Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117DOI 10.1007/s00267-016-0774-3

Climate-Smart Design for Ecosystem Management:A Test Application for Coral Reefs

Jordan M. West1 ● Catherine A. Courtney2 ● Anna T. Hamilton3 ● Britt A. Parker4 ●

Susan H. Julius1 ● Jennie Hoffman5 ● Karen H. Koltes6 ● Petra MacGowan7

Received: 3 June 2016 / Accepted: 29 September 2016 / Published online: 12 October 2016© The Author(s) 2016; This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com

Abstract The interactive and cumulative impacts of cli-mate change on natural resources such as coral reefs presentnumerous challenges for conservation planning and man-agement. Climate change adaptation is complex due toclimate-stressor interactions across multiple spatial andtemporal scales. This leaves decision makers worldwidefaced with local, regional, and global-scale threats to eco-system processes and services, occurring over time framesthat require both near-term and long-term planning. Thusthere is a need for structured approaches to adaptationplanning that integrate existing methods for vulnerabilityassessment with design and evaluation of effective

adaptation responses. The Corals and Climate AdaptationPlanning project of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force seeks todevelop guidance for improving coral reef managementthrough tailored application of a climate-smart approach.This approach is based on principles from a recently-published guide which provides a framework for adoptingforward-looking goals, based on assessing vulnerabilities toclimate change and applying a structured process to designeffective adaptation strategies. Work presented in this paperincludes: (1) examination of the climate-smart managementcycle as it relates to coral reefs; (2) a compilation ofadaptation strategies for coral reefs drawn from a compre-hensive review of the literature; (3) in-depth demonstrationof climate-smart design for place-based crafting of robustadaptation actions; and (4) feedback from stakeholders onthe perceived usefulness of the approach. We conclude witha discussion of lessons-learned on integrating climate-smartdesign into real-world management planning processesand a call from stakeholders for an “adaptation design tool”that is now under development.

Keywords Climate change ● Vulnerability ● Adaptationplanning ● Natural resource management ● Coral reefs ●

Decision making

Introduction

Given increasingly abundant and compelling evidence forclimate change impacts on coral reefs as well as many otherecosystems (Hughes et al. 2003; Parmesan and Galbraith2004; Parmesan and Yohe 2003; Root et al. 2003; Walther2010), there is wide recognition that natural resource

* Jordan M. Westwest.jordan@epa.gov

1 Office of Research and Development, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (8601P),Washington, DC 20460, USA

2 Tetra Tech, Inc., 737 Bishop St., Suite 2340, Honolulu,HI 96813-3201, USA

3 Tetra Tech, Inc., Center for Ecological Sciences, 502 W.Cordova Road, Suite C, Santa Fe, NM 87505, USA

4 The Baldwin Group, Inc., NOAA Coral Reef ConservationProgram, SSMC4, N/OCM6, Rm 10329, 1305 East West Hwy,Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA

5 Private Consultant, 4755 Northeast Lambs Lane, Poulsbo,WA 98370, USA

6 U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Insular Affairs,MS 2429, 1849 C St. NW, Washington, DC 20240, USA

7 The Nature Conservancy, 74 Wall Street, Seattle, WA 98121,USA

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article(doi:10.1007/s00267-016-0774-3) contains supplementary material,which is available to authorized users.

management must integrate climate change impacts intoplanning processes in order to be effective (Dessai et al.2009; Hughes et al. 2003). Many managers have begun toconsider climate change in developing reef managementstrategies (Keener et al. 2012; Levy and Ban 2013; Marshallet al. 2009; The Nature Conservancy 2009, 2010).However, the process of developing and implementingmeaningful climate change adaptation options can bechallenging due to complexities associated with interactionsamong climate change and other stressors across multiplespatial and temporal scales; near- and long-term manifes-tation of impacts; complex time horizons associated withmanagement actions (lead times, response times); multipleuses and ecosystem services; and the multiple managementcontexts within which the conservation planning takesplace. This has led to adaptation planning lagging behindconsideration of climate change impacts and vulnerabilityassessments (Johnson and Weaver 2009).

Managers are requesting tools that will help them in thisendeavor. One tool is a recently-released Climate-SmartConservation guide (Stein et al. 2014). Climate-smartplanning provides a general approach for adopting“forward-looking goals” that consider natural resourcevulnerabilities to climate change and a guided process todevelop and implement strategies crafted to address thosevulnerabilities. Using illustrative steps similar to any man-agement planning approach (Conservation Measures Part-nership 2013), the climate-smart planning cycle explicitlyincorporates principles that are responsive to the challengesof climate change adaptation.

The climate-smart approach includes: nine principles, or“key characteristics” (Fig. 1a) of climate-informed con-servation; a generalized planning cycle (Fig. 1b) comprisedof discrete steps that can be informed by climate-smartmanagement; and four over-arching themes that character-ize fundamental concepts of climate change adaptation(Fig. 1c). There is also a set of general adaptation strategies(Fig. 1d) presented as one framework for generating adap-tation options in a way that embodies an ecosystem-basedmanagement approach (McLeod et al. 2005; United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) 2011). This frameworkrecognizes the importance of focusing management onsustaining ecosystem functions, processes, and services inorder to protect ecological integrity and support ecosystemresilience. Maintenance of ecosystem resilience is a pre-dominant paradigm for climate change adaptation, based onthe premise that increasing resilience extends a system’sability to cope with the added stress imposed by climatechange (Bernhardt and Leslie 2013; Carilli et al. 2009;Fujita et al. 2013; Julius et al. 2008; McClanahan et al.2012; Mumby et al. 2014; West et al. 2009; West and Salm2003). Ecological resilience is defined as the ability of asystem to absorb some degree of disturbance and persist

within boundaries of a characteristic condition, to return toits original state after perturbation, or as the combination of“resistance” and “recovery” potential (Anthony et al. 2015;Cumming et al. 2005; Folke et al. 2002; Gunderson 2000;Holling 1973; Walker et al. 2004). While resilience isrecognized as an important concept for adaptation to climatechange threats, use of the term can at times be vague andused to justify any adaptation strategy in the continuation ofa “business as usual” conservation approach. For effectiveclimate change adaptation, resilience must be consideredwith rigor and explicitly linked to anticipated responses toclimate change effects. At the same time, by taking the“long view” when considering climate change, climate-smart planning also recognizes the need to manage forecosystem change in addition to persistence (Stein et al.2014), because of the rate and magnitude of climatechange and the potential for exceeding ecological thresholds(Stein et al. 2013).

While useful as a key starting point, the climate-smartconservation planning cycle and associated principles aregeneral. For successful application to any particular naturalresource, the generalized approach must be interpretedwithin the context of the particular ecosystem being man-aged, leading to an array of system-relevant adaptationoptions that address core objectives. We have targeted coralreefs as one of the first ecosystems for such “tailoring” andapplication of a climate-smart approach for several reasons.Coral reefs are complex “charismatic” ecosystems valued fortheir high biodiversity and productivity, their economicimportance both commercially and recreationally, and themyriad other ecosystem services they provide (Cesar et al.2003; Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007; Hughes et al. 2003;Moberg and Folke 1999). Coral reef scientists and managershave long been aware of ongoing coral reef degradation thathas been occurring for decades if not centuries (Pandolfiet al. 2003), largely as a result of ecological disruptionscaused by human influences (Jackson et al. 2001, 2014).Climate change is also having substantial interactive andcumulative impacts on reef health and stability (Buddemeieret al. 2004; Mumby and Steneck 2008). Changes in theclimate drivers of such impacts are already measurable—ocean temperatures are warmer (by an average of +0.7 °C),pH is lower (−0.1 units), and carbonate ion concentrationsare lower (~30 mmol kg−1) now than over the geologicrecord of 420,000 years (Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007).These changes have contributed to direct impacts such asincreases in coral bleaching events (Bellwood et al. 2004;Brown 1997), reef dissolution along with reduced calcifi-cation and growth rates (Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007;Kuffner et al. 2013; Manzello et al. 2012; McLeod andAnthony 2012; Orr et al. 2005), and increased stormdamage (Harmelin-Vivien 1994; Wilkinson and Souter2008). Indirect effects include precipitation-driven changes

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 103

in intensity and patterns of sediment and nutrient runoff thatimpair coral reef condition (Hughes et al. 2003; Richmond1993), increased disease outbreaks (ICRI/UNEP-WCMC2010; Work et al. 2012), and species range shifts thatdecouple ecological relationships (Greenstein 2006;Yamano et al. 2011).

The combination of high ecological and human-derivedreef values, high levels of climate change impacts, andongoing legacy of interactive human-induced threats make acompelling case for incorporation of effective climate-change adaptations into reef management plans. Threats tocoral reefs due to climate change are substantial, and thefuture prognosis is poor if strong adaptation planning is notrapidly pursued (Buddemeier et al. 2004; Great Barrier ReefMarine Park Authority 2009; Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007).Adaptation is critically important to buy time for speciesand ecosystems (Hansen and Hoffman 2011), but should beseen as nested within a larger context of policies and actionsto mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.

