Global Warming and Climate Change: How It Affects Alaskans

Question

Completion of your Research Paper (15 – 20 pages) will be in APA format and will include the following sections. (THE BODY OF THE PAPER MUST MEET THE 15 – 20 PAGES NOT INCLUDING TITLE PAGE, TABLE OF CONTENT, REFERENCES AND APPENDICES).

Final paper will be submitted using “Safe Assignments” on blackboard.

Introduction; Scope and context for the study
Problem Statement: This section will include the objectives of the study and state the hypotheses tested.
Literature Review: Describe what the research literature supports.
Methodology: Details about the population and sample, and methods of data collections. Describe how you survey instrument was constructed and utilized in your study.
Analysis: descriptive and statistical analyses.
Summary; A review of data and information provided.
Conclusion: what the data indicates and how the study could be improved or furthered.
References: What sources did you use and list accordingly (using APA format).
Appendices: Include copies of survey instrument and raw data

Using Safe Assignment
Safe Assignment is a third-party plagiarism checking service hosted outside of Blackboard.

Common Errors on the Final Paper that will impact your score.

Title page must be APA format.
Papers must have headings
Tables and Charts must be numbered and Titled: Table 1: Question: __________.
Tables and Charts should appear in the actual paper and not just in the appendices. This directly supports your statements in the paper. If not lower grade.
Literature review should not be copied and pasted from the proposal. Synthesize the material into to two or three paragraphs. Combine (a number of articles) into a coherent whole. Think about what the articles stated, then write your paragraphs for the Literature Review.
You must cite sources in the paper. What did the articles/scholars state about the topic (paraphrase or direct quotes) must be citied.
MARGINS – TOP, BOTTOM, LEFT MARGINS ARE 1” INCH. Do not leave large blank spaces at the bottom of the paper. Make you charts smaller or add more writing.
Do not double –double space between paragraphs.
Remember: Writing Assignment (Final Paper): Completion of your Research Paper (15 – 20 pages) will be in APA format and will include the following sections. (THE BODY OF THE PAPER MUST MEET THE 15 – 20 PAGES NOT INCLUDING TITLE PAGE, TABLE OF CONTENT, REFERENCES AND APPENDICES).

Solution

Introduction

Climate change and global warming are some of the most challenging problems for the world population today. As a result, the challenge has remained one of the most important agendas for scientists, policymakers, interest groups, and concerned members of the public across the world. The scientific community has made attempts to influence policy-making towards the reduction of climate change and global warming globally. Stakeholders recognize the need to ensure that ecosystems can adapt/combat the phenomenon and protect the ecosystem from further degradation. With the increase in the danger of climate change and global warming, many countries around the world have adopted strict regulations and implemented several programs to combat pollutants, including greenhouse gases, which are the primary causes of climate change. One of the worst affected areas in the world is the Arctic, which is already witnessing the detrimental effects of climate change. The region experiences loss of vegetation, wildlife, and natural resources, with considerable social and economic effects on the people, and animals in the region. As a result, it becomes critical to identify the cause of the pollutants, such as greenhouse gases, to address the problem effectively.

Research provides scientists and policymakers with data to make informed decisions and implement adequate regulations that will ease the level of climate change by reducing the level of pollutants entering the ecosystem. Besides, it is necessary to evaluate the current policy attempts to address the problem in order to establish their level of impact on the issue of climate change and global warming. The review of policy documents could lead to valuable recommendations to the government, and other policy-making bodies about the areas of change to make them more effective in addressing climate change and global warming, as well as their related effects on the environment. The current research will review the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation’s policies to establish the extent to which they have achieved the goal of protecting the Alaskan environment from further degradation and their contribution to climate change and global warming reduction.

Problem Statement

Climate change and global warming affect many countries around the world, which informs critical environmental conservation policies. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation is one of the organizations that deal with conversation attempts to save the world from the adverse effects of degradation. The department’s mission is to conserve, improve, and protect the environment and natural resources in Alaska so as to improve the health, safety, social, and economic wellbeing of its people (Beck et al. 201). The department deals with various aspects of the environment, such as prevention and timely response to oil spills, water, and air quality advisory, and the general environmental health of Alaska, among other conservation efforts. Regardless of the department’s effort to meet its obligation to the Alaskans, they are concerned about the high level of environmental degradation and the depletion of natural resources.

One of the leading effects of environmental degradation and improper use of natural resources in the region has been close to the extinction of Polar bears. Current predictions indicate that they could be extinct by 2050. Besides, the region has witnessed a decline in the quantity and size of sea ice and glaciers. Snowfall is an essential climatic aspect of the country’s economic performance due to the Alyeska ski resort in Girdwood, Alaska. The resort has declined in sales due to the massive reduction in snowfall. In 2019, the region witnessed a phenomenon of dead whales that surfaced without an apparent cause (Vos, Shelden, Friday, & Mahoney, 2019). Possibly, a high level of industrialized pollutants, such as polychlorinated biphenyls, mercury, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, is the cause of climate change. Many have entered the Arctic via air, water, and bioaccumulation, affecting the food chain and leading to a detrimental effect on the ecosystem.

The high level of environmental degradation and its adverse effects has led to pressure from the general population to reduce pollution. Significant causes of pollution include, the use of fossil fuels that emit greenhouse gases into the environment (Bessou, C., Ferchaud, F., Gabrielle, B., & Mary, 2011). The transportation sector is the primary source of pollution, which leads to the preferment of the use of electric vehicles to reduce the high level of carbon emissions. Other factors that could reduce global warming include, recycling and reuse, and a ban on the utilization of some plastic products that cause pollution to the environment (Lithner, Nordensvan, & Dave, 2012). Although society has engaged in efforts to conserve the environment and address the global warming challenge, the problem persists at a detrimental level. The Arctic region remains the worst hit by the adverse effects of global warming on the environment. Generally, if the region does not engage in concerted attempts to reduce the level of climate change further, the damage will be irreversible.

Research Objectives

Pollution has led to massive destruction of the environment and the detrimental level of global warming, as well as its adverse effects. The climate change issue is a threat to the society and other inhabitants of the Arctic region. The environmental damage calls for collaborative efforts by the Alaskan community to establish the best course of action to address the problem, and save the environment and health of the inhabitants of the ecosystem. The objective of the project is to establish the extent to which the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation’s policies and efforts have achieved the aim of protecting the environment, which includes a reduction in the current level of climate change in the region. Through scientific research to provide accurate information, the department could determine the leading cause of pollution, whether it is the industrial economy or the public, and implement effective strategies to reduce or minimize the impact. Moreover, understanding the leading cause of the problem is an effective way to intervene, implement more stringent regulations and monitor the effect of the policies on the Alaskans and their ability to benefit from clean air, water, and access to natural resources.

Hypothesis

Given that the current research project focuses on the attempts by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and the impact of its environmental conservation efforts in reducing the level of climate change or global warming, the hypothesis should relate to the subject matter. Therefore, the researcher hypothesized that the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation has been mostly ineffective in reducing the level of climate change, considering the continued detrimental effects on the Arctic, including the reduction in the Polar bear pollution, the reduction in sea ice and glaciers, and the death of whales. However, it is necessary to collect data through research to establish the extent to which the department is working toward saving the environment from further effects of climate change. Besides, data from the research will lead to recommendations to improve the role of the department in addressing the climate change challenge in the region to prevent further environmental, social, and economic damage.

Literature Review

Introduction

The review of literature focuses on the current research on the issue of climate change and global warming in Alaska, and the current attempts to address the problem. The review will include various sources, including journals, books, magazines, and websites with critical information to inform the study. The assessment is organized according to subjects related to the topic to help understand current scholarship, and the gaps that should be filled through the current study.

