Coordination of Domestic Energy Development and
Permitting, and the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice. Many
observers would consider more mainstreaming a positive and important objective. Some instances
of mainstreaming adaptation efforts in agencies are identified in a later section of this report.
On December 18, 2014, CEQ issued updated draft guidance for review and public comment on
when and how federal agencies should consider the effects of GHG emissions and climate change
in their evaluations of proposed federal actions under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA).29 The draft guidance “counsels agencies to use the information developed during the
[NEPA] review to consider alternatives that are more resilient to the effects of a changing
climate.... ”30 The draft guidance would apply to all proposed federal actions including sitespecific actions, grants for or funding of small-scale or broad-scale activities, rulemakings, and
land and resource management decisions. It does not cover actions over which agencies have no
discretion or control, including actions carrying out congressional directions.31 To illustrate some
ways in which climate changes may be relevant, the guidance provides the following description:
For example, a proposed action may require water from a stream that has diminishing
quantities of available water because of decreased snow pack in the mountains, or add heat to
a water body that is exposed to increasing atmospheric temperatures. Such considerations are
squarely within the realm of NEPA, informing decisions on whether to proceed with and
how to design the proposed action so as to minimize impacts on the environment, as well as
informing possible adaptation measures to address these impacts, ultimately enabling the
selection of smarter, more resilient actions.32
The temporal bounds for considering climate change risks to a project under NEPA review would
be determined by the life span of the proposed project, so that this guidance might be most
relevant to long-lived projects including infrastructure that may have a useful life of several
decades or more. The guidance, among other recommendations, suggests that agencies
periodically engage their environmental justice experts, and potentially the Federal Interagency
Working Group on Environmental Justice, to identify approaches to mitigate potential adverse
effects on vulnerable communities including minority and low-income populations.
Interagency Coordination
Effective coordination across agencies and programs has been a concern expressed by some
stakeholders. Overarching coordination occurs through the Council on Climate Preparedness and
Resilience established by E.O. 13653, described above. The Council convened a Climate and
Natural Resources Working Group (CNRWG), which published in October 2014 a “Priority
Agenda: Enhancing the Climate Resilience of America’s Natural Resources,”33 identifying federal
and nongovernmental actions aimed at
29
Council on Environmental Quality, Draft published for public review and comment Dec. 2014, available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/nepa_revised_draft_ghg_guidance.pdf.
30
Ibid., p. 4.
31
CRS has not researched to what degree adaptation to climate change has yet been considered under NEPA reviews.
32
Ibid., p. 22.
33
Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, Priority Agenda: Enhancing the Climate Resilience of America’s
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
15
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
protecting important landscapes and developing new science, planning and tools to foster
climate-resilient lands and waters; enhancing U.S. carbon sinks such as forests, grasslands,
wetlands and coastal areas; promoting innovative 21st century infrastructure that integrates
natural systems into community development, including green stormwater infrastructure; and
modernizing Federal programs, investments, and services to build resilience and enhance
carbon storage.
The Priority Agenda outlined further interagency monitoring and evaluation of these efforts:
Under the direction of the interagency Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, the
CNRWG will track the implementation of this Priority Agenda in coordination with the
existing efforts to implement the National Ocean Policy, the National Action Plan: Priorities
for Managing Freshwater Resources in a Changing Climate, and the National Fish, Wildlife
and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy. In 2015, Federal agencies will conduct a 12 month
appraisal of implementation.34
There exist additional mechanisms for information sharing such as through FedCenter.gov and an
Interagency Forum on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations.35 The latter appears to have
limited participation. To facilitate agency adaptation planning, the Administration has supported
cross-agency data exchange efforts such as the Climate Data Initiative, described below, and
announcements to officials from FedCenter.gov, “the Federal government’s home for
comprehensive environmental stewardship and compliance assistance information for Federal
facility managers and their agencies.”36
Within some departments such as the Department of the Interior, coordination among agencies
appears to be strong and substantive. In others, coordination mechanisms among subagency
programs are less evident, though they may operate effectively through informal practices rather
than through formal bodies.
Mainstreaming Climate Change Considerations
into Line Operations of Agencies
Overall, there have been growing efforts in many agencies to increase attention to potential
climate changes and consideration of how future changes may affect their mainline missions and
operations. This is often referred to as “mainstreaming.”
Numerous federal policies and programs exist that may reduce agencies’ vulnerabilities to climate
change, but are not labeled as “adaptation” projects or do not have explicit mandates to support
adaptation to climate change. Because they are not directly tied to climate change adaptation in
mission or title, it may be difficult to identify them. For example, the requirement in E.O. 13514,
“Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance,” that agencies
reduce their potable water intensity by 2% annually through FY2020, would likely improve
(...continued)
Natural Resources, Washington, DC, October 2014, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/
enhancing_climate_resilience_of_americas_natural_resources.pdf.
34
Ibid., p. 6.
35
https://www.fedcenter.gov/programs/greenhouse/ccforum/.
36
FedCenter.gov.
Congressional Research Service
16
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
agencies’ resilience to climate-induced shortages, but are not expressly categorized as climate
change adaptation programs. In some instances, programs closely related to adaptation might be
more effectively employed rather than if agencies created separate climate change adaptation
tasks.
The Climate Data Initiative
In March 2014, President Obama announced a new Climate Data Initiative, at
http://climate.data.gov, to provide “resources to help companies, communities, and citizens
understand and prepare for the impacts of coastal flooding and sea-level rise. Over time, this
community will expand to include more datasets.”37 The web portal provides access to federal
climate change-related statistics and information. This portal may help alleviate some of the data
accessibility issues that federal agencies identified (discussed later in this report). The data sets
available at this portal may help agencies with their own climate vulnerability assessments and
planning efforts, and may help to identify gaps and redundancies in the data available, as well as
to evaluate the data’s quality and relevance.
Synthesis of Agency Adaptation Plans and Example Actions
Almost 40 Federal Agencies Have Identified Adaptation Efforts
As of December 1, 2014, 38 federal departments and agencies had produced
•
initial (2012) Climate Change Adaptation Plans and, in most cases, second-round
(2014) Plans;38
•
vulnerability assessments;
•
adaptation plans with milestones; and/or
•
metrics to evaluate adaptation performance.
Few, if any, departments or agencies have prepared comprehensive, quantitative assessments of
the vulnerabilities of their missions and programs to projected climate change.39 DOD is perhaps
the farthest along in assessing its vulnerabilities; Secretary Hagel stated in October 2014 that the
department had nearly completed a baseline survey of its nearly 7,000 bases, installations, and
other facilities that would be used to integrate climate change considerations into planning,
operations, and training.40 Most agencies’ assessments have been at a “high level”—broad views
with generalized information, though some have been preparing detailed assessments for
locations that appear to have mission-critical vulnerabilities. Many agencies remain primarily in
stages of “fact-finding,” initial analysis, and broad planning, and sometimes outreach and training
for personnel.41
37
http://www.data.gov/climate/.
Available at http://www.performance.gov/node/3406/view?view=public#supporting-info.
39
Environmental Protection Agency, Climate Change Adaptation Plan (draft), Washington, DC, June 2012, p. 7.
40
Department of Defense, “Military Must Be Ready for Climate Change, Hagel Says,” DoD News, October 13, 2014,
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=123399.
41
Bierbaum, Rosina, Joel B. Smith, Arthur Lee, Maria Blair, Lynne Carter, F. Stuart Chapin III, Paul Fleming et al., “A
(continued...)
38
Congressional Research Service
17
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Some agencies appeared in late 2014 to be in early stages; they appear to have done little thus far
to assess the potential risks of climate change specifically to their property, operations, or
personnel, though they may conduct scientific research or produce data or decision-making tools
to serve their customers (e.g., the public, state and local agencies, etc.). For example, the
Departments of Energy and Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA), among others, released climate change adaptation plans dated in 2014 that do
not contain evidence of having conducted the vulnerability assessments or adaptation planning
required by Section 5, “Federal Agency Planning for Climate Change Related Risk,” of E.O.
13653. Their “plans” may contain many pages of descriptions in general terms of potential
climate change impacts, but do not evidence the location- and event-specific analysis displayed
by many other agencies. In some cases, it is also apparent that little updating occurred in the 2014
releases of planned actions identified in the 2012 documents. Acknowledgements of the modicum
of current information on adaptation planning in these agencies, and explanations of the reasons
(e.g., other pressing priorities, greater priority to serving the agencies’ customers, lack of financial
or expert resources, etc.) might be more useful to Congress and other readers than the generalized
and outdated presentations provided.
CRS found few specific adaptation actions, either planned or taken, that tangibly alter federal
vulnerabilities at this point in time. Certainly, selected actions resulting in risk reductions are
apparent in some agencies. Some may provide significant risk reductions over time. This seems
especially likely where agencies have identified mission-critical infrastructure that may be
vulnerable to certain aspects of climate change, or secondary effects that may result from, say,
outages or overload of electricity supply during extreme events. These examples appear to
represent the leading edge rather than the norm. The challenge in identifying on-the-ground
adaptation actions may reflect the high level of aggregation of most agency-level reporting. It is
likely that some federal programs are acting to reduce their vulnerabilities to climate in ways that
may not be captured in agency-level planning processes. Also, some agencies have begun pilot
activities that, pending positive evaluations, may be propagated more broadly for risk reductions.
Agencies Are Adopting Common Approaches
CRS found that federal agencies are largely using a set of common approaches in their climate
change adaptation efforts. These include the following:
•
researching, assessing, and planning (which are the main focus and deliverables
of current relevant executive orders);
•
implementing initial actions that are obvious, easy, and offer low- to no-regret42
options;
•
developing general options and “decision tools” transferable to other situations;
(...continued)
Comprehensive Review of Climate Adaptation in the United States: More than Before, but Less than Needed,”
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 18, no. 3, March 1, 2013, pp. 361-406, doi:10.1007/s11027012-9423-1. See also Archie, Kelli M., Lisa Dilling, Jana B. Milford, and Fred C. Pampel, “Climate Change and
Western Public Lands: A Survey of U.S. Federal Land Managers on the Status of Adaptation Efforts,” Ecology and
Society 17, no. 4, 2012, doi:10.5751/ES-05187-170420.
42
“No regrets” is a term used to describe actions that may be carried out with no or very low cost, or that provide
ancillary benefits, so they would have little adverse impact even if they do not provide expected primary results.
Congressional Research Service
18
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
•
demonstrating response measures or pilot programs that, if successful, could be
disseminated within an agency or by partner organizations; and
•
arranging outreach and training to federal personnel and contractors.
Some Agencies Are Mainstreaming Consideration of Climate Change Risks
Climate change has long been addressed adjunct to the line missions of agencies. That is, in most
agencies, climate change has been researched and analyzed in specialized staff offices that were
not generally integral to the mission-oriented “line” operations of the agency. As federal efforts to
prepare for climate change have expanded, some observers expressed concerns that adaptation
efforts might evolve as parallel, side-lined, or redundant efforts, rather than integrated into agency
operations. The November 2013 E.O. 13653 encouraged agencies to “mainstream” consideration
of future climate changes into their line operations.