Despite the complexities, implementing climate changeadaptations for coral reefs is not a futile endeavor.Coral reefs are not expected to inevitably disappear, butinstead are likely to undergo substantial changes in speciescomposition and community structure and function (Hugheset al. 2003). This expectation is based on a depth of adap-tive capacity that is attributed to the diversity of corals andtheir symbionts (zooxanthellae), evidence for a range ofresponses to temperature and other stressors across thesespecies, spatial and temporal variations in climate change,and the potential for human management (Berkelmans andvan Oppen 2006; Buddemeier et al. 2004; Darling et al.2013; Dixon et al. 2015; Guest et al. 2012). As a result,sufficiently extensive and well-conceived managementof coral reefs aimed at increasing reef resilience couldsuccessfully preserve values and characteristics of coral reefecosystems, even if there is uncertainty regarding theoutlook for some ecosystem services over the long term(Hughes et al. 2003).

Fig. 1 Climate-smart approach for adaptation planning and implementation. a Key characteristics of climate-smart conservation; b the climate-smart conservation (planning) cycle; c climate-smart themes; and d climate-smart general adaptation strategies (Stein et al. 2014)

104 Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117

This paper presents initial results of the Corals and Cli-mate Adaptation Planning (CCAP) project, which seeks todevelop guidance for improving coral reef managementthrough tailored application of the climate-smart approach.As a collaborative effort under the auspices of the ClimateChange Working Group of the interagency U.S. Coral ReefTask Force, the CCAP project benefits from the expertise ofa network of practitioners, managers and scientists fromover a dozen Federal, State, and Territorial agencies, as wellas local and national non-governmental organizations andacademic institutions, to explore and test climate-smartadaptation planning principles specifically for coral reefmanagement.

Project Approach and Initial Focus

The CCAP project began with an evaluation of how welleach step of the climate-smart cycle (Fig. 1b) is currentlysupported by existing tools, approaches, and best practicesspecific to coral reef management, achieved through acomprehensive, but not necessarily exhaustive examinationof peer-reviewed journal articles, government reports, andgrey literature. Pertinent literature was identified usingrelevant search terms in Google Scholar, Web of Science,and similar search engines. Representativeness of the lit-erature obtained was assured by engaging a network ofexperts, who covered a broad range of technical expertiseand geographic experience, to review our bibliography andprovide additional sources, including case studies, man-agement plans, and other unpublished information relevantto climate change adaptation in the context of coral reefmanagement planning. Our experts network included cli-mate scientists and coral reef and watershed scientists,managers, and practitioners knowledgeable of reef systemsin the Caribbean, Hawaiian archipelago, Great Barrier Reef,and Pacific Island and Southeast Asian countries of theCoral Triangle region. In addition, the outputs of the projectwere guided and reviewed by the Project Technical SteeringCommittee under the Climate Change Working Group ofthe U.S. Coral Reef Task Force. Resources were mappedto one or more steps of the climate-smart cycle in order to(1) confirm the applicability of the generalized cycle tosimilar steps in coral reef management efforts, and(2) assess the “state of the science” and availability of toolsfor each step, again specifically for coral reefs.

This led us to focus the first phase of the CCAP projecton step four of the climate-smart cycle: identifying possibleadaptation options (Step 4; Fig. 2). Earlier steps have anexisting rich knowledge base of tools and methods (see, forinstance, Dubois et al. (2011); Gitay et al. (2011); Glicket al. (2011); Strange et al. (2012); U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) (2012a, b)) that reflect the

sophistication of the science and management communityin setting clear management goals and assessing climateimpacts and vulnerabilities with respect to those goals.Outputs from these approaches have informed discussion ofa number of general adaptation strategies. However, movingbeyond general strategies into specific adaptations for reefsystems in particular places requires analysis of specializedactions under large uncertainties. There is limited guidancefor managers on how to bridge this gap to develop specific,implementable actions that incorporate location-specificclimate change concerns.

The CCAP project focused on filling this gap by buildingon one of the approaches for generating adaptationoptions presented in the Climate-Smart Conservation guide(West and Julius 2014), which in turn built on the U.S.Climate Change Science Program’s synthesis of adaptationoptions for climate-sensitive ecosystems and resources(U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) 2008). Theresult is the CCAP Compendium (see next section; fullCompendium available as Supplementary Online Material),a framework of general strategies, coral reef-specificoptions, and climate-smart design considerations that man-agers can use as a resource from which to jumpstart theirclimate change adaptation efforts. A key advancement is theinclusion of “climate-smart design considerations” that helpmanagers to move from fairly generic adaptation options toactionable alternatives for a particular place and situation.These concepts are presented in greater detail in the sectionsthat follow.

Building a Foundation: the CCAP Compendium

The CCAP Compendium (see Supplementary OnlineMaterial) is a resource for undertaking the identification of

Fig. 2 The climate-smart conservation cycle with the CCAP com-pendium framework

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 105

adaptation options for coral reef ecosystems. It includesseven general climate-smart adaptation strategies from theClimate-Smart Conservation guide (West and Julius 2014),which were developed to encourage a process of ecosystem-based “brainstorming” of options (Colls et al. 2009;Stein et al. 2014). Effective application is predicated on firstdemonstrating the relevancy and appropriateness ofthe general adaptation strategies for coral reefs, through thecompilation of illustrative adaptation options for eachstrategy, and identification of climate-smart design con-siderations for each option.

Confirming Relevancy of General AdaptationStrategies

The relevancy and appropriateness to coral reef ecosystemsof the general adaptation strategies described below wasdetermined by: (1) exploring their meaning and intent inthe context of coral reef ecosystems (as presented in thefollowing subsections), and (2) comparing them to strate-gies reported in the literature and promoted within existingmanagement practices for coral reefs (through tabularcomparison). This literature-based assessment was reviewedand supplemented with additional inputs from our partici-pating coral expert group; additional stakeholder feedbackon the relevancy of the strategies included in the Com-pendium was obtained through its trial application at abroader-based workshop (see section below on Applyingthe CCAP Compendium for details).

Reducing non-climate stressors

This strategy focuses on minimizing local-scale human-generated stressors that hinder the ability of species orecosystems to withstand or adjust to climate events. Stressorreduction is intended to enhance ecosystem resilience(Kareiva et al. 2008) and is a management strategy com-monly applied to coral reefs (Burke et al. 2011; The NatureConservancy 2015). More than 60 percent of the world’sreefs are under immediate and direct threat from localactivities such as overfishing and destructive fishing, coastaldevelopment, watershed-based pollution, or marine-basedpollution and damage (Burke et al. 2012; Fernandes et al.2012; Jackson et al. 2014). Climate change exacerbatesthese local stressors and increases sensitivity to otherstressors (McLeod et al. 2012; West and Julius 2014).Ocean acidification and coral bleaching from ocean warm-ing reduce reef calcification and increase sensitivity todisease and other local threats (McLeod et al. 2012).Watershed-based nutrient pollution can also make reefspecies more susceptible to climate impacts by reducingbleaching thresholds (D’Angelo and Wiedenmann 2014)and increasing disease severity (Bruno et al. 2003). Because

actions under this strategy are already widely used, extraemphasis needs to be placed on considering climate-smartdesign within existing management portfolios.

Protecting key ecosystem features

This concept addresses management of the structural char-acteristics, organisms, and areas that play a critical role inmaintaining resilience in the current or future ecosystem ofinterest (West and Julius 2014). For instance, displacing orremoving a population of keystone species usually results inthe re-organization of the ecosystem and sometimes resultsin its collapse (Jackson et al. 2001; Keller et al. 2009).Marine protected areas are widely used for protecting keyecosystem features (Keller et al. 2009). Key functionalgroups such as herbivores are protected through catch andsize restrictions to support reefs that are threatened by algaldomination (Hawai’i Administrative Rules (HAR)) orrecovering from disturbances such as hurricanes and coralbleaching events (Edwards et al. 2010). However this typeof option is less frequently implemented than some researchrecommends (Bohnsack et al. 2000). While many coral reefbleaching response plans highlight the need for protectionof herbivores, few managers have or use statutory authorityto impose emergency rules that could place temporaryrestrictions on herbivore fishing. The impacts of climatechange on life history and recruitment of keystone speciesand functional groups need to be evaluated in order toprotect those features that can confer resilience to futurechanges.

