Upload
hadieu
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0959-3780/$ - se
doi:10.1016/j.gl
�CorrespondE-mail addr
Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164
www.elsevier.com/locate/gloenvcha
Perception of change in freshwater in remote resource-dependentArctic communities
Lilian (Na’ia) Alessaa, Andrew (Anaru) Kliskeya,�, Paula Williamsa, Michael Bartonb
aResilience and Adaptive Management Group, University of Alaska Anchorage, 3211 Providence Drive, Anchorage, AK 99508, USAbSchool of Human Evolution and Social Change, Arizona State University, P O Box 872402, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA
Received 1 November 2006; received in revised form 23 May 2007; accepted 28 May 2007
Abstract
This paper provides empirical evidence to support existing anecdotal studies regarding the mechanisms by which human communities
become vulnerable to rapid changes in freshwater resources on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska. We interviewed adults, stratified by age,
sex, and extended family, in Inupiat communities on the Seward Peninsula. Using categorical indices as part of a semi-structured
interview we elicited a respondent’s perception of the availability and quality of freshwater resources in their community as well as their
perception of change in the availability and quality of freshwater during the period of their lifetime in that community. Significant
relationships were observed between age groups for the perception of change in the availability of the local water source and the
perception of change in its quality—older generations perceiving more change than younger age groups. These perceptions of change
were examined with respect to recent historic changes in precipitation and temperature on the Seward Peninsula. These findings suggest
that individual perceptions are instrumental in determining whether or not change merits response. The findings also provide evidence
that oral traditional knowledge systems have shifted from continuous to discontinuous transmission, distancing the users from
traditional resources. We discuss the role of collective knowledge, through the transmission of knowledge from elders to subsequent
generations, in aiding the development of a community’s ability to note and respond to changes in critical natural resources.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Resilience; Environmental perception; Freshwater; Environmental change; Human response; Traditional ecological knowledge
1. Introduction
In this paper, we report evidence that a phenomenon bywhich subsequent generations in a community fail toacquire traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), and thusaccurate awareness of rates of change and a consequentsynchronization between perceptions of a resource and itsmeasured change, may be occurring in remote, resource-dependent communities in Alaska. We propose thatacculturation and desensitization to change may be keymechanisms reducing adaptive capacity (Robards andAlessa, 2004) and explore this with respect to residents’perceptions of change in freshwater resources in the Arctic.Specifically, we predict that perception of change willdecrease across generations despite significant changes in
e front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
oenvcha.2007.05.007
ing author. Tel.: +1907 7861136; fax: +1 907 7861314.
ess: [email protected] (A. Kliskey).
Arctic climate trends beginning in the 1950 s (Johannessenet al., 2004).In the last 50 years accelerations in a wide range of
hydrological changes in the Arctic have been detected throughphysical measurement (Overpeck et al., 1997). The combinedobservations and documentation form a case that the Arctichydrological system may rapidly be entering a state not seenbefore in historic times (Magnuson et al., 2000; Serreze et al.,2000)—a state that will have significant implications for theinhabitants of the region (ACIA, 2005). Humans in the Arcticare dependent on surface and ground water which is affectedby the type and distribution of permafrost (ground whichremains frozen all year to varying depths).Observed responses of Arctic river systems to recent
increases in temperature (ACIA, 2005), and winterprecipitation have been highly variable (Serreze et al.,2000). The magnitude of the warming has been about0.5 1C, enough to alter ground thermal conditions which
ARTICLE IN PRESS
1Through one or all of the following: developing infrastructure and
behaviors to acquire and conserve clean water, using alternative water
sources, or moving nearer to other sources.
L. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164154
affects lateral transfers into conduits such as rivers andgroundwater (Hinzman et al., 2005). While continuouspermafrost exhibits highly variable responses to globalwarming trends (Osterkamp and Romanovsky, 1999),discontinuous permafrost shows a distinct thawing trendand is correlated to surface hydrology (Jorgenson et al.,2001), resulting in both increased winter base flow ratesand lateral transfers of sediment (Hinzman et al., 2005).Increased base flow rates potentially have a wide range ofimpacts, including changes in stream chemistry and aquatichabitat (Quinn et al., 1997), increased stream and rivericing (Pollard, 2005), and poorly understood effects onerosion and sediment flux, including activating latentcontamination by historic and current industrial activitiessuch as mining (Vorosmarty et al., 2001). All of these affectwater quantity and quality and may be perceived byresidents to different degrees.
Currently, climate models apply to large regional andglobal systems. They have poor resolution at local(community) and very fine (individual agent) scales andthe relationships between macro- and micro-phenomenaare poorly explored (Wilbanks and Kates, 1999). Thisrepresents a critical gap in our ability to understandcomplex systems: the human–freshwater system describedhere is affected by both slower, top-down (i.e., exogenousclimate change) as well as faster, bottom-up (e.g., localscale land use) factors to tightly couple both spatial andtemporal feedbacks. Changes are driven and mediated, butnot always perceived, by individual agents (Wilbanks andKates, 1999). Interactions between individuals (agents) arecomplex and nonlinear; agent populations are heteroge-neous and outcomes, based on decisions, can result inadaptations (Bonabeau, 2002) leading to responses tochanges in freshwater resources which may or may not besuccessful. Despite research which indicates that agentsmake decisions based on perceptions rather than measuredvariables (e.g., Adamowicz et al., 1997; Oba and Kotile,2001) most predictive models regarding the use of waterresources fail to incorporate social components, such asperceptions.
Due largely to a lack of empirical studies, perceptions asdrivers of behaviors are largely unexplored in the contextof specific natural resource challenges, and even less so inthe context of humans and freshwater. After an extensiveanalysis of existing data on regional and global change,Wilbanks and Kates (1999, p. 623) stated that ‘‘the globalchange research effort would benefit from a greateremphasis on a more local scale of data gathering andanalysis and on bottom-up perspectives on global changeissues, as well as more attention to interactions amongdomains and processes operating at different scales.’’
1.1. Perception: a key to resilience of communities to
changes in freshwater?