CRS found that some agencies have moved beyond general awareness-building and broad policy
statements, and some have transitioned from stand-alone climate change teams and efforts
(producing primarily reports) toward “mainstreaming” climate change data and considerations
into programmatic decisions and actions. An official from DOD voiced this approach as follows:
“... [T]he crux of this report is, rather than creating a stovepipe within the DOD organizational
structure to deal with climate change, we are going to integrate climate change considerations
into the normal processes, the day-to-day jobs of everybody.”43
A few active examples include the following:
•
The Northwoods Climate Change Response Framework of the U.S. Forest
Service in northern Wisconsin. It encompasses a team of land management
agencies, private forest owners, conservation organizations, and others to share
information and experience, develop tools to factor climate change into decision
making, and implement those new tools.44
•
The Exotic Plant Management Teams of the National Park Service (NPS)
identify, control, and manage plant species that are new to, and may have
substantial impacts on, park resources. Such efforts may help protect parks from
invasive species whose ranges shift because of climate change, although the
teams’ mandate is broader than, and not formally part of, NPS’s climate
adaptation framework.45
•
A 2012 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Facilities
Design Guide incorporated climate change-related principles that “could be used
by NASA facilities project managers when determining design requirements and
writing statements of work, and by Architect-Engineer firms who might have
43
John Conger, Acting Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Installations and Environment, as quoted by DOD,
“DOD Wraps Climate Change Response into Master Plans,” DoD News, November 26, 2013, http://www.defense.gov/
news/newsarticle.aspx?id=121237.
44
U.S. Forest Service, Northern Institute of Applied Climate Science, Northwoods Climate Change Response
Framework, http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/niacs/climate/northwoods/.
45
For more on the National Park Service’s (NPS’s) Exotic Plant Management Teams, see http://www.nature.nps.gov/
biology/invasivespecies/EPMT_teams.cfm.
Congressional Research Service
19
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
limited experience working with NASA.”46 This guidance is limited to principles
and references to requirements and standards, and is a step toward considering
what design modifications might be merited in a particular project.
•
The Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or the Corps) has launched the
Comprehensive Evaluation of Projects with Respect to Sea Level Change (SLC)
(CESL) to screen and provide an initial assessment of the vulnerability of its
coastal projects to sea-level change in the 50- and 100-year planning horizons.47
It is a web-based tool that allows users to enter data, view project information,
view SLC curves for tidal gauges at or near project sites, view Extreme Water
Level information, and view projects on a map interface.
•
DOD has identified the Hampton Roads, VA, region, which houses the largest
concentration of U.S. military sites in the world, as experiencing recurrent
flooding today. The department has begun to address a projected sea-level rise
there of 1.5 feet over the next 20 to 50 years.48
Maintaining Hydropower Efficiency and Flexibility: Hoover Dam Example
Extended drought conditions over the last decade have decreased levels at Lake Mead behind Hoover Dam on the
Colorado River, operated by the Department of the Interior (DOI) Bureau of Reclamation. The low water levels
reduced electricity generation and increased turbine operations in zones of high wear and tear (i.e., rough zones). The
Bureau of Reclamation currently is investing in “wide head turbine runners,” increasing the generating units’ ability to
operate efficiently and generate power over a wider range of lake levels. The first wide-range turbine at Hoover Dam
became operational in June 2012, and future additional installations are planned through FY2015.
These investments illustrate how modifications to existing facilities can improve the flexibility and efficiency of
operations of multipurpose infrastructure under different water management conditions, including potentially future
drier conditions. The challenges to western states’ water resources infrastructure management are shaped not only
by climate conditions, but also by land use, agricultural activities, municipal and industrial demands, and species
protections. Since its creation in 1902, the Bureau of Reclamation has attempted to harness the intermittent
precipitation in the West for socially and economically productive uses. The region’s precipitation patterns have been
at the heart of its mission and its challenges since the agency’s inception.
Congress, in Section 9505 of P.L. 111-11, required the Secretary of Energy to assess the vulnerability of federal
hydroelectric power production to water supply risks posed by global climate change. This assessment, along with
ongoing efforts by the Bureau of Reclamation (e.g., its follow-up to a December 2012 Colorado River Supply and
Demand Study) and other federal hydropower operators, may help to identify federal hydropower facilities at risk
from climate variability and change.
While CRS identified these examples, CRS was not able to identify widespread changes in
federal decision making, management, or operations associated with adaptation to projected
climate change. A recent academic survey of four federal land management agencies concluded
that “These adaptation efforts within agencies, however, all represent initiatives promulgated at
the headquarters level. Ultimately, to be considered effective, these policies must result in
46
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Facilities Engineering Division, NASA Facilities Design
Guide, August 2012, http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codej/codejx/Assets/Docs/
NASA_Facilities_Design_Guide_Final_Submittal_-_8_8_124.pdf.
47
Army Corps of Engineers, “Climate Change Adaptation—Comprehensive Evaluation of Projects with Respect to
Sea-Level Change,” web page at http://www.corpsclimate.us/ccacesl.cfm.
48
Department of Defense, FY 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap, October 13, 2014, in “Foreword,”
http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/CCARprint.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
20
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
changes to decision making practices ‘on the ground’ by agency resource managers connected
with the resource in question.”49
Many Agencies Have Identified Climate Change Risks to Their Operations
To date, many agencies have invested the majority of their efforts in understanding their
vulnerabilities to, or benefits from, climate change. Agency officials and observers have
identified a number of ways in which climate shifts may affect agencies’ operations and assets,
including the following examples:
•
Arctic sea ice melting allows increased activity in the Far North, prompting the
U.S. Coast Guard and DOD to increase attention to an evolving Arctic Strategy
for safety, security, resource development, and environmental protection.50
•
DOD, in its FY 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap, concluded that “A
changing climate will have real impacts on our military and the way it executes
its missions. The military could be called upon more often to support civil
authorities, and provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in the face of
more frequent and more intense natural disasters. Our coastal installations are
vulnerable to rising sea levels and increased flooding, while droughts, wildfires,
and more extreme temperatures could threaten many of our training activities.
Our supply chains could be impacted, and we will need to ensure our critical
equipment works under more extreme weather conditions. Weather has always
affected military operations, and as the climate changes, the way we execute
operations may be altered or constrained.”51 The report further noted that climate
change-related effects have been observed at DOD facilities.
•
“The Department of Agriculture estimates an increase of as much as 100 percent
in the number of acres burned by wildfires annually by 2050, putting residents
and firefighting employees at greater risk, further impacting the agency’s budget
and resources, and reducing its capacity to provide other critical services. Fire
suppression funding has already grown from 16 percent in 1995 to 42 percent of
the U.S. Forest Service’s budget.”52
•
USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) is evaluating whether its commodity crop
programs encourage adaptation to a changing climate or the status quo.53
•
Many NASA facilities have been damaged or closed temporarily in recent years
by tornadoes, hurricanes, flooding, and wildfires. An agency-wide assessment
49
Archie, Kelli M., Lisa Dilling, Jana B. Milford, and Fred C. Pampel, “Climate Change and Western Public Lands: A
Survey of U.S. Federal Land Managers on the Status of Adaptation Efforts,” Ecology and Society 17, no. 4, 2012,
doi:10.5751/ES-05187-170420.
50
White House, National Strategy for the Arctic Region, May 2013, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
docs/nat_arctic_strategy.pdf.
51
DOD, FY 2014 Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap, October 13, 2014, http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/
CCARprint.pdf.
52
CEQ, “Obama Administration Releases Federal Agency Climate Plans on Fifth Anniversary of Presidential
Sustainability Initiative,” the White House, October 31, 2014, http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ceq/
Press_Releases/_October_31_2014.
53
Farm Service Agency (FSA), USDA Farm Service Agency: Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, USDA, February
2013, p. 39.
Congressional Research Service
21
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
noted that more than two-thirds of its infrastructure property value—assets worth
about $20 billion—are within 16 vertical feet of current sea level and at risk from
sea-level rise (see Figure 5) alone.54 The assessment found that “changing
climate will impact facility operations (e.g., water management, energy
demands), natural resources (e.g., tidal marsh habitat and increase in invasive
species, increase in pest species), infrastructure that is vital to mission success
(e.g., flooded buildings and launch assets, buildings too hot to work in), quality
of life in the community (e.g., increased number of hot days), and the region’s
economy (e.g., increased percentage of public funds for utility costs, firefighting,
and flood control).”55 NASA identified climate-related vulnerabilities to its
missions including launch capabilities, space operations, ground systems, and
training and test facilities. NASA is pursuing detailed analysis and planning at a
minimum of eight facilities.56
•
NPS found that “The widespread nature of climate change effects amplifies
ongoing resource impacts such as habitat fragmentation, water scarcity, pollution,
invasive species, etc.” It plans to “mainstream” climate change adaptation at a
policy level; it is proposing that its fundamental mission of preserving lands in
their historical condition may need to be rethought in an era of shifting climates
and habitats.57 NPS is also analyzing specific park and facility issues associated
with climate change.
•
EPA plans to examine how climate change may put at risk more contaminant
releases due to severe weather, flooding, or sea-level rise at Corrective Action
sites, Superfund sites, Brownfield sites, chemical storage facilities, or landfills.
Saltwater intrusion and increased ground water salinity in coastal aquifers may
also increase the permeability of clay liners installed at waste sites such as
landfills, allowing contaminants to spread to nearby properties. Contaminant
releases may increase the risk of adverse health and environmental impacts.58
The Text Box above describes an action at Hoover Dam that could help improve an agency’s
resilience to a changing climate, though it is not an adaptation to projected climate change per se.
The likelihood of complementary benefits of actions that improve the resilience of agencies to
climate changes and that provide other benefits may make it difficult to discern and evaluate, now
54
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA Climate Risk Management Plan and Report, 2012. See also
Dominguez, Olga, and Deborah Feng, “Risk to Resilience: NASA’s Framework for Addressing Climate
Change Impacts & Adaptation,” presented at the Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Change Risks Symposium,
Ames Research Center, 2011, http://environment.arc.nasa.gov/symposium2011/symposium/OlgaDominguezsymposium-1.pdf.
55
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Facilities Engineering Division, NASA Facilities Design Guide,
August 2012, http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codej/codejx/Assets/Docs/
NASA_Facilities_Design_Guide_Final_Submittal_-_8_8_124.pdf.
56
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Facilities Engineering Division, op. cit.
57
National Park Service, Climate Change Response Program Adaptation Brief, U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI).
http://www.nps.gov/subjects/climatechange/upload/AdaptationBriefv-4.pdf; National Park System Advisory Board,
Revisiting Leopold: Resource Stewardship in the National Parks, August 25, 2012, at http://www.nps.gov/calltoaction/
PDF/LeopoldReport_2012.pdf.
