51
|
O'Connor MI, Mori AS, Gonzalez A, Dee LE, Loreau M, Avolio M, Byrnes JEK, Cheung W, Cowles J, Clark AT, Hautier Y, Hector A, Komatsu K, Newbold T, Outhwaite CL, Reich PB, Seabloom E, Williams L, Wright A, Isbell F. Grand challenges in biodiversity-ecosystem functioning research in the era of science-policy platforms require explicit consideration of feedbacks. Proc Biol Sci 2021; 288:20210783. [PMID: 34641733 PMCID: PMC8511742 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2021.0783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Feedbacks are an essential feature of resilient socio-economic systems, yet the feedbacks between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human wellbeing are not fully accounted for in global policy efforts that consider future scenarios for human activities and their consequences for nature. Failure to integrate feedbacks in our knowledge frameworks exacerbates uncertainty in future projections and potentially prevents us from realizing the full benefits of actions we can take to enhance sustainability. We identify six scientific research challenges that, if addressed, could allow future policy, conservation and monitoring efforts to quantitatively account for ecosystem and societal consequences of biodiversity change. Placing feedbacks prominently in our frameworks would lead to (i) coordinated observation of biodiversity change, ecosystem functions and human actions, (ii) joint experiment and observation programmes, (iii) more effective use of emerging technologies in biodiversity science and policy, and (iv) a more inclusive and integrated global community of biodiversity observers. To meet these challenges, we outline a five-point action plan for collaboration and connection among scientists and policymakers that emphasizes diversity, inclusion and open access. Efforts to protect biodiversity require the best possible scientific understanding of human activities, biodiversity trends, ecosystem functions and—critically—the feedbacks among them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mary I O'Connor
- Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Akira S Mori
- Graduate School of Environment and Information Sciences, Yokohama National University, Yokohama, Japan
| | - Andrew Gonzalez
- Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Laura E Dee
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
| | - Michel Loreau
- Theoretical and Empirical Ecology Station, CNRS, Moulis, France
| | - Meghan Avolio
- Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218, USA
| | - Jarrett E K Byrnes
- College of Science and Mathematics, University of Massachusetts-Boston, Boston, MA, USA
| | - William Cheung
- Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Jane Cowles
- Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
| | - Adam T Clark
- Institute of Biology, University of Graz, Holteigasse 6, 8010 Graz, Austria
| | - Yann Hautier
- Ecology and Biodiversity Group, Department of Biology, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Andrew Hector
- Department of Plant Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Tim Newbold
- Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, UK
| | - Charlotte L Outhwaite
- Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, UK
| | - Peter B Reich
- Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN 55108 USA.,Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW 2753, Australia.,Institute for Global Change Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.,School for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
| | - Eric Seabloom
- Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
| | - Laura Williams
- Department of Forest Resources, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN 55108 USA
| | - Alexandra Wright
- Biological Sciences Department, California State University Los Angeles, 5151 State University Drive, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Forest Isbell
- Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
52
|
Nicholson E, Watermeyer KE, Rowland JA, Sato CF, Stevenson SL, Andrade A, Brooks TM, Burgess ND, Cheng ST, Grantham HS, Hill SL, Keith DA, Maron M, Metzke D, Murray NJ, Nelson CR, Obura D, Plumptre A, Skowno AL, Watson JEM. Scientific foundations for an ecosystem goal, milestones and indicators for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Nat Ecol Evol 2021; 5:1338-1349. [PMID: 34400825 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-021-01538-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2021] [Accepted: 07/15/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Despite substantial conservation efforts, the loss of ecosystems continues globally, along with related declines in species and nature's contributions to people. An effective ecosystem goal, supported by clear milestones, targets and indicators, is urgently needed for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework and beyond to support biodiversity conservation, the UN Sustainable Development Goals and efforts to abate climate change. Here, we describe the scientific foundations for an ecosystem goal and milestones, founded on a theory of change, and review available indicators to measure progress. An ecosystem goal should include three core components: area, integrity and risk of collapse. Targets-the actions that are necessary for the goals to be met-should address the pathways to ecosystem loss and recovery, including safeguarding remnants of threatened ecosystems, restoring their area and integrity to reduce risk of collapse and retaining intact areas. Multiple indicators are needed to capture the different dimensions of ecosystem area, integrity and risk of collapse across all ecosystem types, and should be selected for their fitness for purpose and relevance to goal components. Science-based goals, supported by well-formulated action targets and fit-for-purpose indicators, will provide the best foundation for reversing biodiversity loss and sustaining human well-being.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily Nicholson
- Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia. .,IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, Gland, Switzerland.
