Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands

Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

Research article

Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands Mateusz Grygoruk a, *, Sven Rannow b a b

Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences - SGGW, ul. Nowoursynowska 159, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland Müritz National Park Authority, Schlossplatz 3, 17237 Hohenzieritz, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 31 December 2015 Received in revised form 24 September 2016 Accepted 31 October 2016 Available online xxx

Effective stakeholder involvement is crucial for the management of protected areas, especially when new challenges like adaptation to climate change need to be addressed. Under these circumstances, sciencebased stakeholder involvement is required. However, there is often a gap between the information produced by science and the need for information from stakeholders. Along with the design and implementation of adaptive management strategies and policies, efforts must be taken to adjust messages about conservation and adaptation issues, to make them easier to understand, relevant and acceptable for stakeholders. In this paper, the experience of closing the gap between scientific information and the user needs of stakeholders in the Biebrza Valley is documented. The requirements of efficient stakeholder dialogue and the raising of awareness are then indicated. We conclude that many attempts to raise awareness of environmental conservation require improvements. Messages often need to be adjusted for different stakeholders and their various perception levels to efficiently anticipate the potential impacts of the changing climate on ecosystem management. We also revealed that the autonomous adaptation measures implemented by stakeholders to mitigate impacts of climatic change often contradict adaptive management planned and implemented by environmental authorities. We conclude that there is a demand for boundary spanners that can build a bridge between complex scientific outputs and stakeholder needs. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Climate change Wetlands Adaptive management Stakeholder dialogue Biebrza

1. Introduction Adaptation to climate change is focused on the adjustment of ecological, social or economic systems to prevent or reduce harm or to benefit from potential opportunities (Smit and Pilifosova, 2001). In recent years, the planned adaptation to climate change has moved from being a theoretical concept to being implemented on the ground (Cuevas et al., 2016; Picketts et al., 2013). Sciencemanagement partnerships have been identified as useful tools for initiating local adaptation processes (Grantham et al., 2010; Littell et al., 2012; Lonsdale and Goldthorpe, 2012). Cooperation between science and local administrations has focused on adaptation in different contexts and locations (Cross et al., 2012; Picketts et al., 2013; Prober et al., 2012). There are several arguments in favour of participatory approaches to also involve the wider public outside of institutionalized organizations (Bulkeley and Mol, 2003). However, the successful implementation of this stakeholder involvement and an effective communication about climate adaptation are still * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Grygoruk).

considered a challenge (Blake, 1999; Raymond et al., 2013). This challenge has been found of critical importance in natural resources management, where the societal and economical drivers have to compromise with the requirements of environmental conservation (Moss et al., 2010). The climate-adapted management of wetland areas is a complex arena with a high priority for the mitigation of the negative impact of a changing climate on biodiversity and ecosystems (Bonn et al., 2014; Gitay et al., 2011). Despite the increasing research activities in connection to the conservation and restoration of wetlands worldwide (Zhang et al., 2010), there are still issues to be solved: the interrelationship of social and environmental sciences requires enhancement for better communication and management of climate-related risks (Capon et al., 2013; Erwin, 2009; Fischhoff, 2011; Grygoruk et al., 2014b; Ignar and Grygoruk, 2015; Rannow and Neubert, 2014; Rowell, 2005). The effects of climate change often add to or interact with existing pressures on wetlands that originate from societal behaviour, which is usually driven by the economy (Gitay et al., 2011). Therefore, stakeholder involvement and the influencing of human attitudes by means of appropriate

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066 0301-4797/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

2

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

target groups (Bostrom et al., 2013; Reed et al., 2009) and the adjusting of messages (CRED, 2009) must become an inherent element of climate-adapted management of wetlands (Walker et al., 2002). On the one hand, this must include stakeholders who are oriented towards the use or exploitation of resources like: agriculture, forestry, fisheries, water extraction for drinking and industrial use, civil protection, transport, energy production and tourism. On the other hand, conservation of biodiversity and sustainable use of ecosystem services must be guaranteed. The action of local conservation management in the planned adaptation to climate change is as much an ecological as a cultural and social challenge (Baron et al., 2009). By definition, adaptive environmental management calls for integration of environmental, social and political dimension. It aims at the reduction of uncertainty and nonlinearity in environmental systems management through continuous monitoring and adjustment of management strategies (Holling, 1978; Rist et al., 2013; Walters, 1986; Williams, 2011). Hence, specific and local knowledge are crucial for successful implementation of an adaptive management. The information provided by scientists must support the development of local adaptation strategies but should not prescribe decisions (Brooks and Adger, 2005). The active involvement of local communities and decision makers implies effective communication of scientific results, but it is a challenge to transfer information from research into domains outside academia (Ungar, 2000; Weingart et al., 2000; Welp et al., 2006). Therefore, the targeting of specific audiences with tailored information on climate change is essential for the success of communication and any resulting cooperation (Adger et al., 2005; Bostrom et al., 2013). In this paper we present the lessons learned from a sciencebased stakeholder dialogue aimed towards fostering climate adaptation in the wetland area of the Biebrza National Park (BNP) in northeast Poland. It accompanied the preparation of a climateadapted management plan for the BNP (Grygoruk et al., 2013b). The project presented in this article focused on the transfer of scientific information and application of existing theoretical concepts to initiate planned actions for climate adaptation in protected areas such as National Parks and Biosphere Reserves (Rannow and Neubert, 2014). Our approach was focused on the following questions: (1) How should a science-based stakeholder dialogue for climate-adapted wetland management be organized? (2) Do adaptation measures of stakeholders contradict or accord structured implementation of adaptive wetland management? (3) What are the catalysts and barriers for the adaptation of wetland management? We share the experience from this implementation project and hope to foster the scientific discussion on bridging the gap between science and local management with publishing this feedback. Therefore, drivers and resisters for stakeholder communication are highlighted and gaps are identified between the messages delivered from scientific research and the perception and needs of stakeholders in Biebrza Valley. We propose solutions that are useful for climate-related science-based stakeholder dialogue in valuable wetland areas with the intention of ensuring efficient conservation and sustainable use of resources. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Study area: Biebrza Valley and national park Biebrza Valley is located in the north east of Poland near the city

of Białystok. Most of this glacial-formed land depression is covered with a peat layer reaching a max. 8 m thickness, which developed _ on the sandy plain (Zurek, 1984). Its unique, near-natural ecosystems of mires and floodplains have been assigned international importance for biodiversity conservation in regard to ecohydrology (Wassen et al., 2006), ornithology (Dyrcz and Zdunek, 1993;  ski, 1975). In the Polakowski et al., 2016) and geobotany (Pałczyn regional scale, Biebrza Wetlands play an important role in carbon sequestration, which is closely linked to the role of local mires to climate change mitigation (Fortuniak et al., 2017). Some wetland ecosystems of the Biebrza Valley were modified and adjusted for agricultural purposes (land reclamation). In the 21st century several broad-scale wetland restoration projects have been implemented (Grygoruk et al., 2015). Approximately 60% of the area of the Biebrza Valley is maintained as hay meadows (Fig. 1A). Current farming practices supported by the EU agro-environmental schemesdaside from their economic benefitsdhelp to prevent the secondary succession of shrubs on open areas of mire and shape the landscape (Fig. 1C). In 1993, the BNP was established to protect nearly 560 km2 of the Biebrza Valley. Together with the buffer zone of the BNP, the area of protected environment covers some 1250 km2, making this one of the largest protected wetlands in the European Union. Approximately 40% of the area of BNP is privately owned. Along with the complex proprietorship structure (Fig. 1B), these private grounds remain an important issue to be addressed in managing Biebrza wetlands. Within the BNP borders, no more than 160 people reside permanently. In 118 villages and towns situated in the buffer zone of the park, approximately 27,000 people are settled, giving an average population density of 59 inhabitants per km2. The wetlands of the BNP depend on the dynamic interactions between seasonal flooding and groundwater flow, which is strongly related to meteorological and climatic variability. The Biebrza Valley is characterized by a continental climate with average annual air temperatures of 6.6  C and strong seasonal differences. Extreme air temperatures in winter can reach 25 , whilst in summer, temperatures can exceed 30  C. Average annual precipitation in the period 1996e2011 was 574 mm (Grygoruk et al., 2014b). The direct impact of climate change on the wetlands is likely to affect landscape composition, water balance (precipitation, snow cover and evapotranspiration), groundwater flow and flooding (Grygoruk et al., 2011, 2014a; Ignar et al., 2011). 2.2. Observed and expected climate-related impacts on ecosystems of the Biebrza Valley Climate-induced impacts on wetlands first and foremost refer to hydrological processes (Acreman et al., 2009; Hartig et al., 1997; Schneider et al., 2011; Szporak-Wasilewska et al., 2015; Winter 2007). In BNP, regular flooding and high groundwater discharge are of particular importance. Both processes are vulnerable to climatic change (Schneider et al., 2011). There has been a variety of scientific approaches and projects to quantify possible climate-hydrology  ski, 1983; Grygoruk et al., 2014b; feedbacks (Byczkowski and Kicin Ignar et al., 2011; Maksymiuk, 2009; Maksymiuk et al., 2008). It was revealed that although the frequency of spring thaw floods has remained constant for the last 60 years, the frequency of summer flooding has increased significantly from some 1e3 per decade in the 1950s and 1960s to 10 in the decade 2001e2010 (Grygoruk et al., 2014b). This phenomenon inspired increased social pressure to restore land reclamation systems, which negatively affect the ecosystem services of Biebrza wetlands by changing flood regime and groundwater dynamics (Grygoruk et al., 2013a). The activities of landowners to mitigate the negative effects of changing hydrological phenomena by re-vitalization of land reclamation

