Category: 3. Business

The US president has nevertheless insisted the oil industry will move quickly, boldly predicting that dominant US players could get an expanded oil operation “up and running” across Venezuela – reputedly home to the world’s largest crude oil reserves – in less than 18 months.

“I think we can do it in less time than that,” Trump claimed in an interview with NBC News on Monday. “But it’ll be a lot of money.”

In the face of such sweeping declarations, US oil firms such as ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Chevron – the only US oil major still operating in Venezuela – have so far declined to publicly outline any such plans for investment.

“It would be premature to speculate on any future business activities or investments,” a Conoco spokesperson said this weekend. Hours earlier, Trump had stated at a press conference that “our very large United States oil companies” were poised to “go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure and start making money for the country”.

The ambitious timeline laid out by Trump could prove unrealistic. “It’s probably going to take three years for any kind of production bounce,” said Dan Pickering, chief investment officer at Pickering Energy Partners, who expects an increase of around half a million barrels per day (bpd) by “2029, maybe late 2028”.

Energy firms will probably spend the first year sorting through new government and security contracts, he suggested, the second year investing in reconstruction, and only find themselves in a position to meaningfully increase output in the third.

“Either the US is going to step up with guarantees, or we’re going to spend six to 12 months watching the dust settle,” added Pickering, who noted that multinationals’ interest in Venezuelan oil does not necessarily correspond with their appetite to invest heavily in a country with an uncertain future.

“I think their interest is an eight, on a scale of one to 10,” he said. “I think their appetite is a four or five on a scale of one to 10, because there is no clarity yet.”

Seasoned operators in the region believe the firms will tread carefully. “I expect that you’ll see all of them now say, ‘This is fantastic, it’s a great opportunity, and we have a team ready to go to Venezuela,’” Elliott Abrams, who served as Trump’s special envoy to Venezuela during his first term, told Politico. “But that’s politics … That doesn’t mean they’re going to invest.”

Trump has repeatedly raised the prospect of oil giants being reimbursed by the federal government for any investments they make in Venezuela.

But the administration has yet to come forward with any detail on whether the US taxpayer will back them.

Only an “iron-clad guarantee” from the government that they will be repaid for “every dollar spent” will prompt oil companies to move more quickly, according to Pickering.

They want to “avoid getting screwed”, he said. “You need to be protected from sovereign risk, that we’ve seen in Venezuela already: you’ve got to protect against being nationalized again. You’ve also got to protect a different US administration in two years, saying: ‘I don’t think that’s a good idea, I’m not going to pay you back.’”

The bill would be vast. Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy estimated that adding between half a million and a million bpd to Venezuelan oil production would require more than $10bn in investment over two to three years.

But an increase on the scale mooted by Trump and his allies is expected to need much more. The Center on Global Energy Policy said building back Venezuelan output to the same level as the early 2010s, near 2.5m bpd, was estimated to take between $80bn and $90bn over six or seven years.

Exxon, Chevron and Conoco did not respond to a request for comment on whether they were consulted ahead of Saturday’s attack. While the president said on Sunday that his administration had spoken to them before and after the operation in Venezuela, unnamed executives have refuted this claim in media reports.

Trump issued a hint to the industry roughly a month before Saturday’s operation, vaguely advising it to “get ready”, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing unnamed sources familiar with the matter.

Governor Kathy Hochul today announced that ElevenLabs — a leader in artificial intelligence that develops foundational models and products for seamless human-computer interaction — will significantly expand its United States operations in New York City. The expansion underscores New York City’s continued emergence as a leading hub for AI innovation, attracting fast-scaling technology companies and high-skilled talent from around the world.

“New York is becoming one of the world’s premiere destinations for artificial intelligence companies, and ElevenLabs’ decision to expand here is proof that our strategy is working,” Governor Hochul said. “With 230 new high-quality jobs, a $33 million R&D investment, and a fast-growing global footprint, ElevenLabs is choosing the Empire State because of our unmatched talent, energy and commitment to responsible technological advancement. We look forward to supporting the company’s continued growth in New York.”

Founded in 2022 by Mati Staniszewski and Piotr Dąbkowski, childhood best friends from Warsaw who were inspired by the poor dubbing of content in their native Poland, the company started with creating human-like AI voice models and have expanded to a suite of frontier audio models used to power an Agents Platform for omnichannel customer engagement, as well as a creative platform for generating speech, music, image, and video. ElevenLabs serves millions of users and thousands of businesses from the fastest growing startups to the largest enterprises.

As part of this expansion, ElevenLabs will create 230 new engineering and corporate jobs, retain 36 existing New York City positions, and invest $33 million in research and development. Nearly 100 of the projected new roles will be software engineering positions, strengthening New York’s growing AI and technology workforce. The company will relocate from its current Spring Street offices to a larger space at 40 Crosby Street in Manhattan’s Soho neighborhood. Empire State Development (ESD) is supporting ElevenLabs with up to $4.4 million in performance-based Excelsior Jobs Program tax credits, which are tied to the company’s planned job creation and research and development investments.