Research focuses on the current issues of environmental degradation in the Arctic, which is a vast region and important socially and economically. National data indicate that climate change affects numerous parts of America and that Alaska is one of the most affected regions. Findings from the National Climate Assessment indicate that Alaska has warmed at a higher rate compared to other states in America. In fact, the state has warmed two times faster compared to the rest of the country (Cochran et al., 2013). The state has witnessed an increase in average annual temperatures by 3 degrees Fahrenheit, during the winter. The increase in average annual temperatures has been by 6 degrees Fahrenheit (How Will Climate Change Affect Alaska? n.d.). The region has been experiencing the detrimental effects of the increase in climate change in recent years, which informs the need for changes to reduce the continued impact on the region. ‘

Alaska has been witnessing the harmful effects of climate change in recent years. For instance, the region has witnessed earlier spring snowmelt, which affects the state economically since it depends on events such as skiing. Furthermore, the state has also witnessed significant glacier retreat and drier landscapes with effects on the ecosystem, such as wildfires and insect outbreaks. The region also witnessed an unprecedented increase at the rate with which summer sea ice is receding. In addition, the speed is likely to increase and potentially cause the complete disappearance of summer sea ice before mid-century (How Will Climate Change Affect Alaska? n.d.). Currently, almost half of the sea ice has disappeared. Ernakovich et al. (2014) suggest that the effects of climate change in the arctic could be worse than the rest of the United States and the world if an effective solution is not implemented. The reality shows the damaging impact of climate change in the state and informs effective solutions.

Alaska has some of the most massive glaciers in the country and even around the world. It is also witnessing the leading loss of glacier ice on Earth. The region is almost being left bare in the wake of climate change and global warming (Andrew, 2017).  Unfortunately, Ernakovich et al. (2014) indicate the gloomy reality as permafrost temperatures in Alaska continue to rise. The interior and southern Alaska has been thawing for the last few decades and could only worsen in the future. Pearson et al. (2013) also reveal the reality of uneven sinking of the ground in reaction to the thawing of the permafrost. The changes come at a cost to the government and the people of Alaska, unfortunately, the case might be worse in the coming years as climate change continues to affect the region. Significant activities and life supported by the region due to its natural ecosystem is increasingly being adversely affected as the temperatures continue to increase with a significant impact on the region.

The increase in the detrimental effects of climate change and global warming in Alaska has numerous negative impacts on the life supported by the environment, such as humans, animals, and vegetation. The Polar Bear population in Alaska is one of the worst affected in the state. Although the animal population, including “Ice bears,” has been the largest in the world, the reality continues to change with the detrimental changes in the climatic conditions. Dybas (2012) argues that the pollution of the arctic is almost causing the end to the polar bear population in the region and could lead to complete extinction by 2021. Dybas (2012) used scholarly evidence to show that in addition to the melting of ice caps, the source of food for the Polar bears in the arctic has been dramatically affected by the climatic changes. For example, industrial pollutants that flow to the Arctic have led to massive effects on their food. Consequently, the Arctic might no longer be able to provide adequate support to the Polar bears, leading to their complete demise.

Other effects of climate change and global warming are evident in Alaska. The region is prone to more massive waves and severe storms due to the late-summer ice edge situated further north than it should be. Coastal erosion could also occur and sweep natural resources as well as affect human lives in Alaska. Jorgenson et al. (2015) supports the observation and reveals that an Alaskan village is currently witnessing the detrimental impact and people living there are already relocating to escape erosion. Therefore, with time the region will increase the number of people whose homes will be destroyed in the wake of the climate change phenomenon. Major economic activities cannot be supported due to the severe changes that affect the natural environment and human life in Alaska. Thus, the region witnesses the social and economic effects of the changes that might continue and affect other generations if the damage is irreversible.

Alaska is one of the leading oil-producing regions in the United States. Busenberg (2011) suggests that such economic activities have witnessed a downward trend due to the changes in the environment. Oil production in Alaska has witnessed a significant decline since 1977 as a result of the alterations in the environment. However, oil production through such activities as, the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, contribute to environmental degradation. Unfortunately, some of the human activities that cause climate change are also affected by environmental degradation. Oil production and use are the leading cause of carbon emitted into the environment that causes climate change. Thus, Humrich (2017) notes the failure to balance between the economic benefits and the environmental effects create the environmental dilemma in the Arctic. The reality of the high cost of environmental damage is evident in Alaska.