We have defined resilience in the context of this study tobe specific to the ability of human communities to
successfully respond to changes in freshwater resources.1
By this definition, we posit that our current understandingof this type of resilience is critically hindered by a lack ofstudies which examine the mechanisms leading to orimpeding it. To date, a growing body of researchexamining resilience of Arctic communities to environ-mental change has had several foci. Research that describestraditional knowledge with respect to environmentalchange has documented oral histories of climate changein the Arctic (Cruikshank, 2001) and contemporaryobservations of climate change (Reidlinger and Berkes,2001; Jolly et al., 2002; Krupnik, 2002; George et al., 2004).A more conceptual line of inquiry has focused on thediscussion and development of frameworks for assessingvulnerability of Arctic communities to climate change(Smithers and Smit, 1997; Kelly and Adger, 2000; Ford andSmit, 2004; Smit and Wandel, 2006), their adaptation tochange (Smit et al., 1999, 2000; Wheaton and MacIver,1999; Schneider et al., 2000; Ford et al., 2006), and generalsyntheses of resilience (e.g., Chapin et al., 2006). Thesestudies converge in their agreement that the ability ofArctic communities to adapt to change depends on theirflexibility in using resources (Berkes and Jolly, 2001) but donot evolve this concept further.In general, humans are largely incapable of basing
decisions on cost–benefit analyses as defined by economistsor extensive numerical datasets (Maule and Hodgkinson,2002). Instead, decisions are often based on an individual’sperception of accumulated and diverse information,including peer reference (Maule and Hodgkinson, 2002).Resource decisions have consequences in the ‘real’ world,with recursive feedbacks to society. A large differencebetween the perceived and measured value of a resourcemeans that decisions made about the resource (e.g.,resource conservation or extraction) may result in un-anticipated feedbacks. We believe that for resources likewater, which are essential for human life and well-being,the perceived and actual values of the resource cannotdiffer widely without incurring serious social and physicalconsequences (see, e.g., Reisner, 1993).The phenomenon by which subsequent generations may
‘‘forget’’ what levels of ecosystem services (i.e., intact andproductive soils, adequate water, diverse range of speciesavailable for subsistence, etc.) existed prior to them and therole of perception in responses of communities to environ-mental change has been poorly explored but may be key tohow resilient our society is to long-term change. We positthat the combination of inherent ecosystem features (e.g.,fragility), rates of change and the failure of knowledgesystems to balance these characteristics as quickly as theyoccur may create vulnerability in Arctic communities withrespect to their freshwater resources.
ARTICLE IN PRESSL. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164 155
The Arctic is a high latitude, dry, cold desert with littlesoil and limited soil nutrients (Hinzman et al., 2005).Additionally, the Artic is undergoing unprecedentedenvironmental change (Overpeck et al., 1997; Magnusonet al., 2000; Serreze et al., 2000). In this project, we workedwith remote Arctic communities with a strong oraltradition and a history of subsistence use of resources(i.e., an ‘‘Elder’’ culture). While components of modernityexist (e.g., satellite, internet, television and equipment suchas All Terrain Vehicles, etc.) there is little or no builtenvironment. All communities are underlain by discontin-uous permafrost which is changing rapidly (specifically,melting) and this is related to changes in surface hydrologysuch as groundwater re-charge and river run-off (e.g.,Yoshikawa and Hinzman, 2003).
Elder cultures possess a deep knowledge base about thecomplex ecological systems with which they interactthrough the transmission of knowledge and wisdom fromone generation to another. This knowledge base has mostcommonly been termed traditional ecological knowledge(TEK) (Berkes et al., 2000, 2003; Kimmerer, 2002; Hunn etal., 2003). TEK is resource and locale specific (Kurien,1998). The acquisition of this knowledge (sometimesreferred to as ‘‘land schooling’’) is acquired over timethrough learning by doing and is communicated fromelders to subsequent generations verbally and by demon-stration. It is also transmitted through songs, stories,proverbs and dance (Kurien, 1998; Olick and Robins, 1998;Pierotti and Wildcat, 2000) and includes diverse sources ofinformation, including Western science.
TEK has the potential to extend the knowledge base ofthe community at least to the length of the life of the oldestmember of the community, and arguably longer. In thesecommunities, knowledge and awareness of changes in thequality and availability of resources, including water, heldby an individual can be, and usually are, transmitted fromgeneration to generation (Kurien, 1998; Berkes et al.,2000). We can view this cultural transmission as aninheritance system with adaptive consequences: if a culturehas continuous transmission of a diversity of options forfreshwater resources as well as the status of particularresources (e.g., plentiful, good) over several generations, anindividual with this inheritance will possess a longertemporal base for accessing resources and for assessingchange in a specific resource than just his/her lifetime, andtherefore promoting resilience (Folke et al., 1998). This issupported by cases of knowledge legacies that retainspecific interpretations of historically infrequent events.For example, during the December 26, 2004 tsunami insoutheast Asia the nomadic Moken sea gypsies moved tohigher ground based on collective memory of extreme tidalrecession despite such an event not occurring in even theeldest community member’s recollection nor the commu-nity having western training (e.g., tsunami announcements,drills, etc.) in tsunami response (Wong, 2005).
Human societies have been shaped by the availabilityand quality of freshwater and will continue to face
challenges regarding its management, particularly underconditions of climatic change (e.g., Lansing, 2002; Oki andKanae, 2006). Among natural resources, the perception ofsurface water bodies per se appears to more consistentlyconverge measured variables—a consequence of humans’preference and inherent need for water (Gobster, 1998;Kweon et al., 2006). Thus, decisions regarding waterresources are often based on the perceived availability ofthe resource, and are therefore especially sensitive to adifference between the measured or quantified resource(Oba and Kotile, 2001; Aronson and Le Floc’h, 1996;Brandenburg and Carroll, 1995).As successive generations inherit natural resources, their
perceptions rely on some measure of change based on a‘‘before’’ and a ‘‘now.’’ This difference in perception is notonly related to the amount of time that a particulargeneration has experienced the natural resource, but alsoon transmission of information from others and on thequality of their experience (Ford et al., 2006; Davidson-Hunt and Berkes, 2003), i.e., the type of interaction withthe resource. We posit that it is the difference in perceivedand actual change that contributes to an individual’s, andhence a community’s, ability to respond to change. Thisdifference strongly influences how adaptive, flexible andultimately, successful, a community’s TEK regarding waterresources is under conditions of change.Despite the implicit need for water resources and the
extensive history of human settlement reliant on them(Moss, 1998) most of the existing literature on freshwaterconsists of economic valuation, particularly that foragriculture (e.g., Wilson and Carpenter, 1999) and industry(e.g., Ogden and Watson, 1999), rather than social andcultural values. The identities of elder cultures, both in thisstudy and globally, are linked with water sources such asrivers, which provide both access and biota (e.g., fish). Thisis reflected in the following narrative from a 72-yearresident:
We have always been a salmon people. The salmoncome up the river because we are their people and we aregrateful for them. They feed us and we take care of theriver.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that the values associatedwith water may affect a society’s sense of perceived andactual vulnerability leading to cooperative (e.g., Lansingand Kremer, 1993) or conflict-driven strategies to minimizerisk (e.g., Giordano et al., 2002), while failure to perceivevulnerability may lead to the resource reaching a supplythreshold (in quality and/or quantity). This threshold mayappear as a ‘‘sudden’’ change in the resource and representsan acute type of vulnerability if a plan for response has notbeen developed. It is this simple component of vulner-ability, the failure to match the perceptual to the actualresource, that we believe is one of the great challenges ofour time. For this reason, documenting and characterizingthe dynamics of sociocultural perceptions of freshwater iscritical to anticipating how communities will respond to
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 1. (A) Historic settlement pattern of Seward Peninsula, Alaska.