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

3

Fig. 1. Study area e Biebrza National Park; (A) generalized land use map: 1 e forests, 2 e intensively managed meadows, 3 e extensively managed wetland meadows, 4 e boundaries of the BNP, 5 e rivers; (B) e land possession structure: a e BNP owned, b e BNP/private owned (shared ownership); c e private owned. (C) e landscape of the floodplain in BNP. Photo: Archive of the BNP.

systems, although ostensibly following environmental regulations, caused the environment of the parts of the Biebrza Valley to _ degrade (Biereznoj-Bazille and Grygoruk, 2013). In Biebrza Valley, unplanned adaptation to current events prevails. The neglect of planned adaptive action in wetlands often stems from the low level of awareness of decision makers and of society in general about the importance and susceptibility of the system to climatic change. The resulting lack of anticipatory adaptation and the inability to connect current events to climatic change exacerbates existing conflicts in the conservation management of the national park and also limits society's adaptive capacity. Consequently, there is an urgent need to guide the autonomous adaptation of stakeholders. Without this guidance, the autonomous adaptation will intensify biodiversity loss and related changes in land use might even cause more harm than the expected impact of climate change. The first consideration of climate-related impacts on local wetland ecosystems and management, including agriculture, appeared in the framework of the HABIT-CHANGE project. The climate projections used in this project were based on the ENSEMBLES project results (van der Linden and Mitchell, 2009). Ten GCM-RCM combinations for the SRES A1B emission scenario were used to provide climate change scenarios for the Biebrza Valley (Grygoruk et al., 2013b; Stagl et al., 2014). Analysis of observations from 1951 to 2010 and projections for the time horizon 2071e2100 indicate an increasing frequency of summer floods and droughts, increasing air temperature in winter and increasing seasonal variability of river discharges. These can be considered to be the most important impacts of the changing climate on the Biebrza wetlands (Grygoruk et al., 2014b). These impacts are also significantly relevant for agriculture in the valley, mostly for meadow mowing. The identified, climate-change-related challenges to the Biebrza wetlands result either directly from transiently changing hydrological processesdwhich reflect changing temporal patterns and quantities of temperatures, precipitation and dischargesdor indirectly, from autonomous, inappropriate management measures

undertaken as stakeholders react to the impact of climate change (e.g. constructing illegal drainage ditches in protected wetland ecosystems, intensive dredging of natural rivers in areas not exposed to flooding, destroying damming facilities in land reclamation systems; Grygoruk et al., 2014b). 2.3. From science-management to stakeholder involvement The development of local adaptation strategies in BNP was built on a science-management partnership that included the strong participation of local groups and communities for the identification of local adaptation options and stakeholder perceptions. The science-management cooperation provided a bottom-up approach to decision making that complemented the top-down generation of scientific information. It was designed as a two-way dialogue that helped managers to obtain the latest site-specific climate data and scientific information on resulting impacts. It also meant that scientists had access to local expert knowledge for verification of models and could identify the site-specific needs of decision makers for information and research. This science-management partnership identified the sensitivity of habitats and protected areas in relation to changes in climate, potential impact pathways and adaptation options for BNP (Grygoruk et al., 2014b; WagnerLücker et al., 2014). To facilitate wider participation in the Biebrza Valley, a science-based stakeholder dialogue was initiated by the National Park administration. This social learning process was based on communication and interaction in small groups. The mutual learning process was meant to strengthen the awareness and understanding of climate-related problems, build trust between participants, improve their capacity to interpret data and identify options for planned adaptation activities. The involvement of the wider public outside the National Park administration was built on the ladder of citizen participation (Arnstein, 1969) and used the categories of information, consultation, collaboration (placation), cooperation (partnership) and

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

4

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

empowerment (delegated power), as adapted by Carter et al. (2007) (Fig. 2). Engaging stakeholders has many different aspects that stretch far beyond pure communication issues. It can have a number of benefits such as social learning or community building and it is an important tool to improve relevance, legitimacy and transparency of actions (Clemens et al., 2015; Giełczewski et al., 2011; Ison et al., 2007). These are considered key aspects for the acceptance and implementation of scientific information in local stakeholder processes (Meinke et al., 2006). 2.4. Stakeholders 2.4.1. Stakeholder segmentation Stakeholders were defined as individuals, groups or organizations that could affect or who were affected by the activities of the BNP administration and the achievement of environmental conservation goals. However, further identification and profiling of distinct stakeholder groups was essential for the targeting of communication and participation. All relevant stakeholders were profiled regarding their objectives and their type of organization. Classification of stakeholders was done on the basis of the work of Boumrane (2007) and Reed et al. (2009), who proposed a stakeholders' classification matrix based on their variable interest and influence (or power after Mitchell et al., 1997) over the management of certain socio-environmental systems. There is a discrepancy in the participation process between the will to engage every potential stakeholder and the available time and resources. Hence, it is important to identify the right stakeholders to work with (Lonsdale and Goldthorpe, 2012). The resulting typology uses four classes of stakeholders (Reed et al., 2009): Key players (KP) can affect the objectives of the adaptation process and have a strong interest in doing so. Context setters (CS) can influence adaptation but currently have little interest in the process. Subjects (S) have little influence on the overall process but show much interest in participating. Bystanders (B) have neither much direct influence nor interest but should be (passively) incorporated into the communication process, as their links to key players and context setters underpin the risk of taking undesirable adaptation actions. The typology graph is presented by Grygoruk et al. (2014b). 2.4.2. Targeting communication The typology of stakeholders was used to guide the level of intended involvement and the objective of the stakeholder dialogue. The objective of the local stakeholder dialogue was to inform

bystanders (sometimes referred to as “crowd”), consult and collaborate with subjects and context setters and reach cooperation with key players. Consequently, tools and messages for communication were assigned to the identified stakeholder groups. The individuation for the initial climate messages in Biebrza Valley was governed by several principles for the transfer of scientific information into climate knowledge at the local level (CRED, 2009; Futerra, 2009; ICLEI, 2009). In line with the ongoing development of the project and based on the experience of the stakeholder dialogue structure (Boumrane, 2007; Carter et al., 2007; Muro et al., 2006; Reed et al., 2009), numerous stakeholder dialogue initiatives have been implemented (Fig. 3). Different types of stakeholder interaction have been undertaken (face-to-face contacts, events, group discussions, seminars and contests), followed by the distribution of printed materials (brochures, newspapers, posters) containing user-adjusted information about climate change, climaterelated impacts on the environment and potential social and economic consequences of the observed and prospective climate dynamics. A factsheet was used to document the results of stakeholder analysis, including the relevant classification of stakeholders and the intended form of participation.

2.4.3. Stakeholder engagement The interaction was limited to the three bottom-most levels of the ladder of citizen participation, namely, the information, consultation and collaboration levels (Fig. 2). The two highest levels (cooperation and empowerment) will only be reached beyond the project framework, at the level of the adaptive management plan implementation, including the Natura 2000 Protection Tasks Plan. A communication strategy was designed to ensure efficiency of the stakeholder dialogue at the relevant level. Context-specific communication methods were applied. As the different communities considered have different social dynamics, different ways of communicating concepts had to be implemented so the specific impacts of climate change were addressed to stakeholders in an acceptable manner. The first step was to evaluate the awareness of the stakeholders in terms of the local relevance of global climatic changes. The action taken involved a meeting where initial communication was carried out about the project's assumptions and the findings of state-ofthe-art climate research in the Biebrza Valley (Fig. 3., Action 1). The messages passed to stakeholders on the climate-induced challenges for the management of wetlands in the Biebrza Valley were based on scientific research (Table 1). Once the information was presented, some 6 months after the project was launched, the

Fig. 2. Different intensities of stakeholder involvement (adapted from Carter et al., 2007; Muro et al., 2006).

