Climatic Change

, Volume 152, Issue 1, pp 85–101 | Cite as

Adaptations to extreme storm events by conservation organizations

  • Chloe B. WardropperEmail author
  • Adena R. Rissman


Extreme precipitation events are associated with increased runoff of sediment and nutrients into surface waters, exacerbating water quality problems and creating challenges for soil and water managers. This change in the hydrologic cycle is expected to intensify under future climate change. Soil and water conservation professionals responsible for advising farmers and other land managers are on the front lines of adaptation to these climate change impacts. This study uses a survey of Soil and Water Conservation District staff (n = 260) in the United States Upper Midwest to better understand adaptation planning and implementation and the factors influencing adaptations by public organizations. In contrast to a typical planning-implementation gap finding, our respondents report a greater emphasis on some kinds of adaptation actions over planning. We find that the concerns of individual government employees about climate change have a greater association with adaptation planning strategies (e.g., planning document updates) compared to implemented adaptations on-the-ground (e.g., stream buffer installation). Also, weather projections were being used in conjunction with both adaptation planning and implementation. This study contributes to efforts to open up the black box of adaptation decision-making in the public sector, revealing the important role of individual concerns and information use.


Adaptation Soil and water conservation Climate change concern Weather projections 



This work was supported by National Science Foundation Water Sustainability and Climate grant DEB 1038759 and Integrative Graduate Education and Research Training (IGERT) DGE 1144752. We appreciate insightful comments on the manuscript from two anonymous reviewers. Thanks to all the Conservation District and state Agriculture Department staff who participated in this study, and for their ongoing work.


