According to the NCA5, Colorado is part of the Southwest region. 

Here are applicable Key Messages for the Southwest related to Communities and Management. 

Key: blue highlight = historical trends, yellow highlight = projected trends, and green highlight = both historical and projected trends. 

Summary 

• Compounding effects of climate and human systems cause property and economic damage: Compound effects, or interactions among disturbances or disasters, often “amplify the effects of individual disturbances on ecosystem services,” human systems, and the economy (5). For instance, “climate change-driven changes in precipitation amount and duration, snowpack/ snowmelt, and soil moisture have combined with land-cover change and increasing property values to increase overall economic damages from floods” (2). Specifically, “drought and related heatwaves in the US caused $334.8 billion in damages,” including costs related to shortages in water supplies and power generation as well as reduction in agricultural production and other regular industrial activities (2).

  

“A portion of observed increases in inland flood damages can be attributed to changes in precipitation” (2)

Figure 4.12: "Cumulative inland flood damages (in 2021 dollars) across the contiguous US (gray) and estimated portion due to changes in precipitation (green) are shown for 1988-2021. Over this period, heavy precipitation has increased over most of the US due to climate change (see Figure 2.8 for heavy precipitation changes over the 1958-2021 period). Error bars (in green) show the plausible range of cumulative damages in 2021, calculating a 95% confidence level. Roughly 20-46% of increases in observed flood damages can be attributed to increasing precipitation (assuming the same historical development patterns over the period 1988-2021). Other important contributors to flood damage include urbanization and land-use change, which can exacerbate runoff, and growth in the number and value of flood-affected buildings and other assets. Adapted from Davenport et al. 2021" (2).

• Impacts to infrastructure and industry: At large scales, flooding of large river and lake systems disrupts infrastructure and industries, including “rail, roadway, and river transportation; agricultural production; commodity deliveries; and industrial production” (2). Across the US, infrastructure - including drinking water delivery infrastructure - is “aging and deteriorating, increasing the risks of contamination and delivery of unpotable water” (2). For instance, “more than 1,000 community water systems… are already providing poor-quality water and are not prepared to cope with climate-change driven flooding, drought, and waterborne diseases” (2). 
• Land-based industries
  • Forestry: While exact impacts are uncertain due to disturbances, such as droughts, fires, insects, and diseases, climate change will impact forest growth and therefore wood and paper markets (5). Resulting “forest management actions taken in response to climate change” will also affect the forestry industry and associated ecosystem services of forests, such as carbon storage (5). 
  • Recreation: Climate change is decreasing certain recreational activities and increasing others; “for example, warming and reduced snowpack have had negative impacts on winter sports and positive effects on warm-weather activities, with mixed effects on water-based activities” (5). 
  • Agriculture: Effects of climate change have disrupted, and will continue to disrupt, all aspects of agriculture. These effects include “decreased productivity of crop species due to increased pest infestations” and limited water availability (10). Due to the current and projected effects of climate change, adaptation of “agricultural practices, including crop selection, use of equipment, and management approaches” will be required (12). For more information, see NCA5 Tool outputs for your location + “Agriculture and Land Use.”
• “All dimensions of food security - availability, accessibility, utilization, and stability - are expected to be affected by climate change through long-term changes in average climatic conditions, as well as increases in climate variability and the frequency, magnitude, and duration of climate extremes” (13). This includes disruption of the food supply chain, including “production, storage, processing, distribution, retail, and consumption,” which will have “local and global impacts… on food security” (13). Localized impacts of climate change on food security will be determined by communities’ resilience to a variety of factors, including dependence on “locally grown versus imported foods and how systems respond to changes in climate, ecosystems, and socioeconomic factors” (13, 14). 