Empire State Development President, CEO and Commissioner Hope Knight said, “ElevenLabs is at the forefront of innovation in generative AI audio, and its expansion in New York City reinforces our state’s leadership in attracting the world’s most dynamic technology companies. This project will create hundreds of good-paying jobs, deepen New York’s bench of engineering talent, and support cutting-edge R&D that strengthens our growing AI ecosystem. ESD is proud to support ElevenLabs as it scales its U.S. operations here in the Empire State.”

ElevenLabs Co-Founder Mati Staniszewski said, “New York City is a global center for innovation, talent, and creative energy, making it the ideal place for ElevenLabs to scale our U.S. presence. This expansion allows us to deepen our investment in frontier AI research, expand our industry partnerships, and advance our mission of reimagining human-technology interaction. We want to lead New York’s rapidly expanding AI ecosystemand this investment puts us in position to do so.”

Assemblymember Steve Otis said, “News of the ElevenLabs expansion is another success story in New York’s program to attract cutting-edge technology growth in our state. Governor Hochul, Empire State Development, and the Legislature have prioritized making New York a leader as a home for growing technology companies and responsible artificial intelligence development. Time and time again companies choose New York because of our educated workforce, the work of our economic development team at ESD, and the synergy we are creating by bringing so many technology innovators to New York. Congratulations to Governor Hochul and ElevenLabs on the expansion announced today.”

ElevenLabs’ expansion aligns with Governor Hochul’s statewide commitment to ensuring New York becomes a national leader in responsible artificial intelligence development. Through initiatives such as the Empire AI Consortium, new workforce training programs, and investments designed to support safe, transparent, and equitable AI innovation, New York is building an ecosystem that attracts world-class companies, strengthens research capacity, and prepares New Yorkers for the jobs of the future. By locating and growing in Manhattan, ElevenLabsjoins a fast-emerging network of AI firms, universities, and innovation partners helping advance the Governor’s vision of making New York a global hub for responsible, next-generation AI technologies.

About Empire State Development
Empire State Development is New York’s chief economic development agency, and promotes business growth, job creation, and greater economic opportunity throughout the state. With offices in each of the state’s 10 regions, ESD oversees the Regional Economic Development Councils, supports broadband equity through the ConnectALL office, and is growing the workforce of tomorrow through the Office of Strategic Workforce Development. The agency engages with emerging and next generation industries like clean energy and semiconductor manufacturing looking to grow in New York State, operates a network of assistance centers to help small businesses grow and succeed, and promotes the state’s world class tourism destinations through I LOVE NY. For more information, please visit esd.ny.gov, and connect with ESD on LinkedIn, Facebook and X (formerly Twitter).

About ElevenLabs
ElevenLabs is reimagining human-technology interaction through advanced AI research and products. Its Agents Platform enables businesses to deploy reliable, intelligent voice and chat agents at scale, with built-in integrations, testing, monitoring and enterprise-grade reliability. Its Creative Platform empowers creators and marketers to generate and edit speech, music, images, and video in more than 70 languages. Both platforms are powered by ElevenLabs’ industry-leading AI research. The company pioneered the first human-like AI voice model and has since expanded its capabilities across dubbing, transcription, music, sound effects and speech-to-speech technologies.

The partners of global law firm K&L Gates LLP have voted to elect the following individuals from across the firm’s global platform as new partners with the firm, effective January 1. The group comprises 26 individuals from all nine of the firm’s practice areas and represents 17 offices, including Boston, Charleston, Charlotte, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Nashville, New York, Newark, Paris, Pittsburgh, Portland, Raleigh, Research Triangle Park, Seattle, Singapore, Sydney, and Washington, DC. 

K&L Gates Global Managing Partner Stacy Ackermann stated: “We are proud to welcome such an accomplished group to our partnership. Their skill, integrity, and unwavering commitment to client service strengthen our global platform and the collaborative culture that defines K&L Gates. We congratulate each of them and look forward to the positive impact they will make for our clients and communities in the years ahead.”

The lawyers joining the firm’s partnership are:

Lauren Ammons (Nashville) represents clients in public and private securities offerings, including initial public offerings, follow-on offerings, high-yield and investment grade debt offerings, and de-SPAC transactions. She regularly counsels public companies regarding Exchange Act reporting and disclosure, proxy solicitation, shareholder activism, stock exchange rules, environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting, Section 16 reporting, and corporate governance.

Samantha Beatty (Pittsburgh) advises on ERISA and tax compliance issues with regard to the design, drafting, and administration of tax-qualified and non-qualified employee benefits plans. She also focuses on public company executive compensation governance and disclosure issues (principally in connection with proxy statements), pension de-risking transactions, and benefits matters in mergers and acquisitions.

Christopher Bozydaj (New York) focuses on mergers and acquisitions, private equity investments and financings, and general corporate governance matters. He has represented clients in a broad range of industries, including life sciences, digital advertising, industrial goods, electronic chemicals, and renewable energy.

Brian Bozzo (Pittsburgh) counsels clients on preserving and enforcing intellectual property rights for emerging technologies, including cryptocurrencies, the internet-of-things, quantum computing, and the emerging commercial space industry, and is intimately familiar with the flowdown of intellectual property rights earned under government contracts.

Karla Cure (Washington, DC) focuses her practice on US customs laws, trade remedies, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), export controls, economic sanctions, and related areas of national security and international trade laws.

Kaitlyn DeYoung (Kansas City) advises developers, sponsors, and financing parties throughout the full lifecycle of energy and infrastructure projects, including site control, permitting, financing, construction, operation, and the purchase and/or sale of both development and operating projects. Her experience spans a broad spectrum of energy technologies, including renewable energy, conventional power, and emerging technologies.

Neil Eddington (Los Angeles) handles a broad range of employment-related cases. He is most often called upon to leverage his experience litigating and advising on wage and hour issues. He oversees single plaintiff and collective actions (class action and PAGA claims) alleging wage and hour violations, including regular rate of pay, overtime and meal and rest break issues, to name a few.

Jonathan Edel (Charlotte) focuses his practice on restructuring and insolvency matters, including bankruptcies (whether under Chapter 7, 11, or 15), assignments for the benefit of creditors, distressed sales and acquisitions, and other out-of-court arrangements. His clients span the spectrum of interested parties in restructuring cases, including debtors and creditors, affiliates of and investors in debtors and potential debtors, and defendants in related litigation. 

Cecilia Ehresman (Charleston) represents employers of all sizes across numerous industries in complex employment and trade secret misappropriation litigation, wage and hour class and collective actions, high-stakes governmental investigations, and with employment diligence in corporate transactions. Her experience spans federal and state courts and regulatory agencies across the nation, and she routinely handles employment-related matters and issues outside of the United States.

Harsharan Gill (Sydney) is a banking and finance lawyer who regularly advises global financial institutions, private debt funds, investors, sponsors, and borrowers on a range of finance transactions, whether in the domestic or cross-border market. With significant experience in syndications, private credit and restructures, Harsharan advises clients across a variety of industries on corporate and acquisition finance, funds finance, resource and renewable financing, real estate finance and derivatives.

Thibaut Gribelin (Paris) assists policyholders under a broad range of insurance policies such as fraud, cyber risks, product recall and liability, property damage, business interruption, and professional liability. More recently, he has started acting on behalf of crypto-assets holders claiming coverage against insurers covering blockchain-related risks.

Adam Husik (Newark) has a proven track record in successfully managing, litigating, and resolving complex cases and large dockets, including multi-district and other consolidated litigation. He is particularly well-versed in the e-discovery space, leveraging his technical experience to optimize the discovery process and skillfully gather critical evidence.

Nicholas Kitko (Charlotte) focuses his practice on mergers and acquisitions, private equity investments, joint ventures and general corporate matters. He regularly represents both strategic and financial buyers and sellers of businesses, debt and growth equity investors, and other participants in a variety of transactions across a number of industries, including business services, manufacturing and distribution, environmental services, telecommunications, healthcare, life sciences, technology and media.

Geoffrey Locher (Pittsburgh) focuses his practice on mergers and acquisitions, venture capital financing, asset and corporate finance, and general corporate governance. He represents clients in multiple industries of varying sizes, ranging from start-ups to large public companies.

McNair Nichols (Research Triangle Park) serves as counsel for broker-dealers, investment advisers, registered investment companies, cryptocurrency exchanges and issuers, banks, publicly-traded companies, hospitals, and other entities and individuals in connection with investigations and enforcement inquiries from the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, the Department of Justice, US Attorneys’ Offices, and a wide range of state regulatory authorities.

Lucas Nicolet-Serra (Singapore) advises clients across the life sciences, digital health, and fintech sectors. His practice focuses on complex cross-border transactions, regulatory compliance, and technology-driven innovation, with a particular emphasis on AI, data privacy, digital assets, and medical technology. He is qualified in France and England & Wales. He is also registered to practice in Singapore on corporate and commercial matters only. 

Christopher Phillips-Hart (Boston) focuses on advising both established and emerging sponsors of private funds with respect to legal and regulatory issues associated with private fund formation and ongoing operational matters related to private funds. He has advised both institutional and boutique sponsors on fundraises in the United States, Europe, and globally. 

Jessica Pingleton (Portland) advises clients on domestic and cross-border mergers and acquisitions, from early-stage growth investments to large multi-party acquisitions. Representing buyers, sellers, and investors across diverse industries, she advises companies on all aspects of the merger and acquisition lifecycle, helping clients navigate complex legal and commercial issues while staying focused on business objectives. She also regularly advises corporate clients on commercial contracting and licensing, contract management, regulatory compliance, commercial leasing, and commercial real estate purchase and sale transactions.

Wesley Prichard (Pittsburgh) has diversified experience across all phases of litigation and includes the areas of industrial incidents, emerging chemicals such as ethylene oxide, deal litigation, mass torts, environmental claims, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duties, closely held businesses, and construction disputes.

Jarel Rosser (New York) focuses his practice on commercial real estate finance and loan servicing. He regularly represents national, international, and regional lenders and servicers in connection with various structured finance transactions, including CMBS and balance sheet mortgage loans, private bank lending, mezzanine debt, and other credit facilities secured by all commercial asset classes.

Christian Scarlett (Seattle) represents clients on a range of commercial real estate transactions including financings, acquisitions, joint ventures, and development projects across diverse asset classes such as hospitality, office, multifamily, retail, industrial, data centers, and agribusiness. He has extensive experience on both the lending side, handling loan originations, intercreditor and co-lending structures, and secondary market transactions, and the ownership side, particularly representing hospitality owners, operators, and investors in negotiating their acquisitions, dispositions, joint ventures, and management agreements.

