Presentació per part de Sandra Lavorel (Directrice de Recherches CNRS, LECA Labaratouir d'Ecologie Alpine, France) en el marc de la jornada del projecte CIRCLE 2 MOUNTain co-organitzat per l'Oficina Catalana del Canvi Climàtic durant els dies 26 i 27 de setembre de 2013.

1. Adaptation of mountain regions
to drought recurrence in a
context of global change
Baptiste NETTIER, Irstea
Sandra Lavorel, Pénélope Lamarque, CNRS - LECA
Benoît Courbaud, Laurent Dobremez, François Véron, Irstea
Richard Bonet, Ecrins National Park

2. Recent climatic trends in the French Alps
Precipitation T min T max
 A context of
great uncertainty

3. SECALP project
Objective: To analyse adaptation mechanisms for
mountain regions in the face of climate change,
especially recurring droughts
– Mechanisms of ecosystem resilience and transformation
– Processes of adaptation for livestock farming and forestry
– Expected effects of climate change scenarios, in the
context of social transformations
Guidelines for supporting managers through policy and
infrastructure
Strategies for long term observation

4. Ecosystem
adaptation
Land use
adaptation
Scenarios and
pathways to
sustainable
management
Long-term
observation system
SECALP: An integrated conceptual framework

5. 2 territories of the French Alps LTSER
Villar d’Arène, OisansVercors
• Vercors:
• Subalpine Extern Alps
• Dairy farming systems, suckler cattle and
sheep farming systems, transhumants
• Oisans:
• High mountain Intern Alps
• Suckler cattle and sheep farming systems

6. 21 sites sampled in 1988, 2001 and 2011
Grande Cabane grassland (Vercors)
Grazed / ungrazed plots
since 1988
• Small changes and stability in grazing
value
• Grazing stabilises composition and
increases diversity even under
drought
-0.5 3.0
-0.52.0
AP11
AD11 BP11
BD11
DP11
DD11
EP11
ED11
FP11
FD11
HP11
HD11
IP11
JP11
KP11KD11
AP88
AD88
BP88
BD88
DD88
DP88
ED88
EP88
FD88
FP88
HP88
HD88
IP88
JP88
KD88
KP88
AP01
AD01
BP01
BD01 DP01DD01
EP01
ED01
FP01
FD01
HP01
HD01
IP01
JP01
KP01
Dry grasslands Mesic grasslands
Forest clearings
Expected trend from 1988 to 2011 under
strong drought response
No shift towards drought tolerant
species = stability
A detectable effect of climate change on
summer pastures?
© G. Loucougaray

7. Experimental drought and heat wave simulation on Lautaret
and Vercors grasslands
- ↘80% summer precipitations + 1°C night warming
- Extreme event (~2003): one month without precipitation (Lautaret & Vercors) +
heat wave +6°C (Lautaret)
- Mowing (0/1) – combined with the climate treatment
Lautaret
Vercors
 Limited sensitivity to drought:
transient response (Vercors) or resistance (Lautaret)
 Short term: prevailing effects of management
 Long term: feedbacks via nutrient cycling
© S. Aubert© S. Lavorel
© G. Loucougaray

8. 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
05152535
Mortalityrate
Lanslebourg
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
051015
Queige
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
01234
Mortalityrate
Engins mortality rate
CI
1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000
0.00.51.01.5
Méaudre
Are there discernable effects of drought
years on tree mortality?
• Overall low mortality rates and no long term trend
• Links to climate variables:
– Strongly predominant effects of storms (yr n or n-1)
– No effect of the Palmer Drought Severity Index (Climatic Research
Unit, Norwich)
– 2nd order effect of increased precipitation

9. Perception by farmers and shepherds
of consequences of droughts since 2003, and reactions
• Decrease in forage resources
• Decrease in water availability for summering herds
• Few vegetation dynamics – “Invasions” by undesirable
species, superficial soil degradation
• Signs of climate change - “Fewer storms in summer"
 Adaptations at farm scale
– Impacts and adaptation options differ widely across
farming systems (level of reliance on winter fodder)
– Mainly tactic responses without long-term adaptation :
decrease of grazing pressure, fodder purchase
– Pastoral systems have integrated the hypothesis of
increasingly frequent droughts into their functioning and
made structural adaptations
– Drought is only one risk among others for livestock
systems: socio-economic context, structural constraints
 What adaptations in case of harder droughts ?
What consequences for ecosystems
Nettier et al., 2010

10. Perception by foresters
of consequences of droughts since 2003, and reactions
• 2003: strong defoliation on drier / thinner
soils, but not in productive stands; good
recovery with only limited mortality
• Beetle damage on spruce in 2004-5
• Foresters are aware of climate change and
the risk of recurring droughts, but are yet
to see climate change effects
• Adaptation responses are limited:
– Manage stands towards species and
structural diversity
– Reduce the share of spruce in regional plans
– Infrastructure for increased fire risk
– Inconclusive attemps to plant more southern
species (frost)
2003
2004-5

11. Building of prospective scenarios
• Co-construction with a group of
local experts
• 4 contrasted scenarios, combining:
– 2 climatic contexts
– 2 socio-economic contexts
• Time path: 30 years trends +
precisions for the next 4 years (CAP
reform)
• Return to the farmers and foresters
: strategic adaptations
– Storylines
– Drawings (landscape changes)
– Graphs (forage productivity, CAP
subsidies, product prices)
• With local experts : consequences
at territorial level
“Intermittent”
climate
“Territorial”
context
Scen.3
Scen.4
Scen.1
Scen.2
“Shock”
climate
“Global”
context

12. Reactions to scenarios: main trends
Intermittent + Global
Leverage system flexibility,
increase surfaces, decrease
livestock as a last resort
Intermittent +
Territorial
Leverage system flexibility
and increase surfaces +
develop direct sales
Shock + Global
Decrease livestock and take
on off-farm; put a stop to
the farm in some cases
Shock + Territorial
Decrease livestock,
develop direct sales + agri-
tourism
Territorial
On-farm
diversification
Shock
Decrease livestock
Intermittent
Adapt to the situation as in the past + increasing
system flexibility to limit fodder purchases
Global
Offset loss of
income
through an
activity
outside the
farm / stop the
farm

13. A role playing game to simulate
grassland management
according to the different
scenarios
Results

14. Local International
a) Current context
Game board (Round 4)
Decisions-based
rules
b) Scenarios
7%
12%
11%
7%
22%
42%
Actuel
1 2 3 4 5 7
14%
14%
6%
2%
22%
42%
Choc territorial
3 3f 4 4f 5 7
9%
1%
15%
2%
3%
25%
2%
42%
Choc global
1 2 3 3f 4 5 5f 7
13% 6%
8%
1%
6%
2%22%
0%
42%
graduel territorial
1 2 3 3f 4 4f 5 5f 7
11%
2%
13%
2%
4%
1%24%
1%
42%
graduel global
1 2 3 3f 4 4f 5 5f 7
Game board (Initial state)
IntermittentDrastic
Lamarque et al., 2013
Drought
Socio-political context
Projection of the game on the territory

15. Ecosystem services modelling at the landscape scale
Agronomic value Cultural value
Pollination value Soil C stocks
Regulation value Total ES value
Lavorel et al. J. Ecol. 2011

16. Lessons from the scenarios
Effects of the climatic hypothesis
• Intermittent drought context already integrated by farmers, even if the forage
systems are not always adapted and many still have to buy fodder.
• Shock climate context difficult for farming systems  degradation of economic and
work conditions + important farming system and land use tranformations
Effects of the socioeconomic hypothesis
• Farmers’ preference for the territorial context: more adapted to mountain farming;
many farmers had already diversification projects
• Global context: interesting subsidies easy to get, but discordant with conception of
job (AEM for wild nature or carbon storage with planting trees…)
• Most of the farmers ready to take out further commitment (diversification)
• Local experts were surprised, even if such changes are already
emerging
• They underlined a need of collective facilities in order to support
diversification (local abattoirs, sales outlets, formation, structuration of
short distribution channels…)
 A need of territorial action to accompany adaptation

17. Conclusion: resilience or fragility of
mountain territories?
• Ecosystem adaptation to environmental variability
– Buffer mechanisms: e.g. plant belowground reserves, rapid soil microbial
responses
– BUT:
• thresholds?
• Sensitivity to practices evolutions : fragile equilibrium
• Adaptation of actors to environmental variability
– Mainly tactic short term responses
– Resistant systems but limited resilience ?
• Systems under strong constraints
– Biophysical limits to production (short growth period, slope…)
– Rigid rules (CAP, land access regulations …)
• A need of local knowledge on ecosystems functioning in this changing
context
– How climate, practices, and vegetation co-evolve ? How to manage it ?
– Need of dialogue and cooperation at a territorial level

18. An interdisciplinary and participative
long term monitoring system
Different protocols to survey
vegetation, climate, management
A sample of diversified
alpine pastures and farms
Co-construction of knowledge
A conceptual model
for data analyzing

19. An interdisciplinary and participative
long term monitoring system

20. Thank you for your attention !

22. Three different reasoning and choices
“I would reduce the economic impact of droughts by diversifying my
productions and my activities”
Cereal, poultry workshop, agri-tourism or city work, according to the context
“I would adapt but without diversifying my productions because I want
to keep my livestock farmer identity”
Possible direct sales of meat, salaried work, but in connection with livestock
“I wouldn’t change my system because it is already robust enough”
Oversized haymaking surfaces or source of income from another activity
• differences in livestock farmers “identity” according to the types of
farming systems:
• Oisans “High mountain” systems : produce hay vs. buy hay
• Vercors “Fodder” systems: type of production
• Vercors “Pastoral” systems: “pastoralist” vs. “grass farmer”

23. Uncertainties on expected climate trends…
Number of days of heat wave
Length of drought
Mean max summer T
Mean annual precipitation

24. Intermittent
Regional
Global
Shock

25. Four scenarios, combining climatic and
socio-economic contexts
2. BUILDING OF PROSPECTIVE SCENARIOS
2 climatic contexts
Intermittent • Spring or summer droughts alternating with wetter years
• Species resilience
• In a drought year : 1st cut yield = 60% of a wet year
Shock • 4 consecutive spring drought years
• Rangeland: deterioration of herbaceous plants
• 40% loss in fodder resource for long term
2 socio-economic contexts
Global • Roles of agriculture: attractive landscape for city dwellers; carbon
storage
• Product prices : ≈ -20% (Organic:-10%)
• CAP pillar 1: -20%, decoupled, minimum guaranteed
• AEM: bonus for grassland, planting trees
Territorial • Roles of agriculture: local quality products
• Product prices:≈ -20%,except organic & PDO label: maintained
• CAP Pillar 1: -20%
• AEM: Bonus for biodiversity, commitment to results

26. Effets des scénarios sur les services
écosystémiques
0
20
40
60
80
100
SOM
RetentNO3
Gbio
LitterMass
CPC
FloweringOnset
PlantDiv
NMP
0
20
40
60
80
100
SOM
RetentNO3
Gbio
LitterMass
CPC
FloweringOnset
PlantDiv
NMP
Lamarque et al., in prep.
Land management types
Soil organic matter
Nitrate retention
Fodder production
Standing litter
Fodder quality
Flowering onset
Plant diversity
N mineralization
Current
Scenarios
Drastic drought induces a shift
from production and cultural
services of interest to local
stakeholders to higher levels of
regulation services of interest
to stakeholders outside the
study site

27. Management change scenarios in response
to combined climate and social chanee
Local InternationalFuture scenarios
7%
12%
11%
7%
22%
42%
Actuel
1 2 3 4 5 7
14%
14%
6%
2%
22%
42%
Choc territorial
3 3f 4 4f 5 7
9%
1%
15%
2%
3%
25%
2%
42%
Choc global
1 2 3 3f 4 5 5f 7
13% 6%
8%
1%
6%
2%22%
0%
42%
graduel territorial
1 2 3 3f 4 4f 5 5f 7
11%
2%
13%
2%
4%
1%24%
1%
42%
graduel global
1 2 3 3f 4 4f 5 5f 7
IntermittentDrastic
Current situation