Ensuring connectivity

Ensuring connectivity to facilitate movement of energy,nutrients, and organisms is a key aspect of maintainingecosystem function that is highly relevant in the climatechange context (Lindenmayer et al. 2008). As an adaptationstrategy, incorporating physical connectivity supportsgenetic exchange among subpopulations of marine organ-isms, particularly at the spatial and temporal scales overwhich marine populations are connected by larval dispersal(Cowen et al. 2007; Cowen and Sponaugle 2009). Thelinking of local populations through the dispersal of indi-viduals as larvae, juveniles or adults, is a key factor toconsider in marine reserve design, since it has importantimplications for the persistence of meta-populations andtheir recovery from disturbance (Green et al. 2014). Theimpacts of climate change on both the reefs that serve assources of recruits and the ocean circulation that delivers thelarvae needs to be considered in designing networks ofmarine protected areas (Fernandes et al. 2012).

106 Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117

Restoring ecosystem structure and function

Here the emphasis is on rebuilding, modifying, or trans-forming ecosystems that have been lost or compromised, inorder to restore desired structures and functions (West andJulius 2014). Restoration can focus on restoring intactecosystems or characteristic species complexes that areimportant to the resilience of the system (Kareiva et al.2008). This is consistent with the common goal of sup-porting continuation of diverse and functioning ecosystemsfor sustainable use (Clean Water Act 1972; Glick et al.2011). The existing species composition may not persistunder a changing climate, but there is the potential to pre-serve key ecosystem services. Examples of managementpractices to restore ecosystem structure and function includerestoring herbivorous fish and invertebrate populations,preventing and managing invasive species, controllingoutbreaks of coral predators, and re-establishing sourcepopulations of corals. For instance, herbivores functionallycontribute to reef recovery following disturbances such ashurricanes and coral bleaching events (Edwards et al. 2010).Conversely, invasive species proliferate from changes inocean currents and increasing stress on reefs. This cantransform marine habitats by displacing native species,changing community structure, and altering fundamentalprocesses such as nutrient cycling and sedimentation(Molnar et al. 2008). Note that there is overlap amongactivities in this and several of the other strategies, espe-cially protecting key ecosystem features.

Protecting refugia

This strategy involves identification and protection of areasless affected by or more resilient to climate change assources of “seed” for recovery or as destinations for climate-sensitive migrants (West and Julius 2014). In coral reefecosystems, refugia may be identified by coral speciesresistant to sea surface temperature anomalies and areas thatsupport oceanographic and biogeochemical conditions thatameliorate the impacts of increased sea surface temperature,ocean acidification, and other impacts of climate change(Manzello et al. 2012; McClanahan et al. 2011; Storlazziet al. 2013; van Hooidonk et al. 2013). Refugia may also befound in areas where the distribution of coral reefs isexpanding or projected to expand poleward due to increas-ing sea surface temperatures (Baird et al. 2012). Such refugianeed to be identified and incorporated into marine protectedarea design (Fernandes et al. 2012; Keller et al. 2009).

Relocating organisms

Relocating organisms refers to human-assisted transplanta-tion or translocation of corals or other organisms from

nurseries or other reefs to overcome environmental barriersand negative chemical cues that can impede recruitment.Establishing nurseries and transplanting corals with ther-motolerant symbionts from the southern Persian/ArabianGulf to reefs in the Indian Ocean could facilitate adaptationto the higher water temperatures expected in the future(D’Angelo et al. 2015). Negative chemical cues fromdegraded reefs with seaweeds may serve as barriers torecruitment, requiring transplantation of corals to providepositive chemical cues that attract recruits (Dixson et al.2014). Climate-induced changes in currents and associatedconnectivity (refer to connectivity section for more detail)can also disrupt recruitment patterns and might necessitate“restocking” organisms to critical reefs that are now cut off.Transplantation as an adaptation strategy would alsoincorporate the emerging discussion and research onhuman-assisted evolution (see section below on SupportingEvolutionary Potential). Although early translocationattempts sometimes fell short of achieving desired objec-tives (Bentivoglio 2003), this strategy is now receivingmore attention.

Supporting evolutionary potential

This concept centers on protecting a variety of species,populations, and systems in multiple places to hedge againstlosses from climate disturbances, and managing these sys-tems to assist positive evolutionary change (West and Julius2014). The concept of “risk spreading” is central to climatechange adaptation. It can be captured through representationby different forms of species, ecosystems, or habitats(Kareiva et al. 2008), essentially preserving existing diver-sity at multiple levels (genetic, organismic, etc.). It is alsocaptured through replication—preservation of multipleexamples of habitats, populations, or ecosystems (Kareivaet al. 2008), in this case to address climate change risks andsupport positive biological adaptation. In coral reef eco-systems, representation and replication of habitat typesthrough networks of marine protected areas spreads risk inthe face of uncertainties (Fernandes et al. 2012; Kareivaet al. 2008) and maintains genetic diversity that provides theraw material for evolutionary change (Kareiva et al. 2008;West and Julius 2014). Populations in different locationsmay contain distinct genetic mixes that represent adaptationto different sets of local conditions. Genetic diversity incorals and their symbionts may reduce bleaching and pre-vent reef collapse (Barshis et al. 2013; Baskett et al. 2009),and some research suggests evolutionary adaptation isalready occurring (Logan et al. 2014). Proposed assistedevolution approaches such as inducing acclimatization,modifying microbial symbiont communities, and selectivebreeding (van Oppen et al. 2015) are very new approachesto identify and propagate species with climate-resistant

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 107

genetic variants and intra-generational acclimatization inmuch the same way as plants are bred for resistance ortolerance to climate and pests. Sometimes using thesetechniques may require human-assisted relocation/trans-plantation (see section above on Relocating Organisms).Given the very recent and evolving experience with such“assisted” techniques, additional research will provideinsights into their feasibility and potential impacts.

The seven general adaptation strategies described arequite applicable to coral reef ecosystems, as demonstratedby the coral reef management literature. In addition,the strategies were largely consistent with other coral reef-specific frameworks (Table 1. For example, Fernandes et al.(2012) identified five overarching strategies for designingresilient networks of marine protected areas that integratefisheries, biodiversity, and climate change objectives forcoral reefs. Meanwhile, management strategies promotedfor conservation practitioners in the Reef Resilience CoralReef Module (The Nature Conservancy 2015) emphasizemanaging local stressors and establishing marine protectedareas and networks. And while the categories used by TheNature Conservancy are largely organized by type of actionor by target stressor, the integration of ecosystem-focusedprinciples is preserved in the elaboration of these strategies(The Nature Conservancy 2015). All three frameworkshave some key strategies in common (e.g., reduction ormanagement of non-climate stressors/threats), and the fullrange of option types is captured using the climate-smartstrategies.

Based on this review and stakeholder feedback, theCompendium (see Supplementary Online Material) main-tains the seven general adaptation strategies as a relevantand useful framework for identifying adaptation options forcoral reef ecosystems. It is not expected that all seven

strategies will be explicitly included in each and every site-specific plan. Rather, they are intended to serve as a fra-mework for brainstorming potential new adaptation optionsto fill gaps, or to refine management goals and objectivesand refocus management efforts with a forward-looking,climate change perspective. To the extent that somepotential climate change adaptation strategies may not beperceived as fitting well into one of these seven categories,such as shading of corals for temperature mitigation(Rau et al. 2012), it must be emphasized that the value ofthe Compendium and its structure of seven ecologicallyoriented strategies is in its potential to stimulate the brain-storming process, and should not constrain the possibleinclusion of novel approaches. In reflecting an ecosystem-based approach to adaptation, it also incorporates traditionalconservation strategies, such as reducing non-climatestressors. However, it becomes clear that especially themore forward-thinking ecological strategies (e.g., restoringecosystem structure and function, supporting evolutionarypotential, protecting refugia, and relocation) should befurther refined with an explicit climate-change focus.Finally, the strategies are not mutually exclusive and maybe used in combination.

Compiling Adaptation Options for Coral Reefs

Building on the general adaptation strategies as a frame-work for the Compendium, over 250 peer-reviewed articlesand other sources of information such as guides and casestudies were reviewed and mined for illustrative, coral-specific adaptation options. These adaptation options werethen binned into the seven general adaptation strategies thatmake up the Compendium. An excerpt of the Compendiumis provided in Table 2, showing one example option for

Table 1 Comparison of generaladaptation strategies

General adaptation strategies formultiple ecosystem types (Steinet al. 2014; West and Julius 2014)

Coral reef specific strategies formultiple conservation objectives(Fernandes et al. 2012)

Coral reef specific strategies formultiple conservation objectives(The Nature Conservancy 2015)

A. Reduce non-climate stresses • Threat reduction • Manage local stressors

• Reduce land-based impacts

• Manage fisheries

B. Protect key ecosystem features • Protect critical areas • Establish marine protected areas

C. Ensure connectivity • Incorporate connectivity • Establish marine protected areasnetworks

D. Restore structure and function • Sustainable use • Facilitate passive restoration

• Manage for social resilience

E. Protect refugia • Protect critical areas • Manage for ocean acidification

F. Relocate organisms  N/A • Conduct active restoration

G. Support evolutionary potential • Risk spreading • Establish marine protected areasnetworks

108 Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117

each of three strategies. The full list of adaptation optionsfor each of the seven strategies in the Compendium can befound in the Supplementary Online Material.