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

5

Fig. 3. Timeframe of the HABIT-CHANGE project implementation in the BNP and implemented activities of the science-based stakeholder dialogue; 1 e publications, 2 e interactive activities, 3 e international workshop.

field campaign, involving face-to-face communication, was started with the aim of obtaining information on people's own perceptions of the relevance of climate change and the level they thought they might be affected by environmental change (Action 2). This action included structured interviews. After identifying these perceptions and communicating the preliminary results of the scientific research on climatic change in the Biebrza Valley, a printed brochure was issued describing the general context of climate change (Action 3). The brochure was distributed at the stakeholders' assembly (forum discussion; Action 4.), where external experts and local stakeholders from all the groups identified were present. Alternatively, the brochures were distributed to local schools and authorities. At the peak of the fieldwork season, a brochure that considered the management of the wetlands and related impacts of climate change was produced and distributed among the KPs and CSs (Action 5). The highlighted fact that climate change will likely trigger changes in the income of local land users was discussed at the Stakeholders Forum meeting, which was directly followed by the meeting of the scientific board of BNP (Action 6). The sequence of interactive activities and meetings allowed scientists and managers of BNP to conclude about the most up-to-date findings of the stakeholder dialogue. Immediately after this, communication of climate-related issues to pupils from local schools was started. In two consecutive issues of a children's newspaper magazine, we announced and finalized a contest for measuring the lowest air temperature outside. Some additional information on the environmental consequences of observed and prospective climatic change was described in these issues of the newspaper (Actions 7. and 8). A short symposium was arranged in the fieldwork season to address farmers, BNP management and local authorities (Action 9.), with the participation of international lecturers. The main topics of the symposiumdbuilding the adaptation capacity and showing adaptive aquatic macrophyte management measures (by implementation appropriate temporal and technical

mowing regime)dwere paired with a presentation highlighting the fact that climate-related wetland management issues are of the highest contemporary international importance (invited speakers from Germany and Belgium). Following the symposium, a local newspaper was used (1 article) to communicate climaterelated impacts on the day-to-day management of wetlands (Action 10). Among the key players and context setters a brochure, containing information about the most relevant climateinduced challenges to management in the Biebrza Valley, was issued and distributed (Action 11). Stakeholders Forum III and the Scientific Board Meeting, which was arranged in the last period of the project implementation (Action 12), were arranged to summarize why climatic change was important for day-to-day management in the area. This sequencedthe Stakeholder Forum followed immediately (the day after) by the assembly of the Scientific Board of the BNPdwas undertaken because the Stakeholders Forum II was an efficient background to the management discussions undertaken at the meeting of the Scientific Board of the park. The summarized results of the stakeholder dialogue were presented at the Policy Event of the European Union (DG Environment, European Commission; Action 13). The relevance of the whole 3-year project and its ability to broaden consideration of climatic change as an important stressor on the environment, society and the economy of the Biebrza Valley was discussed at the meeting of the scientific board of the BNP after finalizing the project implementation (Action 14). The results of all the meetings were recorded and interpreted afterwards. The main features of all the communication actions listed above are presented in Table 2. The years of project implementation (especially 2010 and 2011) were abnormally wet, especially due to significantly higher-than-average precipitation in the summer periods (storm rains; Grygoruk et al., 2014b). Therefore, the communication of the relevance of climatic factors for day-today management practices in the wetlands referred to an actual field situation.

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

6

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

Table 1 Science-based messages communicated to particular stakeholders. Group addressed

Stakeholders addressed

Facts communicated

Scientific references

Key players

Farmers and land managers

- natural origin of floods, no possibilities to reduce flooding in the physical conditions of the Biebrza floodplain, - on-going, increasing frequency of flooding in summer which affects mowing, - lack of adaptation will negatively induce commonwealth, - climate change affects agricultural production, - increasing frequency of extreme meteorological and hydrological events, - local importance of global change, - macrophyte management - efficient measure in flood risk mitigation, - uncertainty of future changes. - natural origin of floods, no possibilities to reduce flooding in the physical conditions of the Biebrza floodplain, - lack of adaptation will negatively induce commonwealth, - uncertainty of future changes. - climate-induced impacts to hydrology will require new approaches to environmental management, - implementation of EIA procedures have to be revisited due to new challenges resulting from climate change, - uncertainty of future changes. - climate change is important in a short-scale planning, - climate change should be considered in everyday management, - management measures applied require continuous verification due the dynamic climate influences evolution of ecosystems, - uncertainty of future changes. - climate change is an important aspect to be considered in day-to-day management, - uncertainty of future changes. - natural origin of floods, limited possibilities to reduce negative effects of floods, macrophyte management required, - climate-induced changes in hydrological cycle require new approaches in river management, - uncertainty of future changes. - climate change requires adaptation, - uncertainty of future changes. - more engagement is required from local NGOs in order to prevent inappropriate anticipation of climate-induced impacts, - uncertainty of future changes. - climate is dynamic and changing - climate is the driver of ecological processes, - climate change affects migratory birds, - climate change forces game species to move beyond the valley, - climate-related impacts induce spawning success of fish, - climate influences state of ecosystems and the landscape, - inappropriate reactions of local management to increased flooding frequency will negatively affect the abundance of birds and though e tourism. - information about the undertaken activities.

 ski, Byczkowski and Kicin 1983; Gerrard et al., 2008; Grygoruk et al., 2014b; Ignar et al., 2011; Maksymiuk et al.,  ˛ tek 2008; Mirosław-Swia et al., 2003; Walker et al., 2013.

Land owners

Environm. Conservation Directorate

Managers and staff of BNP

Context setters

Local authorities

Regional Irrigation and Drainage Councils

Politicians Subjects

Local NGOs

Children Bystanders

Fishermen and hunters

Tourists Guides Owners of unmanaged lands

3. Results - implementation of the stakeholder dialogue During the communication process more than 350 people attended meetings and more than 21,000 copies of printed materials were distributed. The target audience, which consisted of representatives from all four types of stakeholders, was reached successfully. Due to the well-structured and systematic communication process with local schools, the feedback from children was the one we considered the most successful. By organizing a contest in measuring the lowest air temperatures in February 2012 we gained significant interest of pupils in climate-related research. The feedback of simple climate- and adaptation-oriented messages in the newspaper distributed to the local schools suggested that the audience of this information was not limited to the pupils. It covered also their families, who e normally not acquainted with scientific aspects of climate-adapted management e started to follow the most concise and local environment-oriented messages provided for pupils. Similarly, promising results of the stakeholder dialogue were gained from communication with other subjects (NGOs in particular). This is not surprising, as most of the local NGOs consist of people well trained in environmental sciences and having broad background in structured environmental

_ Biereznoj-Bazille and Grygoruk, 2013a; Gerrard et al., 2008; Heller and Zavaleta, 2009; Mawdsley  ˛ tek et al., 2009; Mirosław-Swia et al., 2003; Walker et al., 2013.

Heller and Zavaleta, 2009; Walker et al., 2013.  ˛ tek et al., Mirosław-Swia  ˛ tek 2003; Mirosław-Swia et al., 2016; Walker et al., 2013.

_ Biereznoj-Bazille and Grygoruk, 2013; Grygoruk et al., 2013a; Grygoruk and Okruszko, 2015; Okruszko et al., 2011; Schneider et al., 2011; Walker et al., 2013;

management. The most demanding was the communication with the context setters. Most likely, the reason for this was that the educational and professional backgrounds of the local authorities and politicians addressed, related to climate-environment, climateeconomy and climate-society only to a very limited extent. This was also considered the biggest challenge to the implementation of adaptive management: existing regional management plans (water management strategies, regional development strategies) do not foresee any monitoring of the efficiency of the measures implemented. Moreover, these plans assume a priori that the socioenvironmental-economic system of the area under management (river valley, Natura 2000 area, communes and regions) will remain in a stable state. Thus, only the challenges foreseen in these strategies are addressed and, surprisingly, climatic change is not among them. Hence, there is very limited flexibility to adapt management measures to changes in the nonlinear socio-environmentaleconomic system of the area. Similar obstacles were identified in the responses of the key players. Although non-institutionalized representatives of this group, such as individual farmers and landowners, were, in general, willing to accept the messages communicated. The responses of institutionalized stakeholders, including the Regional Directorate of Environmental Conservation

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

7

Table 2 Setup of activities undertaken within the stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management implementation in the BNP. Order of the activity

