Marques A.,German Center for Integrative Biodiversity Research iDiv Halle Jena Leipzig |
Marques A.,Martin Luther University of Halle Wittenberg |
Pereira H.M.,German Center for Integrative Biodiversity Research iDiv Halle Jena Leipzig |
Pereira H.M.,Martin Luther University of Halle Wittenberg |
And 22 more authors.
Basic and Applied Ecology | Year: 2014
In 2010, the parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 with the mission of halting biodiversity loss and enhance the benefits it provides to people. The 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets (Aichi Targets), which are included in the Strategic Plan, are organized under five Strategic Goals, and provide coherent guidance on how to achieve it. Halfway through the Strategic Plan, it is time to prioritize actions in order to achieve the best possible outcomes for the Aichi Targets in 2020. Actions to achieve one target may influence other targets (downstream interactions); in turn a target may be influenced by actions taken to attain other targets (upstream interactions). We explore the interactions among targets and the time-lags between implemented measures and desired outcomes to develop a framework that can reduce the overall burden associated with the implementation of the Strategic Plan. We identified the targets addressing the underlying drivers of biodiversity loss and the targets aimed at enhancing the implementation of the Strategic Plan as having the highest level of downstream interactions. Targets aimed at improving the status of biodiversity and safeguarding ecosystems followed by targets aimed at reducing the direct pressures on biodiversity and enhancing the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services, were identified as having the highest levels of upstream interactions. Perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of the Strategic Plan is the need to balance actions for its long-term sustainability with the need for urgent actions to halt biodiversity loss. © 2014 The Authors.
News Article | September 9, 2016
An international collaboration of 22 top biologists, including academics from the University of Aberdeen and led by Professor Mark Urban from the University of Connecticut, is calling for a coordinated global effort to gather much-needed biological information that will make climate change forecasts for biodiversity more realistic and precise. This will not only help the scientific community to identify the most at-risk populations and ecosystems, but will also allow for a more targeted distribution of resources as global temperatures continue to rise at a record-setting pace. Current predictions concerning biodiversity responses to climate change draw on broad statistical correlations, often failing to provide the information required to make effective management decisions, which in turn can make it difficult for policy makers to respond accordingly. These predictions are often made without considering a full range of biological factors which can influence a species' reproductive success, survival, competition from other species, mobility and the capacity to adapt and evolve. These factors have been shown to be important in mediating past and present responses to climate change, which means current methods are not providing accurate predictions. Developing approaches for providing more accurate forecasts is essential for global conservation efforts. Many species are already moving to higher ground or towards the poles to seek cooler temperatures, but the capacity of different organisms to survive climate change is likely to vary greatly. For example, some species of frog are able to move along miles of terrain and remain in a habitable environment but other species may only be capable of moving a few metres over generations. Professor Justin Travis, Dr Greta Bocedi and Dr Steve Palmer from the University of Aberdeen have developed state-of-the-art computer software, called RangeShifter, which incorporates many of the biological processes missing in previous models. This Aberdeen group secured funding from the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research and DIVERSITAS, to run a series of workshops that brought together modellers, field biologists and conservation biologists in order to identify the opportunities and challenges involved in using more complex models, such as RangeShifter, to forecast biodiversity responses to climate change. This paper arose from those workshops. Professor Travis said: "I hope that the findings and recommendations of this group are influential in promoting changes in how we conduct and organise ecological research such that we can transform our ability to forecast ecological responses to environmental change. "The collaboration recommends that we approach ecological forecasting with the level of organisation and co-ordination that the climate community successfully adopts. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has overseen vast improvements in climate change forecasting by adopting more advanced tools and applying detailed information that is gathered, coordinated and shared on a global scale, and this is the approach that we require for making more realistic forecasts of ecological responses to climate change." "An important start would be the establishment of Centres for Ecological Forecasting, each tasked with developing their own models. Then we can begin making the same comparisons between ecological forecasts as the climate community routinely does between different climate models. These centres would require teams of ecological modellers, computer programmers and, just as importantly, teams of field ecologists and evolutionary biologists working in a co-ordinated way to gather key data required by the models." Dr Bocedi added: "This is an exciting time. With sufficient commitment and investment, ten years from now we can have a set of global and regional ecological models providing forecasts for biodiversity that are as influential in determining how we manage our planet as the climate models have become." Explore further: Major changes needed to protect Australia's species and ecosystems M. C. Urban et al. Improving the forecast for biodiversity under climate change, Science (2016). DOI: 10.1126/science.aad8466
Larigauderie A.,DIVERSITAS |
Mooney H.A.,Stanford University
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability | Year: 2010
Efforts to establish an 'IPCC-like mechanism for biodiversity', or an IPBES (Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services), may culminate soon - as governments, the scientific community and other stakeholders are getting ready for a third round of negotiations on IPBES. This paper provides firstly, a brief history and broader context for the IPBES process; secondly, a description of the niche that IPBES would occupy in the science-policy landscape for biodiversity and ecosystem services; and thirdly, concludes with some views on the role of scientists in IPBES, and on the need to have strong and proper scientific structures to coordinate scientific efforts internationally, in order to produce the science needed for IPBES. © 2010 Elsevier B.V.
Perrings C.,Arizona State University |
Naeem S.,Columbia University |
Ahrestani F.S.,Columbia University |
Bunker D.E.,New Jersey Institute of Technology |
And 12 more authors.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment | Year: 2011
After the collective failure to achieve the Convention on Biological Diversity's (CBD's) 2010 target to substantially reduce biodiversity losses, the CBD adopted a plan composed of five strategic goals and 20 "SMART" (Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic, and Time-bound) targets, to be achieved by 2020. Here, an interdisciplinary group of scientists from DIVERSITAS - an international program that focuses on biodiversity science - evaluates these targets and considers the implications of an ecosystem-services-based approach for their implementation. We describe the functional differences between the targets corresponding to distinct strategic goals and identify the interdependency between targets. We then discuss the implications for supporting research and target indicators, and make several specific suggestions for target implementation. © The Ecological Society of America.