The process of compiling and binning adaptation optionsrepresents Step 4 of the Climate-Smart Cycle and is inten-ded to support “brainstorming” on the part of managers asthey review (or develop new) management plans and revisethem to be climate-smart. Our literature review resulted inthree to eight adaptation options identified for each strategy.Some options could be categorized under more thanone strategy, i.e., the strategies are not mutually exclusive.This provides a beneficial degree of overlap and redun-dancy, to ensure that all options are captured from a varietyof strategy angles.

In the first example (Table 2), the option under ReduceNon-Climate Stresses, “minimize land-based pollution”,came up in many coral reef management references.Options dealing with other anthropogenic stressors such asfishing pressure, shoreline hardening structures, directhabitat destruction, and non-land based pollutant dischargeswere also identified. The range of familiar options includedunder this strategy (see the full Compendium in the Sup-plementary Online Material) reflects the long history ofcoral reef management activities that have focused on pol-lution reduction, even prior to the addition of climatechange as a management concern.

In the second example (Table 2), options such as this oneunder Protect Key Ecosystem Features, “manage functional

Table 2 Excerpt from the CCAP compendium showing selected general adaptation strategies, adaptation options, and design considerations(see Supplementary Online Material for full list)

General adaptation strategies and adaptation options Climate-smart design considerations

A. Reduce Non-Climate Stresses

Minimize localized human stressors (e.g., pollution, fishing pressure) that hinder the ability of species or ecosystems to withstand or adjust toclimatic events

i. Minimize land-based pollution due to excessive loadings of suspendedsediments and nutrients from agriculture, deforestation, urbanization,and other land uses

• How will climate change-related shifts in precipitation patterns andhydrology affect runoff of sediments and nutrients from different landuse types to coastal waters?

• How and in what locations could the protection or restoration of forestsand/or wetlands, the management of agricultural areas and/or roads, orthe installation of land-based pollution controls be focused to minimizerunoff to coastal waters?

• How will any such pollution control installations have to be designed(including size, structural characteristics) and located to bothaccommodate projected sediment or nutrient runoff loads and alsowithstand the direct physical climate change impacts of larger, moreintense storms, greater erosion, etc.?

B. Protect Key Ecosystem Features

Focus management on structural characteristics (e.g., geophysical stage), organisms, or areas (e.g., spawning sites) that represent important“underpinnings” or “keystones” of the current or future system of interest

i. Manage functional species and groups necessary for maintaining thehealth of reefs and other ecosystems

• What is the vulnerability of functional species and groups (e.g.,herbivores, apex predators) to the interaction of climate change withother human and natural stressors, and in what locations are they mostvulnerable?

•What management options can be employed, and in which locations, tominimize impacts on the most vulnerable species and groups?

C. Ensure Connectivity

Protect and restore habitats that facilitate movement of organisms (and gene flow) among resource patches

i. Identify and manage networks of resilient reefs connected by currents • Which areas have demonstrated resistance to/or recovery fromexposure to climate change impacts?

• Which areas are projected to have less exposure to climate changeimpacts (e.g., increased sea surface temperatures, decreased ocean pH)and could therefore serve as refugia?

• How will climate change affect currents that provide connectivitybetween resilient areas?

• What are the implications of this information for design of managedarea networks to maximize connectivity and maintain it into the future?

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 109

species and groups”, are diverse. This one addresses pro-tection of functional groups that are key within the coralreef ecosystem. But this strategy also includes options thataddress components outside of—but functionally linked to—the coral reef system (e.g., wetlands/mangroves, seagrassbeds, etc.). It encompasses protection or management ofunique areas, sites specific to life cycle functions, criticalhabitat for threatened or endangered species, or areas ofhigh diversity.

The third example, under Ensure Connectivity, “identifyand manage networks of resilient reefs”, recognizes theecological connections among reef patches that can beimportant to the flow of organisms for recruitment and geneflow. The example option represents one possible compo-nent of protecting such connectivity into the future byidentifying networks of resilient reefs. Other options underthis strategy include identifying ecological connectionsamong areas, or protecting up-current reefs as potentialsources of organisms and propagules. Protection of differenttypes of habitat diversity (e.g., including protection ofmultiple habitat types, reef areas of different sizes andshapes, etc.) is another theme incorporated in the optionsaimed at preserving ecological connectivity. Options in thisstrategy have some overlap with other strategies. Forexample, the protection of habitat areas critical as sourcepopulations can also represent the preservation of keyecosystem features, or support of evolutionary potential.

Developing Climate-Smart Design Considerations

The general adaptation strategies and example adaptationoptions in the Compendium provide ideas for identifyingadaptation options; however, for any particular adaptationoption to be considered climate-smart for the managementof a specific reef, it needs to explicitly address vulner-abilities of the conservation targets in that specific place.To achieve this, each adaptation option needs to be sub-jected to “climate-smart design considerations” (see exam-ples in Table 2). Addressing the climate-smart designconsiderations is the process through which managementactions are configured to account for climate change effects,key vulnerabilities, and their interactions with the otherstressors. Answering the climate-smart design questions fora candidate adaptation option is aimed at developingenough information to determine how, when, and where amanagement action should be adjusted to be responsive toand effective under the combination of site-specific climatechange impacts and stressor concerns. Climate-smart designconsiderations fall into two general categories:

● How will climate change directly or indirectly affecthow stressors impact the system, including througheffects on stressor interactions?

● What are the implications of this information for thelocation, timing, or engineering design of managementactions?

The Compendium provides examples of climate-smartdesign considerations in both categories, to focus refine-ment of adaptation options to account for future as well ascurrent conditions and make explicit links to climate-relatedimpacts and vulnerabilities (Table 2; see SupplementaryOnline Material for full list). A management actiondesigned to reduce land-based pollution from agricultureneeds to account for both historical conditions in pre-cipitation and hydrology and future conditions that willresult from climate change. Projected changes in the dis-tribution and intensity of rainfall may require updateddesign specifications to enable more stringent pollutioncontrol and forest and wetland management practices. Anunderstanding of the impacts of climate change on the lifehistory and vulnerability of herbivore species is needed todesign management actions to protect this key ecosystemfeature now and in the future. Climate change may result inchanges in ocean currents that could affect recruitment andconnectivity. The design of marine protected area networksneeds to incorporate consideration of future oceanographicconditions to facilitate gene flow and habitat connectivity.

The example adaptation options and climate-smartdesign considerations in the Compendium are meant to beillustrative rather than comprehensive and to stimulatethinking about site-relevant possibilities. As new researchand practices emerge, the range of examples will continueto grow, and the Compendium will need to be reviewed andupdated over time.

Applying the CCAP Compendium

Integral to the development of the CCAP Compendium andthe process of using it is recognition that many coral reefareas have conservation plans already in place or underdevelopment, reflecting varying degrees of thought aboutpossible climate change impacts. Accordingly, the Com-pendium is designed so it can be referenced during therevision of existing plans, but is equally applicable in ade novo planning process.

Figure 3 shows how the Compendium may be used torevise or expand a set of existing management actions. Forrevision of a plan, the list of existing actions can be com-pared to the Compendium and categorized according to thestrategies they address. Then the Compendium can bereviewed to identify potential gaps, guide brainstorming tofill those gaps, and/or identify strategies that may no longermake sense in the context of anticipated climate changeeffects. Any additional candidate adaptation options would

110 Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117

be added to the existing list. Then, climate-smart designconsideration questions are formulated for each option onthe expanded list. At this point, the outcome of the brain-storming component of Step 4 is intended to be a broad setof potential adaptation actions that are responsive to therange of climate change impacts and vulnerabilities thathave been identified for a particular site (West and Julius2014). These are associated with a set of climate-smartdesign questions that, once answered, will more explicitlylink the design of that option to the relevant combination ofclimate change and other stressor impacts that the option isintended to address.

A stakeholder workshop was held to test this process andassess its efficacy in assisting practitioners to brainstormand refine specific, place-based adaptation actions and craftassociated climate-smart design considerations. The work-shop was held in Honolulu, Hawai’i, and focused on WestMaui’s coral reefs as a test case using the Wahikuli-Honokōwai Watershed Management Plan (SustainableResources Group Intnl 2012) and Conservation Action Plan(Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources et al.2014). Input and feedback from participants was obtainedthrough facilitated discussion during structured exercisesundertaken with participants in two break-out groups, andwas captured as a synthesis of discussions, as related andopposing inputs, and as a tabulated series of category-specific inputs. To support this test effort, participants weregiven a desk-top vulnerability assessment using existingclimate change information for the case study area (Box 1).Participants included 22 experts in coral reef managementand science, especially from West Maui, the broader Pacificregion, and the Caribbean, but including representationfrom major managed coral reef systems globally (e.g., theGreat Barrier Reef, American Samoa, Palau, Guam,Northern Mariana Islands); and with representation from

Federal, State, and Territorial agencies as well as local andnational non-governmental organizations and academia.