| | - Kate E Watermeyer
- Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jessica A Rowland
- Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia
| | - Chloe F Sato
- Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia
| | - Simone L Stevenson
- Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia
| | - Angela Andrade
- IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, Gland, Switzerland.,Conservación Internacional, Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Thomas M Brooks
- IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.,World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), University of The Philippines, Los Baños, The Philippines.,Institute for Marine & Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
| | - Neil D Burgess
- UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), Cambridge, UK.,Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Climate, GLOBE Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Su-Ting Cheng
- School of Forestry & Resource Conservation, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
| | - Hedley S Grantham
- Wildlife Conservation Society, Global Conservation Program, New York, NY, USA
| | - Samantha L Hill
- UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), Cambridge, UK
| | - David A Keith
- IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, Gland, Switzerland.,Centre for Ecosystem Science, University of NSW, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment, Hurstville, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Martine Maron
- Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Daniel Metzke
- Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Potsdam, Germany
| | - Nicholas J Murray
- College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia
| | - Cara R Nelson
- IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Management, Gland, Switzerland.,Department of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT, USA
| | | | - Andy Plumptre
- Key Biodiversity Area Secretariat, BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK
| | - Andrew L Skowno
- South African National Biodiversity Institute, Kirstenbosch Research Centre, Cape Town, South Africa.,Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - James E M Watson
- Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
53
|
Clusella-Trullas S, Garcia RA, Terblanche JS, Hoffmann AA. How useful are thermal vulnerability indices? Trends Ecol Evol 2021; 36:1000-1010. [PMID: 34384645 DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2021.07.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2021] [Revised: 06/23/2021] [Accepted: 07/06/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
To forecast climate change impacts across habitats or taxa, thermal vulnerability indices (e.g., safety margins and warming tolerances) are growing in popularity. Here, we present their history, context, formulation, and current applications. We highlight discrepancies in terminology and usage, and we draw attention to key assumptions underpinning the main indices and to their ecological and evolutionary relevance. In the process, we flag biases influencing these indices that are not always evaluated. These biases affect both components of index formulations, namely: (i) the characterisation of the thermal environment; and (ii) an organism's physiological and behavioural responses to more frequent and severe warming. Presently, many outstanding questions weaken a thermal vulnerability index approach. We describe ways to validate vulnerability index applications and outline issues to be considered in further developing these indices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Raquel A Garcia
- Department of Botany & Zoology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
| | - John S Terblanche
- Department of Conservation Ecology & Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
| | - Ary A Hoffmann
- School of BioSciences, Bio21 Institute, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
54
|
Carroll C, Ray JC. Maximizing the effectiveness of national commitments to protected area expansion for conserving biodiversity and ecosystem carbon under climate change. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY 2021; 27:3395-3414. [PMID: 33852186 PMCID: PMC8360173 DOI: 10.1111/gcb.15645] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2020] [Accepted: 03/30/2021] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
Global commitments to protected area expansion should prioritize opportunities to protect climate refugia and ecosystems which store high levels of irrecoverable carbon, as key components of an effective response to biodiversity loss and climate change. The United States and Canada are responsible for one-sixth of global greenhouse gas emissions but hold extensive natural ecosystems that store globally significant above- and below-ground carbon. Canada has initiated a process of protected area network expansion in concert with efforts at reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, and acknowledged nature-based solutions as a key aspect of climate change mitigation. The US, although not a party to global biodiversity conventions, has recently committed to protecting 30% of its extent by 2030 and achieving the UNFCCC Paris Agreement's mitigation targets. The opportunities afforded by these dual biodiversity conservation and climate commitments require coordinated national and regional policies to ensure that new protected areas maximize biodiversity-focused adaptation and nature-based mitigation opportunities. We address how global commitments can best inform national policy initiatives which build on existing agency mandates for regional planning and species conservation. Previous analyses of global conservation priorities under climate change have been tenuously linked to policy contexts of individual nations and have lacked information on refugia due to limitations of globally available datasets. Comparison and synthesis of predictions from a range of recently developed refugia metrics allow such data to inform planning despite substantial uncertainty arising from contrasting model assumptions and inputs. A case study for endangered species planning for old-forest-associated species in the US Pacific Northwest demonstrates how regional planning can be nested hierarchically within national biodiversity-focused adaptation and nature-based mitigation strategies which integrate refugia, connectivity, and ecosystem carbon metrics to holistically evaluate the role of different land designations and where carbon mitigation and protection of biodiversity's resilience to climate change can be aligned.
