Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Chris Zganjar is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Chris Zganjar.


PLOS ONE | 2009

Applied Climate-Change Analysis: The Climate Wizard Tool

Evan H. Girvetz; Chris Zganjar; George T. Raber; Edwin P. Maurer; Peter Kareiva; Joshua J. Lawler

Background Although the message of “global climate change” is catalyzing international action, it is local and regional changes that directly affect people and ecosystems and are of immediate concern to scientists, managers, and policy makers. A major barrier preventing informed climate-change adaptation planning is the difficulty accessing, analyzing, and interpreting climate-change information. To address this problem, we developed a powerful, yet easy to use, web-based tool called Climate Wizard (http://ClimateWizard.org) that provides non-climate specialists with simple analyses and innovative graphical depictions for conveying how climate has and is projected to change within specific geographic areas throughout the world. Methodology/Principal Findings To demonstrate the Climate Wizard, we explored historic trends and future departures (anomalies) in temperature and precipitation globally, and within specific latitudinal zones and countries. We found the greatest temperature increases during 1951–2002 occurred in northern hemisphere countries (especially during January–April), but the latitude of greatest temperature change varied throughout the year, sinusoidally ranging from approximately 50°N during February-March to 10°N during August-September. Precipitation decreases occurred most commonly in countries between 0–20°N, and increases mostly occurred outside of this latitudinal region. Similarly, a quantile ensemble analysis based on projections from 16 General Circulation Models (GCMs) for 2070–2099 identified the median projected change within countries, which showed both latitudinal and regional patterns in projected temperature and precipitation change. Conclusions/Significance The results of these analyses are consistent with those reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but at the same time, they provide examples of how Climate Wizard can be used to explore regionally- and temporally-specific analyses of climate change. Moreover, Climate Wizard is not a static product, but rather a data analysis framework designed to be used for climate change impact and adaption planning, which can be expanded to include other information, such as downscaled future projections of hydrology, soil moisture, wildfire, vegetation, marine conditions, disease, and agricultural productivity.


Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | 2017

Natural climate solutions

Bronson Griscom; Justin Adams; Peter W. Ellis; R. A. Houghton; Guy Lomax; Daniela A. Miteva; William H. Schlesinger; David Shoch; Juha Siikamäki; Pete Smith; Peter B. Woodbury; Chris Zganjar; Allen Blackman; João Campari; Richard T. Conant; Christopher Delgado; Patricia Elias; Trisha Gopalakrishna; Marisa R. Hamsik; Mario Herrero; Joseph M. Kiesecker; Emily Landis; Lars Laestadius; Sara M. Leavitt; Susan Minnemeyer; Stephen Polasky; Peter V. Potapov; Francis E. Putz; Jonathan Sanderman; Marcel Silvius

Significance Most nations recently agreed to hold global average temperature rise to well below 2 °C. We examine how much climate mitigation nature can contribute to this goal with a comprehensive analysis of “natural climate solutions” (NCS): 20 conservation, restoration, and/or improved land management actions that increase carbon storage and/or avoid greenhouse gas emissions across global forests, wetlands, grasslands, and agricultural lands. We show that NCS can provide over one-third of the cost-effective climate mitigation needed between now and 2030 to stabilize warming to below 2 °C. Alongside aggressive fossil fuel emissions reductions, NCS offer a powerful set of options for nations to deliver on the Paris Climate Agreement while improving soil productivity, cleaning our air and water, and maintaining biodiversity. Better stewardship of land is needed to achieve the Paris Climate Agreement goal of holding warming to below 2 °C; however, confusion persists about the specific set of land stewardship options available and their mitigation potential. To address this, we identify and quantify “natural climate solutions” (NCS): 20 conservation, restoration, and improved land management actions that increase carbon storage and/or avoid greenhouse gas emissions across global forests, wetlands, grasslands, and agricultural lands. We find that the maximum potential of NCS—when constrained by food security, fiber security, and biodiversity conservation—is 23.8 petagrams of CO2 equivalent (PgCO2e) y−1 (95% CI 20.3–37.4). This is ≥30% higher than prior estimates, which did not include the full range of options and safeguards considered here. About half of this maximum (11.3 PgCO2e y−1) represents cost-effective climate mitigation, assuming the social cost of CO2 pollution is ≥100 USD MgCO2e−1 by 2030. Natural climate solutions can provide 37% of cost-effective CO2 mitigation needed through 2030 for a >66% chance of holding warming to below 2 °C. One-third of this cost-effective NCS mitigation can be delivered at or below 10 USD MgCO2−1. Most NCS actions—if effectively implemented—also offer water filtration, flood buffering, soil health, biodiversity habitat, and enhanced climate resilience. Work remains to better constrain uncertainty of NCS mitigation estimates. Nevertheless, existing knowledge reported here provides a robust basis for immediate global action to improve ecosystem stewardship as a major solution to climate change.