Table 3 provides an excerpt from a larger table of casestudy actions and design considerations reviewed by sta-keholders at the Honolulu workshop. Action 1 is anexample of an existing action drawn directly from the WestMaui management plan. Initial draft climate-smart designconsiderations were developed for presentation to stake-holders during the workshop. Through discussions with theparticipants in the workshop, “modified” versions of actionsand climate-smart design considerations emerged. Action 2was developed by the participants as a “new” action inspiredby the Compendium to fill a perceived gap in addressingclimate vulnerabilities. This new management action com-bines elements of several strategies and options in theCompendium (e.g. B. i., C. iv., C. vi.; see SupplementaryOnline Material) and refines them into a place-based actionspecific to the West Maui context.

Participant feedback indicated that using the Compen-dium encouraged practitioners to clarify options, making

Fig. 3 Flow chart for using theCCAP compendium in step 4 ofthe climate-smart conservationcycle

Box 1 Vulnerability Exercise for Stakeholder Workshop

Since information on climate impacts and vulnerabilities is one ofthe inputs needed in Step 4 of the climate-smart cycle, a desktopvulnerability assessment was developed as a resource for theparticipants. While there are many methodologies that could bechosen to complete a vulnerability assessment for a site, forillustrative purposes we used the LEAP guide: “Climate ChangeAdaptation for Coral Triangle Communities: A Guide forVulnerability Assessment and Local Early Action Planning” (U.S.Coral Triangle Initiative Support Program, 2013). The LEAPmethod was applied to develop a vulnerability assessment basedon climate information and projections for the main Hawaiianarchipelago and information on threats to reefs in the watershedmanagement and conservation action plans for West Maui. Thisdesktop assessment was provided and used hand in hand with theCCAP Compendium at the workshop.

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 111

them more specific in terms of intended action and moreclearly related to their target stressors. Action #1, theinstallation of water bars, terraces, and microbasins, wasconsidered important but was found to be too general fordiscussion because the action included several components(water bars, terraces, etc.) that would have climate-smartdesign considerations. As a result, the action was refined tofocus only on terraces, and the other techniques would eachbe assessed separately as additional actions. The iterativeprocess of considering the action, and then its design con-siderations, led stakeholders to modify and refine the designconsiderations, including incorporation of more specificclimate change impacts that would affect the target stressorand various temporal considerations such as how the lifecycle of the action compares to the timing of climate changeeffects.

In the case of Action #2, the workshop participants couldsee the value of adding this new option, which was focusedon preserving connectivity. Through review of the Com-pendium examples and comparison to issues characterizedfor the West Maui reefs and to actions already included intheir existing management plans, they concurred that thisoption addressed gaps in their plan. This new optionresulted in expanding the geographic scope of the man-agement area to an adjacent reef (Olowalu) deemedimportant as a source of coral recruitment to downstreamreefs of West Maui. This also led to considerable refinementof the design considerations to reflect this specificity of reeftype and place.

Overall, participants in the Honolulu workshop thoughtapplying the Climate-Smart Cycle to coral reefs was valu-able. There was also an emerging appreciation for howdeveloping outputs in Step 4 often led to recognizing needs

for additional, more detailed, or more clear informationfrom previous steps, reinforcing the iterative nature of theprocess. The Compendium was considered a rich resourcefor adaptation ideas. There was particular interest in theconcept of climate-smart design considerations, whichpromotes the idea that rigorous adaptation must be speci-fically linked to the when, where, and design of an option.Only by considering climate-smart design can managersdevelop options that address specific place-based informa-tion on the combination of climate change with otherstressor impacts. By delving into the West Maui example,participants found that it wasn’t necessarily easy to developmeaningful design considerations, but it was essential.

Discussion and Conclusions

Building on the climate-smart conservation cycle and gen-eral adaptation strategies of Stein et al. (2014), a new tool,the CCAP Compendium, was developed to advance theability of coral reef managers to integrate climate changethinking into management planning and facilitate effectiveimplementation of climate change adaptations for coralreefs. The Compendium provides a framework and guidingexamples of coral-reef specific adaptation options to helpreef managers refine existing or develop new adaptationoptions within the context of their ongoing managementplanning processes. The formulation of climate-smartdesign considerations for each option establishes athought process that explicitly links climate change impactsto coral reef management. This creates a bridge for man-agers to move from a “business as usual” or “more is better”design of management actions, to revision of actions so

Table 3 Examples from the stakeholder workshop, based on a case study using West Maui management plans

Action Climate-smart design consideration

1 Existing Install water bars, terraces, andmicrobasinsin dirt roads in agricultural areas

How will increasingly severe storms affect the volume of runoff onto the near shore coral reef?How can the design be adjusted to account for these effects?

Modified Install terraces adjacent to dirtroads in agriculturalareas to reduce sediment/nutrientloadsby x and y percent

How will increasingly severe storm events, in combination with increasingly frequent dryperiods, affect the volume of runoff onto the near shore coral reef? What will be the spatialpattern of these effects with respect to the location of dirt roads in agricultural areas? How willthe design of terraces need to be adjusted to: place them at locations of worst erosion; ensure theircapacity to effectively reduce sediment/nutrient loads by x and y percent; and account for howmaintenance and replacement schedules would need to change?

2 New Protect and manage adjacent(Olowalu) coralreef areas that are connectedhydrodynamicallyand can serve as recruitmentsources for coralreefs in West Maui

How will climate change affect connectivity of downstream reefs to Olowalu areas that arerecruitment sources? How will climate change affect stressors to be managed in Olowalu areas(pollution, bleaching, disease, reduced calcification)? What are the implications of this for howwe prioritize, replicate, represent and increase level of protection of Olowalu areas, possibly at agreater scale?

Original Action #1 and design considerations developed in advance of the workshop are compared with modifications that reflect the results of theworkshop exercise. “New” action #2 was identified as a gap by participants after reviewing the Compendium

112 Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117

their designs accommodate a range of plausible futureconditions of the reef driven by climate change.

As a new instrument for implementing Step 4 of theClimate-Smart Cycle (Fig. 2), a step which has heretoforereceived little operational attention, use of the Compen-dium, including development and application of climate-smart design considerations, requires inputs from earlierclimate-smart planning steps. Decision makers engaged indefining the planning purpose and objectives (Step 1) andassessing climate change impacts and vulnerabilities(Step 2) have numerous tools and processes to help themaccomplish these steps (e.g., Dubois et al. (2011); Gitayet al. (2011); Glick et al. (2011); Strange et al. (2012); U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2012a, b)). TheCompendium tool and process presented here integrateswith and utilizes outputs from these existing tools,extending their value to managers and decision-makers.

Limitations of this tool for coral reefs include the currentlack of research and development of techniques for lesswidely applied strategies, such as Supporting EvolutionaryPotential or Relocating Organisms. As previously noted,this highlights the need for review and expansion of theCompendium as additional research and new informationbecome available. Similarly, as practical applications of theCompendium and framework expand, the managementexperience gained will provide valuable insights into theeffectiveness of—and improvements needed in—adaptationdesign. The application of this framework also assumes arelatively structured planning and decision-making processthat includes the development of site- and resource-specificclimate change vulnerability information. We recognize thatcommonly occurring limitations in resources, such as timeand funding for management planning, can constrain thelevel at which inputs needed for the application of thisframework can be developed. That said, the Compendium

provides a clear starting point, thought process, and scien-tific basis for proceeding with climate-smart design usingthe best currently-available information, while also recog-nizing the need for future expansion and improvement asnew knowledge becomes available.

Using the Compendium to identify adaptation optionsalso provides valuable insights that make it advantageous torevisit earlier steps in the climate-smart cycle beforeadvancing to evaluation and selection in Step 5 (Fig. 4). Forexample, a manager may need to modify the geographicscope and scale of the plan (Step 1) if the expanded list ofadaptation options incorporates connectivity with other sitesoutside of the managed area. Or, the expanded list of can-didate climate-smart adaptation options may cause man-agers to revisit conservation goals and objectives (Step 3),for example if the management focus shifts from protectionof key ecosystem features to managing for ecosystem ser-vices. Finally, the formulation of climate-smart designquestions may reveal gaps in knowledge that lead to addi-tional vulnerability assessment (Step 2). In some cases thenecessary site-specific vulnerability information may exist;in others managers may need to decide whether gatheringsuch information is important enough to their decision to beworth the requisite time and money. In making thesedecisions, it is worth considering how additional informa-tion could help in understanding the relative risks andbenefits of protecting reefs with the highest vulnerability vs.those with low or medium vulnerability, where humanintervention may make the biggest difference.

Uncertainty and variability in projections of futureclimate conditions are realities that must be embraced in ourplanning framework in order to understand and managerisks as part of designing and selecting adaptation strategies(Dessai et al. 2009; Hoffman et al. 2014; Hulme et al. 2009;Johnson and Weaver 2009). To the extent possible, it isdesirable to formulate actions that are robust to addressinguncertainty, e.g., that can be successful under a wide varietyof climate changes (Brown 2011; Kareiva et al. 2008).Being “climate-smart” involves asking the key questions(design considerations) about the impacts of climate changethat are of particular concern relative to existing conditionsof the target reef and the management options being con-sidered. By asking these questions, a clearer picture formsof gaps in the information needed to characterize climatechange threats particular to the reef being managed. Oncethis information is obtained, insights emerge as to whetherthe options under consideration can accommodate that levelof threat and reduce risks, and what modifications (e.g., indesign, placement, timing, etc.) will be needed to do soeffectively. In particular, looping back to Step 2 (Fig. 4) inorder to develop more specific types and scales of climatevulnerability information provides the opportunity for theiterative process of making coral reef management climate-

Fig. 4 Additional feedback loops in the climate-smart conservationcycle

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 113

smart. It is recognized that much of the uncertainty in cli-mate projections is irreducible (Pruyt 2007). Thus it is therange of climate projections relevant to the managementoptions being evaluated that are used to judge and improvethe robustness of the adaptations being considered, while atthe same time clearly defining assumptions and risks whenusing the best available data. Development of robust,climate-smart adaptation options may come at a cost, andmay even be prohibitive or infeasible, but the informationgathered in this iterative CCAP framework becomes afoundation for addressing such evaluation and selectioncriteria in subsequent planning steps (Fig. 4, Step 5).Further, the information can immediately begin to informany periodic adaptive management process or planningcycle (e.g., watershed planning) where climate change maynot have been a focus in the past, but is now identified as apriority issue to consider in planning.

The overall goal of Step 4 is to be able to develop andcarry forward an expanded list of candidate climate-smartadaptation actions for evaluation and priority selection(Step 5, Fig. 4) and ultimately implementation (Step 6). Theclimate-smart design considerations formulated for eachcandidate adaptation option contribute to this goal directlyby guiding the revision of options so they more effectivelyreduce climate change impacts and better withstand thedirect impacts of climate changes that are anticipated for asite. In doing so, addressing the climate-smart designquestions also provides information relevant to manycommon evaluation criteria (for example, effectiveness,feasibility, ability to fulfill management objectives). Thusevaluation and selection of actions should be done onlyafter climate-smart design questions have been addressed.Stakeholders at the Honolulu workshop recognized thevalue of the climate-smart design considerations as amechanism for linking site-specific climate vulnerabilitiesto the design of adaptation options for the targeted siteconsidering the suite of human stressors and uses on thesite. They also recognized that the process is complex andarticulated the need for a more explicit, step-by-step guidedprocess for answering, or “unpacking” the questions onceformulated. Ongoing efforts of the CCAP project are todevelop this process and an associated tool to aid in theunpacking of climate-smart design considerations.

The Climate-Smart Conservation guide (Stein et al.2014) sets forth key characteristics and themes, a planningcycle, and general adaptation strategies that could beapplied to both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Step 4 ofthe cycle served as a useful entry point to apply the use ofthis framework to a specific ecosystem—coral reefs. Thegeneral adaptation strategies (West and Julius 2014) serveas a robust framework for coral reef systems to identify gapsin existing management plans for climate-smart adaptation.The process of developing climate-smart design

considerations highlights uncertainties that might lead torevisiting steps in the climate-smart cycle and refiningactions to better manage risks under future conditions.Overall, the insights gained through this coral reef-specificapplication of the climate-smart conservation frameworkillustrate its applicability and relevance to resource man-agement in general.

Acknowledgments This research was funded by U.S. Environ-mental Protection Agency Contract EP-C-12-060, with travel andworkshop contributions from the National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration’s Coral Reef Conservation Program and the Depart-ment of the Interior’s Office of Insular Affairs. We gratefullyacknowledge the constructive feedback offered on an earlier draft byP. Bradley, H. Slay, and R. Coffey. Special thanks to E. Conklin,M. Eakin, and R. Kosaki for expert technical advice early in theproject, and to W. Wiltse, H. Slay, T. Callender, E. Anders, T. Leberer,and R. Parsons for key contributions to workshop planning and par-ticipation. The views expressed in this article are those of the authorsand do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration, or Department of the Interior.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflictof interest.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of theCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricteduse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you giveappropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide alink to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes weremade.

References

Anthony KRN, Marshall PA, Abdulla A, Beeden R, Bergh C, Black R,Wear S (2015) Operationalizing resilience for adaptive coral reefmanagement under global environmental change. Glob ChangeBiol 21(1):48–61. doi:10.1111/gcb.12700

Baird AH, Sommer B, Madin JS (2012) Pole-ward range expansion ofAcropora spp. along the east coast of Australia. Coral Reefs31:1063. doi:10.1007/s00338-012-0928-6

Barshis DJ, Ladner JT, Oliver TA, Seneca FO, Traylor-Knowles N,Palumbi SR (2013) Genomic basis for coral resilience to climatechange. P Natl Acad Sci 110(4):1387–1392. doi:10.1073/pnas.1210224110

Baskett ML, Gaines SD, Nisbet RM (2009) Symbiont diversity mayhelp coral reefs survive moderate climate change. Ecolo Appl 19(1):3–17. doi:10.1890/08-0139.1

Bellwood DR, Hughes TP, Folke C, Nystrom M (2004) Confrontingthe coral reef crisis. Nature 429(6994):827–833. doi:10.1038/nature02691

Bentivoglio A (2003) Compensatory mitigation for coral reef impactsin the Pacific Islands. United States Fish and Wildlife Service,Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Honolulu, HI

Berkelmans R., van Oppen MJH (2006). The role of zooxanthellae inthe thermal tolerance of corals: a ‘nugget of hope’ for coral reefsin an era of climate change. P Roy Soc B 273(1599):2305–2312.doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.3567

114 Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117

Bernhardt JR, Leslie HM (2013) Resilience to climate change incoastal marine ecosystems. Ann Rev Mar Sci 5(1):371–392.doi:10.1146/annurev-marine-121211-172411

Bohnsack JA, Causey B, Crosby MP, Hixon MA, Hourigan TF,Koltes KH,… Tilmant JT (2000). A rationale for 20-30% no-takeprotection. Paper presented at the Proceedings 9th InternationalCoral reef Symposium, Bali, Indonesia

Brown BE (1997) Coral bleaching causes and consequences. CoralReefs 16:S129–S138

Brown C (2011) Decision-scaling for Robust Planning and Policyunder Climate Uncertainty. World Resources Report, WashingtonDC

Bruno JF, Petes LE, Drew Harvell C, Hettinger A (2003) Nutrientenrichment can increase the severity of coral diseases. Ecol Lett6(12):1056–1061. doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2003.00544.x

Buddemeier RW, Kleypas JA, Aronson RA (2004). Coral reefs &climate change: potential contributions of climate change tostresses on coral reef ecosystems. Prepared for the Pew Center onGlobal Climate Change, 56

Burke L, Reytar K, Spalding M, Perry A (2011) Reefs at risk revisited.World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C., p 114

Burke L, Reytar K, Spalding M, Perry A (2012) Reefs at risk revisitedin the coral triangle. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC,p 72

Carilli JE, Norris RD, Black BA, Walsh SM, McField M (2009) Localstressors reduce coral resilience to bleaching. PLoS ONE 4(7):e6324. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006324

Cesar HJS, Burke L, Pet-Soede L (2003) The economics of worldwidecoral reef degradation. Cesar Environmental EconomicsConsulting, Arnhem, and WWF-Netherlands, Zeist, The Nether-lands, p 23

Clean Water Act (1972) 33 USC § 1251 et seq. 1972. Federal WaterPollution Control Amendments of 1972

Colls A, Ash N, Ikkala N (2009) Ecosystem-based adaptation:A natural response to climate change. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland,p 16

Conservation Measures Partnership (2013) Open standards for thepractice of conservation, Version 3. Creative Commons Attribu-tionShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. www.conservationmeasures.org, pp 51

Cowen RK, Gawarkiewicz G, Pineda J, Thorrold SR, Werner FE(2007) Population connectivity in marine systems: an overview.Oceanography 20(3):14–21