(B) Contemporary settlement pattern of Seward Peninsula, Alaska.
(C) Location map of Seward Peninsula, Alaska.
L. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164156
changing hydrological regimes because they incorporatemicro-level dynamics, which explain how individual agentsbehave, which affect or influence broader macro-levelpatterns.
2. Methods
2.1. Study area
The study was done in collaboration with five villages onthe Seward Peninsula (Fig. 1) of western Alaska. Theregional population of 5500 is predominately InupiatEskimo with some Siberian Yupik and central Yup’ikEskimos. The villages are 490% native and have a citycouncil and a tribal or IRA (Indian Reorganization Act)council. Initially, the investigators explained the study toeach village council. With the council’s consent, investiga-tors visited households in the village explaining the studyand requesting individuals X18 years old to complete aninterview. Participants were asked for verbal informedconsent. The study was approved by the InstitutionalReview Boards of the University of Alaska Anchorage andthe University of Alaska Fairbanks.
Communities on the Seward Peninsula (Fig. 1A) wereonce seasonally mobile in order to sustain a subsistencelifestyle that utilized a wide array of biological and physicalresources, including both anadromous and freshwater fish,caribou and waterfowl, among many others (for a reviewand detailed history see Chance, 1990). Fig. 1A and Bshows the pattern of settlement on the Seward Peninsulafrom 1800 to 2000. Associated with these permanentsettlements was the establishment of modern day, seasonalresource use zones which are identified by watershedboundaries and represents the geographic extent for whichresidents have extensive knowledge regarding water re-sources (data not shown). Municipal water systemsinstalled in these communities since 1960 have, in largepart, led to a rapid increase in the domestic use offreshwater (Fig. 2) and large, spatially localized inputs ofwaste such as sewage (data not shown).
The eldest residents in these communities (defined in thisstudy as ages 60 and above), who relied entirely onsubsistence gathering for food in their youth, are those whohave had extensive ‘‘land schooling.’’ They retain the mostexposure to and familiarity with the landscape. The middlegeneration (ages 40–59) experienced land schooling early intheir lives. However, land schooling was interrupted if theywished to continue their education beyond 8th grade, forwhich they were required to leave their village and live in aboarding school usually many miles from their community(Seyfrit and Hamilton, 1997). The middle age generationplays the roles of facilitators and resource managers in thecommunity (Jolly et al., 2002). This generation is respon-sible for facilitating many of the activities of the oldestgeneration as well as supporting extended families. Theyounger generation (ages 18–39) have grown up with anever-increasing adoption of Western culture in their
villages. This includes telephones, use of motorized vehicles(generally ATVs and motorized boats), installation ofwater and sewer systems (municipal water supply), theadvent of grocery stores, television and the internet, toname a few. Although the younger generation fishes andhunts with older generations, communities no longer relyon these resources as their sole source of food. In similarcommunities, researchers have documented that the oldergeneration has commented on the lack of interest of the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
20000
1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
Pop
ulat
ion
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Wat
er U
se (
litre
s pe
r ca
pita
per
day
)
Population
Water use
Fig. 2. Domestic use of freshwater and population in Seward Peninsula communities. Sources: US Census Bureau and Village utility records.
L. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164 157
younger generation in land schooling as well as theincreased interest in watching television and other ‘‘wes-tern’’ activities (Ford et al., 2006).
2.2. Methods
Preliminary visits and interviews in each communitywere conducted in July 2004. During July and August 2005the study recruited 103 individuals from four of thecommunities on the Seward Peninsula. In 2006, 31individuals from an additional community on the SewardPeninsula agreed to be interviewed. Approximately 5% ofindividuals we first approached with a request for aninterview either refused or agreed to at a later date butwere subsequently unavailable. We interviewed at least20% of the adult population in each community, andused a random-stratified sampling procedure combinedwith the snowball technique (Kelsall et al., 1972) to obtainequal numbers of male and female respondents, respon-dents of different ages, and respondents from differentextended families within each community. The respondentsample was distributed among the five communities inproportion to the community’s adult census population,and approximately evenly split between female (48%)and male (52%). The sample was divided into age groupssegmenting the population into three generations: 18–39years (36%), 40–59 years (43%), and 60–99 years (21%).Similar groupings into three generations have been usedin dietary studies of Inupiat Eskimo (Nobmann et al.,2005).
The 20–30min interview was conducted either in anindividual’s home or in a community building according tothat individual’s preference. The interviewers used astructured interview format to complete a questionnaire
survey but also allowed individuals the opportunity to talkopenly, which provided narratives. The structured inter-view contained questions about an individual’s use ofwater, their perceptions of water quality and availabilityand changes in quality and availability.Individuals were asked what their perception was of the
quality and availability (quantity) of community watersources. Water sources referred to typically included themunicipal water supply and the major river or creek usedby the village. We developed a perceived water qualityscale, which asked individuals to rate the quality of thewater source (high, high-medium, medium, medium-low,low). A perceived water quantity scale asked individuals torate the availability of the water source (scarce, scarce-sufficient, sufficient, sufficient-plentiful, and plentiful).Both indices were collapsed into three classes for dataanalysis. Individuals were also asked to rate whether theyperceived that change had occurred in the quality andavailability of water sources during the time they had usedthat water source. Indices of perceived change used 3-pointscales. Perception of change in quality was rated as: poorerquality, no change, or better quality. Perceived change inwater availability was rated as: less availability, no change,or greater availability.Quantitative data analyses were undertaken using
SPSS14.0. For nominal variables measuring perceivedchanges in water quality and quantity, Pearson chi-squareand the Phi measure for strength of association wereused. ANOVA was used to test for differences in means onscales measuring perceived water quality and quantity.Interview narratives were analyzed by extracting domi-nant themes under each of the structured interview topics(water use; and perception of water quality, quantity andchange).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 1
Descriptive statistics for perception of river water quality and quantity by
age group
Quality Quantity
M SD M SD
Descriptive statistics of perception of river water quality and quantity
Younger 1.33 0.63 1.13 0.34
Middle 1.69 0.76 1.38 0.60
Older 1.96 0.92 1.96 0.92
Descriptive statistics of perception of municipal water quality and
quantity
Younger 1.51 0.49 1.14 0.35
Middle 2.00 0.76 1.49 0.53
Older 2.18 0.80 1.47 0.61
perceived change
no perceived change
perceived change
no perceived change
younger middle older
younger middle older
Fig. 3. (A) Perception of change in river water quality by age group. (B)
Perception of change in river water quantity by age group.
L. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164158
3. Results
3.1. Perception of river quality, quantity and change
Respondents in our study typically rated their local riveror creek as being water of a high quality and a plentifulsupply—61% of respondents perceived river water to behigh quality versus only 18% perceiving it to be lowquality. A statistically significant (F(2, 124) ¼ 6.31,po0.01) relationship exists for perception of river waterquality by age group. The younger age group differed fromboth the middle age group, t(124) ¼ �2.420, p(2 taile-d)o0.01 and the older age group, t(124) ¼ �3.399,p(2 tailed)o0.01. There was not a statistically significantdifference between the perceptions of the middle and olderage groups. As age increased, the mean of the perception ofwater quality increased2 (Table 1).
A 65% of respondents perceived river water to be inplentiful supply. A statistically significant relationship (F(2,124) ¼ 3.19, p(2 tailed) ¼ 0.05) was also evident forperception of river water availability (quantity) by agegroup. The younger age group differed from both themiddle age group, t(124) ¼ �2.42, p(2 tailed)o0.01 andthe older age group, t(124) ¼ �3.40, p(2 tailed)o0.01(Table 1). There was not a statistically significant differencebetween the perceptions of the middle and older agegroups. As age increased, fewer respondents perceivedavailability of river water to be plentiful and morerespondents perceived the water to be only sufficient—norespondent indicated that river water was in scarce supply(Table 1). There was also not a statistically significantrelationship between perception of river water quality oravailability and sex.
Most respondents (76%) perceived no changes in riverwater quality, 17% perceived it to be of poor quality. Amoderately statistically significant relationship existed forperception of changes in river water quality by age group,w2(2, N ¼ 127) ¼ 10.85, po0.01, Cramer’s f ¼ 0.21. Se-venty-seven percent of respondents perceived no change inriver water availability (quantity). Perceptions of change toriver water quantity were also statistically significantamong age groups, w2(2, N ¼ 127) ¼ 8.67, po0.01, Cra-mer’s f ¼ 0.18 (Fig. 3).
3.2. Perception of municipal water quality, quantity and
change
Amajority of respondents (43%) perceived the quality oftheir municipal supply to be high, 42% of respondentsperceived medium quality and 16% perceived low quality.Again, there was a statistically significant relationshipbetween age group and perception of quality of themunicipal water supply: F(2, 97) ¼ 1.77, p (2 tailed)o0.01.Following the trend above, the younger age group, differed
21.0 ¼ worse quality or less availability, 2.0 ¼ the same or no change,
3.0 ¼ better quality or increased availability.
significantly from the middle age group, t(97) ¼ �3.49,p(2-tailed)o0.01, and from the older age group,t(97) ¼ �3.94, p (2 tailed)o0.01 (Table 1).Overall the majority of respondents (75%) perceived
their municipal water supply to be plentiful, while 22%perceived a sufficient supply and 3% a scarce supply. Theperceptions followed the same pattern; a statisticallysignificant difference by age group, F(2, 96) ¼ 5.937,po0.01. Levene’s test for homogeneity of variance wassignificant in this comparison. To adjust, test results thatdid not assume equal variance were used. The younger agegroup differed from the middle age group, t(96) ¼ �3.577
ARTICLE IN PRESSL. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164 159
(equal variance not assumed), p(2-tailed)o0.01, and fromthe older age group, t(96) ¼ �2.235, p(2 tailed) ¼ 0.04(equal variance not assumed).
For perception of change in municipal water quality,76% of respondents perceived no change and 10%perceived it as poorer quality. Eighty-four percent per-ceived no change in the supply of municipal water with 8%and 8% perceiving increased and decreased municipalwater availability. There was not a significant difference inage groups for perception of change in municipal waterquality or for perception of change in municipal wateravailability.
3.3. Age, experience and perception of change
The relationship between perceptions of change and agegroup was not simply due to longer period of use orknowledge of the water source by respondents. Thenumber of years a respondent had used or had knowledgeof the major river in their community was independent ofthe age of the respondent (R2
¼ 0.24, po0.01), althoughthe mean number of years use of the river between agegroups was significant (F(2, 95) ¼ 5.28, po0.01), that is,middle and older age generations had, on average, longeruse and knowledge of the major river than the youngergeneration, there were no significant differences in themean number of years respondents had used the majorriver between the three response categories for perceptionsof change in river quality. There were similarly nosignificant differences in the mean number of yearsrespondents had used the major river between the responsecategories for perceptions of change in river availability,between the response categories for perceptions of riverquality, or between the response categories for perceptionsof river availability. Similarly, the aggregated perception ofchange using all four measures of perceived change showedno significant difference based on duration of use of theriver. Thus, the generational differences reported forperception of change in water resources are independentof the length of a respondent’s use of the specific watersource.
4. Discussion
Global environmental change, particularly in waterresources, exists as both perceived and measured condi-tions. Of these two, the former is more powerful (Eiseret al., 2000; Michaels, 2000) and, we argue, more importantin determining mechanisms by which societies are resilientor vulnerable to changes in water resources. If a commu-nity perceives there is ‘‘no change’’ in water supply andquality while in fact there is (e.g., it may be decreasing and/or degraded), they may not respond to it to the point whereit affects health and well being (leading to vulnerability)(e.g., Smith et al., 2003). Change is an intrinsic componentof our global system with rapid and acute changes in waterand climate evident throughout paleological and historic
records (e.g., Briffa et al., 1998; Waelbroeck et al., 2001;Leavesley, 1994).Hansen et al. (1998) pointed out the challenges of
perceiving change as a long-term trend (e.g., climatechange) versus a short-term fluctuation which naturallyoccurs in systems that are inherently noisy or chaotic suchas those found in hydrological systems in the Arctic(ACIA, 2005). As successive generations inherit naturalresources, their perceptions rely on some measure ofchange based on a ‘‘before’’ and a ‘‘now’’. An intact oralhistory (i.e., TEK) could connect older and youngergenerations such that the ‘‘before’’ measure is considerablyearlier than the chronological age of the younger genera-tions. This study provides data (Figs. 3–5, Table 1) whichsupport our prediction that perception of change hasdecreased from the oldest to the youngest generation inthese communities despite rapid changes in water resourcesand a strong Elder culture.A large difference between the actual status of a resource
and how it is perceived is a critical determinant in theability of individuals and their networks to respond tochange. If communities are able to maintain a longtemporal knowledge base through transmission of TEK,and this knowledge informs decision-making and patternsof resource utilization (Tainter, 1988), the greater thelikelihood that decisions will reflect rates and types ofenvironmental change. Particularly with freshwater, in-dividuals and societies can only respond effectively tovariations in supply and quality if they perceive theresource has changed (either positively or negatively) andif this perceived change converges on actual change.Ford et al. (2006) provide narrative from a resource-
based Elder culture in northeastern Canada indicating aloss of traditional knowledge and skills among youngergenerations. In interviews, the residents of the communityattributed the loss to several factors, including a decline inparticipation and interest in hunting and gathering,gathering competing with alternative activities such ascomputer games and TV, increasing dependence on wagedemployment, language differences between generations,and the desire among the youth to follow ‘‘western’’ socialnorms (E. Abraham, personal communication). Thisdisconnection of the younger generation from the land isreinforced by intergenerational segregation of older andyounger generations. These researchers observed that ‘‘theprocesses by which [TEK] is developed and learned,requires experience being regularly out on the land andobserving others.’’ (Ford et al., 2006, p.28). The loss of thisknowledge results in a reduction of adaptive capacityamong younger generations mainly because it reduces thediversity of options they have to access freshwater throughloss of familiarity with the location and reliability of waterresources in the landscape.In our study, the oldest age group was the last generation
to receive cohesive oral histories and land schooling bytheir elders whereas the middle age group was subject towidespread western institutional schooling and incomplete
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000Year
Per
cept
ion
of c
hang
e fo
r ag
e gr
oups
-8.0
-7.0
-6.0
-5.0
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
Mea
n an
nual
tem
p. f
or N
ome,
Ala
ska
(°C
)
60-99 yrsOldest generation
40-59 yrsMiddle generation
18-39 yrsYoungest generation
Fig. 4. Temperature change over time for Nome, Alaska and year of birth versus aggregated perception of change in water. Note that the maximum
amount of climatic change experienced (red horizontal lines) is the same for all three age groups. Note also that the amount of change per time unit is
greater for the youngest age group.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1905
1910
1915
1920
1925
1930
1935
1940
1945
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Year
Per
cept
ion
of c
hang
e fo
r ag
e gr
oups
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Tot
al a
nnua
l pre
cip.
for
Nom
e, A
lask
a (m
m)
60-99 yrsEldest generation
40-59 yrsMiddle generation
18-39 yrsYoungest generation
Fig. 5. Precipitation over time for Nome, Alaska and year of birth versus aggregated perception of change in water. Note that the maximum amount of
climatic change experienced (red horizontal lines) is the same for all three age groups. Note also that the amount of change per time unit is greater for the
youngest age group.
L. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164160
transmission of oral histories. Related to this is theinterruption of the oral tradition and the loss of culturalintegrity during the early and middle parts of the 20thcentury (Burch, 1998). Transmission of TEK as acontinuous, dynamic, and cohesive knowledge system iscentral to resilience to change because it enables commu-nities to identify appropriate responses to maintain the
sustainability of critical resources (Folke et al., 1998;Berkes et al., 2000; Berkes and Folke, 2002). Historicalcollective memory such as TEK, is expected to provide acontinuous accounting of modes of, and reasons for,acquiring diverse resources in the environment. It isbecause of this that the differences between age groups inthis study are notable. If the transmission of values and
ARTICLE IN PRESSL. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164 161
perceptions was complete in these communities, then theyoungest age group should perceive some change in theirwater resources.
Again, the eldest generation received a much longertemporal accounting of freshwater availability and qualitythrough TEK which would be supplemented throughpersonal experience, whereas the youngest generation hashad limited access to this information. Mirroring the Fordet al. (2006) findings, another salient factor, to which ourcollaborators referred in interviews, is the introduction andproliferation of television and other global media in thevillages which they felt reduced the time that the youngestgeneration spent acquiring experience in the landscape. Inother words, they expressed concern that the youngestgenerations did not value, access and utilize the extensivedatabase that comprises traditional knowledge systems.
4.1. Experience on the land: perception of change
While historic and instrument-derived data are lackingfor finer scales on the Seward Peninsula, regional climatedata provide measures for comparison of perceptual versusobjective changes in the landscape. Fig. 4 shows tempera-ture trends for Nome where a cooling period during thebeginning of the 20th century was followed by a distinctwarming period beginning around 1951 (Polyakov andJohnson, 2000). Mean average annual temperature andtotal annual precipitation for Nome, the regional center onSeward Peninsula, shows an increasing trend since recordsbegan in 1915, and a more marked increase since the1976–1978 regime shift (Figs. 4 and 5). Superimposed onthe temperature record (Fig. 4) and on the precipitationdata (Fig. 5) is the aggregated perception of change in riverwater for each generational age group—positioned bymedian birth year of the age group. The older generationperceived greater change in river water quality andavailability while the middle generation perceived somethough less change. Despite the younger generation havingexperienced a period of dramatic temperature changeduring their lifetimes (since the 1976–1978 regime shift)they did not perceive a great deal of change in river waterresources.
4.2. Explaining age differences
The lack of correlation between length of use of waterand perception of change in water indicates that this is notsimply a phenomenon of accumulating exposure to change.While the oldest age group has acquired longer spatial andtemporal knowledge (i.e., ‘‘before to now’’), the youngestage group has been exposed to most rapid change as well asaccess to their elders without overt Western censorship.Notably, all three age groups have experienced the samemaximum range of climatic change (Figs. 4 and 5). Ourdata run counter to the intuitive interpretation of thesedata: that the youngest generation should perceive thegreatest amount of change because they experienced the
maximum range of temperature values over the shortesttime period.All regional climate models confirm that change affect-
ing permafrost and hence hydrology in these areas isoccurring rapidly but our data suggest that youngergenerations are not perceiving change. The data presentedin this paper are, in our opinion, profound. They show thatin older generations individuals are more likely to detectchange in water resources but this perception is notadopted by subsequent generations despite measurementssuggesting they have experienced the greatest rate ofchange. This is a phenomenon that requires furtherinquiry, especially if the resilience of a community is afunction of collective longitudinal information transfer(e.g., traditional knowledge) and learning. Since thesecommunities are gradually shifting to younger decisionmakers (the 35–50 year age group), questions ariseregarding whether the difference between the perceivedand actual resource may be key to the types of decisionsmade regarding water resources. This phenomenon appliesnot only to remote, resource-dependent communities inrapidly changing environments, but also to human societiesworldwide. A salient question which needs to be addressedis how do decision makers perceive and respond to changessuch that sustainability is promoted over time.
5. Conclusions
Our study, conducted in partnership with residents ofremote, resource-dependent communities, shows that theperception of change in water resources is positivelycorrelated with age. Older generations in Seward Peninsulacommunities perceived lower quality, less availability, andgreater change in local water resources than youngergenerations and there were no differences in perceptionsbetween male and female respondents. This relationshipbetween perception of change and age is particularlyinteresting since recent climate records show that increasedvariation in temperature and precipitation have occurred inthe region during the last 40 years (the lifetime of theyoungest generation) compared to 40–90 years ago (theearlier lifetime of older generations).It has been proposed that improving the understanding
of linkages between macroscale and microscale phenomenaand processes is an important challenge for science(Wilbanks and Kates, 1999). The way in which peoplethink about environmental change and their individual‘‘understandings’’ as perceptions are not necessarilyaccurate or complete. However, these cognitive processesare critical to their willingness and ability to respond tochange (Stamm et al., 2000). We believe that the observeddifferences between age group perceptions of change in aresource with respect to recorded changes suggest thatdifferences between perception and the actual status of aresource may be a determinant of resilience or vulner-ability. That is, a widening gap between perceived changeand actual change leads to an accumulation of change until
ARTICLE IN PRESSL. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164162
a threshold is reached. Such a threshold could be describedas sudden or catastrophic, and is more easily perceived,such that the consequences are acute. Our study extendsthe literature on perception of environmental change byproviding evidence that perception mediates willingness toact (e.g., Stern, 2000)—while alternative views exist, that is,that vulnerability itself is experienced through perceptions,those appear to be specific to studies of individualvulnerability to personal risk (Satterfield et al., 2004), andare nonetheless formulated on the basis of perceptions as amediator of behavior (e.g., Kraus et al., 1992). It alsoextends a potentially critical area of inquiry, that ofunderstanding individual perceptions of environmentalchange and their role in creating collective responses, suchas formal and informal institutions.
There are several implications of these findings. Animportant one is that the loss of sensitivity to hydrologicalchanges in younger generations is occurring despite dataand information, both western and traditional, which pointtoward increasingly rapid variability (Overpeck et al., 1997;Jolly et al., 2002). Our results implicate the role of thetransmission of knowledge in aiding a community’s abilityto note and respond appropriately to changes in criticalnatural resources, a key factor in determining the vulner-ability/resilience of a community in the face of environ-mental change. We argue that the transmission ofknowledge from older to younger generations is a criticalprocess in maintaining an intimate familiarity with acommunity’s resource supplies. As this becomes increas-ingly impaired (e.g., fragmented or discontinuous) acommunity becomes less capable of responding to envir-onmental changes affecting critical resources because theymay not detect, and hence respond, to change until it isprofound. While this study of biophysical and socioculturaldynamics was conducted on the Seward Peninsula it yieldsinsight applicable to other systems where environmentalchange is expected to be rapid and communities are relianton a combination of inherent natural resources and a cash-economy. It speaks to a broader human condition ofbasing many decisions on our perceptions of the worldaround us and highlights the need to advance ourunderstanding of how this creates feedbacks betweensociocultural and biophysical systems and ultimately theircohesiveness, functionality, and maintenance of desiredtraits.
Acknowledgments
We are grateful to the National Science Foundation(OPP Arctic System Science #0327296 and #0328686) forfunding this research-the views expressed here do notnecessarily reflect those of the National Science Founda-tion. We acknowledge Dan White for providing the datapresented in Fig. 5. We thank faculty and graduatestudents at the Institute of Resources, Environment andSustainability at the University of British Columbia and atthe School of Human Evolution and Social Change at
Arizona State University for discussion, comments andsuggestions on earlier versions of these data and ideas. Weare grateful for the insightful comments on an earlierversion by two anonymous reviewers. To our communitycollaborators in the villages of Elim, Golovin, Teller, Walesand White Mountain, Quyana.
References
Adamowicz, W., Swait, J., Boxall, P., Louviere, J., Williams, M., 1997.
Perceptions versus objective measures of environmental quality in
combined revealed and stated preference models of environmental
valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32
(1), 65–84.
ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment), 2005. ACIA Scientific Report.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Aronson, J., Le Floc’h, E., 1996. Vital landscape attributes: missing tools
for restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 4, 377–387.
Berkes, F., Folke, C., 2002. Back to the future: ecosystem dynamics and
local knowledge. In: Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S. (Eds.), Panarchy:
Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems.
Island Press, Washington, DC.
Berkes, F., Jolly, D., 2001. Adapting to climate change: social-ecological
resilience in a Canadian western Arctic community. Conservation
Ecology 5 (2), 18 [Online] http://www.consecol.org/vol5/iss2/art18.
Berkes, F., Colding, Folke, C., 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological
knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications 10 (5),
1251–1262.
Bonabeau, E., 2002. Agent-based modeling: methods and techniques for
simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences 99 (3), 7280–7287.
Brandenburg, A.M., Carroll, M.S., 1995. Your place or mine? The effect
of place creation on environmental values and landscape meanings.
Society & Natural Resources 8 (5), 381–398.
Briffa, K.P., Jones, F., Schweingruber, F.H., Osborn, T., 1998. Influence
of volcanic eruptions on Northern Hemisphere summer temperature
over the past 600 years. Nature (London) 393, 450–454.
Burch, E.S., 1998. The Inupiaq Eskimo Nations of Northwest Alaska.
University of Alaska Press, Fairbanks, AK.
Chance, N.A., 1990. The Inupiat and Arctic Alaska: An Ethnography of
Development. Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., Fort Worth, TX.
