Geology topics

Nicole K. Ward

Publications and source records attributed to Nicole K. Ward.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Holistic understanding of uncertainty for collaborative and proactive global change decision making

Global change is accelerating and pushing the planet's ecosystems beyond the range of historical observations, creating increasing uncertainty in future system conditions. Despite general agreement that proactive environmental action is warranted, environmental decision conversations often end by identifying additional data needed to reduce uncertainty before taking novel action. Given the inherent uncertainty in complex issues such as global change, quantitative data alone are likely insufficient to support proactive environmental action. Holistic understanding of uncertainty includes scientific quantification of uncertainty paired with emotional responses and transcendental grounding to help people work together toward proactive action in uncertain decision contexts. Holistic understanding arises from the four ways in which humans perceive the world, termed the Four Realms: Physical (e.g., how I observe), Mental (e.g., how I think), Emotional (e.g., how I feel), and Transcendental (e.g., how I connect to greater meaning or purpose). Environmental scientists and decision makers are generally trained in Physical and Mental Realm observation and analysis, but not in how to apply Emotional and Transcendental Realm understanding. Emotional and Transcendental processing occurs in scientists and decision makers whether it is acknowledged or not and contributes to different people interpreting the same information in different ways. Thus, when the role of Emotional and Transcendental Realms in an individual's interpretation process is not understood, it can derail conversations and perpetuate the status quo. Explicitly recognizing all Four Realms can bring people together across differences and inspire shared, novel decision making even in increasing uncertainty. To illustrate the benefits of holistic understanding, we share stories from our experiences in environmental decision contexts. Because accessing the Four Realms requires experiential and embodied techniques, while still relying on core scientific tenets of observation and analysis, we also present techniques for readers to learn to feel their own emotional understanding and connect to their own transcendental understanding. Holistic understanding can enhance data-driven decisions by recognizing that human responses to uncertainty inherently include interactions between emotions, thoughts, transcendental connections, and behavior. Ultimately, holistic understanding can help anchor data-driven decisions in intra- and interpersonal connections, inspiring action in the face of uncertainty.

Ecosphere↗

USGS2026

Action in uncertainty: Data-driven decisions that acknowledge emotional responses and transcendental connections

The increasing uncertainty with global change often stifles action and results in calls for more data before moving beyond status quo environmental decisions (Mahapatra & Ratha 2017; Ripple et al. 2017; Montefalcone et al. 2025). Advancing science and collecting more data is crucial; however, science alone (i.e., “western” or “positivist” science, as described in Fuller, 2001; Reid et al. 2020) may be insufficient to reduce uncertainty to a comfortable level for decision making. Therefore, increasing personal and collective capacity to make proactive decisions may require decision makers to recognize that their own understanding of the world, and therefore interpretation of scientific data, is influenced by all Four Realms of human perception: Physical, Mental, Emotional, and Transcendental (Wolf 2017; Dukes et al. 2021; Clifford et al. 2022). In the ESA Special Session, Action in Uncertainty, we introduced four questions to help participants increase cognitive awareness of how all Four Realms may affect their understanding in uncertain environmental decision contexts: 1. Physical: How do I observe uncertainty through the five senses (feel, see, hear, taste, smell)? The physical realm is what people observe, including ecological data observations and experimentation. 2. Mental: How do I think about uncertainty using logic, reason, and language-based understanding? The mental realm is how people think about the world, including scientific theory, modeling, and decision frameworks. 3. Emotional: How do I feel in uncertainty? The emotional realm is a person’s subjective emotional state, such as fear, curiosity, defensiveness, and awe. 4. Transcendental: How do I connect to something greater than myself in uncertainty? The transcendental realm includes people’s sense of purpose, responsibility for others, or moral code.

ESA Bulletin↗

USGS2025

Ecological acclimation: A framework to integrate fast and slow responses to climate change

Ecological responses to climate change occur across vastly different time-scales, from minutes for physiological plasticity to decades or centuries for community turnover and evolutionary adaptation. Accurately predicting the range of ecosystem trajectories will require models that incorporate both fast processes that may keep pace with climate change and slower ones likely to lag behind and generate disequilibrium dynamics. However, the knowledge necessary for this integration is currently fragmented across disciplines. We develop ‘ecological acclimation’ as a unifying framework to emphasize the similarity of dynamics driven by processes operating on dramatically different time-scales and levels of biological organization. The framework focuses on ecoclimate sensitivities, measured as the change in an ecological response variable per unit of climate change. Acclimation processes acting at different time-scales cause these sensitivities to shift in magnitude and even direction over time. We highlight shifting ecoclimate sensitivities in case studies from diverse ecosystems, including terrestrial plant communities, coral reefs and soil microbiomes. Models predicting future ecosystem states inevitably make assumptions about acclimation processes; these assumptions must be explicit for users to evaluate whether a model is appropriate for a given forecast horizon. Similarly, decision frameworks that clearly account for multiple acclimation processes and their distinct time-scales will help natural resource managers plan for ecological impacts of climate change from years to many decades into the future. We outline a synthetic research programme focused on the time-scales of ecological acclimation to reduce uncertainty in ecological forecasts.