Type of the activity

Participants/ copies

Stakeholder groups addressed

Message communicated

1

Internal workshop

17

KP, CS, S, B

2

Interviews (face-to-face)

59

KP

3 4 5 6

Publication Event Publication Event

1000 81 2000 43

KP, KP, KP, KP,

7

Publication (Contest)

4000

S

8 9

Publication Event (internal)

4000 26

S KP, CS, S

10

Publication

5000

KP

11

Publication

5000

KP, CS

12

Event

78

KP, CS, S, B

13

Event (international)

60

CS, S

14

Event (internal)

45

KP

- To identify stakeholders - To verify the level of perception of climate-related impacts to environment, society and economy. - To get specific comments on the environmental, social and economic dimensions of the defined climate impacts. - Climate change e basic information. - Consultation and collaboration in the decision making process. - Climate impacts to ecosystems. - Presentation of climate-induced challenges to wetlands and forecast of conflicts to the managers and scientific board of the BNP, politicians, local authorities. - Newspaper for children: climate of the Biebrza Valley, migrations of birds, contest for children (to measure outside temperature in February 2012). - Sum-up of the contest, analysis of results - Mitigation of negative effects of flooding by emergent macrophyte removal e is it efficient? (Participation of external international specialists). - Analysis of observed trends in climate of Biebrza Valley. Assessment of to what extent the changes may affect local economy? - Presentation of prospective climate changes in the Biebrza Valley and foreseen climate impacts on economy and ecosystems. - Discussions on climate-related issues and their relevance for management tasks of BNP for the coming years, empowerment of stakeholders in decision making. - Presentation of problems in communication of climate-related issues to stakeholders in BNP at the EU level. - Communication of project results, critical overview of the management measures implemented by the BNP in the light of project results.

CS CS, S, B CS CS, S, B

and BNP staff, could be considered negative. This group considered climate change predominantly as a global problem that is mostly not relevant (and even seldom considered) in their day-to-day practice. We observed that the efficiency of climate change awareness rising among individual key players (mostly farmers) was considerably higher if the projected impacts of climate change (such as diagnosed changes in the flood-drought regime) were referred to their life experience and contemporary environmental situation. In fact, autumn 2010 and the summer-autumn seasons of 2011 and 2013 were among the wettest in the recent multi-year period, while the winter of 2012-13 was among one of the coldest in the area in many years. We consider this coincidence to be essential for the acceptance of the messages communicated during the stakeholder involvement process. The stakeholder dialogue process was planned as a coherent set of actions implemented in certain order and providing various messages and activities (Fig. 3.). Although numerous institutionalized and individual key players participated in meetings, only a few participated in all interactions. This limited the efficiency of sharing knowledge and gaining feedbacks and can be considered a weakness of the information-response process. A similar problem was observed by Giełczewski et al. (2011) in stakeholder-based scenario development for water management purposes. Bearing in mind the long-term impacts of climatic change and its transsectoral, economic, environmental and social relevance, especially critical for wetlands, we found, similarly to Al-Zu'bi (2016) and OECD (2015), that holistic approaches are required in climateadapted management and governance. Enhancing social learning as a local, knowledge generating tool in structured adaptive management remains an indispensable action, which is suspected to attribute climate-adapted management as socially relevant and environmentally profitable (Stringer et al., 2006). Results from stakeholder communication were used to draft and structure the Climate-Adapted Management Plan (CAMP) for BNP (Grygoruk et al., 2013b), representing the level of collaboration within the participation process (see Fig. 2). The upper-most levels of cooperation and empowerment could not be implemented, due to legal constraints. Decision making in

environmental management within the National Parks of Poland remain the sole competence of the Director of BNP. However, opinions and remarks of stakeholders are taken into consideration in CAMP procedure and further steps in verification of planned actions will include the stakeholder's feedback. Despite the successful implementation of stakeholder dialogue and positive feedback from local communities, authorities, politicians and environmental managers, the most important lesson we gained from the communication process is the discrepancies that existed between the messages we communicated and the perceptions of stakeholders in regard to specific climate-related impacts (Table 3). Statements presented as “stakeholder responses” (Table 3.) do not represent the statements of the whole group of stakeholders, but they do remain the most critical single responses. We observed that although scientific research outputs provide sufficiently detailed and management-relevant information on climate change scenarios and management adaptation, there are limitations in stakeholders' attitudes towards them. Such attitudes impede the perception of the relevance of climate change and affect the knowledge and emotions of the stakeholders; in our case, this issue related most importantly to the key players and context setters. 4. Mind the gap! There have been several publications listing barriers of climate change adaptation (Eisenack et al., 2014; Ekstrom et al., 2011; Biesbroek et al., 2011). Several barriers are highly context and actor specific. However, limited problem awareness is considered one of the main issues (Eisenack et al., 2014). Hence, we consider the communication of scientific results as starting points to overcome these constraints. During the communication process we found that the facts, despite being of the highest scientific consideration (including the GCM-RCM's uncertainty and the variable temporal scale and confidence intervals of prospective changes), are not met with positive feedback in the groups of stakeholders we analysed. Moreover, the stakeholders did not consider the research-related messages to be real-life problems,

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

8

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

Table 3 Outline of the key discrepancies recorded in stakeholder dialogue. Messages

Selected negative responses of stakeholders

1) Uncertainties of climate change predictions and uncertain results of so-far planned measures acting upon the negative impacts of climate change.

Key players and context setters: - If you are not sure about your results as a scientist, why should we consider them important for us? - If one does not know what can happen, what should we be aware of? - It is global warming, so it will be warmer. Though e there will be less water so we should anticipate less flooding. Key players: - There is no climate change. - There are more urgent problems than hypothetical climate change. Context setters: - These are “the others” that are responsible for climate change. We have been doing the same things here for the last centuries. Key players: - Floods occur because river macrophytes are not being removed and rivers are not being dredged, - Rain has always been the same for the last 50 years.

2) Flooding is an inherent element of the floodplain. Temporal patterns and volumes of floods may be altered due to climatic change, 3) Removal of emergent macrophytes is specific technical and temporal regime may reduce the risk of flooding. However, changing patterns in extreme rainfalls may cause flooding regardless any management measures applied. 4) Autonomous adaptation to climatic change such as mass river dredging may result in exaggeration of drought effects in dry years.

5) Flooding as an inherent element of the floodplain, 6) Flooding as a key for migratory birds, fish and tourism, 7) Flooding as valuable ecosystem service.

8) Some management measures (e.g. passive protection) have limited adaptation capacity, 9) More research needed to examine factors of wetland ecosystems' resilience, 10) Monitoring of efficiency of management measures applied is needed as well as the monitoring of reference sites and processes.

which reduced the relevance of the communication. Facing this observation, we identified six major gaps that negatively affect the efficiency of stakeholder communication:

Key players: There are no droughts in wetlands. Wetlands “co-exist” with the human and the open-aspect of their landscape developed only as a result of agricultural practices. Key players: - Ecosystem services concept misunderstood: If you earn money on nature, give us this money back. Key players and context setters: - You talk about models and we talk about life. Bystanders: - National Park management should start fish stocking. Key players and context setters: - Passively protected ecosystems will adapt autonomously to climate change. No management is needed. Key players: - Monitoring was already done (Natura 2000); no additional monitoring is required. - We know what should be done to make environment functioning better; actions do not have to be verified.

is not considered an issue in spontaneous knowledge exchange in the region, or participants of the whole stakeholder dialogue process did not interact one to another, assigning the importance of climate-related issues only to the BNP.

4.1. GAP 1: the scale e global change of local importance 4.2. GAP 2: environment e economy Even though climate change was rarely cited as a driver of autonomous adaptation measures (illegal meadow drainage and _ river dredging (Biereznoj-Bazille and Grygoruk, 2013)), we observed that using the local-scale processes that reflect the trends of global change was much more effective for communicating. This is of special importance to reach key players and context setters. Similarly to Akter et al. (2012), Bulkeley and Kern (2006) and Poortinga et al. (2011), we observed general scepticism and even denial of climate change. Therefore, a focus on flooding and changes in local precipitation was more fruitful in terms of climate change communication, rather than referring to changes in global climate patterns. We conclude that interrelation of climate change impacts with the personal experience of the stakeholders, can close the “perception gap”. The social acceptance for the implementation of climate-adapted management measures will most likely increase. Horizontal interaction between stakeholders is considered essential for social learning processes (Clemens et al., 2015; Ison et al., 2007). We did not observe horizontal interactions between the stakeholders during stakeholder-oriented activities. It was expected that the initiated actions will find spontaneous continuation between the stakeholders addressed, because of their different background. It seems either that the climate-management interface

Similar to the “perception gap” mentioned above, stakeholder dialogue in climate-change-related projects is more efficient if awareness-raising activities do not only highlight environmental consequences but also point out economic consequences of climate change. The concept of ecosystem services induced by the prospective changing of the climate can help to balance the general negative attitudes of stakeholders towards environmental conservation in examined areas, especially in the Biebrza Valley. Again, highlighting site-level issues and the local importance of ecosystem services (such as Blackwell and Pilgrim, 2011) may facilitate closing this gap more effectively than mentioning broad-scale approaches to biodiversity. Presenting ambitious algorithms of ecosystem services calculations and putting these into a biodiversity conservation context candas we observeddnegatively induce local-scale perception of climate change impacts. Even though ecosystem services are well known to the world's environmental sciences, non-environmentalists can easily misunderstand the concept (“pay me for your nature, please”, Table 3), causing the communication process to fail. In addition, if ecosystem services are not referred to as benefits for stakeholders (“flooding brings birds, birds bring tourists”), using them as a medium for communication may even broaden the perception gap. Similar to gap 1., we conclude that

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

climate-impact-related projects should refer to ecosystem services in the most local sense: a single meadow and field rather than the region. 4.3. GAP 3: the language and availability of research results Contemporary communication of the newest scientific achievements in the field of climate change and environmental management is traditionally carried out in English and in journals and reports from specialised fields. We have found high ranked scientific journals a means to assure scientific credibility to scientists rather than the source of information for the majority of managers and practitioners. In this regard, we emphasize the importance of local-scale-related projects aimed at local societies. These projects should entail knowledge transfer by communication in national languages. These local-scale climate-related projects should be aimed towards precise, locally relevant quantification of climate change impacts and increased awareness. They should also involve managers, communication specialists and specialists in fields related to the environment, the economy and the social sciences. We also emphasize that the acceptance of project results and the involvement of stakeholders in local-scale project implementation will only be possible if the working languages of the projects (especially meetings, outputs and publications) are the languages used in the regions. 4.4. GAP 4: simple questions e complex answers Day-to-day environmental management of national parks, nature reserves and other protected areas is normally governed by strict administrative regulations. In the case of the BNP, multiple aspectsdi.e., the complex nature of wetland ecosystems and the numerous stakeholder pressures that existdrequire managing staff members to use simple guidelines for the adaptation of measures to the prospective impacts of climate change. However, most outputs that come from scientific projects are complex and rarely meet the expectations of managers. For instance, instead of gathering reports on the uncertainties of applied climate models, which is one of the hottest topics in contemporary hydrological literature (Anagnostopulos et al., 2010; Kundzewicz and Stakhiv, 2010; Wilby, 2005, 2010), managers expect simple frameworks that point out the thresholds and criteria for monitoring and management. Therefore, scientific projects aimed at climate change analysis often fail to fulfil the criteria of their applicability in practice. In consequence, we state that climate-related scientific projects should go far beyond the “traditional” fields of climatology, hydrology, mathematics and environmental sciences and should expand towards the social and economic sciences. Activists experienced in scientific research, skilled in efficient stakeholder communication and possessing a solid background in environmental management should implement these projects. 4.5. GAP 5: neglected uncertainty Nonlinearity and problems in projecting prospective climate change impacts on the environment of complex wetland ecosystems frequently prevent researchers from stating whether measures aimed at reconstructing or maintaining a “former-shape” ecosystem or sustaining an evolving, new and resilient wetland ecosystem remain the only appropriate way to manage the environment (Harris et al., 2006). Moreover, due to the uncertainty of climatic predictions and the limited knowledge of ecosystems' responses to climatic stressors, it is hard to identify a single trend in the prospective status of ecosystems at any level of significance that would be considered acceptable. Messages such as “uncertainty of

9

forecasts” and “nonlinearity of response processes”, although s to scientists, are difficult to understand and even more cliche difficult for stakeholders to act upon. Millner has also observed this problem (2012). Considerable efforts must be taken towards adjusting messages about climate adaptation to make them more understandable and more acceptable to managing and consulting authorities. The analytical and reductionist approach of science is able to identify driving forces and key elements but lacks the ability to offer solutions or support management decisions if research activities are not especially tailored to do so (Opdam et al., 2009). It is crucial to move climate impact research beyond pure projection and strengthen its integration in decision making and the management of protected areas (Bellard et al., 2012). In this regard, presenting the uncertainty of environmental processes remains crucial in the attempt to successfully span the boundaries between science and management. Relevance, legitimacy and transparency can be considered key aspects for the acceptance and implementation of scientific information in local stakeholder processes (Meinke et al., 2006). This is especially true for the communication of uncertainties associated with information. However, sciencebased stakeholder dialogue requires not only theory and related methods but also many individual skills that have to be learned and trained, such as active listening, moderating, mediating or observing group dynamics (Welp et al., 2006). The ability to apply collaborative skills and mind-sets to the resolution or amelioration of complex problems is essential for the success of participation (Williams, 2002). There is a gap between the current attention paid to the role of individual facilitators in the adaptation process and their importance for the adaptation process. Natural staff transition can be a barrier to an effective adaptation process in this regard. Constant changes in facilitators and participants result in slow progress and a constant “loss of institutional memory” (Lonsdale and Goldthorpe, 2012) that should be avoided. 4.6. GAP 6: adaptive management e what's that? The former gap required referring to the uncertainty of processes and projections and an examination of the consequences of a mismatch between the theory and practice of adaptive management. Contrary to the assumptions of adaptive management (Holling, 1978; Walters, 1986; Rist et al., 2013), strict management plans and environmental restoration processes, which anticipate the need for before-and-after control-impact monitoring, do not provide elasticity in terms of undertaking management measures if the project fails due to external, climatic stressors. Usually, the monitoring of environmental management success is oriented towards observation of selected objects (species, habitats) or processes and refers to actions implemented with no regard to climatic impacts. This monitoring setup excludes the possibility of reacting to transient climatic conditions and does not allow an iterative approach (action-monitoring-assessment-action …) in the decision making indicated by Williams (2011) an inherent procedure of adaptive ecosystem management. Examples shown by Dorau et al. (2015)din which the uncertain success of wetland rewetting, as achieved by technical measures, was presenteddproved that neglecting the monitoring of climate-related stressors on a broad scale may underpin failures in wetland restoration. In this regard, we consider it indispensable to prioritize the monitoring of environmental management and restoration projects with special focus to the monitoring of natural and untouched reference ecosystems. Uncertain climate projections and states of ecosystems that are foreseen to be nonlinear require the re-definition of probable social, environmental and economic responses of the environment to climatic stressors (Virapongse et al., 2016). The only way to anticipate this challenge is continuous monitoring of the management's

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

10

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

efficiency, which in the case of the Biebrza Valley was diagnosed as having inappropriately low priority and as being overtaken by technical restoration and species management (Grygoruk and Okruszko, 2015). This involves integrating general knowledge of examples of working adaptive management procedures and simple rules, based on scientific knowledge, that are easy for relevant stakeholders to follow. We consider the ability of individuals to span boundaries between scientific disciplines and between experts and lay people as an essential aspect of local climate adaptation. The raising of awareness and boundary spanning as target-perception-andbackground-adjusted communication are often-applied concepts in the social sciences (Brion et al., 2012; Marrone, 2010; Marrone et al., 2007; Pülzl and Rametsteiner, 2009; Richter et al., 2006). Gathering specialists from different backgrounds, creating a common interpretation of project results and helping to develop synergistic ideas is especially important for integrated approaches in an environmental context. Supporting the facilitation of adaptation processes requires more attention and support from tools, exchange of experience and organizational structures. Competence training might also be a part of the solution (Robinson et al., 2012). 5. Conclusions Many qualified scientific studies about climate change's impact on the environment, economy and society are available. However, the implementation of their results in local level environmental management fails due to the numerous gaps between theory and implementation. In this study the following issues were highlighted in regard to the case study: - The lack of attribution of current environmental changes to climate change by local stakeholders; - The resulting autonomous adaptation of local land use and the objectives of climate-adapted management; - The expert/lay knowledge divide in climate communication; - The role of individual facilitators in the process of local climate adaptation; - The management of protected areas is ruled by strict administrative regulations limiting the level of participation. Practiceoriented guidelines for the climate adaptation of complex ecosystems such as wetlands with numerous stakeholder pressures must consider this. Local-scale-related projects aiming at local societies are important for climate adaptation. They should entail knowledge transfer by communicating in national languages and e vice versa e provide the opportunity to receive feedback from the stakeholders in national languages as well. Project development must aim at precise, locally relevant quantification of climate change impacts and increased awareness. It has to involve local managers, specialists in fields such as the environment, economics and, predominantly, social sciences, as well as communication specialists. Connecting global information with the personal experience of stakeholders can help to close the existing perception gap. Including economic aspects such as site-related ecosystem services might also help to balance the general negative attitudes of stakeholders in relation to environmental conservation in examined areas (as shown by Blackwell and Pilgrim, 2011). As far as climate-proof adaptive wetland management is concerned, more emphasis should be placed on transferring scientific results into practice through practice-oriented publications and scholarly programs, in order to improve the training and increase the number of local facilitators in this challenging and urgent task. Methods like stakeholder segmentation improve targeted action in the