The changes caused by climate change in Alaska have a substantial economic impact. For example, Ernakovich et al. (2014) reveal that the permafrost could increase the cost of buildings, roads, pipelines, and other infrastructure by $6 billion over the next two decades. As a result, the public could lose billions of dollars in the development of infrastructure in a changing environment due to, climate change and global warming. The state is also facing a risk of wildfires due to the increased frequency of warm, and dry summers. Such fires destroy homes for animals and humans, vegetation, and cause a high economic cost since it becomes impossible to restore the ecosystem following such fire incidents. In the last ten years, Alaska has experienced occurrences of wildfires that cause massive destruction. Climate change is also the leading cause of thunderstorms due to drying out of wetlands. The situation in the state is terrible and will continue to worsen unless adequate measures are taken to reduce the rate at which temperature is increasing in the region.

Research focuses on current attempts to save Alaska from further destruction caused by climate change and global warming. Kremers, Hollister, & Oberbauer (2015) indicate the need for policy responses to reverse the current level of environmental degradation in the region. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation is mandated with the responsibility of protecting the State, and the Arctic from environmental effects, such as those caused by climate change and global warming. Although the department has policies to achieve the objective, research remains limited related to its current achievement in achieving its goals and objectives. Therefore, the lack of practical evaluation of the departmental policies to address the challenges affecting Alaska is one of the reasons for the current research. The project will conduct research on the policy documents and interview with a sample of people affiliated with the department to understand the level of implementation and the impact of environmental policies, as well as to recommend changes that could help in future conservation efforts.

Methodology

The study used two different research approaches, a review of documentary evidence and an interview with representatives drawn from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to understand, the impact of the departmental policies in addressing the adverse effects of global warming and climate change in Alaska. The study explored current programs and regulations adopted by the department and identified whether they are adequate and effective in achieving the objective. Further evidence emanated from research policy recommendations by scientists and information from scholarly sources.

Besides the review of documentary evidence, the study conducted an interview using an interview schedule. The researcher collected data from ten officials working with the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to obtain their views about the extent of the impact of their rules and regulations, as well as policies towards addressing climate change, and its impacts on Alaska. Therefore, the population of the study is the employees and officials of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, and the sample is ten individuals drawn from the department using a purposive sampling method. The data collection method used for the study is a qualitative interview, which is the most suitable method to collect narratives, and detailed views of the participants regarding the adequacy and effectiveness of the rules, regulations, and policies in place to save Alaska from the detrimental effect of climate change and global warming. The interview was conducted in their offices within the department to avoid wasting their working times. Each participant responded to the questions for about 20 minutes, which means that the entire interview lasted for 200 minutes. The researcher recorded their responses using an audio-visual recorder for later analysis and reporting of the findings.

Analysis

The data from the interviews were analyzed using a descriptive, and statistical method (using Microsoft Excel) to establish common themes related to the current policies, and regulations to save Alaska from the ongoing detrimental effect of climate change and global warming. The research recorded the responses of the participants to support the analysis. The data is presented through charts and figures for identification of the critical themes and findings. Furthermore, the results are provided as a report with recommendations for the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation for implementation, and to support future efforts in protecting the environment from the detriment that climate change and global warming are causing. The discussion of findings will also include documentary evidence from the research.

Results

Knowledge about Climate Change

Under the theme, all ten participants indicated that they are either extremely knowledgeable or very knowledgeable about the issue of climate change. In fact, the participants were divided into half (50%-50%) of those who indicated that they were either extremely knowledgeable or very knowledgeable. Therefore, the researcher did not find the need to have a graphical presentation of the data for the first theme.

Highest Level of Education

The ten participants indicated that they all had post-high school education, either undergraduate, graduate, or doctorate. The chart below shows the distribution of findings regarding the level of education of the participants.

 

Chart 1: Question 2

The Level of Concern with the Current State of the Environment

The question was aimed at explaining the current level of understanding, and current concern about the level of environmental issues affecting Alaska and the entire world. The results of the theme aligned with documentary evidence, which indicated that a very high percentage of the public are concerned about the current level of environmental degradation, and its evident effect (Humrich, 2017). The table below shows the distribution of responses from the ten participants.

Item	No.	%age
Extremely concerned	5	50
Very Concerned	3	30
Somewhat concerned	1	10
Not concerned	1	10

Table 1: Question 3

Recycling and Disposal

The question sought to understand the extent of environmental responsibility at a personal level.  Humrich (2017) supported the need to explore the question among people mandated with the responsibility of protecting, and conserving the environment. It is necessary to know whether they follow the recycling and re-use rules implemented by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. The table below indicates their responses.

Very often	2
Frequently	3
Sometimes	3
Never	2

Table 2: Question 4

Strategy with Greater Effect at Reducing Global Warming

The information from the question could lead to recommendations for the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to implement, and improve the current efforts to reduce the impact of climate change in Alaska. The question had four options, and the majority of the participants felt that energy conservation had the most effect since it teaches people the responsibility to the environment. The chart below shows the distribution of responses.

Chart 2: Question 5

Primary Source of Pollution/Climate Change

Although the participants responded to the question, the primary source of information for the question was the documentary evidence. According to Humrich (2017), the leading source of pollution to the environment is the industrial economy, while the leading cause is Cars, aircraft, and ships. The table below shows the responses from the participants depending on their knowledge of the cause of pollution and climate change.  The responses were similar to documentary evidence.

Industrial economy	4
Household/community-related disposal	2
Natural Resource Depletion	1
Cars, aircraft and ships	3

Table 3: Question 6

Can Global Warming be slowed?

The researcher used a leading question to understand the participants’ feelings about whether it is possible to slow global warming with the right intervention. The responses to the question were somewhat neutral since majority either agreed or disagreed, and none strongly agreed or strongly disagreed. The distribution of responses was 50%-50%. Therefore, there was no need for a graphical presentation of the responses.

The Effectiveness of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

The question was as to whether the department protects the environment as best as it can. Before presenting evidence from the study, documentary sources indicate that although the department has rules, regulations, and policies, it has not been entirely effective in protecting the environment, considering the current level of damage to the Arctic (Wang & Hopke, 2014). The responses from the participants provided similar sentiments. The table below shows the distribution of the responses. The results indicate that people are pessimistic about the current level of effectiveness of the department.

Strongly agree	1
Agree	3
Disagree	4
Strongly disagree	2

Table 4: Question 8

Potential of Stricter Laws and Regulations

The question was a recommendation to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation about the need to amend the current laws and regulations to increase compliance. The participants provided their personal views of whether, strict changes would deter individuals and corporations from inflicting harm to the environment. The majority either agreed or strongly agreed with the need to implement stricter rules. The percentage distribution of the responses was: strongly agree (60%), and agree (40%).

Effect of Pollution on Health

All participants either strongly agreed or agreed that pollution has affected their health, and that of their family. The distribution of the results: strongly agreed (50%), and agree (50%). The participants indicated that the pollution had affected their lives in one way or another. Therefore, it aligns with the evidence from scholarly sources that indicate the health-related effects of pollution and climate change (Wang & Hopke, 2014). The results inform efforts to address the problem to protect the health, and wellbeing of people in Alaska.

Summary

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation should understand the sentiments of the people to ensure implement changes that will improve environmental conservation in Alaska. Although the department has rules and regulations to achieve conservation and protect the environment against the negative effect of climate change, it has remained ineffective in achieving the objective since climate change remains a severe issue in Alaska. Members of the public, including those working for the department, feel the need for change in the implementation of its policies, and to embrace strict measures to ensure that individuals and industries follow environmental conservation regulations. The current level of environmental destruction in the region requires new approaches to resolve and reverse the adverse effects, such as saving the remaining Polar bear population.

The study makes one thing clear that the environmental reality in Alaska is severe and requires immediate solutions. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation should act immediately to reverse the damage. Collaborative efforts are necessary for the department to work with the national government and the public to conserve the environment, and reverse the course of climate change. For example, they can use evidence from research and policy analyses to inform their next steps in creating rules, regulations, and policies. They should also use the evidence as the basis for further research to make informed decisions. The findings of the study have policy implications for Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, and other stakeholders responsible for environmental conservation and protection.

Conclusion

Alaska’s climate change situation continues to worsen yearly. The adverse effects of climate change and global warming in the state is undeniable. As a result, people are aware of the situation and task the government through the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation to change its policies to protect the environment from further damage. However, the climate change problem is complex and requires collaborative efforts by the government, NGOs, interest groups, and the public to solve. If the department works with other stakeholders, it will achieve significant strides to address the problem. Although it might be impossible to change the situation completely. At least it will be possible to remedy what is left of the natural environment.

References

Andrew, R. (2017). Socio-economic drivers of change in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP).

Beck, P. S., Juday, G. P., Alix, C., Barber, V. A., Winslow, S. E., Sousa, E. E., … & Goetz, S. J. (2011). Changes in forest productivity across Alaska consistent with biome shift. Ecology Letters, 14(4), 373-379. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01598.x.

Bessou, C., Ferchaud, F., Gabrielle, B., & Mary, B. (2011). Biofuels, greenhouse gases and climate change. In Sustainable Agriculture Volume 2 (pp. 365-468). Springer, Dordrecht.

Busenberg, G. J. (2011). The Policy Dynamics of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. Review of Policy Research, 28(5), 401–422. https://doi-org.waylandbu.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2011.00508.x

Cochran, P., Huntington, O. H., Pungowiyi, C., Tom, S., Chapin, F. S., Huntington, H. P., … & Trainor, S. F. (2013). Indigenous frameworks for observing and responding to climate change in Alaska. In Climate Change and Indigenous Peoples in the United States (pp. 49-59). Springer, Cham.

Dybas, C. L. (2012). Polar Bears Are In Trouble, and Ice Melt’s Not The Half Of It. BioScience, 62(12), 1014-1018. https://doi-org.waylandbu.idm.oclc.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.12.3

Ernakovich, J. G., Hopping, K. A., Berdanier, A. B., Simpson, R. T., Kachergis, E. J., Steltzer, H., & Wallenstein, M. D. (2014). Predicted responses of arctic and alpine ecosystems to altered seasonality under climate change. Global Change Biology, 20(10), 3256-3269. doi:10.1111/gcb.12568.

How Will Climate Change Affect Alaska? (n.d.). retrieved from https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/content/regional_releases_alaska_web_version.pdf

Humrich, C. (2017). Coping with institutional challenges for arctic environmental governance. In Governing Arctic Change (pp. 81-99). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Jorgenson, M., Marcot, B., Swanson, D., Jorgenson, J., & DeGange, A. (2015). Projected changes in diverse ecosystems from climate warming and biophysical drivers in northwest Alaska. Climatic Change, 130(2), 131–144. https://doi-org.waylandbu.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1302-1

Kremers, K. S., Hollister, R. D., & Oberbauer, S. F. (2015). Diminished Response of Arctic Plants to Warming over Time. PLoS ONE, 10(3), 1–13. https://doi-org.waylandbu.idm.oclc.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116586

Lithner, D., Nordensvan, I., & Dave, G. (2012). Comparative acute toxicity of leachates from plastic products made of polypropylene, polyethylene, PVC, acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene, and epoxy to Daphnia magna. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 19(5), 1763-1772.

Pearson, R. G., Phillips, S. J., Loranty, M. M., Beck, P. S., Damoulas, T., Knight, S. J., & Goetz, S. J. (2013). Shifts in Arctic vegetation and associated feedbacks under climate change. Nature climate change, 3(7), 673-677.  doi: 10.1038/NCLIMATE1858

Vos, D. J., Shelden, K. E., Friday, N. A., & Mahoney, B. A. (2019). Age and growth analyses for the endangered belugas in Cook Inlet, Alaska.

Wang, Y., & Hopke, P. K. (2014). Is Alaska truly the great escape from air pollution? Long term source apportionment of fine particulate matter in Fairbanks, Alaska. Aerosol and Air Quality Research, 14(7), 1875-1882.  doi:10.4209/aaqr.2014.03.0047.