Collapse
|
55
|
Hermann E, Hermann G, Tremblay JC. Ethical Artificial Intelligence in Chemical Research and Development: A Dual Advantage for Sustainability. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2021; 27:45. [PMID: 34231042 PMCID: PMC8260511 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-021-00325-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/25/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
Artificial intelligence can be a game changer to address the global challenge of humanity-threatening climate change by fostering sustainable development. Since chemical research and development lay the foundation for innovative products and solutions, this study presents a novel chemical research and development process backed with artificial intelligence and guiding ethical principles to account for both process- and outcome-related sustainability. Particularly in ethically salient contexts, ethical principles have to accompany research and development powered by artificial intelligence to promote social and environmental good and sustainability (beneficence) while preventing any harm (non-maleficence) for all stakeholders (i.e., companies, individuals, society at large) affected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erik Hermann
- IHP - Leibniz-Institut für innovative Mikroelektronik, Frankfurt (Oder), Germany.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
56
|
Grumbine RE, Xu J. Five Steps to Inject Transformative Change into the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. Bioscience 2021; 71:637-646. [PMID: 34084096 PMCID: PMC8169310 DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biab013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Accelerating declines in biodiversity and unmet targets in the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2010-2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity are stimulating widespread calls for transformative change. Such change includes societal transitions toward sustainability, as well as in specific content of the CBD's draft Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. We summarize research on transformative change and its links to biodiversity conservation, and discuss how it may influence the work of the CBD. We identify five steps to inject transformative change into the design and implementation of a new post-2020 framework: Pay attention to lessons learned from transitions research, plan for climate change, reframe area-based conservation, scale up biodiversity mainstreaming, and increase resources. These actions will transform the very nature of work under the CBD; a convention based on voluntary implementation by countries and facilitated by international administrators and experts must now accommodate a broader range of participants including businesses, Indigenous peoples, and multiple nonstate actors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Edward Grumbine
- Chinese Academy of Sciences President's International Fellowship Initiative, Centre for Mountain Futures, Kunming Institute of Botany, Kumming, China
| | - Jianchu Xu
- East and Central Asia Office, World Agroforestry Centre, Kunming, China, and is the director of the Centre for Mountain Futures and a professor at the Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, in Kunming, China
| |
Collapse
|
57
|
O'Connor LMJ, Pollock LJ, Renaud J, Verhagen W, Verburg PH, Lavorel S, Maiorano L, Thuiller W. Balancing conservation priorities for nature and for people in Europe. Science 2021; 372:856-860. [PMID: 34016780 DOI: 10.1126/science.abc4896] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2020] [Accepted: 04/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/02/2022]
Abstract
There is an urgent need to protect key areas for biodiversity and nature's contributions to people (NCP). However, different values of nature are rarely considered together in conservation planning. Here, we explore potential priority areas in Europe for biodiversity (all terrestrial vertebrates) and a set of cultural and regulating NCP while considering demand for these NCP. We quantify the spatial overlap between these priorities and their performance in representing different values of nature. We show that different priorities rarely coincide, except in certain irreplaceable ecosystems. Notably, priorities for biodiversity better represent NCP than the reverse. Theoretically, protecting an extra 5% of land has the potential to double conservation gains for biodiversity while also maintaining some essential NCP, leading to co-benefits for both nature and people.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise M J O'Connor
- Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, LECA, Laboratoire d'Écologie Alpine, F-38000 Grenoble, France.
| | - Laura J Pollock
- Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, LECA, Laboratoire d'Écologie Alpine, F-38000 Grenoble, France.,Department of Biology, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 1B1, Canada
| | - Julien Renaud
- Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, LECA, Laboratoire d'Écologie Alpine, F-38000 Grenoble, France
| | - Willem Verhagen
- Environmental Geography Group, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081HV Amsterdam, Netherlands.,Frederick S. Pardee Center for International Futures, Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208, USA
| | - Peter H Verburg
- Environmental Geography Group, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1085, 1081HV Amsterdam, Netherlands.,Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Zürcherstrasse 111, CH-8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland
| | - Sandra Lavorel
- Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, LECA, Laboratoire d'Écologie Alpine, F-38000 Grenoble, France
| | - Luigi Maiorano
- Department of Biology and Biotechnologies "Charles Darwin," University of Rome "La Sapienza," Rome, Italy
| | - Wilfried Thuiller
- Univ. Grenoble Alpes, Univ. Savoie Mont Blanc, CNRS, LECA, Laboratoire d'Écologie Alpine, F-38000 Grenoble, France
| |
Collapse
|
58
|
Conflicts between agriculture and biodiversity conservation in Europe: Looking to the future by learning from the past. ADV ECOL RES 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/bs.aecr.2021.10.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
|