Chapin III, F.S., Lovecraft, A.L., Zavaleta, E.S., Nelson, J., Robards,
M.D., Kofinas, G.P., Trainor, S.F., Peterson, G.D., Huntington, H.P.,
Naylor, R.L., 2006. Policy strategies to address sustainability of
Alaskan boreal forests in response to a directionally changing climate.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (45),
16637–16643.
Cruikshank, J., 2001. Glaciers and climate change: perspectives from oral
tradition. Arctic 54, 377–393.
Davidson-Hunt, I., Berkes, F., 2003. Learning as you journey: anishi-
naabe perception of social-ecological environments and adaptive
learning. Conservation Ecology 8 (1), 5–25.
Eiser, R.J., Reicher, S.D., Podpadec, T.J., 2000. Awareness of bad news,
environmental attitudes, and subjective estimates of coastal pollution.
Ecological Psychology 12 (3), 241–258.
Folke, C., Berkes, F., Colding, J., 1998. Ecological practices and social
mechanisms for building resilience and sustainability. In: Berkes, F.,
Folke, C. (Eds.), Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Ford, J.D., Smit, B., 2004. A framework for assessing the vulnerability of
communities in the Canadian Arctic to risks associated with climate
change. Arctic 57, 389–400.
Ford, J.D., Smit, B., Wandel, J., 2006. Vulnerability to climate change in
the Arctic: a case study from Arctic Bay, Canada. Global Environ-
mental Change 16 (2), 145–160.
ARTICLE IN PRESSL. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164 163
George, J.C., Huntington, H.P., Brewster, K., Eicken, H., Norton, D.W.,
Glenn, R., 2004. Observations on shorefast ice dynamics in Arctic
Alaska and the responses of the Inupiat hunting community. Arctic 57,
363–374.
Giordano, M., Giordano, M., Wolf, A., 2002. The geography of water
conflict and cooperation: internal pressures and international mani-
festations. The Geographical Journal 168, 293–312.
Gobster, P.H., 1998. Nearby neighborhood residents’ images and
perceptions of the river. In: Gobster, P.H., Westpahl, L.M. (Eds.),
People and the River: Perception and Use of Chicago Waterways for
Recreation. United States Department of the Interior, Milwaukee, WI.
Hansen, J., Sate, M., Glascoe, J., Ruedy, R., 1998. A common-sense
climate index: is climate changing noticeably? Procedures of the
National Academy of Sciences 95, 4113–4120.
Hinzman, L., Bettez, N.D., Bolton, W.R., Chapin, F.S., Dyurgerov, M.B.,
Fastie, C.L., Griffith, B., Huang, H.-P., Weickmann, K.M., Juno, C.,
2005. Evidence and implications of recent climate change in northern
Alaska and other Arctic regions. Climatic Change 14, 1525–1534.
Hunn, E.S., Johnson, D.R., Russell, P.N., Thornton, T.F., Alvard, M.S.,
Berkes, F., Broughton, J.M., Cruikshank, J., Moss, M.L., Rose, D.B.,
Tucker, B., 2003. Huna Tlingit traditional environmental knowledge,
conservation, and the management of a ‘‘wilderness’’ park. Current
Anthropology 44, S79–S103.
Johannessen, O.M., Bengtsson, L., Miles, M.W., Kuzmina, S.I., Semenov,
V.A., Alekseev, G.V., Nagurnyi, A.P., Zakharov, V.F., Bobylev, L.P.,
Pettersson, L.H., Hasselmann, K., Cattle, H.P., 2004. Arctic climate
change: observed and modeled temperature and sea-ice variability.
Tellus A 56, 328–341.
Jolly, D., Berkes, F., Castleden, J., Nichols, T., Community of Sachs
Harbor, 2002. We can’t predict the weather like we used to: Inuvialuit
observations of climate change. In: Krupnik, I., Jolly, D. (Eds.), The
Earth is Faster Now. ARCUS, Fairbanks, AK.
Jorgenson, M.T., Racine, C.H., Walters, J.C., Osterkamp, T.E., 2001.
Permafrost degradation and ecological changes associated with a
warming climate in central Alaska. Climatic Change 48, 551–579.
Kelly, P.M., Adger, W.N., 2000. Theory and practice in assessing
vulnerability to climate change and facilitating adaptation. Climatic
Change 47, 325–352.
Kelsall, R.K., Poole, A., Kuhn, A., 1972. The questionnaire in a
sociological research project. British Journal of. Sociology 23,
344–357.
Kimmerer, R.W., 2002. Weaving traditional ecological knowledge into
biological education: a call to action. BioScience 52 (5), 432–438.
Kraus, N., Malmfors, T., Slovic, P., 1992. Intuitive toxicology: expert and
lay judgments of chemical risks. Risk Analysis 12, 215–232.
Krupnik, I., 2002. Watching ice and weather our way: some lessons from
Yupik observations of sea ice and weather in St. Lawrence Island. In:
Krupnik, I., Jolly, D. (Eds.), The Earth is Faster Now. ARCUS,
Fairbanks AK.
Kurien, J., 1998. Traditional ecological knowledge and system sustain-
ability: new meaning to Asian coastal proverbs. Ecological Applica-
tions 8 (1), S2–S5.
Kweon, B.-S., Ellis, C.D., Lee, S.-W., Rogers, G.O., 2006. Large scale
environmental knowledge: investigating the relationship between self-
reported and objectively measured physical environments. Environ-
ment and Behavior 38, 72–91.
Lansing, J.S., 2002. Complex adaptive systems. Annual Review of
Anthropology 32, 183–204.
Lansing, J.S., Kremer, J.N., 1993. Emergent properties of Balinese water
temple networks: coadaptation on a rugged fitness landscape.
American Anthropologist 95 (1), 97–114.
Leavesley, G.H., 1994. Modeling the effects of climate change on water
resources—a review. Climatic Change 28, 159–177.
Magnuson, J.J., Robertson, D.M., Benson, B.J., Wynne, R.H., Living-
stone, D.M., Arai, T., Assel, R.A., Barry, R.G., Card, V., Kuusisto,
E., Granin, N.G., Prowse, T.D., Stewart, K.M., Vuglinski, V.S., 2000.
Historic trends in lake and river ice cover in the northern hemisphere.
Science 289, 1743–1746.
Maule, A.J., Hodgkinson, G.P., 2002. Heuristics, biases and strategic
decision making. Psychologist 15 (2), 68–71.
Michaels, C.F., 2000. Information, perception, and action: what should
ecological psychologists learn from Milner and Goodale (1995)?