Cowen RK, Sponaugle S (2009) Larval dispersal and marinepopulation connectivity. Annu Rev Mar Sci 1(1):443–466.doi:10.1146/annurev.marine.010908.163757

Cumming GS, Barnes G, Perz S, Schmink M, Sieving KE, SouthworthJ, Van Holt T (2005) An exploratory framework for theempirical measurement of resilience. Ecosystems 8(8):975–987.doi:10.1007/s10021-005-0129-z

D’Angelo C, Hume BCC, Burt J, Smith EG, Achterberg EP,Wiedenmann J (2015) Local adaptation constrains the distribu-tion potential of heat-tolerant Symbiodinium from the Persian/Arabian Gulf. ISME Journal 9:2551–2560. doi:10.1038/ismej.2015.80

D’Angelo C, Wiedenmann J (2014) Impacts of nutrient enrichment oncoral reefs: New perspectives and implications for coastal man-agement and reef survival. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 7:82–93.doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.029

Darling ES, McClanahan TR, Côté IM (2013) Life histories predictcoral community disassembly under multiple stresors.Glob Change Biol 19:1930–1940. doi:10.1111/gcb.12191

Dessai S, Hulme M, Lempert R, Pielke Jr. R (2009) Do we needbetter predictions to adapt to a changing climate? Eos90(13):111–112

Dixon GB, Davies SW, Aglyamova GA, Meyer E, Bay LK, Matz MV(2015) Genomic determinants of coral heat tolerance acrosslatitudes. Science 348(6242):1460–1462. doi:10.1126/science.1261224

Dixson DL, Abrego D, Hay ME (2014) Chemically mediated behaviorof recruiting corals and fishes: a tipping point that may limit reefrecovery. Science 345(6199):892–897. doi:10.1126/science.1255057

Dubois N, Caldas A, Boshoven J, Delach A (2011) Integrating climatechange vulnerability assessments into adaptation planning: Acase study using the natureserve climate change vulnerabilityindex to inform conservation planning for species in Florida.Defenders of Wildlife, Washington D.C.

Edwards HJ, Elliott IA, Eakin CM, Irikawa A, Madom JS, McField M,Morgan JA, Van Woesik R, Mumby PJ (2010) How much timecan herbivore protection buy for coral reefs under realisticregimes of hurricanes and coral bleaching? Glob Change Biol 17(6):2033–2048. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2010.02366.x

Fernandes L, Green A, Tanzer J, White A, Alino PM, Jompa J, …Pressey B (2012) Biophysical principles for designing resilientnetworks of marine protected areas to integrate fisheries,biodiversity and climate change objectives in the Coral Triangle.Report prepared by The Nature Conservancy for the CoralTriangle Support Partnership. 152

Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T, Gunderson L, Holling CS,Walker B, … Svedin U (2002) Resilience and sustainabledevelopment: Building adaptive capacity in a world of transfor-mations. scientific background paper on resilience for the processof the world summit on sustainable development on behalf of theenvironmental advisory council to the Swedish government.Ministry of the Environment, Sweden, pp 74

Fujita R, Moxley JH, DeBey H, Van Leuvan T, Leumer A, Honey K,Foley M (2013) Managing for a resilient ocean. Mar Policy38:538–544. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.05.025

Gitay H, Finlayson CM, Davidson NC (2011) A framework forassessing the vulnerability of wetlands to climate change.Ramsar Convention Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland &Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal,Canada, Ramsar Technical Report No. 5/CBD Technical SeriesNo. 57

Glick P, Stein BA, Edelson NA (2011) Scanning the conservationhorizon: A guide to climate change vulnerability assessment.National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C.

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (2009) Great barrier reefoutlook report 2009. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority,Townsville Queensland, Australia, pp 212

Green A, Maypa A, Almany G, Rhodes K, Weeks R, Abesamis R, …White A (2014) Larval dispersal and movement patterns of coralreef fishes, and implications for marine reserve network design.Biological Reviews, n/a-n/a. doi:10.1111/brv.12155

Greenstein BJaJMP (2006) Escaping the heat: range shifts of reef coraltaxa in coastal Western Australia. Glob Change Biol (2008)14:1–16. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01506.x

Guest JR, Baird AH, Maynard JA, Muttaqin E, Edwards AJ, CampbellSJ, Chou LM (2012) Contrasting patterns of coral bleachingsusceptibility in 2010 suggest an adaptive response to thermalstress. PLoS ONE 7(3):e33353. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033353

Gunderson LH (2000) Ecological resilience—in theory and applica-tion. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31(1):425–439. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.425

Hansen LJ, Hoffman JR (2011) Climate savvy: Adapting conservationand resource management to a changing world. Island Press,Washington, DC, p 245

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 115

Harmelin-Vivien MLT (1994) The effects of storms and cyclones oncoral reefs: A review. Journal of Coastal Research SpecialIssue 12: 211–231

Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, The NatureConservancy, National Oceanic Atmospheric AdministrationCoral Reef Conservation Program, Coral Reef Alliance, WestMaui Ridge to Reef, & U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.(2014). Wahikuli-Honokowai Coastal: Conservation Action Plan

Hoegh-Guldberg O, Mumby PJ, Hooten AJ, Steneck RS, Greenfield P,Gomez E, Hatziolos ME (2007) Coral reefs under rapid climatechange and ocean acidification. Science 318(5857):1737–1742.doi:10.1126/science.1152509

Hoffman J, Rowland E, Hawkins Hoffman C, West J, Herrod-Julius S,Hayes M (2014) Managing under uncertainty. In: Stein BA,Edelson N, Staud A (eds) Climate-smart conservation: puttingadaptation principles into practice. National Wildlife Federation,Washington, DC

Holling CS (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems.Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4(1):1–23. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245

Hughes TP, Baird AH, Bellwood DR, Card M, Connolly SR, Folke C,Roughgarden J (2003) Climate change, human impacts, and theresilience of coral reefs. Science 301:929–933. doi:10.1126/science.1085046

Hulme M, Pielke R Jr, and Dessai S (2009) Keeping prediction inperspective. Nature reports climate change, doi:10.1038/cli-mate.2009.110. http://www.nature.com/climate/2009/0911/full/climate.2009.110.html

ICRI/UNEP-WCMC (2010) Disease in tropical coral reef ecosystems:ICRI key messages on coral disease. p 11

Jackson JBC, Donovan MK, Cramer KL, Lam VV (2014) Status andtrends of Caribbean coral reefs: 1970–2012. Global Coral ReefMonitoring Network, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland

Jackson JBC, Kirby MX, Berger WH, Bjorndal KA, Botsford LW,Bourque BJ, Warner RR (2001) Historical overfishingand the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems. Science 293(5530):629–637. doi:10.1126/science.1059199

Johnson TE, Weaver CP (2009) A framework for assessingclimate change impacts on water and watershed systems. EnvironManage 43:118–134. doi:10.1007/s00267-008-9205-4

Johnson TE, Weaver CP (2009) A framework for assessingclimate change impacts on water and watershed systems. EnvironManage 43(1):118–134

Julius SH, West JM, Blate GM, Baron JS, Griffith B, Joyce LA, ScottJM (2008) Executive summary. In: Julius SH, West JM (eds)Preliminary review of adaptation options for climate-sensitiveecosystems and resources. U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Washington, DC, p 1–1. A Report by the U.S. ClimateChange Science Program and the Subcommittee on GlobalChange Researchto 1–6

Kareiva P, Enquist C, Johnson A, Julius SH, Lawler J, Petersen B,West JM (2008) Synthesis and Conclusions. In: Julius SH,West JM (eds) Preliminary review of adaptation options forclimate-sensitive ecosystems and resources. U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Washington, DC, p 9–1. A Report by the U.S.Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee onGlobal Change Research, J.S. Baron, B. Griffith, L.A. Joyce, P.Kareiva, B.D. Keller, M.A. Palmer, C.H. Peterson, and J.M. Scott(Authors)]to 9–66

Keener VW, Marra JJ, Finucane ML, Spooner D, Smith MH (eds)(2012) Climate change and Pacific Islands: Indicators andimpacts. Island Press, Washington, DC, Report for the 2012Pacific Islands Regional Climate Assessment

Keller BD, Gleason DF, McLeod E, Woodley CM, Airame’ S,Causey BD, … Steneck RS (2009). Climate change, coral reef

ecosystems, and management options for marine protected areas.Environ Manage. doi:10.1007/s00267-009-9346-0

Kuffner IB, Hickey TD, Morrison JM (2013) Calcificationrates of the massive coral Siderastrea siderea and crustosecoralline algae along the Florida Keys (USA) outer-reef tract.Coral Reefs 32(4):987–997. doi:10.1007/s00338-013-1047-8

Levy JS, Ban NC (2013) A method for incorporating climate changemodelling into marine conservation planning: An Indo-westpacific example. Mar Policy 38(0):16–24. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.05.015

