Overview

The fourth meeting of the U.S. National Assessment Synthesis Team took place April 12-15 in Atlanta, Georgia. This meeting was combined with the annual meeting of regions and sectors (those minutes are available separately to allow for clarity).

In total, eleven of thirteen members of the Synthesis Team participated in all or part of the meeting; in addition. While there were about one hundred participants in the total meeting, approximately seventeen participated consistently in the sessions of the Synthesis Team. No members of the general public participated in the meeting, although the full participants list contains a broad diversity of experts and stakeholders.

Attendance

The following members of the Synthesis Team participated in the meeting:

• Eric Barron, Pennsylvania State University
• Virginia Burkett, U.S. Geological Survey
• John H. Gibbons, retired Office of Science and Technology Policy
• Katharine Jacobs, Arizona Department of Water Resources
• Tony Janetos, NASA Headquarters (Co-Chair)
• Linda Joyce, USDA Forest Service
• Tom Karl, NOAA Climatic Data Center (Co-Chair)
• Jerry Melillo, Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory (Co-Chair)
• M. Granger Morgan, Carnegie-Mellon University
• Richard Richels, EPRI
• Dave Schimel, National Center for Atmospheric Research

The following additional National Assessment leaders and staff participated in the sessions of the Synthesis Team:

• Dave Easterling, NOAA Climatic Data Center
• Ben Felzer, National Center for Atmospheric Research
• Paul Grabhorn, Grabhorn Studios
• Mike MacCracken, National Assessment Coordination Office
• Joel Smith, Stratus Consulting
• Melissa Taylor, National Assessment Coordination Office

Summary of Comments and Proposed Revisions

Prior to the meeting, a zero-order draft of various sections of the Synthesis Report was distributed to National Assessment leaders, and all meeting participants. Comments were received in written form, as well as in the meeting sessions. The following summarizes the comments, as well as general directions for the revisions.

Section	Summary of Comments	Next Steps
Overview Comments	Elements are not yet integrated; too technical, too much jargon. Need to use more visuals throughout.	The next draft will attempt to address these points.
Executive Summary	Not yet written	This will be drafted using the outline and concepts developed at the Atlanta meeting.
Introduction	The examples are too long and not integrated.	The examples will be weaved into a linked narrative that illustrates key themes and grabs the attention of the readers.
Scenarios	The section is too long and too oriented around process and methods. There is too much emphasis on GCMs. It does not provide a sound theoretical understanding of how models should and should not be used - and does not provide an accurate picture of how they were used in this assessment.	These sections need to be revised to be more clear and accessible. The technical material can be moved to a technical chapter or annex.
Regions	The sections are uneven in style and technical depth. There is not enough emphasis on adaptation. There is not enough information highlighting priorities and areas of greatest vulnerability.	These need to be revised following the updated template which includes adaptation, future uncertainties, more "examples" and a summary up front.
Sectors	Most are not yet developed into text and are very anecdotal.	These need to be revised following the updated template.
Adaptation	[Not yet written - only bulleted]	This will be developed for the subsequent draft.
Looking Forward	[Not yet written - only bulleted]	This will be developed for the subsequent draft.

Executive Summary Outline

The Synthesis Team developed an outline/storyline of the Synthesis Report Executive Summary. This will be the basis for a first draft:

1. Overview
2. Changing Climate (past, present)
   • global
   • U.S., regional
3. Impacts
   • regional
4. People have adapted to climate
   • bonanza (i.e. agriculture, water)
   • disaster (i.e. coastal housing, Alaskan infrastructure)
   • value of forecast (i.e. ENSO, heat waves, hurricanes)
5. Increased concern about climate future based on research (link to 3)
6. Need to manage risks associated with climate change in context of other stresses
7. Go through examples, including adaptation
8. More knowledge will make us better risk managers

Executive Summary - Proposed Visuals

The following were proposed as graphics for the Executive Summary:

• Box showing the rate of turnover of infrastructure (to show when decisions need to be made) - question of "retirement" of infrastructure - should it be based on experience or foresight?
• Figure showing projected ecosystem changes - robust projections include increased woodiness in the west, increase in C4 grasses, increased competitive advantage for broadleaf species in the southeast, northward migration of tropical/subtropical climate regimes, increased productivity.
• A map of the U.S. linking the temperature/CO2 record with historical observations (i.e. temperature change in Alaska, precipitation change in the SW, extreme events in the midwest, drought of the Mississippi River, increased growing season, variability of hurricane paths.
• Another map of the U.S. illustrating consequences: contrast a bonanza, a disaster, and an example illustrating the value of forecasting.