“Food security is an outcome of the food system, which influences and is influenced by the climate system, ecosystems, and socioeconomic systems” (13)

Figure 11.9: "A food system is a complex network that encompasses all inputs and outputs involved food production, foraging, harvesting, transport, processing, retailing, consumption, and food loss and waste. There can be different types of food systems, each having impacts on and being impacted by climate, ecosystems, and socioeconomic systems. Interactions between these systems influence human well-being through food security outcomes, such as food availability, access, utilization, and stability. Interventions, such as mitigation and adaptation, can reduce risks to food systems, which improves food security and well-being within socioeconomic systems. Adapted with permission from Figure 5.1 in Mbow et al. 2019" (13).

As of the 2023 release of the NCA5, “approximately 38 million people in the United States live in food-insecure households” (13). As climate change results in “increasingly frequent and severe extreme events… food system disruptions… will disproportionately affect food accessibility, nutrition, and health,” particularly in low-income and underserved communities, who already face many of these risks due to their rural location (13, 14). Additionally, communities who rely on hunting, foraging, and subsistence farming - whether for cultural, recreational, financial, or other reasons - may be at increased risk of food insecurity (13). 

• Ecosystem services are being impacted by climate change. 
  • Due to climate change, the ranges and abundances of “some plants and fungi used for food, medicine, and other purposes” have been altered (5). 
  • Furthermore, “climate change affects heritage values, cultural identity, and spiritual connections associated with forests” (5). 

“Ecosystems provide a broad range of relational benefits, from the material to the spiritual” (10)

Figure 8.17: "Ecosystem services, also called "nature's contributions to people," are the benefits that humans receive or derive from ecosystems. These are both material (e.g., energy sources) and non-material (e.g., sense of place), and contribute to the regulation of ecosystem processes. The broad categories of benefits pictured are fluid and overlapping. People value nature in multiple ways, such as "living as" nature (Figure 16.3) or "living from" nature (e.g., people's dependency on key services). Adapted from O'Connor and Kenter 2019" (10).

• Water availability for both human and agricultural uses has, and will continue to, be reduced due to climatic changes in temperature and precipitation (10). 

• Invasive species are experiencing range shifts due to climate change, which can have either positive or negative effects on ecosystem services, depending on the species (9). Ranges of many invasive species are expected to expand, as “some invasive species are more successful than natives… because they better tolerate or more rapidly adapt to changing conditions. Yet not all invasive species are favored by climate change; many invasive plants and vertebrates may experience decreased ranges while the ranges of many invasive invertebrates and pathogens are expected to increase” (9). 

  While spruce and mountain pine beetles are native - not invasive - species in the Northern Great Plains, outbreaks have become more frequent due to climate change (4). Historically, these species’ populations have been kept in check by cold winters that reduce their population for the next year (4). However, as the climate changes and winters become more warm, it is no longer cold enough to keep beetle populations from increasing to unusual levels (4). In addition, increases in drought have stressed forest ecosystems, making trees more susceptible to colonization from beetles (4). Together, these factors are responsible for the large-scale beetle outbreaks observed in the Northern Great Plains, and have impacted forestry practices and industries (4). 

• Wildfires, which are a natural part of the Southwestern ecosystem, are becoming more frequent and more severe (23). This has resulted in increasingly severe property damage and risk to human lives (23). Communities in the Southwest have a variety of “exposure to wildfire risk and capacity to adapt,” making some more vulnerable to wildfires than others (23). 
• “Diminished benefits from ecosystem services can also occur based on other factors… [such as] discriminatory planning practices, housing segregation, and racism [that] have created inequitable distributions of services, leading to communities of color experiencing reduced access to benefits like improved air quality or heat reduction” (10). Interactions between human and environmental impacts on ecosystem services “highlight[s] the need for clear management priorities and recognition of diverse values” (10). 

“Climate and non-climate stressors together affect biodiversity, ecosystems, and the services they provide” (7)

Figure 8.1: "Species and ecosystems respond to pressures in different ways, such as shifting their locations or transforming into new, often degraded systems less able to provide ecosystem services. Adaptation measures can help species and ecosystems cope with some climate impacts but are not always going ot be effective or feasible, requiring increasingly difficult decisions on what resources to prioritize and what changes to accept. Adapted from Lipton et al. 2018" (7).

