Climate change and biodiversity loss are complex environmental issues that will require multiple and integrated solutions to reach sustainability goals. Understanding the linkages between planning and policy outcomes can optimize reciprocal benefits and reduce unintended trade-offs.
The challenge with large conservation projects, such as creating wildlife crossing and landscape corridors, is that they often cross transboundary jurisdictions, which can result in fragmented coordination. Similarly, government departments are often administratively independent of one another, making it challenging to collaborate. Different planning actions and policies may not overlap in a way that supports shared conservation goals.
Newell, R., Dale, A. and Lister, N.M. 2022. An integrated climate-biodiversity framework to improve planning and policy: an application to wildlife crossings and landscape connectivity. Ecology and Society 27(1).
In a recent study, researchers conducted a literature review to identify the co-benefit and trade-off relationships between climate change and biodiversity outcomes to develop an integrated climate-biodiversity framework (ICBF) that can be used to analyze real world scenarios. Applying an integrative approach to planning and policy provides a comprehensive understanding of complex environmental issues by identifying areas of competing strategies while maximizing complementary strategies.
Through the literature review, six themes emerged as major planning and policy topics: green infrastructure, green space, transportation, food and agriculture, energy, and land management. Climate and biodiversity co-benefits and trade-offs were identified in the papers by thematic coding, and were categorized as either strategies or outcomes of the major themes.
The ICBF was then applied to a case study in Ontario, Canada. Data was collected from governmental agencies, non-profit organizations and private-sector stakeholders who implemented wildlife crossing and landscape connectivity projects. It was then analyzed to reveal the opportunities and challenges of intersecting conservation objectives.
Applying the ICBF to real world situations uncovered many co-benefits between climate change and biodiversity when planning for landscape connectivity and wildlife crossings. Most notably, green infrastructure strategies provided co-benefits when designed to support the movement of aquatic species by incorporating vegetated buffers across the landscape, since these areas also reduce erosion and run-off and/or create habitat for pollinator species.
The ICBF case study also revealed trade-offs between climate change and biodiversity outcomes when administering connectivity and wildlife crossing strategies. Trade-offs were associated with the development of large-scale energy infrastructure, leading to further habitat fragmentation that reduces landscape connectivity for wildlife. Impacting species movement is an important consideration when scaling the development of energy infrastructure, since species ranges are predicted to shift as a response to climate change.
As climate change and loss of biodiversity persists, there is a need to evaluate the effectiveness of traditional planning strategies and policy. Applying an integrated perspective can elucidate areas where opportunities will provide a co-benefit between climate change and biodiversity outcomes, and areas where potential trade-off will need more research and planning to meet sustainability challenges.
Related Posts
Balancing the benefits and risks of connectivity for disease spread
Restoring coral reefs degraded by stony coral tissue loss disease requires balancing the benefits of larval connectivity with the risk of spreading disease.
Climate warming disrupts connectivity for terrestrial vertebrates
A global assessment projects that nearly 80% of the world's land area will experience reduced climate connectivity under future warming.
Climate models often miss the pace of range shifts
A global assessment of more than 3,500 terrestrial and marine species shows that while observed range shifts often follow the predicted direction, species frequently move much faster than climate models anticipate.