Jenny Sneed (Raleigh) advises both public and private companies on transactional and corporate governance matters, including mergers and acquisitions, venture capital, securities and general corporate law matters.

Elle Stuart (Washington, DC) advises clients on statutes and regulations related to the US maritime sector, including cabotage laws, US Customs and Border Protection rulemakings, and Federal Maritime Commission regulations. She also advocates before the US Congress and various federal agencies for a wide variety of maritime industry companies and organizations, including ship owners and operators, equipment providers, and trade associations that support the domestic maritime industry.

Derek Sutton (Raleigh) has particular experience defending companies in class action and multidistrict litigation, as well as in enforcement actions brought by the US Department of Justice Antitrust Division, Federal Trade Commission, and state attorneys general. 

Zachary Timm (Los Angeles) focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation, complex commercial disputes, and appeals. He has represented public and private companies in high-stakes litigation involving claims for trade secrets misappropriation, tortious interference, privacy, consumer protection, breach of contract, false advertising, unfair competition, and fraud.

Brett White (Raleigh) has more than 10 years of experience in drafting and prosecuting patent applications and is skilled in novel artificial intelligence architectures and their innovative uses, including large language models (LLMs) and generative models. He also assists in patent-related diligence matters for mergers, acquisitions, and asset purchases.

As a new Spring semester begins, Clemson Parking and Transportation Services would like to share several recent updates and improvements for students, faculty, staff and visitors. Visit the PATS website for more information or to purchase a permit.

Tigers Commute and real-time parking and transportation availability

• Tigers Commute is Clemson University’s unified mobility and commute management platform. The Tigers Commute app is a one-stop shop for all parking, transit and ride sharing information.
• Over 10,000 parking sensors on main campus show real-time availability of employee, commuter, Park-N-Ride, metered, EV charging and ADA accessible parking spaces in Tigers Commmute. Watch the video tutorial to learn more about the app.

Park-N-Ride

• Park-N-Ride provides a great economical parking option for students and employees. Employees with a valid employee permit can park in the East and West Park-N-Ride lots, and annual Park-N-Ride permits are available at a prorated rate.
• Park-N-Ride shuttles arrive every six minutes during peak times (7-11 a.m. and 3-6 p.m.) and 10 minutes during off-peak times (11 a.m.- 3 p.m.). The East Campus Park-N-Ride shuttle picks up from P-7 and P-8 and stops at Hendrix Student Center, Edwards Hall, Redfern Health Center, Academic Success Center, and Cherry Road at Bryan Circle. The West Campus Park-N-Ride shuttle stops at Sikes Hall, Brackett Hall, McAlister Hall and Fike Recreation Center.  
• East Park-N-Ride now operates on Fridays, offering 10-minute service from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m.  All Park-N-Ride permits are valid in unrestricted employee and commuter space from 4:30 p.m. to 7 a.m. Monday-Friday and all-day Saturday-Sunday according to campus parking regulations.
• BikeShare features e-bikes at 11 different stations across campus, available for checkout using your phone. BikeShare is available for $20 annually plus a 25-cent fee per unlock for two hours.
• Free, safe, on-demand nighttime transportation is available on the Clemson Nightline app. Nightline operates from 6 p.m. to 2 a.m. Sunday-Thursday and 6 p.m. to 3 a.m. Friday-Saturday.

Commuter updates

Many commuter and employee parking spaces have been displaced due to the construction of the new parking garage and Clemson/MUSC Medical Office Building.

• Student commuters are encouraged to use the Tigers Commute app to find available parking spaces at designated on-street spaces and lots
• Visit the campus map to see all commuter options (denoted in orange).

Permit reminders

• Fall permits expired on December 31, 2025. As there is no spring permit, those who have expired permits will need to purchase an annual permit at a prorated price. The prorated price will show when added to the cart.
• Free carpool permits are available to groups of two or more students or employees with similar commuting schedules. Prorated permit refunds are available for those who exchange a current valid parking permit for a carpool permit.
• Clemson University will implement updated parking regulations beginning in Fall 2026 to limit on-campus vehicle access for first-year and Bridge students. Clemson News article.
• Make sure to check the Announcements section of PATS homepage for timely parking-related updates.

NEW YORK, January 5, 2026 – Cushman & Wakefield (NYSE: CWK), a leading global real estate services firm, is pleased to announce that Andy Jansen has joined the company as President of Project & Development Services (PDS), effective today.

As President of PDS, Jansen will set the vision for the business, shaping and executing the full-scale Americas PDS strategy to drive growth. Collaborating across Investor and Occupier Services, Jansen will be responsible for mobilizing resources, championing the implementation of technology solutions for efficient service delivery, and developing a next-generation sales methodology.

“We are thrilled to welcome Andy Jansen to Cushman & Wakefield,” said Marla Maloney, Co-Chief Executive, Americas. “Andy’s proven ability to lead organizations through transformation and his deep understanding of technology and innovation will guide our PDS business into its next chapter of success.”

Jansen joins Cushman & Wakefield from NEO4J, a leading graph intelligence platform. There, he led a matrixed sales organization where he and his team solved highly complex, generational technology challenges for top global enterprises. Additionally, he co-founded BuiltWorlds, an internationally recognized organization focused on innovation in construction, real estate, architecture and engineering.