• “Human well-being is dependent on natural and managed ecosystems, which provide crucial functions and resources for nearly everything we eat, make, and do”; therefore, human health is strongly tied to ecosystem health (7). 
  • Increasing wildfires, and therefore increasing levels of wildfire smoke, “are increasing respiratory and cardiovascular-associated hospitalizations and out-of-hospital cases of cardiac arrest” (5). In addition, “intensified aridity from higher temperatures and drought is expected to lead to more dust storms,” which will further increase respiratory illnesses (22). 
  • “Disease threats to wildlife, plants, and humans have emerged as a significant climate change risk [as] climate change promotes range expansions and population growth of disease-spreading (vector) species, increased host susceptibility via stress, and enhanced pathogen transmission, with major economic consequences” (9). Climate-impacted disease creates risks in both humans and wildlife (9). For instance, increases in human West Nile virus cases due to increased mosquito populations can be attributed to temperature and precipitation changes caused by climate change, while the fungal white-nose syndrome causing widespread bat mortality can also be affected by climatic changes (9, Table 8.1). 
  • Productivity and safety of outdoor workers, including farmworkers, are being affected by “higher temperature and humidity” resulting in greater rates of “heat-related stress and death” (13, 22). As a result, the “number of unsafe working days is projected to double by midcentury” (13). In addition to extreme heat, high ozone days are also projected to “increase heat and air-pollution exposure, illness, and premature death” (22). 
• Disproportionate impacts: “Climate change creates unequal burdens on people and communities,” and “relationships between humans and ecosystems, such as the kinship values that many Black, Indigenous, and Tribal communities experience with regard to nature, are also endangered by [climate] change” (2, 7). Disproportionate impacts of climate change on these communities include: 
  • “Increased exposure to water-related hazards” by communities living along large bodies of water, people working in agriculture or fisheries, and Tribal and Indigenous communities who are often “displace[d] from lands with cultural significance” (2). Additionally, “older adults, children, and residents of low-income neighborhoods and rural areas are at greatest risk” of exposure to flooding risks and damages as well as “exposure to pathogens and pollutants from climate change-driven impacts to water quality” (2). 

“Losses due to floods are projected to increase disproportionately in US Census tracts with higher percentages of Black residents” (2)

Figure 4.14: "Average annual losses - economic damages in a typical year - due to floods in census tracts with a Black population of at least 20% are projected to increase at roughly twice the rate of that in tracts where Black residents make up less than 1% of the population. Black bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Adapted from Wing et al. 2022" (2).

• Tribal and Indigenous communities’ “health, economic vitality, education, environmental quality, governance, and cultural continuance” are negatively impacted by climate change (15). While exacerbated by climate change, these challenges are rooted in historical injustice (15). Tribal and “Indigenous initiatives addressing climate and energy are often organized as movements for protecting and advancing Indigenous rights… to self-determination regarding climate change responses in their territories - rights that are critical to Indigenous efforts to choose the best pathways for supporting health, economic vitality, educational institutions, environmental quality, governance, cultural continuance, and spiritual traditions” (15). 

“Indigenous holistic worldviews offer diverse and complex expressions of climate change” (15) 

Figure 16.3: "As an intentionally non-exhaustive example by particular Indigenous designers, the "Indigenous holistic worldview" image demonstrates interconnected drivers of sustenance, climate change impacts, and future aspirations. Illustrations connecting human social systems and the environment, including the relationship between social justice (e.g., colonialism, racism) and environmental change (e.g., ecological degradation, pollution), represent certain Indigenous approaches to climate change. Figure credit: © STACCWG 2021. Used with permission" (15).

The present and projected effects of climate change “disrupt the conditions for critical Indigenous subsistence practices… [which] Indigenous livelihoods and economies often rely on,” along with “natural resource management, small businesses, nonprofit organizations, community development corporations and financial institutions, Tribal government employment and contracts, Tribal enterprises, and multinational corporations” (16). 

Tribal communities have expressed the “need for climate impact assessments as a first step to resilience planning and identified information about climate change impacts to water as a top priority” (3). Lack of data, and lack of data sovereignty, are major barriers to Tribal and Indigenous response to climate change (3). Other priorities include “food security, protection of Traditional Knowledge, and Tribal capacity to implement adaptation plans, monitor and collect data, and conduct climate vulnerability assessments are also high priorities” (3). While federal assistance is available for some Tribes, barriers include “access to limited resources, including agency requirements (e.g., funding matches); lack of Tribal capacity; and navigating interagency processes” (3). 

Similarly, the “lack of [Indigenous communities’] capacity to transition toward renewable energy can be considered a vulnerability to climate change - that is, vulnerability to being excluded from unlocking the capacity to enact mitigation measures” (16). Indigenous self-determination in renewable energy includes “barriers to infrastructure ownership, access to financing tax initiatives, the navigation of regulations and jurisdictions, and income opportunities from renewables” (16). 

Additionally, effects of climate change on culturally-significant ecosystems “exacerbat[e] environmental injustices affecting Indigenous and Tribal food sovereignty, health, cultural practices, and knowledge transmission” (5). This is because “Indigenous concepts of health and well-being often remain closely tied to the health of the environment, waters, and more-than-human relatives that provide for subsistence and cultural needs” (16). In addition to impacts from food insecurity and more widespread climate-related health concerns (such as heat-related stress), Indigenous Peoples are also experiencing “post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, suicide, and other mental, spiritual, and socio-emotional health challenges” (16). 

Ultimately, self-determination is central to Indigenous Peoples’ “decisions about how to respond to climate change in ways that meet community-defined needs and aspirations. Indigenous climate resilience requires having adequate options for deciding how to adapt to and mitigate climate change and the capacity to implement decisions and make strategic decisions upon evaluation” (17). However, “Indigenous self-determination has been limited by institutions and policies, colonial in their organizational structure, that enable federal, state, and local governments and private industry to make decisions for Indigenous Peoples and to maintain low levels of funding and administrative support for implementation” (17). Therefore, “many Tribes have called for Indigenous-led management, as well as comanagement of lands, waters, and other resources currently under federal or state management… [which] represents opportunities to assert Tribal resource-management practices that address climate change” (17). 

• Management and planning: Uncertainty driven by natural climatic fluctuations has “always been part of water resources planning,” but effects of climate change exacerbate this uncertainty (3). 

  • Policymaking: The relationship between climate change and policymaking is changing, as rates of change “outpace the regulatory changes needed to cope with them” (3). These changes “will continue, challenging planning and policy formulation for adaptation to climate change, and suggesting that durable and realistic long-term perspectives are necessary for robust policy development” (3). 

     

“Natural hydrologic variability can promote urgency or complacency in long-term planning” (3) 

Figure 4.18: "The figure shows hydrologic variability in both space and time: (a, b) runoff variability (a surrogate for streamflow variability) across the country between two decades, with the boundary of the Upper Colorado River Basin shown; and streamflow variability across time with (c) estimates of Colorado River flows from historical observations and (d) reconstructed flows from ancient tree rings (blue line), with data from (c) showin in orange. Wedges point to two negotiated policy events. Figure credit: Lynker and University of Colorado Boulder" (3).

• “Conflict, competition, and collaboration”: climate change impacts and disputes over resources have been observed in many communities (3). For example, “water disputes in the western US are resolved through litigation,” but as impacts from drought increase, many communities are “struggling to avoid litigation through negotiated settlements and voluntary use reduction” (3). 
  • Conflicts may exist between human communities but also between human communities and wildlife (9). These conflicts may also be caused by competition for limited resources, but may be caused instead by management actions intended to increase wildlife species’ populations (9). For instance, “translocation of nonhuman species into human communities unwilling to coexist with them” has caused conflict over management actions intended to improve ecosystem conditions (9). 

How are communities addressing these changes?