58
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plan—Draft,
Environmental Protection Agency, June 2013, http://epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/impacts-adaptation/office-ofsolid-waste-and-emergency-response-plan.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
22
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
and in the future, the degree to which agencies are making adaptations and what effect they may
have.
Figure 5. NASA’s Wallops Island Facilities Near Current Sea Level
Source: NASA, from Dominguez, Olga, and Deborah Feng, “Risk to Resilience: NASA’s Framework for
Addressing Climate Change Impacts & Adaptation,” presented at the Resilience and Adaptation to Climate
Change Risks Symposium, Ames Research Center, 2011.
Most agencies and multiagency consortia are regionalizing their approaches to climate change
adaptation. This facilitates their assessments according to physically linked locations. Looking
more broadly, this is also a complicating factor as definitions of regions often differ across
programs and agencies. They often are not consistent with the eight geographic regions used
under the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) and the nine plus Alaska
and Hawaii used by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) for science and climate
monitoring purposes. (See Figure 6.)
•
DOI uses Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) and Climate Science
Centers (CSCs) as geographic coordinating units.
•
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) further uses regions for Rapid
Ecological Assessments (REAs) to support vulnerability and adaptation
assessments.
Congressional Research Service
23
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
•
NOAA relies on centers of Regional Integrated Science and Assessments
(RISAs), in addition to NCDC’s regions.
•
EPA uses the USGCRP regions and adds a “Montane” region in the
Intermountain West, though these do not correspond with EPA’s organizational
Regional Offices.
The different definitions of regions present a challenge within and across agencies, as well as to
stakeholders, in accessing relevant information and understanding climate change impacts and
related programs.
Figure 6 illustrates some of the major federal regional schemes used by various agencies, and
also overlays state and congressional district boundaries. The different regional schemes are tied
to the agencies’ varying missions and resources; however practical, the differences also pose
challenges for sharing and interpreting information across agencies and with the public. (This is
discussed later in this report.) (A URL below Figure 6 provides access to an interactive PDF
version of this map that allows the user to turn on and off map layers to facilitate viewing and
comparing of different boundary definitions.)
In sum, most agencies have planning efforts under way to identify the vulnerabilities and
opportunities of their missions, assets, and personnel to climate change. Much of the current
adaptation planning appears confined to information gathering and analysis at a high level. A
number of agencies focus almost exclusively on how they may help their clients (e.g., states,
businesses, specific populations, etc.) understand risks and understand adaptation planning, but
have done little to understand the vulnerabilities or opportunities to the federal agency itself.
Among those agencies that have begun implementation, measures to adapt appear mostly as pilot
or demonstration efforts. A number of agencies acknowledge that they have not moved
substantially into implementing adaptation actions.59 A few federal entities, including DOD,
EPA,60 NASA,61 and the Department of Transportation (DOT),62 appear to be among the more
advanced in preparing their assets, programs, and operations for climate change. (Other agencies
may have focused their attention primarily on assisting their clients to anticipate and prepare for
climate change.)
59
For example, the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS’s) 2013 sustainability performance plan states
that “While HHS has made significant progress since 2010, the Department recognizes a gap between the
conceptualization of its Sustainability and Climate Adaptation Plans and the actual implementation of those plans
within health and human service programs.” HHS is not alone at this stage.
60
EPA has, office by office, released Climate Change Adaptation Implementation Plans for public review and
comment, at http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/fed-programs/EPA-impl-plans.html. These draft plans
identify specific vulnerabilities in each program, as well as actions that the offices propose to take to reduce agency
vulnerabilities. For example, the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention noted that potentially toxic
chemicals may be stored in low-lying areas and could be at risk of release in the event of major weather events or
flooding; the office may need to investigate the locations of such chemical facilities and evaluate this uncertain risk.
61
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA Climate Risk Management Plan and Report, op. cit.
62
Department of Transportation, “DOT Transportation and Climate Change Clearinghouse,” accessed March 24, 2014,
http://climate.dot.gov/impacts-adaptations/planning.html. DOT’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has as part
of its adaptation efforts supported nonfederal “climate resilience pilots” in 16 states. For more on FHWA’s climate
adaptation efforts, see https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/climate_change/adaptation/
ongoing_and_current_research/summary/index.cfm. Its recent efforts have been research to analyze adaptation options
to increase resiliency (e.g., enlarging culverts, raising bridges, using more heat-resistant materials) and the integration
of climate resilience into FHWA programs (e.g., updated engineering circulars). Its next steps are aimed at developing
tools and information for states to assess their vulnerabilities.
Congressional Research Service
24
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Figure 6. Federal Agencies Use Different Regional Definitions
for Climate Adaptation Work
Selected federal regional schemes shown relative to state and congressional district boundaries
Interactive Version of Map: An interactive PDF version of this map is available at http://www.crs.gov/
products/map/pdf/MAP10000.pdf. In the PDF version, the viewer may clear all boundaries by clicking the “CLEAR
ALL” icon, or may turn on and off individual “layers” by clicking the checkboxes in the legend.
Sources: CRS map from geographic information provided by various federal agencies. National Climate
Assessment regions defined at http://www.globalchange.gov; National Climate Data Center’s (NCDC’s) U.S.
Climate Regions are defined at http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/maps/us-climate-regions.php;
Department of the Interior’s (DOI’s) Regional Climate Science Centers are defined at http://www.doi.gov/csc/
index.cfm; the Landscape Conservation Cooperative’s regions are at http://lccnetwork.org/Find.
Agencies Have Identified Some Specific Benefits of Adaptation
A number of agency action plans have identified some of the benefits that could arise from
planning for climate change adaptation. Examples include the following:
•
identifying actions that have no cost or would have net benefits regardless of the
magnitude of future climate change impacts (e.g., EPA/OPPTS, identifying
where toxic chemicals are stored in existing flood zones);
•
limiting federal financial liability for disaster losses and encouraging efficient
risk management by private decision makers (e.g., increasing community
preparedness for extreme weather events);
•
modifying infrastructure specifications or considering locations for new facilities
to be compatible with uncertain future climate conditions (e.g., NASA’s review
and re-specification of building requirements);
Congressional Research Service
25
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
•
making assets and operations robust to potential disruptions of water or energy
supplies (e.g., making arrangements for national laboratories to maintain
essential operations when water supplies become extremely low);
•
facilitating more rapid and efficient responses to acute weather events where and
when they occur; and
•
identifying potential emerging opportunities with climate change such as
increasing accessibility of Arctic resources or lengthening growing seasons in
some locations.
Most of these benefits are abstract, as relatively few adaptation activities have yet been carried
out. Evaluations may be planned to develop empirical, and possibly quantitative, information
about the effectiveness, costs, and benefits of various adaptation measures.
Agencies Face Adaptation Challenges
Most reports on climate change adaptation identify “barriers” to effective adaptation. For
example, a 2009 GAO review of the status of federal adaptation efforts concluded the following:
The challenges faced by federal, state, and local officials in their efforts to adapt fell into
three categories, based on our analysis of questionnaire results, site visits, and available
studies. First, available attention and resources are focused on more immediate needs,
making it difficult for adaptation efforts to compete for limited funds. Second, insufficient
site-specific data, such as local projections of expected changes, makes it hard to predict the
impacts of climate change, and thus hard for officials to justify the current costs of
adaptation efforts for potentially less certain future benefits. Third, adaptation efforts are
constrained by a lack of clear roles and responsibilities among federal, state, and local
agencies.63
Evidently, the attention to vulnerabilities and adaptation at the White House level has resulted in a
great deal of effort at communication and report-writing in most agencies. Beyond reports, there
remain challenges of sharing useful information, making programmatic decisions, and carrying
out first-priority measures that reduce agency vulnerabilities. Three of the most frequently cited
challenges are funding, information management and use, and uncertainty. Each is discussed
below.
Funding
Adaptation competes with other agency priorities and missions. Recent reports have cited “lack of
funding” as a primary challenge to adaptation.64 Resources for fact-finding, assessment, and
63
Government Accountability Office, Climate Change Adaptation: Strategic Federal Planning Could Help
Government Officials Make More Informed Decisions, Washington, DC, October 7, 2009, p. 31. See also Bierbaum,
Rosina, Joel B. Smith, Arthur Lee, Maria Blair, Lynne Carter, F. Stuart Chapin III, Paul Fleming et al., “A
Comprehensive Review of Climate Adaptation in the United States: More than Before, but Less than Needed,”
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 18, no. 3, March 1, 2013, pp. 361-406, doi:10.1007/s11027012-9423-1.
64
See, for example, Archie, op cit., Bierbaum, op. cit.; Federal Highway Administration, “Assessment of the Body of
Knowledge on Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation Measures into Transportation Projects—Overcoming
Barriers,” web page, January 14, 2014, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/climate_change/adaptation/
resources_and_publications/transportation_projects/page06.cfm; GAO, Climate Change: Federal Efforts Under Way to
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
26
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
decision-making resources may be most readily identifiable. In contrast, adaptations may take
place as actions incremental to and obscured within existing program efforts. For example,
adaptation plans may call for updating climate data in decision models or operational plans, or
may require changing the types of materials or locations for infrastructure projects. The costs of
such adaptation efforts may be difficult to estimate or identify in agency budget requests. Only a
few agencies specifically requested appropriations in the FY2016 or earlier budget requests for
adaptation activities.65 Current budget constraints and federal budget scrutiny may not permit
greater financial resources for federal adaptation actions.
While the President’s FY2016 budget request and other recent announcements (e.g., executive
order on flooding and proposed FEMA rules) may mention adaptation (or “resilience”) to climate
change, most pertain to programs outside the narrow scope of this report: assessments and actions
that agencies may be undertaking to address potential risks to their missions, property,
operations, and personnel. For further detail or updates on climate change adaptation plans by
individual agencies, the report provides contact information for CRS analysts at the end of each
agency section in Part II.
Information Management and Use
Multiple federal agencies, as well as nonfederal entities, readily acknowledge that finding and
accessing the climate and related data they need—and having the right skill sets to use those
data—remain important obstacles to preparing for climate change. For example, federal officials
often lack information applicable to their particular agencies, programs, or localities, especially
regarding climate data (recent and projected). Agencies identified challenges in acquiring
information on projections of demographic, economic, technological, and other factors that might
influence choices among options. For example, a number of agencies identified lack of
information on facilities and other built infrastructure (e.g., dams, roadways, railways, etc.) as a
key need to further develop their adaptation plans under E.O. 13514 and E.O.13653.66
Acquiring information to inform adaptation decisions is not solely a lack of precise information,
but also its disarray or difficulty to use from a user’s perspective.67 In response, the Obama
Administration initiated an Internet portal (http://www.data.gov/climate/) intended to provide
eventually a one-stop shop for climate-related data and tools. The website provides data sets,
mapping tools, and “challenges” to nonfederal entities to help address specific problems by
(...continued)
Assess Water Infrastructure Vulnerabilities and Address Adaptation Challenges, Washington, DC, December 13, 2013.
