Towards future-oriented conservation: Managing protected areas in an era of climate change

Communicating climate change and biodiversity loss with local populations: exploring communicative utopias in eight transdisciplinary case studies

Climate change and biodiversity loss trigger policies targeting and impacting local communities worldwide. However, research and policy implementation often fail to sufficiently consider community responses and to involve them. We present the results of a collective self-assessment exercise for eight case studies of communications with regard to climate change or biodiversity loss between project teams and local communities. We develop eight indicators of good stakeholder communication, reflecting the scope of Verran's (2002) concept of postcolonial moments as a communicative utopia. We demonstrate that applying our indicators can enhance communication and enable community responses. However, we discover a divergence between timing, complexity and (introspective) effort. Three cases qualify for postcolonial moments, but scrutinising power relations and genuine knowledge co-production remain rare. While we verify the potency of various instruments for deconstructing science, their sophistication cannot substitute trust building and epistemic/transdisciplinary awareness. Lastly, we consider that reforming inadequate funding policies helps improving the work in and with local communities.

Foresight science in conservation: Tools, barriers, and mainstreaming opportunities

Foresight science is a systematic approach to generate future predictions for planning and management by drawing upon analytical and predictive tools to understand the past and present, while providing insights about the future. To illustrate the application of foresight science in conservation, we present three case studies: identification of emerging risks to conservation, conservation of at-risk species, and aid in the development of management strategies for multiple stressors. We highlight barriers to mainstreaming foresight science in conservation including knowledge accessibility/organization, communication across diverse stakeholders/decision makers, and organizational capacity. Finally, we investigate opportunities for mainstreaming foresight science including continued advocacy to showcase its application, incorporating emerging technologies (i.e., artificial intelligence) to increase capacity/decrease costs, and increasing education/training in foresight science via specialized courses and curricula for trainees and practicing professionals. We argue that failure to mainstream foresight science will hinder the ability to achieve future conservation objectives in the Anthropocene.

Framing co-productive conservation in partnership with Arctic Indigenous peoples

Indigenous communities at the front lines of climate change and biodiversity loss are increasingly shaping the conservation of lands, waters, and species. The Arctic is a hotbed for emerging local, national, and international conservation efforts, and researchers, managers, and communities alike will benefit from a framework that improves approaches to Indigenous partnerships. Co-productive conservation is a framework that encompasses both the co-production of knowledge and the co-production of public services to pursue ethically conscious, culturally relevant, and fully knowledge-based approaches to biodiversity concerns. Co-productive conservation recognizes that conservation can be practiced in a way that embodies Indigenous perspectives, knowledge, rights, priorities, and livelihoods. Six iterative and reflexive co-production processes (i.e., co-planning, co-prioritizing, co-learning, co-managing, co-delivering, and co-assessing) focus on the human dimensions that allow research, management, and conservation to affect change. By opening discussions on how to structure conservation efforts in partnership with Indigenous communities, the conservation community can move away from narratives that perceive Indigenous participation as an obligation or part of an ethical narrative and instead embrace a process that broadens the evidence base and situates conservation within Indigenous contexts.

Protected area characteristics that help waterbirds respond to climate warming

Protected area networks help species respond to climate warming. However, the contribution of a site's environmental and conservation-relevant characteristics to these responses is not well understood. We investigated how composition of nonbreeding waterbird communities (97 species) in the European Union Natura 2000 (N2K) network (3018 sites) changed in response to increases in temperature over 25 years in 26 European countries. We measured community reshuffling based on abundance time series collected under the International Waterbird Census relative to N2K sites' conservation targets, funding, designation period, and management plan status. Waterbird community composition in sites explicitly designated to protect them and with management plans changed more quickly in response to climate warming than in other N2K sites. Temporal community changes were not affected by the designation period despite greater exposure to temperature increase inside late-designated N2K sites. Sites funded under the LIFE program had lower climate-driven community changes than sites that did not received LIFE funding. Our findings imply that efficient conservation policy that helps waterbird communities respond to climate warming is associated with sites specifically managed for waterbirds.

Using the Conservation Standards Framework to Address the Effects of Climate Change on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

Climate change has challenged biodiversity conservation practitioners and planners. In this paper, we provide scalable guidance on integrating climate change into conservation planning and adaptive management that results in the most appropriate conservation strategies. This integrated “Climate-Smart Conservation Practice” focuses on analyzing the potential impact of climate change on species, ecosystems, and ecosystem services, combined with “conventional” (non-climate) threats, and incorporating this knowledge into projects. The guidance is based on the already widely-used “Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation”, an application of systems thinking and adaptive management, which has been successfully applied to thousands of conservation projects. Our framework emphasizes a methodical analysis of climate change impacts for projects to support more productive goals and strategy development. We provide two case studies showing the applicability and flexibility of this framework. An initial key element is developing “situation models” that document both current and future threats affecting biodiversity while showing the interactions between climate and conventional threats. Guidance is also provided on how to design integrated, climate-smart goals and strategies, and detailed theories of change for selected strategies. The information and suggestions presented are intended to break down the steps to make the process more approachable, provide guidance to teams using climate change information within a systematic conservation planning process, and demonstrate how climate scientists can provide appropriate information to conservation planners.

Management Foundations for Navigating Ecological Transformation by Resisting, Accepting, or Directing Social–Ecological Change

Despite striking global change, management to ensure healthy landscapes and sustained natural resources has tended to set objectives on the basis of the historical range of variability in stationary ecosystems. Many social–ecological systems are moving into novel conditions that can result in ecological transformation. We present four foundations to enable a transition to future-oriented conservation and management that increases capacity to manage change. The foundations are to identify plausible social–ecological trajectories, to apply upstream and deliberate engagement and decision-making with stakeholders, to formulate management pathways to desired futures, and to consider a portfolio approach to manage risk and account for multiple preferences across space and time. We use the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska as a case study to illustrate how the four foundations address common land management challenges for navigating transformation and deciding when, where, and how to resist, accept, or direct social–ecological change.

RAD Adaptive Management for Transforming Ecosystems

Intensifying global change is propelling many ecosystems toward irreversible transformations. Natural resource managers face the complex task of conserving these important resources under unprecedented conditions and expanding uncertainty. As once familiar ecological conditions disappear, traditional management approaches that assume the future will reflect the past are becoming increasingly untenable. In the present article, we place adaptive management within the resist–accept–direct (RAD) framework to assist informed risk taking for transforming ecosystems. This approach empowers managers to use familiar techniques associated with adaptive management in the unfamiliar territory of ecosystem transformation. By providing a common lexicon, it gives decision makers agency to revisit objectives, consider new system trajectories, and discuss RAD strategies in relation to current system state and direction of change. Operationalizing RAD adaptive management requires periodic review and update of management actions and objectives; monitoring, experimentation, and pilot studies; and bet hedging to better identify and tolerate associated risks.

Cross-scale monitoring of habitat suitability changes using satellite time series and ecological niche models

One of the biggest challenges to deal with the global crisis of biodiversity loss is the lack of efficient and viable monitoring systems across scales. Unlike traditional in situ biodiversity monitoring, a usually costly and time-consuming enterprise, satellite remote sensing (SRS) data offer a technically feasible and sustainable in time solution. Here, we devise a cost-effective and upgradeable spatiotemporal framework for monitoring the species-specific habitat availability changes across scales by trend analysis of habitat suitability index (HSI) derived from ecological niche models (ENMs; Maxent) and using time series of SRS data (MODIS). The SRS-ENM framework was applied for a large suite of native species (911), from major taxonomic groups (flora (vascular plants), amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals), and listed in the IUCN Red List at regional (Iberian Peninsula) and continental (Europe) scales. The HSI-trend analyses predict cumulative reductions in habitat suitability for Threatened and Non-Threatened species across scales for the period 2002-2016. Specifically, 19% and 66% of the total grid cells for both species' groups showed negative trends at both regional and continental scales, respectively. Results were similar when considering all IUCN threat categories. All taxa groups showed a decrease in habitat suitability, but amphibians and reptiles groups hosted the largest number of negative HSI-trends grid cells. Considering all groups together, 12% and 34% of both study areas have strong reductions in habitat quality. We conclude that our framework detects increases and decreases in species' habitat suitability regardless of the spatial scale, extent, and pixel size. Species' range predictions across space and time based on SRS time series represent a promising Earth observation tool to support traditional risk assessment protocols and anticipate the decision-making process, while serving as a cross-scale biodiversity monitoring system.

Five Steps to Inject Transformative Change into the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework

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.