Lindenmayer D, Hobbs RJ, Montague-Drake R, Alexandra J,Bennett A, Burgman M, Zavaleta E (2008) A checklistfor ecological management of landscapes for conservation.Ecol Lett 11(1):78–91. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01114.x

Logan CA, Dunne JP, Eakin CM, Donner SD (2014)Incorporating adaptive responses into future projections ofcoral bleaching. Glob Change Biol 20(1):125–139. doi:10.1111/gcb.12390

Manzello DP, Enochs IC, Melo N, Gledhill DK, Johns EM (2012)Ocean Acidification Refugia of the Florida Reef Tract. PLoSONE 7(7):e41715

Marshall NA, Marshall PA, Tamelander J, Obura D, Malleret-King D,Cinner JE (2009) A framework for social adaptation to climatechange; sustaining tropical coastal communities and industries.IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, pp v + 36

McClanahan TR, Donner SD, Maynard JA, MacNeil MA, GrahamNAJ (2012) Prioritizing key resilience indicators to support coralreef management in a changing climate. PLoS ONE 7(8):e42884.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042884

McClanahan TR, Maina JM, Muthiga NA (2011) Associationsbetween climate stress and coral reef diversity in the westernIndian Ocean. Glob Change Biol 17(6):2023–2032. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02395.x

McLeod E, Anthony KRN, Andersson A, Beeden R, Golbuu Y,Kleypas J, Smith JE (2012) Preparing to manage coral reefs forocean acidification: Lessons from coral bleaching. Front EcolEnviron 11(1):20–27. doi:10.1890/110240

McLeod E, Anthony KRN (2012) Ocean acidification - management.Berkshire Publishing Group (Vol. 5). Awiti, Alex O. Aga KhanUniversity, Nairobi, Kenya. www.berkshirepublishing.com

McLeod K, Lubchenco J, Palumbi S, Rosenberg A (2005)Scientific consensus statement on marine ecosystem-basedmanagement

Moberg F, Folke C (1999) Ecological goods and services of coral reefecosystems. Ecol Econ 29:215–233

Molnar JL, Gamboa RL, Revenga C, Spalding MD (2008) Assessingthe global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity.Front Ecol Environ 6(9):485–492. doi:10.1890/070064

Mumby PJ, Steneck RS (2008) Coral reef management andconservation in light of rapidly evolving ecological paradigms.Trends Ecol Evol 23(10):555–563

Mumby PJ, Wolff NH, Bozec Y-M, Chollett I, Halloran P(2014) Operationalizing the resilience of coral reefs in an era ofclimate change. Conserv Lett 7(3):176–187. doi:10.1111/conl.12047

Orr JC, Fabry VJ, Aumont O, Bopp L, Doney SC, Feely RA, Yool A(2005) Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-firstcentury and its impact on calcifying organisms. Nature 437(7059):681–686. doi:10.1038/nature04095

Pandolfi JM, Bradbury RH, Sala E, Hughes TP, Bjorndal KA,Cooke RG, Jackson JBC (2003) Global trajectories of the long-term decline of coral reef ecosystems. Science 301(5635):955–958. doi:10.1126/science.1085706

Parmesan C, Galbraith H (2004) Observed Impacts of global climatechange in the U.S p 67

116 Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117

Parmesan C, Yohe G (2003) A globally coherent fingerprint of climatechange impacts across natural systems. Nature 421:37–42.doi:10.1038/nature01286

Pruyt E (2007, July 29-August 2, 2007). Dealing with Uncertainties?Combining System Dynamics with Multiple Criteria DecisionAnalysis or with Exploratory Modelling. Paper presented at theProceedings of the 25th International Conference of the SystemDynamics Society

Rau GH, McLeod E, Hoegh-Guldberg O (2012) The need for newocean conservation strategies in a high-carbon dioxide world. NatClim Change 2(10):720–724. doi:10.1038/nclimate1555

Richmond RH (1993) Coral reefs: Present problems and future con-cerns resulting from anthropogenic disturbance. Am Zool33:524–536

Root TL, Price JT, Hall KR, Schneider SH, Rosenzweig C, Pounds JA(2003) Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals andplants. Nature 421:57–60. doi:10.1038/nature01333

Stein BA, Glick P, Edelson NA, Staudt A (2014) Climate-smartconservation: Putting adaptation principles into practice

Stein BA, Staudt A, Cross MS, Dubois NS, Enquist C, Griffis R, PairisA (2013) Preparing for and managing change: climate adaptationfor biodiversity and ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 11(9):502–510. doi:10.1890/120277

Storlazzi CD, Field ME, Presto MK, Cheriton OM, Logan JB (2013)Rapid fluctuations in flow and water-column properties in AsanBay, Guam: implications for selective resilience of coral reefs inwarming seas. Coral Reefs. doi:10.1007/s00338-013-1061-x

Strange E, Lipton J, Lefer M, Henderson J, Hazen J (2012) A fra-mework to assess the relative vulnerability of aquatic ecosystemservices to global stressors. Stratus Consulting, Boulder, CO

Sustainable Resources Group Intnl, Inc (2012) Wahikuli-HonokōwaiWatershed Management Plan. Volume 1: WatershedCharacterization

The Nature Conservancy (2009). Conservation action planningguidelines for developing strategies in the face of climate change.The Natural Conservancy, p 26

The Nature Conservancy (2010). Climate change action plan for theflorida reef system 2010 – 2015 (pp. 20)

The Nature Conservancy (2015). Reef Resilience: Coral Reef Modulefrom http://www.reefresilience.org/coral-reefs/management-strategies/

U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) (2008). Preliminaryreview of adaptation options for climate-sensitive ecosystems andresources. A report by the U.S. climate change science programand the subcommittee on global change research. Julius SH, WestJM (eds), J.S. Baron, B. Griffith, L.A. Joyce, P. Kareiva, B.D.Keller, M.A. Palmer, C.H. Peterson, and J.M. Scott (Authors)].Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

U.S. Coral Triangle Initiative Support Program (2013) ClimateChange Adaptation for Coral Triangle Communities: Guide forVulnerability Assessment and Local Early Action Planning

(LEAP Guide). Prepared with support from the United StatesAgency for International Development

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2012a) Vulnerabilityassessments in support of the climate ready estuaries program: Anovel approach using expert judgment, volume I: Results for theSan Francisco Estuary partnership. National Center for Environ-mental Assessment, Washington, DC

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2012b) VulnerabilityAssessments in Support of the Climate Ready Estuaries Program:A Novel Approach Using Expert Judgment, Volume II: Resultsfor the Massachusetts Bays Program. National Center forEnvironmental Assessment, Washington, DC

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2011). TakingSteps toward Marine and Coastal Ecosystem-Based Management- An Introductory Guide. UNEP Regional Seas Reports andStudies No. 189

van Hooidonk R, Maynard JA, Planes S (2013) Temporary refugia forcoral reefs in a warming world. Nat Clim Change. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1829

van Oppen MJH, Oliver JK, Putnam HM, Gates RD (2015)Building coral reef resilience through assisted evolution. P NatlAcad Sci 112(8):2307–2313. doi:10.1073/pnas.1422301112

Walker B, Holling CS, Carpenter SR, Kinzig A (2004) Resilience,adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems.Ecol Soc 9(2):5

Walther G-R (2010) Community and ecosystem responses to recentclimate change. Philos Trans R Soc B 365(1549):2019–2024.doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0021

West JM, Julius SH (2014) The art of the possible: Identifyingadaptation options. In: Stein BA, Glick P, Edelson N, Staud A(eds) Climate-smart conservation: Putting adaptation principlesinto practice. National Wildlife Federation, Washington, DC

West JM, Julius SH, Kareiva P, Enquist C, Lawler JJ, Petersen B,Shaw MR (2009) U.S. natural resources and climate change:Concepts and approaches for management Adaptation. EnvironManage 44(6):1001–1021. doi:10.1007/s00267-009-9345-1

West JM, Salm RV (2003) Resistance and resilience to coral bleach-ing: Implications for coral reef conservation and management.Conserv Biol 17(4):956–967

Wilkinson C, Souter D (2008) Status of Caribbean coral reefs afterbleaching and hurricanes in 2005. Global Coral Reef MonitoringNetwork, and Reef and Rainforest Research Centre, Townsville,p 152

Work TM, Russell R, Aeby GS (2012) Tissue loss (white syndrome)in the coral Montipora capitata is a dynamic disease withmultiple host responses and potential causes. P Royal Soc B 279(1746):4334–4341. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1827

Yamano H, Sugihara K, Nomura K (2011) Rapid poleward rangeexpansion of tropical reef corals in response to rising sea surfacetemperatures. Geophys Res Lett 38(4):L04601. doi:10.1029/2010GL046474

Environmental Management (2017) 59:102–117 117