65
CRS Report R43227, Federal Climate Change Funding from FY2008 to FY2014, by (name redacted), (name redac
ted), and (name redacted).
66
Seyller, Emily A., “Overview of Research and Information Needs from the 2012 Agency Adaptation Plans,”
presented at the 2013 White House Council on Environmental Quality GreenGov Workshop on Climate Science and
Adaptation, August 2, 2013.
67
See example studies: Kirchhoff, Christine J., Maria Carmen Lemos, and Suraje Dessai, “Actionable Knowledge for
Environmental Decision Making: Broadening the Usability of Climate Science,” Annual Review of Environment and
Resources 38, no. 1, 2013, pp. 393-414; McNie, Elizabeth C., “Delivering Climate Services: Organizational Strategies
and Approaches for Producing Useful Climate-Science Information,” Weather, Climate, and Society 5, no. 1, January
2013, pp. 14-26, doi:10.1175/WCAS-D-11-00034.1; Lackstrom, Kirsten, Nathan P. Kettle, Benjamin Haywood, and
Kirstin Dow, “Climate-sensitive Decisions and Time Frames: a Cross-sectoral Analysis of Information Pathways in the
Carolinas,” Weather, Climate, and Society, November 11, 2013.
Congressional Research Service
27
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
developing applications (i.e., apps) or other solutions. Its initial phases incorporated agency
information related to coastal flooding, resilience of food supply, and ecosystems.
Some agencies are also tackling this access problem. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), for
example, sees among its functions the responsibility to provide climate change information to
other agencies within DOI (and to nonfederal entities) to assist them in adaptation assessment. It,
along with DOD, DHS, and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, provides data sets
containing mapping information on infrastructure and geographical features that can assist federal
and nonfederal organizations with climate preparedness.68
There are several data portals in various agencies with climate-related data, and the location and
distinctions among them may not be clear to most potential users. President Obama, in June 2013
and again in March 2014, announced a “climate data initiative” to make relevant data more easily
accessible (discussed earlier).69 One effort to make climate projections more easily available is a
publicly available archive of high-resolution (“downscaled”) results from the latest phase of
global climate modeling (CMIP5).70 Another is the USGCRP’s MATCH portal, a Metadata
Access Tool for Climate and Health, which offers centralized access to thousands of governmentheld data sets related to health, the environment, and climate science.71
The ability of organizations to take advantage of climate change-related information is also
critical. A number of reports suggest that improving in-house expertise to use such information
may be important, as well as institutional flexibility to adapt to new information.72
Uncertainty
Planning and decision making in the face of uncertainty are a challenge in many fields. For
adaptation action, the wide range of uncertainty in global climate projections increases over time,
and increases as regional and local trends and impacts are protected.73 Uncertainties also are
68
Data.gov (https://www.data.gov/climate/).
Executive Office of the President, “The President’s Climate Action Plan,” June 2013; White House, “FACT SHEET:
The President’s Climate Data Initiative: Empowering America’s Communities to Prepare for the Effects of Climate
Change,” March 19, 2014, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/03/19/fact-sheet-president-s-climate-datainitiative-empowering-america-s-comm.
70
Maurer, E.P., L. Brekke, T. Pruitt, B. Thrasher, J. Long, P. Duffy, M. Dettinger, D. Cayan, and J. Arnold, “An
Enhanced Archive Facilitating Climate Impacts and Adaptation Analysis,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological
Society, November 18, 2013. The archive is available through Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: http://gdodcp.ucllnl.org/downscaled_cmip_projections.
71
http://match.globalchange.gov/geoportal/catalog/main/home.page.
72
See, for example, Bolson, Jessica, and Kenneth Broad, “Early Adoption of Climate Information: Lessons Learned
from South Florida Water Resource Management,” Weather, Climate, and Society 5, no. 3, July 2013, pp. 266-281,
doi:10.1175/WCAS-D-12-00002.1. The experience of the South Florida Management District may be helpful to
understanding the challenges of federal agencies.
73
The core climate change scenarios are produced by global-scale models that provide output with resolution typically
at 100 to 200 kilometers square (62 miles to 124 miles square). Because of ongoing uncertainty in modeling approaches
and the underlying variability in climate, models run “ensembles”—or many computer runs—of each scenario and then
provide ensemble averages, which are then averaged with the ensembles of other models. These provide ranges of
uncertainty and other statistics that analysts may use to consider how future climate may differ from historical patterns
in specific locations. However, the resolution of global models is typically too coarse for local analyses, so the data are
“downscaled” with regional models or statistical techniques to finer resolutions, such as 12-kilometer and sometimes
800-meter resolutions (7.5 miles and 0.5 mile, respectively). For an example of very recent downscaling, see Bureau of
Reclamation, Downscaled CMIP3 and CMIP5 Climate and Hydrology Projections: Release of Downscaled CMIP5
(continued...)
69
Congressional Research Service
28
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
greater for variables other than annual average surface-air temperature (e.g., precipitation, runoff)
and for more regional or local precision.
The federal adaptation planner is tasked with acquiring and using future climate scenarios and
meshing those projections and their uncertainties with local and historical information and
science relevant to federal missions, property, personnel, and/or operations. Planning for climate
change means trying to discern when that change may become important and how—when it may
exceed the weather or environmental variability to which the existing assets or operations may
already be adapted. Statistical methods become important to making robust decisions, and
determining which statistical measures to use is an element of ongoing research. (See Text Box
below.) A question of particular concern for planning adaptation regards the existence and timing
of potential “tipping points,” at which climate change exceeds the tolerance of existing climaterelated systems and may change abruptly, and in possibly unexpected ways.
(...continued)
Climate Projections, Comparison with preceding Information, and Summary of User Needs, prepared by DOI, Bureau
of Reclamation, Technical Services Center, Denver, CO, 2013.
Congressional Research Service
29
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
When Does Local Climate Change Become Evident? Assistance from Statistics
For decades, scientists and engineers have used statistical evidence to discern the strength of a measurement
compared to underlying variability, or “noise.” In recent climate research and adaptation planning, such “signal to
noise ratios” helps analysts to understand how significant climate changes may be relative to the variability to which
systems are accustomed. To facilitate federal preparations for climate change, the General Services Administration
(GSA) recently issued a request for information on service providers that might provide critical statistical analyses.
GSA defined climate impacts as changes in variations in mean state and other aspects of climate over time, and the
time at which the “signal” of climate change may emerge from the “noise” of natural climate variability. Below are
examples of some of these statistical metrics and their significance in addressing adaptation efforts.
Time of Emergence/Time of Departure. Statistics to examine when a warming or otherwise changing climate
will be outside the range of natural climate variability—that is, outside of what current systems have been exposed to
in the past. The significance of these estimates lies in helping to identify populations and ecosystems that may be most
susceptible to the nearest-term impacts and may require accelerated adaptation planning.
Mitigation Signal. Estimates of the time when a detectable signal of mitigation arises from ongoing and future
reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. The complexities of feedbacks between greenhouse gas forcing and the
internal variability of the climate system may prove to mask or delay reductions in warming expected from mitigation
scenarios. The significance of these estimates lies in helping to identify when climate benefits from mitigation efforts
may be detected, and could provide key inputs to cost-benefit analyses employed in adaptation planning efforts.
Climate Fingerprint. Estimates to detect the signals of various anthropogenic and natural external factors (the
fingerprints) from amid the noise of historical climate variability. These statistics help to assess confidence in the
diagnoses of climate change and in designing effective policies that focus on the “right” causes and related projections
of change.
While subtle changes in methodology and historical time period selected can affect regional and temporal predictions,
improvement and consistency in calculation of these and similar statistical analyses are important in designing relevant
and cost-effective policy strategies.
Sources: Deser et al., “Communication of the role of natural variability in future North American climate,” Nature
Climate Change, October 2012; GSA, RFI XZ003-XZ988-3, “Services to Support Federal Climate Change Adaptation
Activities,” September 26, 2013; Hasselmann, “On the signal-to-noise problem in atmospheric response studies,”
Meteorology of Tropical Oceans, 1979; Hawkins and Sutton, “Time of emergence of climate signals,” Geophysical Research
Letters, January 2012; Mahlstein et al., “Early onset of significant local warming in low latitude countries,” Environmental
Research Letters, 2011; Mora et al., “The projected timing of climate departure from recent variability,” Nature,
October 2013; Santer, B.D., et al., “Separating signal and noise in atmospheric temperature changes: The importance
of timescale,” J. Geophysical Research, November 2011; Santer et al., “Identifying human influences in atmospheric
temperature,” PNAS, January 2013; Tebaldi and Friedlingstein, “Delayed detection of climate mitigation benefits due to
climate inertia and variability,” PNAS, September 2013.
Congressional Research Service
30
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Issues for Congress
To date, the White House has guided federal agency climate change adaptation planning. As
agencies continue their planning efforts, Congress may opt to oversee adaptation efforts, consider
responses to third parties’ recent and past recommendations regarding federal adaptation,74 and
provide advice or statutory direction to the executive branch or specific agencies, as well as
consider the funding and data used to support these efforts. Congress may consider the following:
•
reviewing the significance and nature of the climate change risks to the federal
government (including the distribution and timing of those risks);
•
evaluating which, if any, preparations and adaptations are cost-beneficial and
feasible; and
•
assessing whether to alter specific agencies’ existing authorities.75
Congress may act to provide federal agencies direction on whether and how adaptation efforts are
to be organized and funded, and their performance measured and evaluated (e.g., effectiveness at
reducing damage to property, lives, and habitat relative to the federal and private investment of an
adaptation measure). Congress may decide to review the accessibility of adaptation-relevant
information and the strategies under way to improve it, and consider options for authorities,
directions, and resources to overcome data management and accessibility challenges.
Congress may consider the role, costs, and benefits of adapting federal agencies to projected
climate change. Considerations may arise in the broader context of whether and how to address
climate change, as well as in other public policy concerns such as policies affecting natural
disaster preparedness; ocean, energy, environmental, agricultural, and federal lands management;
national and international security; public health; and public finance and budgets. There are
complementarities and trade-offs among major adaptation approaches and actions in these
broader fields of policy. Congress may seek improved information and analysis to support
examination of the socioeconomic, distributional, political, and moral dimensions of various
adaptation approaches, of making policy choices under uncertainty, and of appropriate federal and
nonfederal roles and responsibilities.76
74
GAO, among others, has provided recommendations in the past regarding federal adaptation activities. As examples,
see Government Accountability Office, Climate Change Adaptation: Strategic Federal Planning Could Help
Government Officials Make More Informed Decisions, Washington, DC, October 7, 2009, http://www.gao.gov/
products/GAO-10-113; GAO, Climate Change: Various Adaptation Efforts Are Under Way at Key Natural Resource
Management Agencies, GAO-13-253, Washington, DC, May 31, 2013; and Bierbaum, Rosina, et al., “A
Comprehensive Review of Climate Adaptation in the United States: More Than Before, but Less Than Needed,”
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 18, no. 3, March 1, 2013, pp. 361-406.