“I’m honored to join Cushman & Wakefield and lead the Project & Development Services team,” Jansen said. “This organization’s commitment to growth and innovation deeply resonates with me. I look forward to driving strategic initiatives, leveraging technology and delivering exceptional results for our clients.”

Unprecedented adaptation intentions among Canadian private forest owners

We found that our sample of Canadian forest owners and practitioners exhibit a strong intention to adapt, with 92.1% of the 611 participants willing to adopt at least one adaptation strategy (Fig. 1). Even when excluding ‘laissez-faire’, which could be seen as a passive strategy that requires minimal intervention or resource investment, the adaptation intention rate remains high at 79.6%. For comparison, adaptation intentions among foresters in similar studies worldwide are notably lower, with rates of only 18% in France³² and eastern Oregon¹⁰ and 25% to 40% in Sweden^28,33. Although adaptation intentions can vary depending on the timeframe for taking action or the wording of the survey questions, these findings represent an unprecedented level of commitment.

While our sample of private forest owners shows a preference for certain adaptation strategies (Fig. 2), such as decreasing stand density (54.1%), a key finding of this study is the tendency to adopt multiple adaptation strategies, with 73.8% of respondents expressing intentions to implement two or more adaptations simultaneously (Fig. 1).

Most respondents intend to implement multiple strategies, hence strategies are not exclusive. Different letters indicate a posterior probability of ≥0.99 that mean-willingness differs between strategies. Scores to the left of the dashed line indicate a reluctance to adapt, while those to the right indicate a willingness to do so. Black lines denote a 95% equal-tailed credible interval for the mean willingness scores.

At the lower end of the preference spectrum, ‘prescribed burning and fuel reduction’ is the least favored strategy, which aligns with respondents’ motivations related to timber production and the aesthetic value of landscapes, two major forest ecosystem services potentially impacted by this approach (Supplementary Fig. 1). Fire-resilient forestry also requires advanced technical skills and the highest level of coordination among forest owners, but private forest owners are completely—and notably—absent from Canada’s forest fire prevention strategies³⁴.

The most favored strategy, ‘laissez-faire’ (Fig. 2), requires the least effort and reflects a lower level of personal engagement in adaptive management. Yet, laissez-faire should not be confused with management cessation, as 95.5% of respondents intending to implement it are actively managing their forests.

To identify the most influential covariates underlying the intention to adapt, we employed Bayesian predictive projection for variable selection³⁵. This recent method employs cross-validation and takes into account the uncertainty in the posterior predictive distribution to identify a subset of explanatory variables that can sufficiently explain the outcome while avoiding overfitting. For this study, we set up predictive projection such that no other set of explanatory variables (including the full set of all variables) achieves better predictive performance than the subset that was selected (Fig. 3). Out of the 29 covariates selected based on their predictive performance (Fig. 3B), two belong to the category of demographic control variables, specifically private forest owners’ age and location in the province of Quebec (Fig. 4). The remaining covariates relate to personal stakes, threat appraisal, and coping appraisal, aligning directly with the protection motivation theory framework and revealing complex patterns in private forest owners’ willingness to adopt adaptation strategies (Fig. 3). However, the relevance of these covariates strongly differs between adaptation strategies (Fig. 3A): While sufficient predictive performance of the willingness to adopt the species replacement strategy requires 13 different covariates, no covariate contributes substantially to the adoption of prescribed burning. When comparing across multiple strategies, we found that 17 covariates are associated with only one strategy (Fig. 3B), further highlighting the need to distinguish between specific adaptation strategies. This shows that comprehensive adaptation measures (i.e. measures that focus on multiple strategies) are required to focus on a diverse set of underlying motivations and concerns. As foresters’ intention to adapt does not systematically translate into actual adaptive management change³⁶, it is crucial to both understand how key variables can act as levers to increase their willingness to adapt, and identify where current understanding concerning the adaptation willingness and motivation remains limited.

A Model performance is the difference in expected log pointwise predictive density (ELPD) of the best model and the model considered. Vertical lines: standard errors of ELPD estimates. White background highlights covariate contrasts contained in the smallest model that is indistinguishable from the best model, i.e. for which performance is less than one standard error away from the best model. The performance of the best model is indicated by a solid red line. A description of the most influential non-selected variables is provided in Supplementary Tab. 2. B Explanatory variables can be selected for multiple strategies. Among the 29 variables selected based on their predictive performance, 17 of them relate to one strategy only, which underlines the importance of discriminating between adaptations, compared to approaches combining different adaptation actions. ‘Species replacement’ displays the highest complexity, with 13 unique variables selected.

Each cell shows the maximal marginal effect of the corresponding variable on the willingness to adopt an adaptation strategy in the future, with positive effects in shades of green and negative effects in shades of brown. Darker shades indicate stronger positive or negative effects. For categorical covariates, numerical values correspond to the largest difference between factor levels (see Supplementary Table 1 for compared categories and corresponding credible intervals). For instance, NIPF owners for whom producing maple syrup is extremely important show a willingness to replace species that is 21% lower than respondents for whom it is not at all important. Due to correlations between covariates, marginal effects are not additive. Overall effect size decreases from left to right. Effects are shown only if the 0.1 posterior quantile is situated above zero, or the 0.9 quantile is situated below zero.

