anthropogenic uses and impact
DESCRIPTION
Anthropogenic Uses and Impact. Yukon Lowland – Kuskokwim Mountains – Lime Hills Rapid Ecoregional Assessment. Institute of Social and Economic Research University of Alaska Anchorage. Grouping of MQs. Socio-economic conditions Data reduction Identification of domains - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Anthropogenic Uses and Impact
Institute of Social and Economic ResearchUniversity of Alaska Anchorage
Yukon Lowland – Kuskokwim Mountains – Lime HillsRapid Ecoregional Assessment
Grouping of MQs• Socio-economic conditions• Data reduction• Identification of domains• Attempts at deriving common metrics
• Human footprint• Compilation of human activities – past and present
• Traditional Ecological Knowledge• Documenting available TEK• Deriving a method to use available TEK for REA purposes
Socio economic conditions• Arctic Social Indicators (ASI)• Domains and indicators identified for assessing conditions in
the circumpolar North• Identification based on what is important, not what is
available• Data gaps were acknowledged
• Our approach• Indicators and proxies• Data reduction• A relative comparison for planning and decision-making
purposes
Arctic Social Indicators – Domains
Health Population & demographics
Material well-being
Education Cultural well-being
Closeness to nature
Fate control
• Infant mortality• Child mortality• Access to health
care• Suicides • Self-reported
health• Obesity • Smoking
• Total population
• Births• Deaths• Net migration • Population
change• Age/sex • Ethnicity
• Per capita household income
• Net migration• Subsistence
harvest
• % students in post-secondary education
• % post-secondary education
• % graduates living in community
• Language retention
• % pop engaged in subsistence
• Subsistence harvest
• Subsistence consumption
• Households engaged in subsistence
• % of Natives in govt.
• % land locally controlled
• % of public expenses raised locally
• % speAlaskaing Native language
Arctic Social Indicators – Overlap of Domains
Health
Population & demographics
Material well-being
Education
Cultural well-being
Closeness to nature
Fate control
• Access to health care
• Self-reported health
• Obesity • Smoking
• Total population
• Births• Population
change• Age/sex • Ethnicity
Per capita household income
• % students in post-secondary education
• % post-secondary education
• % graduates living in community
% pop engaged in subsistence
• Subsistence consumption
• % of Natives in govt.
• % land locally controlled
• % of public expenses raised locally
Deaths
Migration
% speaking Native language
Subsistence harvest
Arctic Social Indicators – Available DataASI domain ISER measure SourceHealth Injury death rate (average 2003 to 2008) Vital StatisticsPopulation & Demography Native share of population 2010 US Census 2010
Population & Demography Population change 2008 to 2012 Alaska Department of Labor, US CensusMaterial well-being Total employment 2011 Alaska Department of Labor, ALARIMaterial well-being Private sector employment 2011 Alaska Department of Labor, ALARI
Material well-being Nominal diesel fuel price
ISER, Alaska Energy Authority, Alaska Department of Community Economic Development
Material well-being Estimated total incomeISER calculations using Alaska Dept of Labor ALARI data and PFD.
Education Enrollment K-12 2010-2011Alaska Department of Early Education and Development
Education High school graduation rate (average 2000 to 2011)Alaska Department of Early Education and Development
Cultural well-being % of population speaking language other than English American Community Survey 2008-2011
Closeness to nature % of population using subsistence (various years)Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Subsistence Division
Closeness to nature Per capital subsistence harvest (various years)Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Subsistence Division
Fate control Alcohol Control status Alaska Beverage Control
Principal components analysis• Material well being • Places with relatively large populations, high employment, high
income, lower fuel prices
• High cost, high subsistence, language • High fuel prices, high subsistence harvests, use of Native
language
• Fate control, autonomy • Alaska Native, strict alcohol control
• Population decline, subsistence, language • Declining populations, Native language, high subsistence
participation
Material Wellbeing
Most smaller communities grouped together representing:
• Low levels of material wellbeing
• High cost of living• High death rate• High levels of subsistence use
Larger communities, with their direct access to larger markets
High cost-death-subsistence
High fuel prices,High subsistence harvests, Use of Native language
Autonomy
Percent of the population Alaska Native, Local option law - alcohol control
Demographics and Subsistence
Decline in population, Native language, high subsistence participation
Anthropogenic Footprint• Includes all human activity
• Major data gaps• Subsistence use areas
• Other parts under works• Land status and implications for land management
CommunitiesTotal population just over 5000 (2012)
Four hub communities• Aniak• McGrath• Galena• Illiamna
Region is landlocked
Two major rivers (transportation corridors)• Yukon• Kuskokwim
Non-river transportation Network
Energy Infrastructure
Mining
Land Status• Many different categories• Ownership• Regulation• Monitoring• Other types of jurisdiction
• Working on indentifying appropriate definitions
Traditional Ecological Knowledge• Transformed the MQ (with AMT approval) • Goals• Literature review• Annotated Bibliography• MS Access database of documents searchable by CA and CE• Methodology to use TEK in REAs.
TEK - methodology• Several terms used to identify/describe Traditional Ecological
Knowledge – many of them were used as search terms• local ecological knowledge, • indigenous knowledge, • traditional knowledge, and • local knowledge, etc.
• More than150 peer-reviewed articles collected for literature review, 57 of which pertain to the YKL region
• Bibliography in the works
TEK – Collection methods used• Structured interviews• Semi-directed interviews• Informal discussions• Group discussions• Joint site visits (in which both researchers and
interviewees/TEK holders participate) • Surveys/questionnaires• Participant observation
TEK – General uses• To acquire baseline data to restore degraded habitats
• To inform research needs, questions, designs, methodologies
• Used in combination with or comparison to scientific data (monitoring, GIS, etc.)
• Integrated into community-based natural resource management or voluntary use of common pool resources
TEK – General uses in the USA• Used in combination with or comparison to scientific data
(monitoring, GIS, etc.) to promote and enact ecological restoration
• To inform research needs, questions, designs, methodologies
• Can potentially be used in management
TEK Bibliography
TEK – Data Viewer
TEK – Query and Results
Next steps• Finalize the socio-economic index variables• Expand to include all communities in the state• Clarify the domain definitions• Clarify interpretation of relative comparisons
• Land use• Analyze transportation options• Clarify mining data – ex: placer vs. hard rock mining• Analyze land status
• TEK• Develop methodology for using TEK for REA purposes