  1. Adger NW, Arnell NW, Tompkins EL (2005) Successful adaptation to climate change across scales. Glob Environ Chang 15(2):77–86Google Scholar
  2. Adger WN, Dessai S, Goulden M, Hulme M, Lorenzoni I, Nelson DR, Naess LO, Wolf J, Wreford A (2009) Are there social limits to adaptation to climate change? Clim Chang 93(3):335–354Google Scholar
  3. Alexander RB, Smith RA, Schwarz GE, Boyer EW, Nolan JV, Brakebill JW (2008) Differences in phosphorus and nitrogen delivery to the Gulf of Mexico from the Mississippi River Basin. Environ Sci Technol 42(3):822–830Google Scholar
  4. Angel JR, Widhalm M, Todey D, Massey R, Biehl L (2017) The U2U corn growing degree day tool: tracking corn growth across the US Corn Belt. Clim Risk Manag 15:73–81Google Scholar
  5. Anhalt-Depies CM, Knoot TG, Rissman AR, Sharp AK, Martin KJ (2016) Understanding climate adaptation on public lands in the Upper Midwest: implications for monitoring and tracking progress. Environ Manag 57(5):987–997Google Scholar
  6. Arbuckle JG, Morton LW, Hobbs J (2013) Farmer beliefs and concerns about climate change and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation: evidence from Iowa. Clim Chang 118(3–4):551–563Google Scholar
  7. Baker I, Peterson A, Brown G, McAlpine C (2012) Local government response to the impacts of climate change: an evaluation of local climate adaptation plans. Landsc Urban Plan 107(2):127–136Google Scholar
  8. Barmuta LA, Linke S, Turak E (2011) Bridging the gap between ‘planning’ and ‘doing’ for biodiversity conservation in freshwaters. Freshw Biol 56(1):180–195Google Scholar
  9. Berggren K, Olofsson M, Viklander M, Svensson G, Gustafsson A-M (2011) Hydraulic impacts on urban drainage systems due to changes in rainfall caused by climatic change. J Hydrol Eng 17(1):92–98Google Scholar
  10. Biggs D, Abel N, Knight A, Leitch A, Langston A, Ban N (2011) The implementation crisis in conservation planning: could “mental models” help? Conserv Lett 4(3):169–183Google Scholar
  11. Buizer J, Jacobs K, Cash D (2010) Making short-term climate forecasts useful: linking science and action. Proc Natl Acad Sci 200900518Google Scholar
  12. Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(14):8086–8091Google Scholar
  13. Corfee-Morlot J, Cochran I, Hallegatte S, Teasdale P-J (2011) Multilevel risk governance and urban adaptation policy. Clim Chang 104(1):169–197Google Scholar
  14. Dabney SM, Delgado JA, Reeves DW (2001) Using winter cover crops to improve soil and water quality. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 32(7–8):1221–1250Google Scholar
  15. Darnall N, Henriques I, Sadorsky P (2010) Adopting proactive environmental strategy: the influence of stakeholders and firm size. J Manag Stud 47(6):1072–1094Google Scholar
  16. Dilling L, Lemos MC (2011) Creating usable science: opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Glob Environ Chang 21(2):680–689Google Scholar
  17. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2014) Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  18. Dunlap RE, McCright AM (2008) A widening gap: Republican and Democratic views on climate change. Environ: Sci Pol Sustain Dev 50(5):26–35Google Scholar
  19. Feldman DL, Ingram HM (2009) Making science useful to decision makers: climate forecasts, water management, and knowledge networks. Weather Clim Soc 1(1):9–21Google Scholar
  20. Fernandez S, Moldogaziev T (2010) Empowering public sector employees to improve performance: does it work? Am Rev Publ Admin 41(1):23–47Google Scholar
  21. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (2011) Predicting and changing behavior: the reasoned action approach. Taylor & Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. Gillon S, Booth E, Rissman A (2016) Shifting drivers and static baselines in environmental governance: challenges for proving and improving water quality outcomes. Reg Environ Chang 16(3):759–775Google Scholar
  23. Grothmann T, Patt A (2005) Adaptive capacity and human cognition: the process of individual adaptation to climate change. Glob Environ Chang 15(3):199–213Google Scholar
  24. Hornsey MJ, Harris EA, Bain PG, Fielding KS (2016) Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nat Clim Chang 6:622Google Scholar
  25. Howden SM, Soussana J-F, Tubiello FN, Chhetri N, Dunlop M, Meinke H (2007) Adapting agriculture to climate change. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104(50):19691–19696Google Scholar
  26. IPCC (2014) IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC (eds) Page. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  27. Kirchhoff CJ, Carmen Lemos M, Dessai S (2013) Actionable knowledge for environmental decision making: broadening the usability of climate science. Annu Rev Environ Resour 38:393–414Google Scholar
  28. Kling CL (2015) Can voluntary adoption of agricultural practices achieve the hypoxic zone reduction goals? Agric Policy Rev 2014(2):3Google Scholar
  29. Knight AT, Cowling RM, Rouget M, Balmford A, Lombard AT, Campbell BM (2008) Knowing but not doing: selecting priority conservation areas and the research–implementation gap. Conserv Biol 22(3):610–617Google Scholar
  30. Krause RM (2011) Policy innovation, intergovernmental relations, and the adoption of climate protection initiatives by U.S. cities. J Urban Aff 33(1):45–60Google Scholar
  31. Lal R, Delgado JA, Groffman PM, Millar N, Dell C, Rotz A (2011) Management to mitigate and adapt to climate change. J Soil Water Conserv 66(4):276–285Google Scholar
  32. Larson WE, Lindstrom MJ, Schumacher TE (1997) The role of severe storms in soil erosion: a problem needing consideration. J Soil Water Conserv 52(2):90–95Google Scholar
  33. Lemos MC, Rood RB (2010) Climate projections and their impact on policy and practice. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 1(5):670–682Google Scholar
  34. Lemos MC, Kirchhoff CJ, Ramprasad V (2012) Narrowing the climate information usability gap. Nat Clim Chang 2(11):789–794Google Scholar
