Biodiversity: climate change and the ecologist.

Nature (Impact Factor: 42.35). 09/2007; 448(7153):550-2. DOI: 10.1038/448550a
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The evidence for rapid climate change now seems overwhelming. Global temperatures are predicted to rise by up to 4 °C by 2100, with associated alterations in precipitation patterns. Assessing the consequences for biodiversity, and how they might be mitigated, is a Grand Challenge in ecology.

  • Source
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Developing resource management strategies in the face of climate change is complicated by the considerable uncertainty associated with projections of climate and its impacts and by the complex interactions between social and ecological variables. The broad, interconnected nature of this challenge has resulted in calls for analytical frameworks that integrate research tools and can support natural resource management decision making in the face of uncertainty and complex interactions. We respond to this call by first reviewing three methods that have proven useful for climate change research, but whose application and development have been largely isolated: species distribution modeling, scenario planning, and simulation modeling. Species distribution models provide data-driven estimates of the future distributions of species of interest, but they face several limitations and their output alone is not sufficient to guide complex decisions for how best to manage resources given social and economic considerations along with dynamic and uncertain future conditions. Researchers and managers are increasingly exploring potential futures of social-ecological systems through scenario planning, but this process often lacks quantitative response modeling and validation procedures. Simulation models are well placed to provide added rigor to scenario planning because of their ability to reproduce complex system dynamics, but the scenarios and management options explored in simulations are often not developed by stakeholders, and there is not a clear consensus on how to include climate model outputs. We see these strengths and weaknesses as complementarities and offer an analytical framework for integrating these three tools. We then describe the ways in which this framework can help shift climate change research from useful to usable.
    ECOLOGY AND SOCIETY 01/2014; 19(3). DOI:10.5751/ES-06813-190341 · 2.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    American Journal of Botany 02/2015; 102(2):173-5. DOI:10.3732/ajb.1400545 · 2.46 Impact Factor

Full-text (4 Sources)

Available from
May 16, 2014