adaptation process. In any case, a clear concept for the form and level of participation is mandatory. Gaps in a science-based stakeholder dialogue originate from failure to relate highly sophisticated scientific findings to the requirements of the day-to-day management of valuable ecosystems. Future projects aimed at management adaptation to climatic change should involve social scientists and individuals capable to understand and elucidate the social-environmental interface (also shown by Virapongse et al., 2016). Including a methodology to measure social response and reflect institutional transformations as well as social learning processes is advocated (e.g. Cuevas et al., 2016). The experience of the HABIT-CHANGE project in numerous European protected areas indicated that although the ongoing, cutting-edge research into climate change's impact on the environment develops exponentially, stakeholders with non-scientific backgrounds experience problems reaching and processing the research results that are continuously presented in the worldwide scientific literature due to limited accessibility and the different objectives of problem formulation and analysis. We conclude that the participation of individuals with both scientific and practiceoriented backgrounds is indispensable for efficiently closing the gaps between the sophisticated theory and the day-to-day practice of adaptive management of wetlands facing climate change. Acknowledgments This study was funded by the project HABIT-CHANGE e Adaptive management of climate-induced changes of habitat diversity in protected areas 2CE168P3. It was implemented in the Biebrza National Park through the E.U. Central Europe Program and cofinanced by the European Regional Development Fund. Our sincerest thanks go to everyone who made HABIT-CHANGE such a successful project. We are especially grateful to all colleagues directly involved in the Biebrza case study and the local stakeholders who participated in local events. We thank three anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments that helped us to improve the manuscript. References Acreman, M.C., Blake, J.R., Booker, D.J., Harding, R.J., Reynard, N., Mountford, J.O., Stratford, C.J., 2009. A simple framework for evaluating regional wetland ecohydrological response to climate change with case studies from Great Britain. Ecohydrology 2, 1e17. Adger, W.N., Arnell, N.W., Tompkins, E.L., 2005. Successful adaptation to climate change across scales. Glob. Environ. Change 15, 77e86. Akter, S., Bennett, J., Ward, M.B., 2012. Climate change scepticism and public support for mitigation: evidence from an Australian choice experiment. Glob. Environ. Change 22, 736e745. Al-Zu’bi, M., 2016. Jordan's climate change governance framework: from silos to an intersectoral approach. Environ. Syst. Decis. 36, 277e301. Anagnostopulos, G.G., Koutsoyiannis, D., Christofides, A., Efstafridis, A., Mamassis, N., 2010. A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data. Hydrol. Sci. J. 55, 1094e1110. Arnstein, S.R., 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. JAIP 35 (4), 216e224. Baron, J.S., Gunderson, L., Allen, C.D., Fleihmann, E., McKenzie, D., Meyerson, L.A., Oropeza, J., Stephenson, N., 2009. Options for national parks and reserves for adapting to climate change. Environ. Manag. 44, 1033e1042. Bellard, C., Bertelsmeier, C., Leadley, P., Thuiller, W., Courchamp, F., 2012. Impacts of climate change on the future of biodiversity. Ecol. Lett. 15, 365e377. _ Biereznoj-Bazille, U., Grygoruk, M., 2013. Scale matters: efficiency assessment of EU environmental directives implementation in a local-scale management of protected wetlands in Poland. Sci. Ann. Danube Delta Inst. 19, 5e12. Biesbroek, G.R., Klostermann, J., Termeer, C., Kabat, P., 2011. Barriers to climate change adaptation in The Netherlands. Clim. Law 2, 181e199. Blackwell, M.S.A., Pilgrim, E.S., 2011. Ecosystem services delivered by small-scale wetlands. Hydrol. Sci. J. 56, 1467e1484. Blake, J., 1999. Overcoming the “value-action gap” in environmental policy: tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environ. 4, 257e278. Bonn, A., Macgregor, N., Stadler, J., Korn, H., Stiffel, S., Wolf, K., van Dijk, N., 2014. Helping Ecosystems in Europe to Adapt to Climate Change. BfN-skripten 375.

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12 Federal Agency for Nature Conservation. Germany, Bonn, p. 160. €hm, G., O'Connor, R., 2013. Targeting and tailoring climate change Bostrom, A., Bo communication. WIREs Clim. Change 4, 447e455. Boumrane, M., 2007. Dialogue in Biosphere Reserves: References, Practices and Experiences. Biosphere Reserves e Technical Notes 2. Unesco, Paris. Brion, S., Chauvet, V., Chollet, B., Mothe, C., 2012. Project leaders as boundary spanners: relational antecedents and performance outcomes. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 30, 708e722. Brooks, N., Adger, W.N., 2005. Assessing and enhancing adaptive capacity. In: Lim, B., Spanger-Siegfried, E. (Eds.), Adaptation Policy Frameworks for Climate Change: Developing Strategies, Policies and Measures. UNDP-GEF. Cambridge University Press, pp. 165e181. Bulkeley, H., Kern, K., 2006. Local government and the governing of climate change in Germany and the UK. Urban Stud. 43, 2237e2259. Bulkeley, H., Mol, A., 2003. Participation and environmental governance: consensus, ambivalence and debate. Environ. Val. 12 (2), 143e154.  ski, T., 1983. Frequency and duration of floods in the Biebrza Byczkowski, A., Kicin w Nauk. Rol. 255, 75e87. river valley. Zesz. Probl. Poste˛ po Capon, S.J., Chambers, L.E., MacNally, R., Naiman, R., Davies, P., Marshall, N., Pittock, J., Reid, M., Capon, T., Douglas, M., Catford, J., Baldwin, D.S., Stewardson, M., Roberts, J., Parsons, M., Williams, S.E., 2013. Riparian ecosystems in the 21st century: hotspots for climate change adaptation? Ecosystems 16, 359e381. Carter, T.R., Jones, R.N., Lu, X., Bhadwal, S., Conde, C., Mearns, L.O., O'Neill, B.C., Rounsevell, M.D.A., Zurek, M.B., 2007. New assessment methods and the characterisation of future conditions. In: Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P., van der Linden, P.J., Hanson, C.E. (Eds.), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 133e171. Clemens, M., Rijke, J., Pathirana, A., Evers, J., Quan, N.H., 2015. Social learning for adaptation to climate change in developing countries: insight from Vietnam. J. Water Clim. Change. http://dx.doi.org/10.2166/wcc.2015.004. CRED e Center for Research on Environmental Decisions, 2009. The Psychology of Climate Change Communication: a Guide for Scientists, Journalists, Educators, Political Aides, and the Interested Public. New York. Cross, M.S., Zavaleta, E.S., Bachelet, D., Brooks, M.L., Enquist, C.A.F., Fleishman, E., Graumlich, L.J., Groves, C.R., Hannah, L., Hansen, L., Hayward, G., Koopman, M., Lawler, J.J., Malcom, J., Nordgren, J., Petersen, B., Rowland, E.L., Scott, D., Shafer, S.L., Shaw, M.R., Tabor, G.M., 2012. The Adaptation for Conservation Targets (ACT) Framework: a tool for incorporating climate change into natural resource management. Environ. Manag. 50, 341e351. Cuevas, S.C., Peterson, A., Morrison, T., Robinson, C., 2016. Methodology for examining the challenges in mainstreaming climate change adaptation. Int. J. Clim. Change Strateg. Manag. 8, 3. Dorau, K., Gelhausen, H., Esplor, D., Masfeldt, T., 2015. Wetland restoration management under the aspect of climate change at a mesotrophic fen in Northern Germany. Ecol. Eng. 84, 84e91. Dyrcz, A., Zdunek, W., 1993. Breeding ecology of the aquatic warbler Acrocephalus paludicola on the Biebrza marshes, northeast Poland. Ibis 135, 181e189. Eisenack, K., Moser, S.C., Hoffmann, E., Klein, R.J.T., Oberlack, C., Pechan, A., Rotter, M., Termeer, C.J.A.M., 2014. Explaining and overcoming barriers to climate change adaptation. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 867e872. Ekstrom, J.A., Moser, S.C., Torn, M., 2011. Barriers to Climate Adaptation: a Diagnostic Framework. California Energy Commission, USA. Erwin, K.L., 2009. Wetlands and global climate change: the role of wetland restoration in a changing world. Wetl. Ecol. Manag. 17, 71e84. Fischhoff, B., 2011. Applying the science of communication to the communication of science. Clim. Change 108, 701e705.  ski, M., 2017. Fortuniak, K., Pawlak, W., Bednorz, L., Grygoruk, M., Siedlecki, M., Zielin Methane and carbon dioxide fluxes of a temperate mire in Central Europe. Agric. For. Meteorol. 23, 306e318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet. 2016.08.023. Futerra, 2009. Sizzle e the New Climate Message. London. Gerrard, M., El Kahloun, M., Rymen, M., Beauchard, O., Meire, P., 2008. Importance of mowing and flood frequency in promoting species richness in restored floodplains. J. Appl. Ecol. 45, 1780e1789. Giełczewski, M., Stelmaszczyk, M., Piniewski, M., Okruszko, T., 2011. How can we involve stakeholders in the development of water scenarios? Narew River Basin case study. J. Water Clim. Change 2 (2e3), 166e179. Gitay, H., Finlayson, C.M., Davidson, N.C., 2011. A Framework for Assessing the Vulnerability of Wetlands to Climate Change. Ramsar Technical Report No. 5/ CBD Technical Series No. 57. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland and Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal. Grantham, H.S., Bode, M., McDonald-Madden, E., Game, E.T., Knight, A.T., Possingham, H.P., 2010. Effective conservation planning requires learning and adaptation. Front. Ecol. Environ. 8, 431e437. _ Grygoruk, M., Biereznoj-Bazille, U., Mazgajski, M., Sienkiewicz, J., 2014b. Climateinduced challenges for wetlands: revealing the background for adaptive management of ecosystems in the Biebrza Valley, Poland. In: Rannow, S., Neubert, M. (Eds.), Managing Protected Areas in Central Europe under Climate Change. Advances in Global Change Research 58. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7960-0_14.  kowska, A., Jabłon  ska, E., Janauer, G.A., Kubrak, J., MirosławGrygoruk, M., Ban  ˛ tek, D., Kotowski, W., 2015. Assessing habitat exposure to eutrophication in Swia

11

restored wetlands: model-supported ex-ante approach to rewetting drained mires. J. Environ. Manag. 152, 230e240.  ˛ tek, D., Szatyłowicz, J., Okruszko, T., Grygoruk, M., Batelaan, O., Mirosław-Swia 2014a. Evapotranspiration of bush encroachments on a temperate mire meadow - a nonlinear function of landscape composition and groundwater flow. Ecol. Eng. 73, 598e609.  ˛ tek, D., Chorman  ski, J., Grygoruk, M., Batelaan, O., Okruszko, T., Mirosław-Swia Rycharski, M., 2011. Groundwater modelling and hydrological system analysis of wetlands in the Middle Biebrza Basin. In: Okruszko, T., Swiatek, D. (Eds.), Modelling of Hydrological Processes in the Narew Catchment, GeoPlanete Earth and Planetary Sciences, pp. 89e109.  ˛ tek, D., Chrzanowska, W., Ignar, S., 2013a. How much Grygoruk, M., Mirosław-Swia for water? Economic assessment and mapping of floodplain water storage as a catchment-scale ecosystem service of wetlands. Water 5, 1760e1779. Grygoruk, M., Okruszko, T., 2015. Do water management and climate-adapted management of wetlands interfere in practice? Lessons from the Biebrza Valley, Poland. In: Ignar, S., Grygoruk, M. (Eds.), Wetlands and Water Framework Directive: Protection, Management and Climate Change, GeoPlanet: Earth and Planetary Sciences. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13764-3_4. Grygoruk, M., Sienkiewicz, J., Hattermann, F., Stagl, J., 2013b. Climate-adapted Management Plan for the Biebrza National Park. 2CE168P3 HABIT-Change Project, 5.3.1 Report, 99 pp. http://www2.ioer.de/download/habit-change/ HABIT-CHANGE_5_3_1e_BNP_CAMP_for_Biebrza_NP.pdf. Harris, J.A., Hobbs, R.J., Higgs, E., Aronson, J., 2006. Ecological restoration and global climate change. Restor. Ecol. 14, 170e176. Hartig, E.K., Grozev, O., Rosenzweig, C., 1997. Climate change, agriculture and wetlands in Eastern Europe. Clim. Change 36, 107e121. Heller, N.E., Zavaleta, E.S., 2009. Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: a review of 22 years of recommendations. Biol. Conserv. 142, 14e32. Holling, C.S., 1978. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. John Wiley and Sons, UK, Chichester. ICLEI, 2009. Climate Change Outreach and Communication Guide. Boston. Ignar, S., Grygoruk, M., 2015. Wetlands and Water Framework Directive: protection, management and climate change. In: Ignar, S., Grygoruk, M. (Eds.), Wetlands and Water Framework Directive: Protection, Management and Climate Change. GeoPlanet: Earth and Planetary Sciences. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 1e7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13764-3_1.  ˛ tek, D., Chorman  ski, J., Ignar, S., Maksymiuk-Dziuban, A., Mirosław-Swia Okruszko, T., Wysocki, P., 2011. Temporal variability of selected flood parameters in the Biebrza River valley. Ann. Warsaw Univ. Life Sci. e SGGW 43, 135e142. Ison, R., Roling, N., Watson, D., 2007. Challenges to science and society in the sustainable management and use of water: investigating the role of social learning. Environ. Sci. Policy 10, 499e511. Kundzewicz, Z.W., Stakhiv, E.Z., 2010. Are climate models “ready for prime time” in water resources management applications, or is more research needed? Hydrol. Sci. J. 55, 1085e1089. Littell, J.S., Peterson, D.L., Millar, C.I., O'Halloran, K.A., 2012. U.S. National Forest adapt to climate change trough Science-Management partnership. Clim. Change 110, 269e296. Lonsdale, K., Goldthorpe, M., 2012. Collaborative Research for a Changing Climate: Learning from Research and Stakeholders in the ARCC Programme. Adaptation and Resilience in a Changing Climate Coordination Network. UKCIP, Oxford. Available from: www.arcc-cn.org.uk/wp-content/pdfs/ACN-collaboartiveresearch.pdf. Maksymiuk, A., 2009. Time Variability of Selected Environmental Factors in the Biebrza River System. PhD Thesis. Department of Hydraulic Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences e SGGW, p. 119.  czyk, K., Ignar, S., Krupa, J., Okruszko, T., 2008. Analiza Maksymiuk, A., Furman  w klimatycznych i hydrologicznych w dolinie rzeki zmiennosci parametro  _ Biebrzy. Przegla˛ d Nauk. Inzynieria i Kształt. Srodowiska 17, 59e68. Marrone, J.A., 2010. Team boundary spanning: a multilevel review of past research and proposals for the future. J. Manag. 36, 911e940. Marrone, J.E., Tesluk, P.E., Carson, J.B., 2007. A multilevel investigation of antecedents and consequences of team member boundary-spanning behavior. Acad. Manag. J. 50, 1423e1439. Mawdsley, J.R., O'Malley, R., Ojima, D.S., 2009. A review of climate-change adaptation strategies for wildlife management and biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 23, 1080e1089. Meinke, H., Nelson, R., Kokic, P., Stone, R., Selvaraju, R., Baethgen, W., 2006. Actionable climate knowledge: from analysis to synthesis. Clim. Res. 33, 101e110. Millner, A., 2012. Climate prediction for adaptation: who needs what? Clim. Change 110, 143e167.  ˛ tek, D., Okruszko, T., Chorman  ski, J., 2003. Natural floodplain storage Mirosław-Swia capacity e modelling approach. In: Proceedings of the International Conference towards Natural Flood Reduction Strategies. Warsaw, Poland.  ˛ tek, D., Szporak-Wasilewska, S., Grygoruk, M., 2016. Assessing Mirosław-Swia floodplain porosity for accurate quantification of water retention capacity of near-natural riparian ecosystems e a case study of the Lower Biebrza Basin, Poland. Ecol. Eng. 92, 181e189. Mitchell, R., Agle, B., Wood, D., 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad. Manag. Rev. 22, 853e886. Moss, R.H., Edmonds, J.A., Hibbard, K.A., Manning, M.R., Rose, S.K., van Vuuren, D.P.,

