Redesigning biodiversity conservation projects for climate change: examples from the field

Abstract

Few conservation projects consider climate impacts or have a process for developing adaptation strategies. To advance climate adaptation for biodiversity conservation, we tested a step-by-step approach to developing adaptation strategies with 20 projects from diverse geographies. Project teams assessed likely climate impacts using historical climate data, future climate predictions, expert input, and scientific literature. They then developed adaptation strategies that considered ecosystems and species of concern, project goals, climate impacts, and indicators of progress. Project teams identified 176 likely climate impacts and developed adaptation strategies to address 42 of these impacts. The most common impacts were to habitat quantity or quality, and to hydrologic regimes. Nearly half of expected impacts were temperature-mediated. Twelve projects indicated that the project focus, either focal ecosystems and species or project boundaries, need to change as a result of considering climate impacts. More than half of the adaptation strategies were resistance strategies aimed at preserving the status quo. The rest aimed to make ecosystems and species more resilient in the face of expected changes. All projects altered strategies in some way, either by adding new actions, or by adjusting existing 123Biodivers Conserv (2011) 20:185-201 DOI 10.1007 actions. Habitat restoration and enactment of policies and regulations were the most frequently prescribed, though every adaptation strategy required a unique combination of actions. While the effectiveness of these adaptation strategies remains to be evaluated, the application of consistent guidance has yielded important early lessons about how, when, and how often conservation projects may need to be modified to adapt to climate change.

Demography linked to climate change projections in an ecoregional case study: integrating forecasts and field data

“…Despite well-described limitations to forecasting methods (Austin 2007, Dawson et al 2011, resources limit the possibilities of comprehensive field monitoring (McDonald-Madden et al 2010). Deep uncertainties around species response to climate change create an enormous planning challenge for land managers with potentially significant economic and ecological consequences (Poiani et al 2011). Methods that combine modeling's potential for broad-scale, long-range predictions with targeted field data can improve the reliability of predictions and build multiple lines of evidence to inform climate change conservation strategies.…”

Moving Targets and Biodiversity Offsets for Endangered Species Habitat: Is Lesser Prairie Chicken Habitat a Stock or Flow?

“…The authors propose the use of temporary habitat offsets that can shift along with species whose habitat "moves" in space, as a result of migratory behaviors or environmental changes (e.g., climate change). In developing their conception of dynamic habitat offsets, the authors cite Poiani et al [5] who sampled 20 existing conservation projects, estimating that "…more than half would require major alterations if climate-change impacts were considered. In cases where species' ranges are projected to shift in response to climate change, mobile [protected areas] could facilitate conservation".…”

Protected area management under climate change: A framework for decision making

“…Most research and planning is undertaken at the strategic level with a lack of implementation (Pierce et al 2005;Pressey & Bottrill 2009) and very few protected areas incorporate climate change into their planning and management at a park level (Poiani et al 2011). Lack of implementation of adaptation strategies may be due to the perceived costs and shortage of resources, lack of localised climate change predictions and responses, uncertainty, absence of transformative strategies not yet fully developed, and competing priorities (Galatowitsch et al 2009;Heller & Zavaleta 2009;Moser & Ekstrom 2010;Poiani et al 2011;Jones et al 2016;Wyborn et al 2016).…”

“…Lack of implementation of adaptation strategies may be due to the perceived costs and shortage of resources, lack of localised climate change predictions and responses, uncertainty, absence of transformative strategies not yet fully developed, and competing priorities (Galatowitsch et al 2009;Heller & Zavaleta 2009;Moser & Ekstrom 2010;Poiani et al 2011;Jones et al 2016;Wyborn et al 2016). Other research and management effort has been focused on the matrix and surrounding land uses to complement and support protected areas or how protected areas contribute to biodiversity on a regional scale (Lawler 2009;Hagerman et al 2010b).…”

“…Poiani et al (2011) have indicated that there is a substantial gap between theory and practice from their study of existing conservation strategies. They believe that climate change may require more emphasis to be given to transformative approaches including strategies aimed at managing for change and novel ecosystems.…”