  35. Lubell M (2003) Collaborative institutions, belief-systems, and perceived policy effectiveness. Polit Res Q 56(3):309–323Google Scholar
  36. McCright AM (2010) The effects of gender on climate change knowledge and concern in the American public. Popul Environ 32(1):66–87Google Scholar
  37. Measham TG, Preston BL, Smith TF, Brooke C, Gorddard R, Withycombe G, Morrison C (2011) Adapting to climate change through local municipal planning: barriers and challenges. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 16(8):889–909Google Scholar
  38. Melillo JM, Richmond T, Yohe GW (2014) Climate change impacts in the United States: the third National Climate AssessmentGoogle Scholar
  39. Michalak AM, Anderson EJ, Beletsky D, Boland S, Bosch NS, Bridgeman TB, Chaffin JD, Cho K, Confesor R, Daloğlu I (2013) Record-setting algal bloom in Lake Erie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends consistent with expected future conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(16):6448–6452Google Scholar
  40. Minnesota Statutes §103B.801 (2015) Comprehensive Watershed Management Planning ProgramGoogle Scholar
  41. Minnesota Statutes §114D.50 (2017) Clean Water FundGoogle Scholar
  42. Morton TA, Rabinovich A, Marshall D, Bretschneider P (2011) The future that may (or may not) come: how framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Glob Environ Chang 21(1):103–109Google Scholar
  43. Moser SC (2010) Now more than ever: the need for more societally relevant research on vulnerability and adaptation to climate change. Appl Geogr 30(4):464–474Google Scholar
  44. Moser SC, Ekstrom JA (2010) A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107(51):22026–22031Google Scholar
  45. Noe RA, Wilk SL (1993) Investigation of the factors that influence employees’ participation in development activities. J Appl Psychol 78(2):291Google Scholar
  46. Petersen B, Hall KR, Kahl K, Doran PJ (2013) In their own words: perceptions of climate change adaptation from the Great Lakes Region’s resource management community. Environ Pract 15(4):377–392Google Scholar
  47. Porter JJ, Demeritt D, Dessai S (2015) The right stuff? Informing adaptation to climate change in British Local Government. Glob Environ Chang 35:411–422Google Scholar
  48. Prokopy LS, Morton LW, Arbuckle JG Jr, Mase AS, Wilke AK (2015) Agricultural stakeholder views on climate change: implications for conducting research and outreach. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 96(2):181–190Google Scholar
  49. Pryor SC, Howe JA, Kunkel KE (2009) How spatially coherent and statistically robust are temporal changes in extreme precipitation in the contiguous USA? Int J Climatol 29(1):31–45Google Scholar
  50. Pryor SC, Scavia D, Downer C, Gaden M, Iverson L, Nordstrom R, Patz J, Robertson GP (2014) Midwest. Climate change impacts in the United States: the third national climate assessment. In: Melillo JM, Richmond TC, Yohe GW (eds) National Climate Assessment Report. US Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, pp 418–440Google Scholar
  51. Rissman AR, Carpenter S (2015) Progress on nonpoint pollution: barriers and opportunities. Daedalus 144(3):35–47Google Scholar
  52. Rissman AR, Smail R (2014) Accounting for results: how conservation organizations report performance information. Environ Manag 55(4):916–929Google Scholar
  53. Rosenberg EA, Keys PW, Booth DB, Hartley D, Burkey J, Steinemann AC, Lettenmaier DP (2010) Precipitation extremes and the impacts of climate change on stormwater infrastructure in Washington State. Clim Chang 102(1):319–349Google Scholar
  54. Semenza JC, Hall DE, Wilson DJ, Bontempo BD, Sailor DJ, George LA (2008) Public perception of climate change: voluntary mitigation and barriers to behavior change. Am J Prev Med 35(5):479–487Google Scholar
  55. Shaw A, Sheppard S, Burch S, Flanders D, Wiek A, Carmichael J, Robinson J, Cohen S (2009) Making local futures tangible—synthesizing, downscaling, and visualizing climate change scenarios for participatory capacity building. Glob Environ Chang 19(4):447–463Google Scholar
  56. Shortle JS, Ribaudo M, Horan RD, Blandford D (2012) Reforming agricultural nonpoint pollution policy in an increasingly budget-constrained environment. Environ Sci Technol 46(3):1316–1325Google Scholar
  57. Spence A, Poortinga W, Butler C, Pidgeon NF (2011) Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nat Clim Chang 1(1):46–49Google Scholar
  58. Spence A, Poortinga W, Pidgeon N (2012) The psychological distance of climate change. Risk Anal 32(6):957–972Google Scholar
  59. Stein BA, Staudt A, Cross MS, Dubois NS, Enquist C, Griffis R, Hansen LJ, Hellmann JJ, Lawler JJ, Nelson EJ, Pairis A (2013) Preparing for and managing change: climate adaptation for biodiversity and ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 11(9):502–510Google Scholar
  60. Tausanovitch C, Warshaw C (2013) Measuring constituent policy preferences in congress, state legislatures, and cities. J Pol 75(2):330–342Google Scholar
  61. USDA (2016) FY 2016 budget summary and annual performance planGoogle Scholar
  62. Villarini G, Smith JA, Vecchi GA (2013) Changing frequency of heavy rainfall over the Central United States. J Clim 26(1)Google Scholar
  63. Wardropper CB (2018) Environmental performance information use by conservation agency staff. Environ Manag 61(4):563–576Google Scholar
  64. Wisconsin Statutes § 92.10 (2005) Land and water resource management planning programGoogle Scholar
  65. Young OR, Berkhout F, Gallopin GC, Janssen MA, van der Leeuw S (2006) The globalization of socio-ecological systems: an agenda for scientific research. Glob Environ Chang 16(3):304–316Google Scholar
  66. Zhang X, Liu X, Zhang M, Dahlgren RA, Eitzel M (2010) A review of vegetated buffers and a meta-analysis of their mitigation efficacy in reducing nonpoint source pollution. J Environ Qual 39:76–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Natural Resources and SocietyUniversity of IdahoMoscowUSA
  2. 2.Department of Forest and Wildlife EcologyUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations