understanding human and ecosystem dynamics in the arctic: the imandra watershed project (kola,...
TRANSCRIPT
Understanding Human and Ecosystem Dynamics in the
Arctic: the Imandra Watershed Project
(Kola, Russia)
Alexey Voinov (Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont)
Lars Bromley (American Association for Advancement of Science)
Tatiana Moiseenko (Institute for Water Problems, RAS, Moscow)
Vladimir Selin (Institute for Economic Problems, Kola Science Center, Apatity)
Supported by a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation, Office of Polar Program
(OPP #0095196)
American Team:Elizabeth KirkJoshua FarleyRobert WheelersburgRobert Edson
Russian Team:Tatiana KrasovskayaAlexander PerlikovGalina KharitonovaAnatoliy KorchakVladimir MasloboyevIlia MikhailovZoya Makarova
International Team
Geolocation
• Watershed area - 12 300 km2
• Population - 300 000 people
• Relatively warm- no permafrost
• Tundra and Northern Taiga
• Severe environmental degradation
• Mining, smelters, Ni, Fe, Cu, Apatite, etc.
Project Goals
• What are the effects of industrial and human activity on the ecological health or resilience of the watershed?
• What data is available, what data is needed?• How to apply integrated modeling for
consensus-building in the region?• What are the possible scenarios for future
economic and social development of the region under changing global conditions?
Ecological studies
Data sets compiled (1978 -> ):- Climatic data
- Temperature, precipitation, humidity- Hydrology data
- Flows, water levels- Water chemistry
- Nutrients, metals (Fe, Cu, Ni, Mo, Co, Hg, sediments, discharges)
- NPP
Severonikel: wastewater discharge rate
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996
x103 m3
0
100
200
300
400
500
1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999
tonns
Ni discharged
Ecological studies
Decrease in Ni concentration in the Lake
Socio-economic studies
Data sets compiled (1930-> 1995 -> ):- Main socio-economic indicators
- Population and labor- Living standards- Volume of industrial production- Transport- Investments
- Emissions- Trade indices
Wastewater discharge
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996
x106 m3
x103 t
0
5
10
15
20
1930 1949 1965 1977 1989
Apatite production
Recent socio-economic trends
• ~70 000 people have left the region since 1991 (~20%), mostly of working age
• Real purchasing power declines, for pensioners it fell 2.3 times
• Sharp increases of export of nickel, aluminum and other metals brought the world prices to a decline: for nickel by 13%, aluminum - by 28%
• The nuclear power station is to be shut down in 10 years
• Ecological gains are human losses
Recent socio-economic trends
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
200.0
1959 1964 1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
Apatity+Kirovsk KandalakshaMonchegorsk+Olenegorsk Pol.Zori 1)Kovdor 2) Total
Population dynamics
0
5
10
15
20
1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995
Mln. tons
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180x 1000 people
Production of Apatite
Apatity & Kirovsk population
-4000
-3000
-2000
-1000
0
1000
2000
3000
1975 1985 1995
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Net migration
Births
Deaths
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
110.0
120.0
130.0
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
x 1000 people Total population
Population dynamics
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
1975 1985 1995
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Net Migration
Births
Deaths
Monchegorsk+Olenegorsk
Population dynamics
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Kandalakshapopulation
-2000
-1500
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
Net Migration
Births
Deaths
Kandalaksha
Water Quality
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1984 1989 1994 1999
N (tonns)
0
400
800
1200
1600
2000Cl (tonns)N Cl
• Day 1. Field trips – getting the feeling of the region and its problems
• Day 2. Presentations by stakeholders• Day 3. What do we know? - Science
and data• Day 4. What we do not know? -
Brainstorming in breakout sessions• Day 5. Planning for the future. Who is
doing what?
Workshop process, Apatity, Russia, May 14 – 18, 2001
ApatityMonchgorskPolyarnii ZoriKandalaksha
Workshop process
October, 27- November, 3,
2001
How to link science and decision making?
Transparency and openness of the modeling process
Model as a tool for consensus building
The process is more important than the result
Questions:
• What affects your life quality?• How do you see your city in 10, 100 years
from today?• How decisions are made and can you
influence them?• What do we know about our regional system,
what could be the variables in the model?• What development strategy is most desirable?
What scenarios can you think of?• How can we make development sustainable?
Apatity
• Major players: Kola Science Center, Apatit Enterprise• 54 people present• Topics discussed:
– Majority prefers to emigrate, but have no means to do it– NGOs important but almost non-existent– Ecotourism important but unreliable– Public needs information– Ecological education inadequate– Quality of life is the priority
Monchegorsk
• Major players: Severo-Nickel Enterprise• 19 people present• Topic discussed:
– The enterprise controls everything– People are afraid to have an opinion
Polyarnii Zori
• Major player: Kola Nuclear Power Station• 30 people present, mostly high school
students• Topics discussed:
– Ecological education in school– The city entirely depends on the Station - there is
no alternative– The Station supports the city and takes good care
of the environment.
Kandalaksha
• Major players: many• 53 people present• Topics discussed:
– Environmental conditions and culture– Need for a tax reform– Emigration is a hard problem– Youth organizations are dead– Economic problems should be solved first of all
Participatory Integrated Modeling Approach
• Data models that are based on measurements and Data models that are based on measurements and experimentsexperiments
• Qualitative, conceptual frameworks of systems and Qualitative, conceptual frameworks of systems and processes involvedprocesses involved
• Quantitative numeric models that are used to Quantitative numeric models that are used to formalize our qualitative modelsformalize our qualitative models
• Mathematical methods and models used to analyze Mathematical methods and models used to analyze the numeric models and interpret the resultsthe numeric models and interpret the results
• Decision-making models that transform our values Decision-making models that transform our values and knowledge into actionsand knowledge into actions
ModelingAIR
WATER
LAND
EconomicSystem
SocialSystem
RESOURCES(natural capital)
INSTITUTIONS(social capital)
INFRASTRUCTURE(built capital)
EcologicSystem
SocialSystem
Modeling
POPULATIONHEALTH
QUALITY OF LIFE
EMPLOYMENT
EDUCATION
EconomicSystem
Ecosystem
SOCIETY
Modeling
BiomassGrowth Mortality
C Grow C Mort
Consumers
Uptake
Con Mort
BiomassGrowth Mortality
C Grow C Mort
Consumers
Uptake
Con Mort
Horizontal fluxesbetween cells
UnitModel
UnitModel
PhotosyntheticBiomass
Surface Water
Unsaturated Water
Saturated Water
PrecipitationEvaporation
Overland flow
Surface -Saturatedexchanges
Percolation& upflow
Groundwaterflow
Transpiration
Infiltration
SnowIce
Non-PhotoBiomass
Runoff
N insediment
Photosynthesis
N onsurface
Detritus
DOM
Translocation
Mortality
Decomposition
Uptake
Questions with no answers… yet
• What should be the path to sustainable livelihood if that is the vision for the future?
• If extractive industries are not sustainable, what can replace them?
• What kind of economies can be sustainable and self-sufficient in the harsh northern climate?
• What kind of quality of life is most desired by the local population?
Plans for future
• Sediment core analysis - temporal dimension• TMDLs - spatial dimension• Specific relationship between environmental
knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and policy changes in the societies
• Possible future development scenarios under global change
http://xserver.aaas.org/international/eca/kolahttp://imandra.ksc.ru