Revised Regional and Sectoral Template

Sections III and IV of the Synthesis Report contain write ups on the regions and sectors. Due to the variety of styles, it was felt that the group would benefit from a revised, common template. The following was agreed upon to (a) bring out key messages up front; and (b) focus more on adaptation:

1. Front Page
   • Map
   • States included
   • Summary box
   • Statistical information
2. Background Information
   • Physical Setting and Unique Attributes
   • Socioeconomic Context (including relative importance of sectors)
   • Climate Context (historical, present, future)
   • Ecosystems and Land Cover Context
   • Include key stresses throughout
3. Key Issues
   • About 3-4 broad areas (example: one write-up covers water, extreme events, invasive species and people)
   • Build in context for each: background, current stresses, areas of greatest vulnerability, coping strategies, uncertainties)
   • Use examples (i.e. in boxes) developed in a few paragraphs
4. Adaptation Strategies - Summary
5. Crucial Unknowns
6. Literature Cited

Writing Assignments

Section	Responsible
Executive Summary	Jerry Melillo, Tony Janetos and Granger Morgan
Section I: Introduction
Introductory Text	Melissa Taylor
Why a National Assessment	Tony Janetos
Dust Bowl Example	Jerry Melillo
Mississippi Flood Example	Jerry Melillo
Hantavirus Example	Jerry Melillo
U.S./Mexico Example	Kathy Jacobs
Wetland Example	Virginia Burkett
New England Example	Barry Rock
Section II: Scenarios
Overview	Linda Joyce
Climate	Eric Barron
Socioeconomic	Ted Parson
Ecological	Dave Schimel
Section III: Regions
Northeast	Eric Barron
Southeast	Virginia Burkett
Heartland	Tom Karl/Dave Easterling
Great Plains	Linda Joyce
Northwest and Alaska	Ted Parson
West	Rich Richels/Barbara Miller/Joel Smith
Islands	Melissa Taylor/Virginia Burkett
Section IV: Sectors
Water Resources	Kathy Jacobs
Coastal and Marine	Virginia Burkett
Forests	Linda Joyce
Human Health	Tom Cecich
Agriculture	Dave Schimel
Native Peoples	Mike MacCracken
Section V: Adaptation	Author(s) TBD
Section VI: Looking Ahead	Author(s) TBD
Primers
Climate Science	Mike MacCracken
Policy Domain	Rich Richels
Ecological Modeling	Tony Janetos/Jerry Melillo

Timetable

Note that the date of the July meeting was changed and will now be July 7-9.

Date	Event
May 10, 1999	New and revised drafts circulated internally to Synthesis Team; may be subsequently distributed to Blue Ribbon Panel.
June 7-8, 1999	Meeting of the Synthesis Team, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.
July 7-9, 1999	Meeting of the Synthesis Team, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA
August 10-20, 1999	Meeting of the Synthesis Team, Woods Hole, MA
September 1999	Technical Review
October 1999	Synthesis Team revises draft based on comments from Technical Review. Editorial/Responsiveness Review to assure comments from Technical Review have been adequately addressed.
November 1999	Synthesis Team revises draft based on comments from Editorial/Responsiveness Review. NSTC/CENR Review (followed by revision as needed).
December 1999	Synthesis Report and other available volumes of the National Assessment are sent to printer.
January 2000	Synthesis Report and other volumes of the National Assessment become available; additional volumes (i.e. regional assessment not yet finalized) are published as they become available.

Certification

I certify that these Minutes accurately reflect discussions at this Meeting:

Melissa J. Taylor, Rapporteur and Executive Secretary