Climatic Change | 2014

Dissecting indices of aridity for assessing the impacts of global climate change

Evan H. Girvetz; Chris Zganjar

There is great interest in understanding how climate change will impact aridity through the interaction of precipitation changes with rising temperatures. The Aridity Index (AI), Climatic Moisture Deficit (CMD), and Climatic Moisture Surplus (CMS) are metrics commonly used to quantify and map patterns in aridity and water cycling. Here we show that these metrics have different patterns of change under future climate—based on an ensemble of nine general circulation climate models—and the different metrics are appropriate for different purposes. Based on these differences between the metrics, we propose that aridity can be dissected into three different types—hydrological (CMS), agricultural (CMD), and meteorological. In doing this, we propose a novel modified version of the Aridity Index, called AI+, that can be useful for assessing changes in meteorological aridity. The AI + is based on the same ratio between precipitation and evapotranspiration as the traditional AI, but unlike the traditional AI, the AI + only accounts for changes to precipitation during months when precipitation is less than reference/potential evapotranspiration (i.e. there is a deficit). Moreover, we show that the traditional AI provides a better estimate of change in moisture surplus driven by changes to precipitation during the wet season, rather than changes in deficit that occur during the drier seasons. These results show that it is important to select the most appropriate metric for assessing climate driven changes in aridity.


Remote Sensing of Environment | 2008

Spatial and temporal patterns of gap dominance by low-canopy lianas detected using EO-1 Hyperion and Landsat Thematic Mapper

Jane R. Foster; Philip A. Townsend; Chris Zganjar


Diversity and Distributions | 2015

Considering the impact of climate change on human communities significantly alters the outcome of species and site-based vulnerability assessments

Daniel B. Segan; David G. Hole; Camila I. Donatti; Chris Zganjar; Shaun Martin; Stuart H. M. Butchart; James E. M. Watson


Archive | 2013

Making Climate Data Relevant to Decision Making: The important details of Spatial and Temporal Downscaling

Evan H. Girvetz; Edwin P. Maurer; Philip B. Duffy; Aaron Ruesch; B. L. Thrasher; Chris Zganjar


Archive | 2013

A Systematic Approach to Incorporate the Human Response into Climate Change Conservation Planning

Daniel B. Segan; James E. M. Watson; David G. Hole; Camila I. Donatti; Chris Zganjar; Shaun Martin; Kamweti Mutu; Natalie Bailey


Archive | 2009

Visualizing and communicating climate change using the ClimateWizard: decision support and education through web-based analysis and mapping

Evan H. Girvetz; Chris Zganjar; George T. Raber; Edwin P. Maurer; Philip B. Duffy


Archive | 2008

AN ANALYTICAL TOOLBOX FOR ASSESSING POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON CONSERVATION PRIORITY AREAS

Evan H. Girvetz; Carolyn A. F. Enquist; Chris Zganjar; George T. Raber; Peter Kareiva; Joshua J. Lawler


Archive | 2008

CONSERVATION AND CLIMATE USING TECHNOLOGY TO INFORM DECISION MAKING

Chris Zganjar; Evan H. Girvetz; George T. Raber; Dominique Bachelet; Josh Lawler

Collaboration


Dive into the Chris Zganjar's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

George T. Raber

University of Southern Mississippi

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Camila I. Donatti

Conservation International

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

David G. Hole

Conservation International

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Philip B. Duffy

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge