Rachel E. Schattman

Droughts and dry periods represent a novel and emerging threat to agriculture in historically water rich, temperate regions, such as the Northeast United States. Water governance institutions to manage water quantity in these regions are underdeveloped in the context of current needs. In this study, we examine the state of Maine as a case study in drought institutions in a historically water‐rich region. Specifically, we review the institutional landscape for drought resilience and resistance for Maine agriculture and identify the gaps that may be hindering agricultural adaptation. Through focus groups with farmers and agricultural advisors, we find: (a) There are few quasi‐governmental organizations and programs dedicated to agricultural drought‐adaptation; rather farmers rely upon mostly federal, state, and non‐governmental regional programs and policies that are non‐drought specific in nature; and (b) there is a need for articulated and persistent coordination between federal‐state‐local organizations and programs, to ensure vertical and horizontal integration and complementarity. In the absence of drought‐specific institutions that coordinate across scales, there is the potential for ineffective drought adaptation and maladaptation in Maine and other temperate regions. This could result in wasted public and private resources, ineffective use of natural resources, and inequitable or otherwise socially undesirable outcomes. Our research adds to the growing body of evidence showing that, even in temperate and historically water‐rich regions, drought is a threat to agricultural viability. Here, we outline the need for institutional coordination around drought‐adaptation to facilitate strategic program development.

Scientific assessments play a critical role in synthesizing evidence to support evidence‐based decision‐making in many sectors and topics. For climate change, large‐scale assessments like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the United States (U.S.) National Climate Assessment (NCA) reports help many different users—from national government to local governments, Indigenous Peoples and communities, the private sector, the social sector, and the scientific community itself—navigate the complex field of climate risks, impacts, and integrated solutions. While co‐creation with users is essential to developing actionable assessments, this paper lays the groundwork for future processes by identifying many advancing and emerging areas of relevant knowledge ready for assessment or additional near‐term research. Drawing on the expertise of many scholars who were formerly tasked with producing the Sixth NCA and authors of other national or sub‐national climate assessment reports, this paper highlights select U.S.‐relevant topics in which research advances since the 2023 Fifth NCA make new syntheses particularly valuable for future national, sub‐national, and sectoral climate assessments. It also identifies critical research topics in those select areas that would be useful for future climate assessment efforts. Overall, this research priorities roadmap aims to catalyze collaborations, research, and a network of climate assessments to synthesize the state of climate impacts, risks, and responses and to provide widely accessible and foundational information for sectoral, regional, and cross‐cutting climate action plans and decisions in the U.S.

Due to ongoing and projected environmental change farmers and agricultural advisors need access to up-to-date and relevant information and advice to continue to be effective in their work. Education and advising services aim to transmit new information and facilitate change in behavior, often using peer-to-peer or cohort style approaches. However, given that learning and behavior is continuously shaped by interactions, we must understand the role of these interventions within broader climate adaptation networks. This study explores the social networks of a cohort of farmers and agricultural advisors who participated in a Climate Adaptation Fellowship program. Drawing on pre- and post-program surveys and interviews and longitudinal social network analysis, we first explore the range of sources that farmers and advisors in this cohort reported using for adaptation-related information, advice, and support. We also examine the impact of the program on the inter-cohort network and participants’ individual social networks. We find high diversity in the composition of interviewees’ adaptation networks. Farmers and advisors engage widely on adaptation, and while they use other farmers and advisors as resources for adaptation, they also draw on media, customers, friends, family, and the broader community. This heterogeneity has benefits for effective decision-making but also implies that messaging through single channels will only reach a limited audience. The analysis also shows that the program had variable effects among participants over time. There was a meaningful change in the social networks of approximately half of the fellows. While a subset of the group grew progressively more densely connected, others lost contact. We argue that this uneven engagement and impact is not a fault, but instead an invitation to capitalize on the energy of these most interconnected members and also find opportunities to engage those on the periphery over time. Programming can also be strategically expanded to a wider circle to help participants carry forward new learning.