Functional Ecology↗

USGS2023

Reimagining large river management using the Resist–Accept–Direct (RAD) framework in the Upper Mississippi River

Background Large-river decision-makers are charged with maintaining diverse ecosystem services through unprecedented social-ecological transformations as climate change and other global stressors intensify. The interconnected, dendritic habitats of rivers, which often demarcate jurisdictional boundaries, generate complex management challenges. Here, we explore how the Resist–Accept–Direct (RAD) framework may enhance large-river management by promoting coordinated and deliberate responses to social-ecological trajectories of change. The RAD framework identifies the full decision space of potential management approaches, wherein managers may resist change to maintain historical conditions, accept change toward different conditions, or direct change to a specified future with novel conditions. In the Upper Mississippi River System, managers are facing social-ecological transformations from more frequent and extreme high-water events. We illustrate how RAD-informed basin-, reach-, and site-scale decisions could: (1) provide cross-spatial scale framing; (2) open the entire decision space of potential management approaches; and (3) enhance coordinated inter-jurisdictional management in response to the trajectory of the Upper Mississippi River hydrograph. Results The RAD framework helps identify plausible long-term trajectories in different reaches (or subbasins) of the river and how the associated social-ecological transformations could be managed by altering site-scale conditions. Strategic reach-scale objectives may reprioritize how, where, and when site conditions could be altered to contribute to the basin goal, given the basin’s plausible trajectories of change (e.g., by coordinating action across sites to alter habitat connectivity, diversity, and redundancy in the river mosaic). Conclusions When faced with long-term systemic transformations (e.g., > 50 years), the RAD framework helps explicitly consider whether or when the basin vision or goals may no longer be achievable, and direct options may open yet unconsidered potential for the basin. Embedding the RAD framework in hierarchical decision-making clarifies that the selection of actions in space and time should be derived from basin-wide goals and reach-scale objectives to ensure that site-scale actions contribute effectively to the larger river habitat mosaic. Embedding the RAD framework in large-river decisions can provide the necessary conduit to link flexibility and innovation at the site scale with stability at larger scales for adaptive governance of changing social-ecological systems.

Upper Mississippi River↗

USGS2022

A framework for ensemble modelling of climate change impacts on lakes worldwide: The ISIMIP lake sector.

Empirical evidence demonstrates that lakes and reservoirs are warming across the globe. Consequently, there is an increased need to project future changes in lake thermal structure and resulting changes in lake biogeochemistry in order to plan for the likely impacts. Previous studies of the impacts of climate change on lakes have often relied on a single model forced with limited scenario-driven projections of future climate for a relatively small number of lakes. As a result, our understanding of the effects of climate change on lakes is fragmentary, based on scattered studies using different data sources and modelling protocols, and mainly focused on individual lakes or lake regions. This has precluded identification of the main impacts of climate change on lakes at global and regional scales and has likely contributed to the lack of lake water quality considerations in policy-relevant documents, such as the Assessment Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Here, we describe a simulation protocol developed by the Lake Sector of the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) for simulating climate change impacts on lakes using an ensemble of lake models and climate change scenarios for ISIMIP phases 2 and 3. The protocol prescribes lake simulations driven by climate forcing from gridded observations and different Earth system models under various representative greenhouse gas concentration pathways (RCPs), all consistently bias-corrected on a 0.5 ∘ × 0.5 ∘ global grid. In ISIMIP phase 2, 11 lake models were forced with these data to project the thermal structure of 62 well-studied lakes where data were available for calibration under historical conditions, and using uncalibrated models for 17 500 lakes defined for all global grid cells containing lakes. In ISIMIP phase 3, this approach was expanded to consider more lakes, more models, and more processes. The ISIMIP Lake Sector is the largest international effort to project future water temperature, thermal structure, and ice phenology of lakes at local and global scales and paves the way for future simulations of the impacts of climate change on water quality and biogeochemistry in lakes.

Geoscientific Model Development↗