Ecological Psychology 12, 241–258.
Moss, B., 1998. Ecology of Fresh Waters: Man and Medium, Past to
Future. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.
Nobmann, E.D., Ponce, R., Mattil, C., Devereux, R., Dyke, B., Ebbesson,
S.O.E., Laston, S., Maccluer, J., Robbins, D., Romenesko, T.,
Ruotolo, G., Wenger, C.R., Howard, B.V., 2005. Dietary
intakes vary with age among Eskimo adults of northwest Alaska
in the GOCADAN study, 2000–2003. Journal of Nutrition 135,
856–862.
Oba, G., Kotile, D.G., 2001. Assessments of landscape level degradation
in southern Ethiopia: pastoralists versus ecologists. Land Degradation
& Development 12 (5), 461–475.
Ogden, S., Watson, R., 1999. Corporate performance and stakeholder
management: balancing shareholder and customer interests in the UK
privatized water industry. The Academy of Management Journal 42,
526–538.
Oki, T., Kanae, S., 2006. Global hydrological cycles and world water
resources. Science 313, 1068–1072.
Olick, J.K., Robins, J., 1998. Social memory studies: from ‘‘collective
memory’’ to the historical sociology of mnemonic practices. Annual
Review of Sociology 24, 105–140.
Osterkamp, T.E., Romanovsky, V.E., 1999. Evidence for warming and
thawing of discontinuous permafrost in Alaska. Permafrost and
Periglacial Processes 10 (1), 17–37.
Overpeck, J., Hughen, K., Hardy, D., Bradley, R., Case, R., Douglas, M.,
Finney, B., Gajewski, K., Jacoby, G., Jennings, A., Lamoureux, S.,
Lasca, A., Macdonald, G., Moore, J., Retelle, M., Smith, S., Wolfe,
A., Zielinski, G., 1997. Arctic environmental change of the last four
centuries. Science 278, 1251–1256.
Pierotti, R., Wildcat, D., 2000. Traditional ecological knowledge: the third
alternative. Ecological Applications 10 (5), 1333–1340.
Pollard, W.H., 2005. Icing processes associated with high Arctic perennial
springs, Axel Heiberg Island, Nunavut, Canada. Permafrost and
Periglacial Processes 16 (1), 51–68.
Polyakov, I.V., Johnson, M.A., 2000. Arctic decadal and interdecadal
variability. Geophysical Research Letters 27, 4097–4100.
Quinn, T.P., Hodgson, P.S., Peven, C., 1997. Temperature, flow, and the
migration of adult sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in the
Columbia River. Canadian Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences 54,
1349–1360.
Reidlinger, D., Berkes, F., 2001. Contributions of traditional knowledge
to understanding climate change in the Canadian Arctic. Polar Record
37, 315–328.
Reisner, M., 1993. Cadillac Desert: The American West and its
Disappearing Water. Penguin Books, NY.
Robards, M., Alessa, L., 2004. Timescapes of community resilience and
vulnerability in the circumpolar north. Arctic 57 (4), 415–427.
Satterfield, T.A., Mertz, C.K., Slovic, P., 2004. Discrimination, vulner-
ability, and justice in the face of risk. Risk Analysis 24, 115–129.
Schneider, S.H., Easterling, W.E., Mearns, L.O., 2000. Adaptation:
sensitivity to natural variability, agent assumptions and dynamic
climate changes. Climatic Change 45, 203–221.
Serreze, M.C., Walsh, J.E., Chapin III, F.S., Osterkamp, T., Dyurgerov,
M., Romanovsky, V., Oechel, W.C., Morison, J., Zhang, T., Barry,
R.G., 2000. Observational evidence of recent change in the northern
high-latitude environment. Climatic Change 46, 159–207.
Seyfrit, C.L., Hamilton, L.C., 1997. Alaska native youth and their
attitudes toward education. Arctic Anthropology 34 (1), 135–148.
Smit, B., Burton, I., Klein, R.J.T., Street, R., 1999. The science of
adaptation: a framework for assessment. Mitigation and Adaptation
Strategies for Global Change 4, 199–213.
Smit, B., Burton, I., Klein, R.J.T., Wandel, J., 2000. An anatomy of
adaptation to climate change and variability. Climatic Change 45,
223–251.
ARTICLE IN PRESSL. Alessa et al. / Global Environmental Change 18 (2008) 153–164164
Smit, B., Wandel, J., 2006. Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulner-
ability. Global Environmental Change 16, 282–292.
Smith, J.B., Klein, R.J.T., Huq, S., 2003. Climate Change, Adaptive
Capacity and Development. Imperial College Press, London.
Smithers, J., Smit, B., 1997. Human adaptation to climatic variability and
change. Global Environmental Change 7 (2), 129–146.
Stamm, K.R., Clark, F., Eblacas, P.R., 2000. Mass communication and
public understanding of environmental problems: the case of global
warming. Public Understanding of Science 9, 219–237.
Stern, P.C., 2000. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant
behavior. Journal of Social Issues 56, 407–424.
Tainter, J.A., 1988. The Collapse of Complex Societies. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Vorosmarty, C.J., Hinzman, L., Peterson, B.J., Bromwich, D.L.,
Hamilton, L., Morison, J., Romanovsky, V., Sturm, M., Webb, R.,
2001. The Hydrologic Cycle and its Role in ARCTIC and Global
Environmental Change. ARCUS, Fairbanks, AK.
Waelbroeck, C., Duplessy, J.-C., Michel, E., Labeyrie, L., Paillard, D.,
Duprat, J., 2001. The timing of the last deglaciation in North Atlantic
climate records. Nature (London) 412, 724–727.
Wheaton, E.E., MacIver, D.C., 1999. A framework and key questions for
adapting to climate variability and change. Mitigation and Adaptation
Strategies for Global Change 4, 215–225.
Wilbanks, T.J., Kates, R.W., 1999. Global climate change in local places:
how scale matters. Climatic Change 43, 601–628.
Wilson, M.A., Carpenter, S.R., 1999. Economic valuation of freshwater
ecosystem services in the United States: 1971–1997. Ecological
Applications 9, 772–783.
Wong, P.P., 2005. A wave of geographical research. Singapore Journal of
Tropical Geography 26, 257–261.
Yoshikawa, K., Hinzman, L.D., 2003. Shrinking thermokarst ponds
and groundwater dymnamics in discontinuous permafrost
near Council, Alaska. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 14 (2),
151–160.