Scientific assessments play a critical role in synthesizing evidence to support evidence-based decision-making in many sectors and topics. For climate change, large-scale assessments like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the U.S. National Climate Assessment (NCA) reports help many different users—from national government to local governments, Indigenous Peoples and communities, the private sector, the social sector, and the scientific community itself—navigate the complex field of climate risks, impacts, and integrated solutions. While cocreation with users is essential to developing actionable assessments, this paper lays the groundwork for future processes by identifying many advancing and emerging areas of relevant knowledge ready for assessment or additional near-term research. Drawing on the expertise of many scholars who were formerly tasked with producing the Sixth NCA and authors of other national or subnational climate assessment reports, this paper highlights select U.S.-relevant topics in which research advances since the 2023 Fifth NCA make new syntheses particularly valuable for future national, subnational, and sectoral climate assessments. It also identifies critical research topics in those select areas that would be useful for future climate assessment efforts. Overall, this research priorities road map aims to catalyze collaborations, research, and a network of climate assessments to synthesize the state of climate impacts, risks, and responses and to provide widely accessible and foundational information for sectoral, regional, and cross-cutting climate action plans and decisions in the United States. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Scientific assessments are critical in informing households, communities, businesses, institutions, and governments as they respond to intensifying climate hazards. As climate change impacts accelerate, the pace of assessment and integration of science with decision-making and action must accelerate as well. A network of U.S. climate assessment efforts could rapidly synthesize actionable science and case studies to inform climate response strategies. To support future processes, this paper presents a selection of foundational topics needing assessment and near-term research across climate impacts, risks, and actions from the perspective of the United States and some of its key regions, environments, and economic sectors. For example, assessment is needed for the increasing threats posed by compound extremes and cascading climate risks, which can overwhelm systems developed for independent events. The effectiveness of climate responses likewise requires continuous evaluation and improvement, with consideration of the broader impacts (e.g., economic, environmental, health) associated with those strategies. System-level understanding of integrated climate response strategies can be advanced by combining observations and modeling with mitigation, adaptation, climate interventions, disaster management, and resilience decision scenarios. Overall, these research priorities aim to encourage new research and future national, regional, local, and sectoral climate assessments that support climate-informed decision-making in the United States.

Farmers in temperate regions, such as the northeastern United States, face challenges to establishing cover crops between crop harvest and the onset of winter. The short growing season, coupled wit...

The far-reaching effects of climate change and the proliferation of non-native plants, insects, and diseases on forests across the globe are projected to cause unprecedented social, ecological, and...

As climate variability increases, farmers and agricultural advisors must continually adapt to maintain viable food systems. To build efficacy for climate adaptation, we must understand and support the realities of individuals' adaptation processes. We argue here that we should in turn make visible the continuous and iterative adaptation processes of both farmers and advisors, and depart from previous short-term or practice-based approaches. This study investigates the adaptation processes of 18 fruit and vegetable growers and 18 professional advisors who participated in a Climate Adaptation Fellowship program in the Northeast US. Using longitudinal data from surveys and semi-structured interviews collected over three years, the study applies an integrated theoretical framework combining behavioral adaptation and a multi-stage adoption model to examine how adaptation unfolds during and after the program. Using a robust, mixed methods approach, we break down adaptation into action steps, and in doing so show the prevalence and diversity of actions occurring within a modification stage, where participants improve or tweak practices and systems over time. Case studies of participants illustrate how adaptation processes consisted of multiple, layered adoption processes. These processes were slow and iterative, as individuals explored, trialed, and evaluated results over multiple seasons. Influential factors included disruptive environmental stressors, personal values and experiences, as well as institutional and social support. Social interactions were salient in both early and later stages of adoption as participants drew on their connections to persist through challenging processes. These findings suggest that farmer and advisor adaptation processes are interdependent, reinforcing the value of joint learning and experimentation. This study highlights the need to move away from studying and recommending single prescriptive practices in the context-specific arena of climate adaptation, and instead focus on supporting advisors and farmers to work together on the sustained modification needed for effective adaptation in agricultural systems.