75
One review commissioned to inform the National Climate Assessment recommends that “regulations, laws, and
agency missions should be reevaluated with climate change in mind” (Bierbaum, Rosina, et al. “A Comprehensive
Review of Climate Adaptation in the United States: More Than Before, but Less Than Needed,” Mitigation and
Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 18, no. 3, March 1, 2013, pp. 361-406, doi:10.1007/s11027-012-9423-1. See
also CRS Report R42613, Climate Change and Existing Law: A Survey of Legal Issues Past, Present, and Future, by
(name redacted).
76
See CRS Report R41973, Climate Change: Conceptual Approaches and Policy Tools, by (name redacted). See also
Congressional Budget Office, Uncertainty in Analyzing Climate Change: Policy Implications, January 2005.
Congressional Research Service
31
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Part II: Summaries of Adaptation Plans in
Some Federal Departments and Agencies
More than 30 federal departments and agencies have produced reports on their climate change
adaptation efforts. Agencies’ adaptation plans are available from many agencies as appendixes to
their 2012 and 2014 sustainability performance plans. CRS has researched materials beyond what
is included in these documents, but has not comprehensively identified or reviewed information
from all agencies regarding their climate change adaptation efforts. Additional agencies and
updates may be added to the summaries in this section, subject to congressional interest.
FY2016 Budget Request
The President’s FY2016 budget request and other related administrative announcements roughly concurrent with its
release on February 2, 2015, are not addressed in this report. While the President’s FY2016 budget request and
other recent announcements (e.g., executive order on flooding and proposed FEMA rules) may mention adaptation
(or “resilience”) to climate change, most pertain to programs outside the narrow scope of this report: assessments
and actions that agencies may be undertaking to address potential risks to their missions, property, operations, and
personnel. For further detail or updates on climate change adaptation plans by individual agencies, the report provides
contact information for CRS analysts at the end of each agency section in Part II.
For further information on specific departments and agencies, each section that follows identifies
relevant CRS experts.
Congressional Research Service
32
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Table 1. Selected Departments and Agencies with Adaptation Plans
Links to the full set of agencies’ adaptation plans are available at http://www.performance.gov/node/3406/
view?view=public#supporting-info
Selected Departments/Agencies
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
U.S. Forest Service (USFS)
Department of Commerce (DOC)
Latest Plan Posted
June 2014
October 2014
June 2014
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Department of Defense (DOD)
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or the Corps)
October 2014
June 2014
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
October 2014
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) Addendum to its Adaptation Plan of 2012
June 2014
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
July 2014
Department of the Interior (DOI)
October 2014
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation)
National Park Service (NPS)
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Department of State (DOS)
Agency for International Development (USAID)
October 2014
October 2014
Source: CRS, from various federal websites.
Congressional Research Service
33
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Department of Agriculture
The Department of Agriculture (USDA) is responsible for the management of 193 million acres
of national forests and grasslands in the National Forest System, and provides assistance in
managing the nation’s 1.3 billion acres of farm, ranch, and private forest lands through public and
private partnerships.77 Studies have suggested that climate change will have a varying impact on
agricultural production.78 The overall impact to agricultural production depends partly on the
direction, magnitude, and rate of changes in temperature and precipitation.79 Producers have, and
continue to, adapt to these changes; however, the long-term response to climate change may
require new management techniques and technologies.80
Similarly, some research indicates that climate variability is reshaping forest landscapes by
altering the frequency, intensity, and timing of disturbance events (e.g., wildfires, precipitation
events, and insect and disease infestations) that influence the structure, composition, and function
of the forest and grassland ecosystems.81 Forest ecosystems have inherent characteristics that
enhance their capacity to survive disturbance events (resistance) or facilitate recovery after
disturbance (resilience). Despite this inherent capacity, current thinking suggests that the rapid
pace and magnitude of climate change may exceed the resistance and resilience capacity of many
forests.82
Forest ecosystems and agricultural land also play a role in mitigating against rising carbon levels:
growing vegetation removes carbon from the atmosphere and stores (“sequesters”) it in wood and
soil. Carbon is released back into the atmosphere during some disturbance events (e.g., a forest
fire). Thus, appropriate management of disturbances may be critical for avoiding potential future
releases of large amounts of carbon.
In June 2011, USDA issued Departmental Regulation 1070-001, establishing USDA’s Official
Policy Statement on Climate Change Adaptation within the Office of the Chief Economist.83 This
policy recognized the Climate Change Program Office (CCPO) as the point of contact for
development of the Adaptation Plan required by Executive Order 13514, and called for
department-wide integration of climate change adaptation planning and actions. The department’s
Adaptation Plan was updated in 2014 in response to E.O. 13653.84 In addition to climate change
77
U.S. Department of Agriculture, FY2014 Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plan, 2013,
http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/FY14budsum.pdf.
78
Scott Malcolm, Elizabeth Marshall, and Marcel Aillery, et al., Agricultural Adaptation to a Changing Climate:
Economic and Environmental Implications Vary by U.S. Region, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service, ERR-136, July 2012, http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/848748/err136.pdf.
79
Ibid.
80
Jerry Hatfield, Gene Takle, and Richard Grotjahn et al., Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third
National Climate Assessment, U.S. Global Research Program, Chapter 6: Agriculture, May 6, 2014,
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/sectors/agriculture.
81
James M. Vose, David L. Peterson, and Toral Patel-Weynard, Effects of Climate Variability and Change on Forest
Ecosystems: a Comprehensive Science Synthesis for the U.S., Forest Service, PNW-GTR-870, Portland, OR, 2012,
http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/42610.
82
Ibid.
83
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Policy Statement on Climate Change Adaptation, Departmental Regulation 1070001, Washington, DC, June 3, 2011, http://www.ocio.usda.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2012/DR1070-001.pdf.
84
U.S. Department of Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture Climate Change Adaptation Plan, June 2014,
http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/USDA_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Plan_FULL.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
34
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
adaptation activities, the CCPO represents USDA to the U.S. Global Change Research Program
(USGCRP), chairs the USDA Global Change Task Force, oversees departmental greenhouse gas
accounting capabilities and responsibilities, and directs international climate change initiatives.85
Under the direction of the CCPO, USDA offices and agencies provided input for the USDA
Climate Change Adaptation Plan in addition to identifying vulnerabilities to key agency resources
and mission areas. The USDA Climate Change Adaptation Report includes specific plans from
the following USDA agencies and offices: Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), CCPO, Farm Service Agency (FSA), Foreign
Agricultural Service (FAS), Forest Service (FS), Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards
Administration (GIPSA), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), National Institute of
Food and Agriculture (NIFA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), Risk
Management Agency (RMA), and Rural Development (RD). Each agency identified specific
actions related to climate change adaptation, and provided timelines, performance metrics, and
agency leads in a tabular format as appendixes to individual plan documents. The full plan and
individual sections can be found on USDA’s climate change website, http://www.usda.gov/oce/
climate_change/adaptation/adaptation_plan.htm.
Adaptation-Related Activities
Of USDA’s four overall strategic goals in its strategic plan for FY2010-FY2015, one is
specifically related to climate adaptation; Goal 2 states that USDA will “ensure our national
forests and private working lands are conserved, restored, and made more resilient to climate
change, while enhancing our water resources.”86 While other strategic goals allude to varying
challenges associated with climate change adaptation, this goal is reflected throughout the annual
budget request, adaptation plan, and office and specific agency activities. Although a full
accounting of department-wide adaptation activities is beyond the scope of this report, a brief
description of activities is provided below regarding the department overall, followed by selected
offices and agencies.
Department-Level Activities
As previously stated, the department’s Climate Change Program Office has primary responsibility
for coordinating and leading USDA’s response to climate change, including the following:
•
analysis, planning, and research coordination;
•
development of climate change response strategies;
•
providing liaison with other federal agencies;
•
informing department leadership of related scientific developments and policy
issues; and
85
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Climate Change Program Office, The Climate Change Program Office, Fact Sheet,
http://usda.gov/oce/climate_change/fact_sheets/CCPO_FactSheet.pdf.
86
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Strategic Plan FY 2010-2015, http://www.ocfo.usda.gov/usdasp/sp2010/sp2010.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
35
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
•
ensuring climate change concerns are fully integrated into USDA’s research,
planning, and decision-making processes.87
At the department level, USDA participates in a number of interagency efforts including the
Council on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, U.S. Global Change Research Program,
National Climate Assessment, National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy
Implementation Team, Agricultural Air Quality Task Force, Joint Fire Science Program, and the
National Interagency Fire Center.88
In February 2014, USDA announced the creation of regional hubs for risk adaption and
mitigation to climate change. These hubs are based on existing statutory authorities within
USDA, and do not require additional resources. Hub locations were chosen through a
competitive, internal application process among USDA facilities (see Figure 7). The purpose of
these hubs is to (1) provide technical support for agricultural producers and landowners
responding to climate change, (2) assess and monitor the risk to agricultural production, and (3)
conduct research and education to the department’s clients about the effect of climate change on
agriculture and forests.89
Figure 7. USDA Climate Hubs for Risk Adaptation and Mitigation
to Climate Change
Source: USDA Climate Hub Regions, http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/hubs/Hub_PPT_11182014.pdf.
87
U.S. Department of Agriculture, CCPO Presentation, December 5, 2013.
A detailed description of USDA’s involvement in these activities may be found in USDA’s 2014 Adaptation Plan:
http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/USDA_Climate_Change_Adaptation_Plan_FULL.pdf.
89
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Charter of the Executive Committee of the Regional Hubs for Risk Adaptation and
Mitigation to Climate Change, USDA ARS-NRCS-Forest Service-NIFA-FSA-RMA-RD-CCPO, Washington, DC,
January 31, 2014, http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/hubs/RegionalHubCharter.pdf.
88
Congressional Research Service
36
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Forest Service
The U.S. Forest Service (FS) is an agency within USDA with a mission to sustain the health,
diversity, and productivity of the nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and
future generations. FS is responsible for managing national forests and grasslands, conducting
forestry research, and providing assistance to state, private, and international forestry agencies.
Each of these FS mission areas has activities related to the effects of climate variability and
change on forest ecosystems. While the CCPO has primary responsibility for organizing and
leading USDA climate change activities, FS’s mission increases its presence in climate change
activities above those of most other agencies at USDA.
In fulfilling the FS mission, the agency has identified several intertwined roles regarding climate
change management including federal land management, research, and engagement and outreach
with other forestry managers. As a land manager, FS addresses climate change through strategic
planning and policy initiatives regarding the management of the National Forest System. FS also
is responsible for responding to active wildfires on federal lands and on nonfederal lands by
request.90
In the FS Research and Development office, climate change research is one of five priority areas
for emphasis, and the Global Change Research Strategy 2009-2019 includes research on
adaptation, mitigation, and decision-support strategies. Through the State and Private Forestry
office, FS provides technical and financial assistance to states and private forest landowners,
including a program to fund restoration and other forest health management projects. Several of
the USDA Regional Climate Hubs (see Figure 7) are operated in partnership with both Research
and Development and State and Private Forestry activities. FS also conducts a regular forest
inventory and analysis program that provides both a baseline on ecosystem composition and
monitoring of changes across time. In addition, FS addresses climate change in international
forestry issues through policy engagement and technical cooperation to develop capacity and
strengthen existing institutions related to forest governance and management worldwide.
The Climate Change Resource Center is a compilation of FS’s related research, outreach, and
management activities.91 This resource provides land managers and other decision makers—
private and public—with information, research, decision-support models, maps, and simulations.
These tools may be used to incorporate climate change management activities into planning and
project management.
FS developed several policy initiatives in accordance with E.O. 13514 and E.O. 13653.92 The
agency published the Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change, which set forth
seven goals as the overarching structure for agency strategies, priorities, policy decisions, and
resource allocations for responding to climate change.93 To implement the strategic framework,
90
Federal responsibility for wildfire suppression is to protect lives, property, and resources on federal lands. For more
information, see CRS Report R41858, Federal Assistance for Wildfire Response and Recovery, by (name redacted).
91
For more information, see http://www.fs.fed.us/ccrc.
92
USDA, Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014: Forest Service, http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/
adaptation_plan.htm.
93
Forest Service, Forest Service Strategic Framework for Responding to Climate Change, October 2008,
http://www.fs.fed.us/climatechange/documents/strategic-framework-climate-change-1-0.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
37
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
FS published the National Roadmap for Responding to Climate Change in 2011.94 The roadmap
describes three interconnected modes of action for FS response:
•
assessing current risks, vulnerabilities, policies, and gaps in knowledge;
•
engaging employees and stakeholders to seek solutions; and
•
managing for resilience through adaptation and mitigation strategies.
From the action items in the roadmap, FS developed a performance scorecard to measure
progress, with the goal of each national forest and grassland achieving 7 out of 10 of the
scorecard’s benchmarks by 2015. A 2011 baseline measurement found that 16% of the national
forests already achieved the performance goals. In 2013, 49% of the national forests were in
compliance.95
For the national forests, the National Roadmap for Responding to Climate Change outlined how
the agency plans to address major stressors from climate variability and provide direction for
landscape restoration goals. FS is establishing a restoration and resilience policy to provide a
foundational policy for sustainable management of the national forests.96 As part of the policy, the
agency is focusing on restoration strategies aimed to improve the capacity of the ecosystem to
withstand stressors and return to specified desired conditions post-disturbance. The desired
conditions are to be determined at the landscape level by assessing the adaptive capacity and
enhancing the resistance and resilience of forest ecosystems. The FS 2012 Planning Rule, through
which the agency makes land use decisions for the national forests as directed by the National
Forest Management Act,97 provides an adaptive framework for incorporating resilience goals into
land management planning and decision making. The adaptive framework includes an expanded
inventory and monitoring system as part of the planning process to assess progress toward the
restoration goals and refocus efforts as necessary. FS also has several programs to accelerate
restoration activities in the national forests, including the Collaborative Forest Landscape
Restoration Program, which leverages local resources to encourage large-scale, long-term
restoration projects.
Natural Resources Conservation Service
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has primary responsibility for assisting
private landowners with addressing natural resource concerns. In addition to providing technical
assistance related to soil and water, the agency also administers a number of financial incentive
programs that pay farmers and ranchers to alter production practices to achieve environmental
benefits. NRCS conducted an internal examination of these programs and technical resources, and
found that conservation practices prescribed within these programs were effective at both
mitigation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and climate change adaptation.98 Existing practices such
94
Forest Service, National Roadmap for Responding to Climate Change, http://www.fs.fed.us/climatechange/pdf/
Roadmapfinal.pdf.
95
Forest Service, Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Justification, March 2014, pp. 1-4, http://www.fs.fed.us/aboutus/budget/.
96
USDA, Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2014: Forest Service, http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/
adaptation_plan.htm.
97
16 U.S.C. §1600 et seq.
98
USDA, NRCS, Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Plan 2014, http://www.usda.gov/oce/
climate_change/adaptation/Natural%20Resources%20Conservation%20Service.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
38
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
as residue management, forest stand improvement, cover crops, and prescribed grazing may make
agricultural systems more resilient to changes in climate.
The NRCS adaptation report99 makes few action recommendations that would require
congressional action. The report states that integrating adaptation to changes in climate can be
developed within the current NRCS conservation structure. Adjustments to traditional
conservation planning approaches will be required in order to focus on a more holistic approach
to conservation delivery that includes flexibilities for producers to adapt to changing climate
conditions.
Agricultural Research Service
The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is the in-house research agency at USDA. The agency
is organized into “National Programs” that coordinate the research carried out by ARS. Under the
National Climate Change, Soils, and Emissions program (NP #212), ARS works “to improve the
quality of atmosphere and soil resources affected by, and having an effect on agriculture and to
understand the effects of, and prepare agriculture for, adaptation to climate change.”100 ARS
research activities within NP# 212 support a number of soil and atmospheric research projects,
including mechanisms for enabling agriculture to adapt to climate change.101 As part of this effort,
ARS is also co-leading the collaborative research project known as the Agricultural Model
Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), with a goal to improve the characterization
of risk of hunger and world food security due to climate change, and to enhance adaptation
capacity in developing and developed countries.
Risk Management Agency
The Risk Management Agency (RMA) offers federal crop insurance and other production risk
management products through a network of private-sector entities.102 RMA also funds
partnerships with state departments of agriculture, universities, and other public or private
organizations to develop risk management tools to assist producers in minimizing their risks and
adapting to increased risks from climate change, drought, and other weather-related conditions. In
2010, RMA released a report on the potential effects of climate change on crop insurance. The
report found that the effects will vary greatly across the country, with production in the South and
Southeast more negatively impacted than production in the West.103 Another such collaboration is
with Oregon State University to build PRISM—a climate and weather web portal that houses
99
Ibid.
USDA, ARS, National Program 212: Climate Change Soils, and Emission, website, http://www.ars.usda.gov/
research/programs/programs.htm?NP_CODE=212.
101
Examples of related activities may be found in the USDA ARS FY2012 Annual Report, National Program 212—
Climate Change, Soils, and Air Emissions, https://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Program/212/
NP%20212%20FY%202012%20Annual%20Rpt.pdf.
102
For additional information on RMA and USDA’s production risk management programs, see CRS Report R40532,
Federal Crop Insurance: Background, by (name redacted), and CRS Report R42759, Farm Safety Net Provisions in
a 2013 Farm Bill: S. 954 and H.R. 2642, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).
103
Robert H. Beach, Chen Zhen, and Allison Thomson et al., Climate Change Impacts on Crop Insurance, RTI
International for USDA Risk Management Agency, RTI Project Number 2011911, Research Triangle Park, NC, May
2010, http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/files/ImpactsCropInsurance062010.pdf.
100
Congressional Research Service
39
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
USDA’s climatological data.104 The agency is also changing program implementation procedures
including the establishment of emergency adjustment procedures for catastrophic loss events to
ensure that the crop insurance program reflects changes in the climate and agronomics for crops
currently covered; the expansion of programs to ensure that crop insurance coverage is available
to new areas where crops are grown due to changes in the climate; the development and
maintenance of maps for identification of at-risk areas; and the development of special provisions
to address unique crop or regional conditions that pose potential program vulnerabilities.105
Congress has shifted risk management for agriculture away from ad hoc disaster payments and
toward more permanent disaster support programs and federal crop insurance, as authorized in the
2014 farm bill (P.L. 113-79, §1501 and Title XI of P.L. 113-79). As RMA adapts these risk
management programs to a changing climate, shifts in traditional production and the continued
use of historical crop yield data could prove to be a challenge. Extreme weather events and
possible increased production damage could prove costly to the current system.
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
The National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) supports research, education, and
extension programs in the Land-Grant University System and other organizations. The agency
does not perform research, education, or extension, but rather provides funds and national
leadership in these areas.106 Climate change is a “priority science area” at NIFA. Projects are
administered through the Institute of Bioenergy, Climate, and Environment (IBCE), a division of
NIFA that manages programs to help agricultural, forest, and range production systems adapt to
climate variables.107 Most NIFA-funded grants that are focused on climate change are
multimillion-dollar, integrated, transdisciplinary projects that address the adaptation of food, feed,
and fiber production systems to changing climates and the goal of reducing greenhouse gas
emissions and increasing carbon sequestration in the agriculture and forestry sectors. According
to NIFA’s adaptation report, the agency anticipates the need to balance an increasing demand for
scientific research, modeling, educational programs, and extension activities in order to address
climate change issues with other research, education, and extension needs for agriculture.108 For
example, investigations of climate stressors and tipping points could become more important to
climate adaptation science research, and would have to be balanced with susceptible areas of crop
and livestock production research and formal and informal state educational programs.109
104
PRISM stands for Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model. Additional information may be
found at http://prism.oregonstate.edu/.
105
USDA, RMA, Climate Adaptation Plan, http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/
Risk%20Management%20Agency.pdf.
106
For additional information, see CRS Report R40819, USDA’s Research, Education, and Economics (REE) Mission
Area: Issues and Background.
107
USDA, NIFA, Institute of Bioenergy, Climate, and Environment, Institute Fact Sheet IBCE R7, December 11, 2012,
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/about/pdfs/fact_sheets/inst_fs_ibce.pdf.
108
USDA, NIFA, USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture—Agency Climate Change Adaption Plan, 2012,
http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/National%20Institute%20of%20Food%20and%20Agriculture.pdf.
109
Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
40
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is tasked with protecting and
promoting the health of U.S. agriculture and natural resources. As climate changes, pests and
diseases can pose increased threats to the agricultural industry. The primary role of APHIS in
USDA’s climate change response is to analyze and anticipate changes in these threats. APHIS
focuses on plant health response programs, early-warning systems for and management of vectorborne diseases—diseases spread by insects—in livestock and wild animal populations, trade
regulations and management in regard to international disease outbreaks, emergency preparedness
for both pest and disease emergencies as well as natural disasters and biosecurity hazards, and
collaboration with federal, state, local, academic, and business community partners, and other
stakeholders.110 According to the APHIS adaptation report, the agency does not anticipate that
climate change will require a modification of its statutory authority. The agency plans to continue
to adopt regulations and policies to address new or shifting pest and disease scenarios.111
Farm Service Agency
The Farm Service Agency (FSA) administers a number of financial incentives for farmers and
ranchers through farm loans and commodity, disaster, and conservation programs. FSA identified
three climate change adaptation actions in the USDA adaptation report, including amending
policy to facilitate adaptation, providing outreach to producers through the existing FSA service
center structure and USDA’s new climate change hubs, and conducting a “continuity of
operations” exercise to prepare for an increase in large-scale crop failures resulting from climate
change. With the passage of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-79, the 2014 farm bill),
Congress reauthorized a number of the existing programs FSA cited as necessary for its response
to climate change (e.g., the Conservation Reserve Program, the Conservation Reserve
Enhancement Program, loan programs, and disaster programs).112 Congress did not, however,
amend these existing programs to specifically change the agency’s current limited use for
adaptation. In most cases, the agency’s use of these programs has continued relatively unchanged
since the issuance of the adaptation plan.
Issues for Congress
Agriculture and forestry face a number of challenges (e.g., weather, disease, pests) that could be
substantially affected by a changing climate. As the federal entity tasked with providing
“leadership on food, agriculture, natural resources, rural development, nutrition, and related
issues based on sound public policy, the best available science, and efficient management,”
USDA could play an integral role in assisting U.S. producers with climate adaptation. A number
of challenges related to climate change and its role in agricultural and forestry adaptation remain
for USDA.
110
USDA, APHIS, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and Climate Change, Fact Sheet, http://www.usda.gov/
oce/climate_change/fact_sheets/APHIS_Climate_Change_Fact_Sheet.pdf.
111
USDA, APHIS, USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Climate Change Adaptation Plan, June 2014,
http://www.usda.gov/oce/climate_change/adaptation/Risk%20Management%20Agency.pdf.
112
For information on the changes made by the Agricultural Act of 2014, see CRS Report R43076, The 2014 Farm Bill
(P.L. 113-79): Summary and Side-by-Side, coordinated by (name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
41
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
First, existing federal policies both help and hinder adaptation-related activities. For example,
many of USDA’s programs rely on voluntary participation by producers. This could slow the
application of adaptation-related activities and reduce the agriculture industry’s ability to adapt to
climate change in the long term. Producers are not required to adopt practices recommended by
USDA, or, if paid to do so, are not required to maintain practices beyond the period for which
payment is received. Similarly, FS technical and financial assistance programs also rely on
voluntary participation by nonfederal forest landowners.
Second, federal funding for research, conservation, outreach, and other adaptation-related
activities has declined in recent years. While some private-sector funding has increased over time
to fill some of the gap in public spending—namely in research and conservation—there is
growing concern among some that private-sector funding focuses primarily on taking existing
technologies to market (i.e., more applied research), and does not focus on basic problems and/or
longer-term challenges that the agricultural and forestry sectors may face in the future, such as
adaptation to climate variability. The rising of cost of suppressing wildfires—both on federal and
nonfederal land—is another funding concern.
Finally, while there is recognition at the department level that a coordinated response to climate
adaptation may be most effective, agency-level actions appear to diverge in some respects. A
number of USDA agencies have developed adaptation plans, but the diversity of agency mission
areas has resulted in an inconsistent application of those plans. Some USDA agencies have
recognized the need to adapt current programs to potential effects of climate change, and have
carried out adaption measures with tangible results, such as RMA’s expansion of program
coverage to new areas in which crops are grown due to changes in the climate and agronomics.
Other USDA agencies have identified the need for adaptation, but lack the program flexibility or
funding to act, such as the cost to fully implement FS’s restoration strategy for the national
forests.
For More USDA Information
USDA: (name redacted), Specialist in AgriculturalConservation and Natural Resources Policy,
[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-.....
Forest Service: (name redacted), Analyst in Natural Resources Policy, [redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-.....
Congressional Research Service
42
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Department of Commerce
The Department of Commerce (DOC) is composed of 12 bureaus with a wide range of
responsibilities. DOC focuses on five basic missions:
•
promoting the development of U.S. business and increasing foreign trade;
•
improving the nation’s technological competitiveness;
•
encouraging economic development;
•
fostering environmental stewardship and assessment; and
•
compiling, analyzing, and disseminating statistical information on the U.S.
economy and population.
On August 31, 2011, in response to E.O. 13514, the Secretary of Commerce signed Departmental
Administrative Order (DAO) 216-18,113 which states that “it is the policy of the Department to
undertake comprehensive climate change adaptation planning in order to ensure that the
Department fulfills its mission and maintains its programs and operations in a changing climate.”
The DAO established a Climate Coordinating Committee to develop DOC’s Climate Change
Adaptation Strategy (CCAS). In June 2012, the strategy was released as an appendix to the 2012
update of DOC’s Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan.114 In June 2014, the CCAS was
updated to reflect lessons learned since the first strategy was released, and to incorporate
guidance provided by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) on implementing E.O.
13653.115
The CCAS identifies key climate change vulnerabilities and outlines the department’s approach to
addressing these vulnerabilities. Climate change vulnerabilities also were linked to priority
adaptation actions that were updated for FY2014. The key climate change vulnerabilities and
priority adaptation actions are organized by the following strategic themes: economic growth,
science and information, environmental stewardship, and infrastructure, facilities, and operations
management.116 Each of these themes is discussed below in more detail. The CCAS also presents
five-year strategic goals for adaptation planning, describes how interagency coordination can be
supported, addresses barriers to federal climate resilience investment, and identifies opportunities
to support climate resilient investments by states, local communities, and tribes.117
113
Secretary of Commerce, Climate Change Adaptation Planning, Department of Commerce, Number: DAO 216-18,
Washington, DC, August 31, 2011, http://www.osec.doc.gov/opog/dmp/daos/dao216_18.html.
114
U.S. Department of Commerce, United States Department of Commerce Strategic Sustainability Plan, Washington,
DC, June 22, 1012.
115
Department of Commerce, Department of Commerce Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, Washington, DC, June
2014, hereinafter cited as the Climate change Adaptation Strategy 2014.
116
Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2014.
117
Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2014.
Congressional Research Service
43
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Economic Growth
Most of DOC’s bureaus118 support economic growth by developing the tools, systems, policies,
and technologies that foster U.S. competitiveness, improve efficiency, and facilitate the
development of new businesses. Climate change may present challenges to U.S. businesses by
interfering with their ability to produce, transport, and deliver goods and services. Sea-level rise
and extreme weather events influenced by climate change could damage infrastructure and harm
natural resource-dependent industries such as forestry, fishing, and agriculture. Businesses may
be challenged to develop new technologies and processes to help themselves or others adapt.
Climate change challenges may also present opportunities for businesses that satisfy the demand
for clean energy and climate-friendly technologies. According to the CCAS, DOC will need to
ensure it is positioned to assist companies to turn innovative products such as climate-friendly
technologies into a competitive advantage for the U.S. economy. Moreover, the CCAS states that
the department will need to enhance efforts to promote trade, economic and business
development, innovation, entrepreneurship, supply chain information, best practices, and
standards that consider climate change.119 In the CCAS, DOC identified the following adaptation
actions to address economic growth in FY2014, and identified lead offices for each action within
DOC:
•
Factor in resiliency (including resiliency to the effects of climate change) into
economic development investments.
Lead Office /Bureau—Economic Development Administration (EDA)
•
Help businesses capitalize on an increased demand for green technologies
sparked by a changing climate.
Lead Office/Bureau—International Trade Administration (ITA)
•
Improve the ability to process patent application filings for climate change
adaptation-related technologies in a timely manner.
Lead Office/Bureau—U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Science and Information
DOC science and information agencies120 enhance scientific knowledge and provide information
to stakeholders to improve innovation and technology, support economic growth, and improve
public safety. Climate change is anticipated to increase the need for climate, weather, economic,
ecological, and demographic data in the private and public sectors. These data are needed to
model and assess physical, biological, and social processes that may be altered by climate change;
much of this data is significant to adaptation efforts of other federal agencies and departments.
Enhancing understanding of climate-related changes to the U.S. economy, society, and the
118
Bureaus identified in the department strategic plan under the economic growth theme include the International Trade
Administration (ITA), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO), Economic Development Administration (EDA), Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA).
119
Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2014.
120
Bureaus identified in the department’s strategic plan under the science and information theme are the Economics
and Statistics Administration (ESA), which includes the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA),
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA).
Congressional Research Service
44
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
environment can improve decision making broadly. For example, buildings, infrastructure, and
communities may suffer losses associated with climatic events such as drought, hurricanes,
floods, and wildfires. By improving understanding of climate change, standards and practices can
be developed to minimize risks to public safety and economic losses. DOC agencies will need to
enhance information collection, scientific knowhow, and services capabilities to meet the data and
knowledge needs of federal partners, state and local government, nongovernmental organizations,
and businesses that are vulnerable to changing climate. DOC identified the following adaptation
actions to address federal vulnerabilities related to science and information in FY2014:
•
Continue coordinating climate and related ecological research and services
partnerships within the department and with department partners to better
understand climate variability and change and how climate variability and change
may affect communities and ecological processes.
Lead Office/Bureau—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)
•
Develop frameworks and tools to help coral reef managers incorporate climate
change information into effective decision making that minimizes their risks to
climate change.
Lead Office/Bureau—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)
•
Develop performance-based standards and tools for new and retrofit building
designs resistant to extremes of wind, storm surge, and fire and that prevent or
mitigate collapse.
Lead Office/Bureau—National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
•
Understand and prepare for ocean acidification.
Lead Office/Bureau—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)
•
Support adaptation decisions through the National Integrated Drought
Information System (NIDIS).
Lead Office/Bureau—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)
•
Support adaptation decisions with climate data, forecasts, and tools in order for
the nation to better respond to extreme weather and water events.
Lead Office/Bureau—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)
•
Develop climate change adaptation decision-support information for the Arctic
region.
Lead Office/Bureau—National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)
Environmental Stewardship
Within DOC, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) mission is to
understand and predict changes in climate, weather, oceans, and coasts; to share that knowledge
and information with others (including other federal entities); and to conserve and manage coastal
Congressional Research Service
45
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
and marine ecosystems and resources.121 Climate adaptation is a central element of NOAA’s
mission and its future vision of resilient ecosystems, communities, and economies. In many cases,
existing approaches to natural resource management assume relatively static conditions.122 One of
NOAA’s tasks is modify management systems to increase resilience to rising sea level (and
associated coastal flooding), higher air and water temperatures, ocean acidification, and droughts.
For example, climate change may allow pathogens, parasites, and invasive species to live in new
areas, which may affect the health of coastal and ocean ecosystems and species. Moreover, the
distribution and abundance of fish stocks, protected species, and other marine organisms may
shift with changing ocean conditions. According to the CCAS, NOAA will need to incorporate
climate considerations into natural resource and coastal planning to maintain healthy and resilient
coastal communities. DOC identified the following adaptation actions to address vulnerabilities
related to environmental stewardship for which NOAA is the lead office:
•
Continue developing networks of “sentinel sites”123 to coordinate assets and
efforts to increase understanding of, and improve response to, sea-level change
impacts on coastal ecosystems and adjacent communities.
•
Track and assess climate-related impacts on U.S. marine ecosystems and the
distribution of major fish stocks.
•
Assess the climate vulnerability and resilience of fish stocks and fishing
communities.
•
Increase understanding of current and future climate impacts on living marine
resources.
•
Provide training to coastal communities to build their capacity to adapt to climate
change.
•
Enhance climate resilience of endangered corals.
•
Develop climate-ready protection and recovery of Pacific Northwest salmon and
other riverine-dependent species—projecting climate impacts and designing
resilient salmon restoration projects.
•
Inform and advance the use of natural and nature-based infrastructure for coastal
resilience, including through increased understanding of the value of the
ecosystem services and benefits provided.
Infrastructure, Facilities, and Operations Management
Climate change could affect DOC’s performance and its ability to deliver its services effectively
and efficiently. Climate change may affect DOC’s facilities and infrastructure and impede its
ability to carry out its missions and operations. DOC identified the following adaptation actions
to address vulnerabilities related to infrastructure, facilities, and operations management in
FY2014:
121
Office of Program Planning, NOAA’s Next-Generation Strategic Plan, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Silver Spring, MD, December 2010, http://www.ppi.noaa.gov/wp-content/uploads/NOAA_NGSP.pdf.
122
Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2012, p. 11.
123
NOAA, NOAA Sentinel Site Program, September 30, 2011, http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/sentinelsites/pdf/SentinelSite-Program.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
46
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
•
Assess the vulnerability of the department’s leased facilities to climate change.
Lead Office/Bureau—Chief Financial Officer/Assistant Secretary for
Administration
•
Continue to work with the General Services Agency (GSA) to assess and analyze
climate change vulnerabilities for real property assets GSA has assigned to the
Department of Commerce.
Lead Office/Bureau—Chief Financial Officer/Assistant Secretary for
Administration
Issues for Congress
One of many challenges to implementing both short- and long-term actions related to climate
change in ocean and marine areas is the need for coordination among federal agencies and other
governmental entities. For example, elevated levels of carbon dioxide, warming oceans, and sealevel rise are expected to affect marine ecosystems, coastal infrastructure, and marine-related
activities. Actions needed to meet these challenges will depend on many different federal, state,
and local authorities. For broad regional and global changes, coordination is especially important
for avoiding gaps or duplication in efforts related to climate change adaptation. Effective
communication is also needed to ensure the free flow of information among agencies including
state and local governments.
According to the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, at the federal level, 11 of 15 Cabinet-level
departments and 4 independent agencies play important roles in the development of ocean and
coastal policy.124 Although the Administration has developed a national ocean policy, it remains
an open question whether Congress will provide new authorities to improve coordination of
efforts to mitigate, increase resilience to, and adapt to cross-cutting ocean issues, such as climate
change.
For More Department of Commerce Information
(name redacted), Analyst in Natural Resources Policy, [redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-.....
124
U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century, Final Report, Washington, DC,
September 2004, http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/oceancommission/documents/full_color_rpt/000_ocean_full_report.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
47
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Department of Defense
The Department of Defense (DOD) can be affected by climate change in several areas including
potential impacts on geopolitics and national security interests that could result in military
operations, risks to existing military infrastructure, and hindrances to readiness and the ability to
execute missions.125 For example, the Air Force has found that the combination of thawing
permafrost, decreasing sea ice, and rising sea levels on the Alaskan coast has increased coastal
erosion at several Air Force radar early-warning and communication installations.126
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE or the Corps) is an agency in DOD with both
military and civilian responsibilities. The Corps’ civil works activities associated with domestic
water resources are discussed separately in a later section.
Congressional Action and DOD Response
In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (P.L. 110-181), Congress required
the first national security strategy and first national defense strategy127 prepared after January
2008 to
include guidance for military planners to assess the risks of projected climate change to
current and future mission of the armed forces; to update defense plans based on these
assessments, including working with allies and partners to incorporate climate mitigation
strategies, capacity building, and relevant research and development; and to develop the
capabilities needed to reduce future impacts.128
Congress also required DOD to include in the first Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) prepared
after 2008 an analysis of “the capabilities of the armed forces to respond to the consequences of
climate change, in particular, preparedness for natural disasters from extreme weather events and
other missions the armed forces may be asked to support inside the United States and
overseas.”129
Subsequently, DOD included a discussion of climate change (and energy) in the 2010 QDR, and
the Administration included a discussion of climate change in the 2010 national security strategy
125
U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Department of Defense, The National
Security Implications of Climate Change, Written Statement of Dr. Daniel Chiu, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Strategy and Force Development, 113th Cong., 2nd sess., May 21, 2014, p. 13.
126
GAO, Climate Change Adaptation: DOD Can Improve Infrastructure Planning and Processes to Better Account for
Potential Impacts, Washington, DC, May 30, 2014, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-446.
127
The President’s national security strategy, the Secretary of Defense’s national defense strategy and its associated
Quadrennial Defense Review report, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s national military strategy (NMS)
are core national security strategic guidance documents. In theory, these documents and review exercises are all
“nested” with each other, such that guidance issued at higher levels of the executive branch, for example by the
President, informs guidance issued at lower levels, for example by the Secretary of Defense, whose guidance, in turn,
informs that issued by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS). For more information on these and other
strategy documents, see CRS Report R43174, National Security Strategy: Mandates, Execution to Date, and Issues for
Congress, by (name redacted).
128
§951.
129
The Quadrennial Defense Review is a statutorily mandated strategic review process (P.L. 104-201) conducted by
DOD every four years. The review process generates an unclassified report whose contents are also specified in law.
Congressional Research Service
48
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
(the first of either documents published after 2008).130 According to DOD, the 2010 QDR is the
foundation for the department’s strategic policy on climate change adaptation.131 In 2012,
pursuant to Executive Order 13514, DOD published a nine-page FY 2012 Climate Change
Adaptation Roadmap, which laid out in broad strokes the challenges of climate change and the
initial steps being taken by DOD.132
While these initial efforts were mandated by Congress and the President, DOD has continued to
address the issue and is working to develop a more robust approach for managing the risks posed
by climate change. DOD issued a brief FY2013 update to the Climate Change Adaptation
Roadmap133 and a more robust Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap in FY2014, and included a
discussion on climate change in the 2014 QDR,134 even though there was no legislative or
executive dictate to do so.
DOD Risks from Climate Change
DOD considers climate change to pose two broad categories of risk:135
1. Climate change could affect the type, scope, frequency, tactics, and location of
military operations worldwide.
2. Climate change could impact the force structure and the effectiveness and
configuration of bases, training facilities, and other infrastructure that DOD relies
upon to execute its mission.
1. Effect of Climate Change on Military Operations
Climate change can serve as a catalyst for conflict between nations, instability within nations, and
more severe or frequent natural disasters and humanitarian crises.136 The military may be called
upon to respond to these scenarios, potentially affecting the type, scope, frequency, and location
of military operations. Climate change can also alter the physical environment within which DOD
must operate. For example, sea-level rise could affect amphibious landings, and weather pattern
changes could alter operational timing and intelligence-gathering capabilities from airborne
platforms.
130
P.L. 110-81 §951.
Department of Defense, Climate Change Adaption Roadmap, FY2012, http://www.acq.osd.mil/ie/download/
green_energy/dod_sustainability/2012/Appendix%20A%20%20DoD%20Climate%20Change%20Adaption%20Roadmap_20120918.pdf.
132
Ibid.
133
See Department of Defense, Sustainability Performance Report, FY2013, August 14, 2013, Appendix C. The update
is two pages.
134
Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review, 2014, pp. 84-88, as well as mentions in other sections of the
document.
135
Department of Defense, Climate Change Adaption Roadmap, FY2012, p. 1; U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Department of Defense, The National Security Implications of Climate Change,
Written Statement, 113th Cong., 2nd sess., May 21, 2014, p. 1.
136
FY 2014 Climate Change Adaption Roadmap, p. 4.
131
Congressional Research Service
49
Climate Change Adaptation by Federal Agencies
Exacerbating Conflict and Instability
Climate change can serve as “an accelerant of instability or conflict.”137 Rising sea levels, rising
temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, and competition for water, among other factors,
could have significant geopolitical impacts contributing to “poverty, environmental degradation,
the weakening of fragile governments and food and water scarcity.”138 The 2014 National
Intelligence Strategy stated the following:
Many governments will face challenges to meet even the basic needs of their people as they
confront demographic change, resource constraints, effects of climate change, and risks of
global infectious disease outbreaks. These effects are threat multipliers that will aggravate
stressors abroad such as poverty, environmental degradation, political instability, and social
tensions—conditions that can enable terrorist activity and other forms of violence. The risk
of conflict and mass atrocities may increase.139
According to news reports, the National Intelligence Council reportedly found that Sub-Saharan
Africa, the Middle East, and Central and Southeast Asia are most vulnerable to climate changerelated drought, flooding, extreme weather, and resulting food insecurity.140 DOD may be called
upon to respond to climate change-related conflict or instability, thereby impacting the roles and
missions of the military.
Nonconflict Operations
DOD has an established mission to conduct humanitarian assistance/disaster relief, and has long
played a role in U.S. efforts to assist foreign populations, militaries, and governments.141 The
historical DOD role in providing assistance and support to foreign nations can be regarded as
serving three purposes:
1. responding to humanitarian and basic needs,
2. building foreign military capacity and capabilities, and
3. strengthening foreign governments’ ability to deal with internal and international
threats through state-building measures.142
137
Department of Defense, Quadrennial Defense Review, 2014, p. 85; Department of Defense, Climate Change
Adaption Roadmap, FY2012, p. 1; Department of Defense, FY 2014 Climate Change Adaption Roadmap, “Foreword.”
138
Department of Defense, “Quadrennial Defense Review, 2010,” p. 85. This theme was echoed in the 2014 QDR.
139
Office of the Director of National Intelligence, The National Intelligence Strategy of the United States of America,
2014, September 2014, p. 5. A 2012 report coordinated by the intelligence community predicted that “during the next
10 years, water problems will contribute to instability in states important to U.S. national security interests ... [A]s
water shortages become more acute beyond the next 10 years, water in shared basins will increasingly be used as
leverage; the use of water as a weapon or to further terrorist objectives also will become more likely beyond 10 years.”
Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Global Water Security, Intelligence Community Assessment, February
2, 2012, p. iii, http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/Special%20Report_ICA%20Global%20Water%20Security.pdf.
140
Gjelten, Tom. “Intel Report Eyes Climate Change-Security Link,” NPR, June 23, 2008, http://www.npr.org/
templates/story/story.php?storyId=91819098. Referring to National Intelligence Council 2008, National Security
Im
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.