How well threat appraisal, coping appraisal, and personal stakes may generally contribute towards the explanation of adaptation willingness is expressed by comparing, for each adaptation strategy, the intercept-only null model (which does not include any effects of survey items) to the model that includes the relevant subset of covariates (Fig. 3A). Including survey items based on protection motivation theory substantially increases predictive performance for five adaptation strategies (S1-S5), with performance increasing most strongly for the strategies of species replacement, species diversification, and more frequent logging. Conversely, the willingness to perform prescribed burning is not predicted by any survey items, suggesting that our analytical framework (at least for our sample and as implemented in our survey) does not provide an explanation for this adaptation behavior.

Varying influence of ownership motivations and risk perception on adaptation intention

Designing effective support policies requires a clear understanding of the motivations driving private forest owners to adapt. To that end, we quantified the effects of the entire set of influential covariates (as selected via predictive projection in the previous stage) across all six adaptation strategies simultaneously (Fig. 4). For this purpose, we use a multi-level item-response model³⁷, which accounts for correlations between adaptation actions and covariates³⁸. From this model we calculate marginal effects that express how adaptation willingness changes according to responses given to the survey items (i.e. explanatory variables), conditional on the demographic composition of the sample.

Among all strategies, species replacement represents the most important change in forest operations and can be viewed as a cautious, but proactive approach to adaptive management, with benefits anticipated only in the distant future. The variables influencing species replacement support this perspective, indicating a focus on non-commercial forest ecosystem services (e.g., aesthetic value) and a disinterest in or rejection of commercial services (e.g., Christmas tree production). The active engagement in experimental changes, coupled with the negative impact of private forest owners’ age on species replacement, suggests a commitment to ongoing experimentation in adaptive forest management. A similar set of variables is associated with the ‘species diversification’ strategy, which is clearly oriented toward close-to-nature forestry aimed at preserving forests and enhancing resilience to climate risks^5,6.

Strategies such as ‘decreased stand density’ and ‘more frequent logging’ align with traditional forestry practices focused on the production of timber and maple syrup, two lucrative forest ecosystem services. ‘More frequent logging’ may also reflect increased salvage logging following climate disturbances (Supplementary Fig. 2). In contrast, the ‘laissez-faire’ and ‘prescribed burning’ strategies, which are respectively the most and least favored strategies (Fig. 2), are also the least versatile, with the fewest influencing variables and the smallest effect sizes. Laissez-faire is mainly adopted by owners who do not derive income from their forests, while prescribed burning is more strongly rejected in Quebec, possibly due to the lower perceived wildfire risk compared to provinces with a longer history of wildfires¹⁵.

Two key variables stand out in our analysis of covariates influencing adaptation intentions: the diversity of ownership motivations and the belief in future changes in tree species composition. First, ownership motivations strongly influence adaptation decisions^28,39, which suggests that programs and policies aimed at encouraging private forest owners to adapt to climate change should emphasize the co-benefits of adaptation for a wide range of forest ecosystem services rather than focusing on climate issues alone. No variables related to carbon sequestration are contained in the set of influential variables, which further supports that these aspects do not play an important role in influencing adaptation intentions among private forest owners.

Second, the belief in future changes in tree species composition exerts a major positive influence on proactive adaptation strategies, such as ‘species diversification’ and ‘species replacement’. Consistent with studies in Sweden and Belgium^33,40, our findings—representing the first analysis of this kind in North America—suggest that adaptation willingness among private forest owners is more strongly shaped by their subjective perceptions of climate risks than by objective measures of climate vulnerability. This is further supported by the results of the Bayesian variable selection, which found that variables tied to vulnerability, such as property size or proximity to harvest date provided little additional information (Supplementary Tab. 2). This might indicate sensitivity to climate-related disturbances such as wildfires and windstorms.

For respondents with no intention to implement adaptive strategies, key barriers include limited know-how, uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of adaptation measures, and insufficient manpower (Fig. 5). Conversely, factors such as enhanced self-efficacy or improved woodlot accessibility do not appear to serve as effective levers for increasing adaptation intentions.

Bars represent the percentage of respondents who rated each reason on a scale from ‘Not at all important’ (dark blue) to ‘Extremely important’ (dark green). The right side of the figure shows the proportion of respondents who rated each reason as ‘Neutral’ (gray). Number of respondents: 30.

Overall, these results indicate that policies aimed at supporting private forest adaptation to climate change should appeal to forest owners’ common but differentiated motivations for owning forests and fully account for threat appraisal as a useful leverage point. Another important insight for policy formulation is that most of the highly influential explanatory variables show constant direction of effects across all adaptation strategies (although at varying degrees of impact) (Fig. 4). This suggests that the design of highly effective policies is indeed possible, targeting multiple strategies simultaneously with little trade-offs between competing options.

Less than one in ten forest regulations or climate programs support private forest adaptation

An important question remains, do current forest policies in Canada encourage private forest owners to implement adaptive management? To evaluate the extent of support provided to private forest owners in their efforts to adapt to climate change, we examined three primary levers of adaptive management in forestry: public regulations, voluntary programs, and sustainable certification systems. In Canada, public authorities have traditionally favored assistance and support programs over imposing laws and regulations, particularly in the context of public forests¹⁴. However, regulations do apply to private forests, primarily through provincial legislation⁴¹. We identified 100 acts, strategies, voluntary programs, and certification systems relevant to privately owned forests⁴², but only nine specifically addressed climate change mitigation or adaptation. This variation in public authority involvement, both across and within federal and provincial governments, affects the consistency and effectiveness of climate adaptation policies available to private forest owners.

At the federal level, the Canadian government prioritizes partnerships with the private sector and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) over regulatory approaches⁴³. For example, the ‘2030 Emissions Reduction Plan’ mobilizes funding for climate initiatives across Canada, including specific support for forest owners in Prince Edward Island, where over 85% of forests are privately owned, a marked contrast to the predominantly public forest ownership in the rest of Canada. The Prince Edward Island Woodlot Owners Association, supported by this federal funding, promotes forest biodiversity through a participatory conservation planning tool offering forest tours, information sessions, and the ‘Woodlot Owner of the Year’ award⁴⁴. This initiative aligns well with one of the key motivations for climate change adaptation identified in our study: an emphasis on non-productive forest ecosystem services (Fig. 4). It is noteworthy that such voluntary, incentive-based programs are most effective when combined with regulatory frameworks⁴⁵, yet none of the eight forestry-related federal acts explicitly addresses climate change adaptation in privately owned forests (Fig. 6). The closest approach to regulation comes through certification systems, such as the Forest Stewardship Council and the Sustainable Forestry Initiative. However, since these certifications primarily apply to private forest owners engaged in commercial logging, they predominantly encourage practices centered on timber production, such as ‘decreased stand density’ and ‘more frequent logging,’ while neglecting other adaptation strategies that respondents in our study favored, such as ‘species diversification’.

The letters (A, S, V, F) represent different types of policy instruments or support mechanisms – A: Acts regulating forest management, including private forests. S: Strategies initiated by public authorities related to (private) forest management and/or climate change. V: Public voluntary programs supporting private forestry or climate change mitigation or adaptation. F (federal scale): Forestry certification systems. The numbers indicate the count of documents explicitly mentioning the role of private forests in mitigation or adaptation, with the total number of documents shown in parentheses (full dataset available online³³). Spatial data on private forest locations is sourced from Stinson (2019)⁸⁶ under a CC BY 4.0 license. ‘Other forests’ encompass treaty/settlement and Crown forests, Indian and federal reserves, and restricted or protected forested areas.

At the provincial level, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Newfoundland and Labrador offer no assistance for private forest owners’ climate change adaptation (Fig. 6). While this may be unsurprising in Newfoundland and Labrador, where private forest ownership is rare, it leaves nearly 3 million hectares of private forests in the Western provinces vulnerable to a wide range of climate change-related risks, from wildfires to pest outbreaks⁴⁶. In contrast, British Columbia and Quebec have integrated adaptive practices into the management guidelines of their funding programs for timber-oriented private forest operations⁴², taking the lead in mainstreaming climate change adaptation in private timber production. However, we found no specific funding for private owners interested in non-timber forest ecosystem services, such as carbon sequestration or biodiversity conservation.

Most regulations, strategies, and voluntary programs primarily allocate budgets to tax reductions or refunds for forest operations. However, our findings suggest that these funds could be utilized more effectively. Financial incentives alone do not appear to be important drivers of adaptation among private forest owners, as our analysis did not identify them as major motivators (variable ‘Forest as income source’, Fig. 4). For instance, increasing direct funding would likely have only a marginal impact on the small fraction of private forest owners currently unwilling to adapt (Fig. 4, Fig. 5).

Instead, technical assistance emerged as a more effective driver of adaptation, consistent with findings from studies in Europe and other regions^29,39,47. Redirecting funds toward providing appropriate forest reproductive material (e.g., seeds and seedlings for assisted migration) and protection against browsing damage could better support ‘species replacement’ strategies (Fig. 4). Technical assistance in the form of expert-led field tours could help build private forest owners’ confidence in changing tree species composition and strengthen their capacities to adapt their forests.

While payments for ecosystem services remain popular among public authorities³⁹, public support still predominantly targets timber-oriented adaptation strategies, overlooking opportunities to implement a wider array of strategies on private forests. Encouraging a more diversified approach to adaptation could better equip private forests to meet the challenges posed by climate change, even if such strategies are currently less favored by owners.