• Communities have responded to uncertainty caused by effects of climate change through “watershed management, nature-based solutions, planned relocation, floodplain management, water conservation and reuse, decision science,” and more (3). 

  • Nature-based solutions, or “ecosystem-based mitigation and adaptation opportunities,” are another pathway for adapting management practices to climate change; when NBSs are “managed in collaboration with affected communities and… local knowledge,” these can be effective solutions for addressing multiple management goals in an inclusive, cost-effective method (10). Ecosystem-based adaptations, a type of NBS, have been used in solutions such as “protecting and restoring floodplains to help reduce flood impacts or helping farmers cope with drought through soil conservation measures” (10). 

     

“Nature-based solutions buffer the effects of climate change” (10)

Figure 8.18: "Nature-based solutions (NBS) are actions to protect, manage, and restore ecosystems to address societal challenges such as climate change. Examples in the US include (a) oyster restoration; (b) cover cropping; (c) stormwater management; and (d) urban agriculture. These not only help buffer the impacts of climate change, such as through physical barriers or improved local microclimates, but also provide additional benefits like food and habitat provisioning. Figure credit: Rutgers University and NPS. See figure metadata for additional contributors. Photo credits: (a) Linda Walters, NPS; (b) David Bosch, USDA; (c) Alisha Goldstein, EPA; (d) Bob Nichols, USDA" (10).

• “Adaptive management iteratively plans, implements, and modifies strategies for managing resources under uncertainty” (8). These strategies require overarching structures and “decisionmaking processes for coordinating efforts across scales, managing uncertainties and conflicts, mobilizing diverse knowledges, and addressing stakeholder interests” (8). 

• Decisionmaking frameworks, such as Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD), are being studied to “advance adaptive management processes” (8). 

  The “Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) framework helps identify conditions where ecosystem management can resist a trajectory of change, accept change, or direct change toward desired future conditions” (8). The NC CASC is contributing to an ongoing Cross-Park RAD project with resource managers at the Glacier National Park and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes - learn more here! 

   

“Decision frameworks can help plan for the potential transformation of ecosystems,” (8)

Figure 8.9: "Two examples of adaptive decision frameworks are the Corals and Climate Adaptation Planning cycle (a) and the Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) framework (b). In (a), users are guided through assessment and design considerations to adjust climate-smart management interventions. In (b), the current ecosystem (gray) is affected by either moderate or strong transformational forcing that drives decisions (black dots) to resist (red time periods), accept (yellow time periods), and direct (green time periods) the trajectory of change. (a) Adapted from West et al. 2017, 2018; (b) adapted from Lynch et al. 2022" (8).

• Assisting species adaptation, “including increasing conservation efforts, reducing habitat fragmentation, protecting wildlife corridors, and expanding protection activities,” is one way to address effects of climate change on ecosystems and even individual species (9). 

  For example, assisted migration of forest species involves “1) assisted population migration within a species range, 2) assisted range expansion adjacent to a species range, and 3) assisted species migration that moves species far outside their range” in order to “promote tree species… expected to survive future climates and disturbance regimes” (6). Other types of adaptive reforestation practices, including where and which species are planted, are being implemented as well (6). However, “private forest owners’ [and other landowners’] actions to adapt to climate change are socially, institutionally, and economically constrained; therefore, policy and market-based incentives have the potential to increase adaptation on private lands” (6). 

  Additionally, managing ecosystems for connectivity, which may include reduction of “habitat fragmentation [and] protecting [or creating] wildlife corridors,” can “enhance species climate resilience, particularly for wide-ranging and migratory species. Priorities include connecting climate refugia, areas of high diversity, and current and future habitat types” (9). Increased connectivity can lead to increased biodiversity, which is linked to increased ecosystem resilience (9). 

• Updating metrics: data collection methods and existing metrics are often “widely outdated,” requiring extensive updates to make them useful for present-day decisionmaking (3). Furthermore, there are frequent gaps in data in “lightly populated and lower-income areas,” affecting the accuracy and usability of climate models based on these data (3). To address this, initiatives including “expanding direct observational data collection…[and] supporting development and testing of remotely sensed data and models,” such as satellite remote sensing, are being implemented in some communities and agencies (3). 

• Increased monitoring of transformations: Similarly to updating metrics, increased monitoring of ecosystem transformations - specifically, “identifying and monitoring species or ecosystem traits that provide early warnings of vulnerability, system-wide decline, or tipping points” - can reduce risks and provide early detection of ecosystem transformations (8). Long-term monitoring networks, including federal- or community- operated networks and community science networks (such as iNaturalist) - in addition to elders and Indigenous knowledge holders - “collect observations across large areas and have helped detect altered species distributions, abundances, and phenologies (seasonal patterns)” (8). 

   

“Monitoring programs are critically important for observing and projecting trends in resilience, species invasions, range shifts, declines, and extinctions” (8)

Figure 8.8: "Federally operated networks (NPS I&M, NERR) and other long-term networks (LTER, LTAR, NEON, MBON, AmeriFlux) provide consistent and permanent observations at limited sites, whereas volunteer networks (USA-NPN, Indigenous Sentinels) offer more oportunistic observations across a wider landscape. Together, these networks provide critical data for understanding species and ecosystem changes, although gaps in coverage remain. Figure credit: Lynker and USGS" (8).

• Interest in, and publication of, reports such as “vulnerability assessments and adaptation plans for federal, state, private, and Tribal lands” has increased significantly to help communities prepare for impacts of climate change (6). Often, social factors are considered in these reports; “assessments can consider ecological changes and altered ecosystem services” as climate change affects ecosystems (6). For example, incorporating consideration of local industries, adaptation capacity of local communities, and environmental justice provide a more holistic understanding of ecosystems (6). 
• Policies: Large-scale, actionable environmental policy is difficult due to the variety of landowners, governments, and rights holders responsible for decisionmaking. However, many communities pursue policy to address environmental and social concerns. For example, potential policies regarding forests “include regulations that require adaptation actions; subsidies that reduce private costs of actions or account for public benefits of private actions; and taxes that increase the private costs of inaction or of actions that make forests less resilient to climate change” (6). 
• Proactive food security projects are increasing communities’ resilience to climate change-related food insecurity. For instance, the “Osage Nation’s community orchard - informed by Tribal Ecological Knowledge, designed with community health in mind, and providing nutritious fruits, nuts, and berries for community members” - is one example of community-led action to protect health and ensure food availability (13). 
• Participatory approaches to enhancing climate resilience are being employed by many communities to “ensure that efforts are equitable and meet community needs” (14). For example, Greensburg, Kansas “utilized multiple rounds of public meetings to engage citizens in planning a sustainable, climate-smart rebuilding process” after the town was destroyed by a natural disaster (14). 
• Indigenous-led “climate and energy [initiatives] include implementation of climate adaptation strategies, climate and energy planning and policy initiatives, youth movements on climate justice, artistic mixed-media messaging about Indigenous experiences with and knowledges of climate change, and movements aimed to connect diverse Indigenous Peoples with one another spanning local to international scales” (18). These initiatives include Tribal-led energy projects, creation of climate and hazard mitigation plans, and adaptation planning training (18). There are many examples of Indigenous communities leading these efforts, such as the Karuk Tribe’s work “to ensure that the State of California has permitting requirements for vegetation management to reduce fire hazards through prescribed burns that have cultural value” and the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community of Washington’s work to build “clam gardens as a climate adaptation strategy to combat sea level rise and ocean acidification and to bolster food security” (18). Equitable and effective climate solutions will support Tribal sovereignty and Indigenous-led initiatives while centering Indigenous Peoples and Traditional Ecological Knowledge. 
• The Upper Colorado River Commission (UCRC) may implement a demand-management program in some NGP states that would compensate users for voluntarily reducing water consumption (20). The excess water would be "stored in federal reservoirs and released [elsewhere] when needed" (20).