A metric‐based framework for climate‐smart conservation planning

Abstract

Climate change is already having profound effects on biodiversity, but climate change adaptation has yet to be fully incorporated into area-based management tools used to conserve biodiversity, such as protected areas. One main obstacle is the lack of consensus regarding how impacts of climate change can be included in spatial conservation plans. We propose a climate-smart framework that prioritizes the protection of climate refugia-areas of low climate exposure and high biodiversity retention-using climate metrics. We explore

Uncertainties in forecasts of ecosystem persistence under climate change

“…Our scenario-based forecasts could be further refined by considering socio-economic and political feasibility of the proposed management and restoration actions, which would require regional or local information to assess 23 . Paired with information on action feasibility, the probabilistic forecasts from our network model could be used to inform climate-smart conservation plans 24 .…”

Priorities for protected area expansion so nations can meet their Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework commitments

“…But connectivity will also be needed in fragmented landscapes given that climate change is also a factor, with predicted changes in temperature, precipitation, and other variables that will lead to changes in habitat extent and condition. There are an increasing array of methods that can ensure connectivity is considered in the assessment phase for future PCA designation (Buenafe et al, 2023;Keeley et al, 2021;Theobald et al, 2022) but an important consideration is that connectivity should not be prioritised over other objectives aimed at achieving either representation or those identified as 'especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity'-it is important additional factor for successful biodiversity outcomes, not a direct priority for PCA establishment. Indeed, the extent to which connectivity might 'weight' decisions about PCA siting should reflect the context of the proposed PCA-namely, the specific biota it is seeking to protect and enhance, and the land-and seascape context (i.e., use, threats, degree of climate change it will experience) in which it occurs.…”

Climate change reduces long‐term population benefits from no‐take marine protected areas through selective pressures on species movement

“…To advance conservation planning in a world affected by climate change, new frameworks for MPA design that incorporate climate change adaptation have been developed (Grorud‐Colvert et al., 2021; Tittensor et al., 2019; Wilson et al., 2020). Current approaches for “climate smart” MPAs include either selecting areas with low rates of climate change, considered “climate refugia” (e.g., Arafeh‐Dalmau et al., 2021; Brito‐Morales et al., 2022; Buenafe et al., 2023), or protecting areas with high historical sea surface temperature variability (e.g., Green et al., 2014). Other strategies advocate for protecting a representative portion of habitat and/or functional groups (e.g., Colton et al., 2022; McLeod et al., 2009).…”