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066

12

M. Grygoruk, S. Rannow / Journal of Environmental Management xxx (2016) 1e12

Carter, T.R., Emori, S., Kainuma, M., Kram, T., Meehl, G.A., Mitchell, J.F.B., Nakicenovic, N., Riahi, K., Smith, S.J., Stouffer, R.J., Thomson, A.M., Weyant, J.P., Wilbanks, T.J., 2010. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463, 747e756. Muro, M., Hartje, V., Klaphake, A., Scheumann, W., 2006. Pilot Study in Identifying and Analysing Stakeholders for the Information and Consultation According to Art. 14 of the EU Water Framework Directive in a River Basin. Umweltbundesamt Texte 27e06. Dessau. OECD, 2015. Stakeholder Engagement for Inclusive Water Governance. OECD Studies on Water. OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/ 9789264231122-en. Okruszko, T., Duel, H., Acreman, M., Grygoruk, M., Florke, M., Schneider, C., 2011. Broad-scale ecosystem services of European wetlands e overview of the current situation and future perspectives under different climate and water management scenarios. Hydrol. Sci. J. 56, 1501e1517. Opdam, P., Luque, S., Jones, K.B., 2009. Changing landscapes to accommodate for climate change impacts: a call for landscape ecology. Landsc. Ecol. 24 (6), 715e721.  ski, A., 1975. Bagna Ja Pałczyn cwieskie (Pradolina Biebrzy): zagadnienia Geobotaniczne, Paleofitosocjologiczne i Gospodarcze. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych Ser. D., p. 232. Picketts, I.M., Curry, J., Dery, S.J., Cohen, S.J., 2013. Learning with practitioners: climate change adaptation priorities in a Canadian community. Clim. Change 118, 321e337. Polakowski, M., Broniszewska, M., Krajewski, Ł., 2016. The importance of the Biebrza Basin for ducks Anatinae during their spring migration. Ornis Pol. 57, 83e106. Poortinga, W., Spence, A., Whitmarsh, L., Capstik, S., Pidgeon, N.F., 2011. Uncertain climate: an investigation into public scepticism about anthropogenic climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 21, 1015e1024. Prober, S., Thiele, K., Rundel, P., Yates, C., Berry, S., Byrne, M., Christidis, L., Gosper, C., Grierson, P., Lemson, K., Lyons, T., Macfarlane, C., O'Connor, M., Scott, J., Standish, R., Stock, W., van Etten, E., Wardell-Johnson, G., Watson, A., 2012. Facilitating adaptation of biodiversity to climate change: a conceptual framework applied to the world's largest Mediteranean-climate woodland. Clim. Change 111, 227e248. Pülzl, H., Rametsteiner, E., 2009. Indicator development as ‘boundary spanning’ between scientists and policy makers. Sci. Public Policy 36, 743e752. Rannow, S., Neubert, M. (Eds.), 2014. Managing Protected Areas in Central and Eastern Europe under Climate Change, Advances in Global Change Research 58. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7960. Raymond, C., Peterson, D., Rochefort, R., 2013. The North Cascadia adaptation partnership: a science-management collaboration for responding to climate change. Sustainability 5, 136e159. Reed, M.S., Graves, A., Dandy, N., Posthumus, H., Hubacek, K., Morris, J., Prell, C., Quinn, C.H., Stringer, L.C., 2009. Who's in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. J. Environ. Manag. 90, 1933e1949. Richter, A.W., West, M.A., van Dick, R., Dawson, J.F., 2006. Boundary spanners' identification, intergroup contact, and effective intergroup relations. Acad. Manag. J. 49, 1252e1269. € m, C., Rosvall, O., 2013. A new paradigm Rist, L., Felton, A., Samuelsson, L., Sandstro for adaptive management. Ecol. Soc. 18, 63. Robinson, S., Willenbockel, D., Strzepek, K., 2012. A dynamic general equilibrium analysis of adaptation to climate change in Ethiopia. Rev. Dev. Econ. 16, 489e502. Rowell, D.P., 2005. A scenario of European climate change for the late twenty-first century: seasonal means and interannual variability. Clim. Dyn. 25, 837e849. €rke, M., Geerling, G., Duel, H., Grygoruk, M., Okruszko, T., 2011. The Schneider, C., Flo future of European floodplain wetlands under a changing climate. J. Water Clim. Change 2, 106e122. Smit, B., Pilifosova, O., 2001. Adaptation to Climate Change in the Context of

Sustainable Development and Equity. Chapter 18 in Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability e Contribution of the Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Stagl, J., Hatrermann, F.F., Vohland, L., 2014. Exposure to climate change in Central Europe: what can be gained from regional climate projections for management decisions of protected areas? Reg. Environ. Change. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10113-014-0704-y. Stringer, L.C., Dougill, A.J., Fraser, E., Hubacek, K., Prell, C., Reed, M.S., 2006. Unpacking “participation” in the adaptive management of social-ecological systems: a critical review. Ecol. Soc. 11 (2), 3. Szporak-Wasilewska, S., Piniewski, M., Kubrak, J., Okruszko, T., 2015. What can we learn from a wetland water balance? Narew National Park case study. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecohyd.2015.02.003. Ungar, S., 2000. Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: climate change versus the ozone hole. In: Public Understanding of Science, H. 9, S. 297e312.United Nations Economic Commission for Europe 2009. van der Linden, P., Mitchell, J.F.B. (Eds.), 2009. ENSEMBLES: Climate Change and its Impacts: Summary of Research and Results from the ENSEMBLES Project. Met Office Hadley Centre. FitzRoy Road, Exeter EX1 3PB, UK., 160 pp. Virapongse, A., Brooks, A., Covelli Metcalf, E., Zedalis, M., Gosz, J., Kliskey, A., Alessa, L., 2016. A Social-ecological Systems Approach for Environmental Management. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.028. €rster, M., Janauer, G., 2014. Assessment of climate-induced Wagner-Lücker, I., Fo impacts on habitats. In: Rannow, S., Neubert, M. (Eds.), Managing Protected Areas in Central Europe under Climate Change. Advances in Global Change Research, vol. 58. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg. Walker, B., Carpenter, S., Anderies, J., Abel, N., Cumming, G., Janssen, M., Lebel, L., Norberg, J., Peterson, G.D., Pritchard, R., 2002. Resilience management in socialecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conserv. Ecol. 6, 14. http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss1/art14. Walker, W.E., Haasnoot, M., Kwakkel, J.H., 2013. Adapt or perish: a review of planning approaches for adaptation under deep uncertainty. Sustainability 5, 955e979. Walters, C.J., 1986. Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources. Macmillan, New York.  ˛ tek, D., Mioduszewski, W.,  ski, J., Swia Wassen, M.J., Okruszko, T., Kardel, I., Chorman Bleuten, W., Querner, E.P., el Kahloun, M., Batelaan, O., Meire, P., 2006. Ecohydrological functioning of the Biebrza Wetlands: lessons for the conservation and restoration of deteriorated wetlands. In: Bobbink, R., Veltman, B., Verhoeven, J.T.A., Whigham, D.F. (Eds.), Wetlands: Functioning, Biodiversity Conservation and Restoration. Series: Ecological Studies 191. Springer Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg. Weingart, T., Engels, A., Pansegrau, P., 2000. Risks of communication: discourses on climate change in science, politics, and the mass media. Public Underst. Sci. 9, 261e283. Welp, M., de la Vega-Leinert, A., Stoll-Kleemann, S., Jaeger, C.C., 2006. Science-based stakeholder dialogues: theories and tools. Glob. Environ. Change 16, 170e181. Wilby, R.L., 2005. Uncertainty in water resource model parameters used for climate change impact assessment. Hydrol. Process. 19, 3201e3219. Wilby, R.L., 2010. Evaluating climate model outputs for hydrological applications e opinion. Hydrol. Sci. J. 55, 1090e1093. Williams, B.K., 2011. Adaptive management of natural resources: framework and issues. J. Environ. Manag. 92, 1346e1353. Williams, P., 2002. The competent boundary spanner. Public Adm. 80, 103e124. Winter, T.C., 2007. The vulnerability of wetlands to climate change: a hydrologic landscape perspective. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 32, 305e311. Zhang, L., Wang, M.H., Hu, J., Ho, Y.S., 2010. A review of published wetland research, 1991-2008: ecological engineering and ecosystem restoration. Ecol. Eng. 36, 973e980. _Zurek, S., 1984. Relief, geologic structure and hydrography of the Biebrza Valley. Pol. Ecol. Stud. 10 (3e4), 239e251.

Please cite this article in press as: Grygoruk, M., Rannow, S., Mind the gap! Lessons from science-based stakeholder dialogue in climate-adapted management of wetlands, Journal of Environmental Management (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.066