Implications for policy formulations

Extreme events, such as the unprecedented wildfire season in Canada in 2023⁴⁸, the extreme drought in central Europe in 2018⁴⁹ or the expected increase in climatic risk to the world forests particularly in southern boreal, dry tropics and central Europe⁵⁰ underscore the urgent need for climate change adaptation strategies. As most countries have substantial private forest ownership, forest owners constitute an important lever to implement these strategies and ensure the provision of critical ecosystem services, particularly in proximity to more densely populated areas. Yet, our findings reveal a concerning paradox. On the one hand, we found one of the highest recorded intentions to adapt among private forest owners compared to the existing literature on forest management, along with a strong preference for implementing multiple adaptation strategies concurrently. On the other hand, we observed a mismatch in government efforts, as federal and provincial authorities often prioritize adaptation goals focused on productivity at the expense of other essential ecosystem services provided by private forests. This suggests an urgent and crucial need to reevaluate traditional policy approaches, such as tax reductions and forest operation reimbursements, which, while necessary, are insufficient to decidedly increase adaptation intentions. Our results indicate that the most effective support for private forest owners lies in providing detailed information on local climate change impacts and emphasizing the positive outcomes of adaptation for environmental and personal values rather than solely focusing on climate risk reduction. Despite limitations in the representativeness of our sample, these findings align with several articles in different national contexts emphasizing the importance of promoting voluntary adoption of adaptive forestry practices, e.g. ref. ⁵¹, alongside appropriately balanced regulatory approaches^14,52. This international perspective offers a complementary framework for considering how supporting the adaptation of non-industrial private forests (NIPFs) to climate change benefits national objectives. Empirical insights from African⁵³ and European⁵⁴ contexts demonstrate that public support for private forests can simultaneously advance social and environmental objectives (e.g., poverty reduction, climate mitigation). This dynamic is of clear relevance to Canada’s efforts to achieve the targets of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Offering technical assistance and capacity-building support on key aspects of adaptive practices implementation could complement this approach, supporting multiple adaptation strategies simultaneously, as outlined in European contexts^32,55,56. Had it been feasible, a fully representative sample of NIPF owners could also have brought feedback on this point from voluntary programs led in British Columbia and New-Brunswick. Our study was also somewhat limited by the small number of private forest owners unwilling to adapt, which prevented a robust statistical analysis of their socio-economic profiles—insights that could help refine public policies and programs targeting this specific audience. In this regard, we must acknowledge the pioneering training provided by the University of British Columbia to forest experts aimed at enhancing climate change readiness among private sector consultants¹³.

Our findings should also be assessed in light of adaptive forest management approaches that aim to reconcile biodiversity and climate goals. The strategies most favored by private forest owners align with the climate-smart forestry and functional network approaches^5,6. For instance, the ‘laissez-faire’ strategy can lead to the successional development of old-growth forests, which exhibit unique structural attributes that enhance species diversification and support multiple ecosystem services^57,58. This strategy reflects the motivations of these managers to allow forests to develop on their own, often driven by high uncertainty about the effectiveness of the strategies and a preference for less costly and time-consuming options²⁰. Nevertheless, there are concerns regarding the ecological adaptive capacity of these forests, which may be outpaced by the rapidity of climate change⁵⁹. While increasing species diversity could mitigate risks and enhance ecosystem stability, it may also entail economic costs for the forestry sector and pose risks of habitat losses for certain species⁶⁰.

Despite our best efforts, the study’s conclusions should be interpreted in light of its methodological limitations. In particular, representativeness biases are inherently difficult to avoid, especially in Canada, where data on non-industrial private forest owners remain fragmented and incomplete. This situation could be addressed through the development of comprehensive lists of forest landowners in the country, for instance by the Canadian Council of Forest Ministers. Although socio-economic comparisons were constrained by limited reference data, the sample appeared reasonably representative on key variables, with higher education levels and larger landholdings aligning with established patterns in voluntary survey participation. Nevertheless, the study makes a novel contribution by drawing on the protection motivation theory to connect individual-level determinants with broader institutional dynamics. It reinforces the idea that adaptation should not rest solely on landowners, but must also involve governments and institutions⁶¹.

The lack of adequate institutional support for private forest owners, despite their willingness to adapt, represents a major opportunity not only for Canada but also for forest management globally. Effective governance and coordination among forest managers are critical to successfully implementing adaptation strategies, such as those emphasized in climate-smart forestry and functional diversity approaches. Involving private forest owners in participatory policy-making could shed light on practical barriers to implementation, such as access to diversified tree seeds, including setting up nurseries for seed production and supply. Private forest owners account for a substantial share of forested land in many countries⁸, are majorly found close to where people live, and we expect that, similarly to Canada, their high levels of motivation to pursue adaptive practices could create the potential for a rapidly implementable forest network that could serve as a long-term social-ecological adaptation observatory and testing ground for possible implementation in public forests worldwide. This presents a unique opportunity for a global body like the United Nations Forum on Forests Council of Forest Ministers to recommend and pilot programs offering local climate impact information, along with technical assistance and expert guidance.

SANTA FE — The New Mexico Health Care Authority announced the opening of a new Child Support Services Division office in a more centrally located area to serve the northern portion of Bernalillo County. 

The new Child Support Services Division (CSSD) office, located at 3900 Masthead NE, Suite 300, opened Monday, Jan. 5. It will serve more than 7,000 cases previously handled by the CSSD office at 1010 18th St. NW, which closed Dec. 26, 2025. 

“Child support offices historically have been located close to the district courthouse for hearings. However, since most hearings are now virtual, CSSD has the ability to move to an area closer to the customers we serve in Albuquerque,” said Betina Gonzales McCracken, CSSD director.  

CSSD has two offices in Albuquerque, with cases assigned by ZIP code in Bernalillo County. The new Masthead office serves northern Bernalillo County ZIP codes, while the CSSD office at 1015 Tijeras NW, Suite 100, serves southern Bernalillo County ZIP codes. 

Many child support services can be handled without the need to visit a child support office. Child support customers are encouraged to use the customer portal at YES.NM.GOV  or contact the HCA Customer Service Center at 1-800-283-4465.  

###