Global progress in incorporating climate adaptation into land protection for biodiversity since Aichi targets

Climate adaptation strategies are being developed and implemented to protect biodiversity from the impacts of climate change. A well-established strategy involves the identification and addition of new areas for conservation, and most countries agreed in 2010 to expand the global protected area (PA) network to 17% by 2020 (Aichi Biodiversity Target 11). Although great efforts to expand the global PA network have been made, the potential of newly established PAs to conserve biodiversity under future climate change remains unclear at the global scale. Here, we conducted the first global-extent, country-level assessment of the contribution of PA network expansion toward three key land prioritization approaches for biodiversity persistence under climate change: protecting climate refugia, protecting abiotic diversity, and increasing connectivity. These approaches avoid uncertainties of biodiversity predictions under climate change as well as the issue of undescribed species. We found that 51% of the countries created new PAs in locations with lower mean climate velocity (representing better climate refugia) and 58% added PAs in areas with higher mean abiotic diversity compared to the available, non-human-dominated lands not chosen for protection. However, connectivity among PAs declined in 53% of the countries, indicating that many new PAs were located far from existing PAs. Lastly, we identified potential improvements for climate adaptation, showing that 94% of the countries have the opportunity to improve in executing one or more approaches to conserve biodiversity. Most countries (60%) were associated with multiple opportunities, highlighting the need for integrative strategies that target multiple land protection approaches. Our results demonstrate that a global improvement in the protection of climate refugia, abiotic diversity, and connectivity of reserves is needed to complement land protection informed by existing and projected species distributions. Our study also provides a framework for countries to prioritize land protection for climate adaptation using publicly available data.

Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century

Humanity will soon define a new era for nature-one that seeks to transform decades of underwhelming responses to the global biodiversity crisis. Area-based conservation efforts, which include both protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, are likely to extend and diversify. However, persistent shortfalls in ecological representation and management effectiveness diminish the potential role of area-based conservation in stemming biodiversity loss. Here we show how the expansion of protected areas by national governments since 2010 has had limited success in increasing the coverage across different elements of biodiversity (ecoregions, 12,056 threatened species, 'Key Biodiversity Areas' and wilderness areas) and ecosystem services (productive fisheries, and carbon services on land and sea). To be more successful after 2020, area-based conservation must contribute more effectively to meeting global biodiversity goals-ranging from preventing extinctions to retaining the most-intact ecosystems-and must better collaborate with the many Indigenous peoples, community groups and private initiatives that are central to the successful conservation of biodiversity. The long-term success of area-based conservation requires parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity to secure adequate financing, plan for climate change and make biodiversity conservation a far stronger part of land, water and sea management policies.

Projected Impacts of Climate Change on the Protected Areas of Myanmar

Protected areas are the backbone of biodiversity conservation but are fixed in space and vulnerable to anthropogenic climate change. Myanmar is exceptionally rich in biodiversity but has a small protected area system. This study aimed to assess the potential vulnerability of this system to climate change. In the absence of good biodiversity data, we used a spatial modeling approach based on a statistically derived bioclimatic stratification (the Global Environmental Stratification, GEnS) to understand the spatial implications of projected climate change for Myanmar’s protected area system by 2050 and 2070. Nine bioclimatic zones and 41 strata were recognized in Myanmar, but their representation in the protected area system varied greatly, with the driest zones especially underrepresented. Under climate change, most zones will shift upslope, with some protected areas projected to change entirely to a new bioclimate. Potential impacts on biodiversity include mountaintop extinctions of species endemic to isolated peaks, loss of climate specialists from small protected areas and those with little elevational range, and woody encroachment into savannas and open forests as a result of both climate change and rising atmospheric CO2. Myanmar needs larger, better connected, and more representative protected areas, but political, social, and economic problems make this difficult.

Co-producing ecosystem services for adapting to climate change

Ecosystems can sustain social adaptation to environmental change by protecting people from climate change effects and providing options for sustaining material and non-material benefits as ecological structure and functions transform. Along adaptation pathways, people navigate the trade-offs between different ecosystem contributions to adaptation, or adaptation services (AS), and can enhance their synergies and co-benefits as environmental change unfolds. Understanding trade-offs and co-benefits of AS is therefore essential to support social adaptation and requires analysing how people co-produce AS. We analysed co-production along the three steps of the ecosystem cascade: (i) ecosystem management; (ii) mobilization; and (iii) appropriation, social access and appreciation. Using five exemplary case studies across socio-ecosystems and continents, we show how five broad mechanisms already active for current ecosystem services can enhance co-benefits and minimize trade-offs between AS: (1) traditional and multi-functional land/sea management targeting ecological resilience; (2) pro-active management for ecosystem transformation; (3) co-production of novel services in landscapes without compromising other services; (4) collective governance of all co-production steps; and (5) feedbacks from appropriation, appreciation of and social access to main AS. We conclude that knowledge and recognition of co-production mechanisms will enable pro-active management and governance for collective adaptation to ecosystem transformation. This article is part of the theme issue 'Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions'.