IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/snk95_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Maximizing the effectiveness of national commitments to protected area expansion for conserving biodiversity and ecosystem carbon under climate change

Author

Listed:
  • Carroll, Carlos
  • Ray, Justina

Abstract

Global commitments to protected area expansion should prioritize opportunities to protect climate refugia and ecosystems which store high levels of irrecoverable carbon, as key components of an effective response to biodiversity loss and climate change. The United States and Canada are responsible for one-sixth of global greenhouse gas emissions but hold extensive natural ecosystems that store globally-significant above- and below-ground carbon. Canada has initiated a process of protected area network expansion in concert with efforts at reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples, and acknowledged nature-based solutions as a key aspect of climate change mitigation. The US, although not a party to global biodiversity conventions, has recently committed to protecting 30% of its extent by 2030 and achieving the UNFCCC Paris Agreement’s mitigation targets. The opportunities afforded by these dual biodiversity conservation and climate commitments require coordinated national and regional policies to ensure that new protected areas maximize biodiversity-focused adaptation and nature-based mitigation opportunities. We address how global commitments can best inform national policy initiatives which build on existing agency mandates for regional planning and species conservation. Previous analyses of global conservation priorities under climate change have been tenuously linked to policy contexts of individual nations and have lacked information on refugia due to limitations of globally available datasets. Comparison and synthesis of predictions from a range of recently-developed refugia metrics allow such data to inform planning despite substantial uncertainty arising from contrasting model assumptions and inputs. A case study for endangered species planning for old-forest-associated species in the US Pacific Northwest demonstrates how regional planning can be nested hierarchically within national biodiversity-focused adaptation and nature-based mitigation strategies which integrate refugia, connectivity, and ecosystem carbon metrics to holistically evaluate the role of different land designations and where carbon mitigation and protection of biodiversity’s resilience to climate change can be aligned.

Suggested Citation

  • Carroll, Carlos & Ray, Justina, 2021. "Maximizing the effectiveness of national commitments to protected area expansion for conserving biodiversity and ecosystem carbon under climate change," SocArXiv snk95_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:snk95_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/snk95_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5fe55fc1e3acd100504ac826/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/snk95_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernardo B. N. Strassburg & Alvaro Iribarrem & Hawthorne L. Beyer & Carlos Leandro Cordeiro & Renato Crouzeilles & Catarina C. Jakovac & André Braga Junqueira & Eduardo Lacerda & Agnieszka E. Latawiec, 2020. "Global priority areas for ecosystem restoration," Nature, Nature, vol. 586(7831), pages 724-729, October.
    2. James E. M. Watson & Takuya Iwamura & Nathalie Butt, 2013. "Mapping vulnerability and conservation adaptation strategies under climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(11), pages 989-994, November.
    3. C. R. Margules & R. L. Pressey, 2000. "Systematic conservation planning," Nature, Nature, vol. 405(6783), pages 243-253, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ferreira, João J. & Lopes, João M. & Gomes, Sofia & Nogueira, Elisabete & Dabić, Marina, 2024. "Nature's safecrackers: Decoding substitutability and protecting natural capital in innovation ecosystems SSA and MENA regions," Innovation and Green Development, Elsevier, vol. 3(4).
    2. Carroll, Carlos & Noon, Barry & Masino, Susan & Noss, Reed F., 2024. "Coordinating Old-Growth Conservation Across Scales of Space, Time, and Biodiversity: Lessons from the US Policy Debate," OSF Preprints c7fek_v1, Center for Open Science.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Auriel M. V. Fournier & R. Randy Wilson & Jeffrey S. Gleason & Evan M. Adams & Janell M. Brush & Robert J. Cooper & Stephen J. DeMaso & Melanie J. L. Driscoll & Peter C. Frederick & Patrick G. R. Jodi, 2023. "Structured Decision Making to Prioritize Regional Bird Monitoring Needs," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 207-217, May.
    2. Wang, Haoluan, 2017. "Land Conservation for Open Space: The Impact of Neighbors and the Natural Environment," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258125, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    4. Sari, Dwi Amalia & Margules, Chris & Lim, Han She & Widyatmaka, Febrio & Sayer, Jeffrey & Dale, Allan & Macgregor, Colin, 2021. "Evaluating policy coherence: A case study of peatland forests on the Kampar Peninsula landscape, Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    5. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Kim, Taeyoung & Larson, Eric R. & Armsworth, Paul R., 2017. "Economies of scale in forestland acquisition costs for nature conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 73-82.
    6. Bi Goli Jean Jacques Iritie, 2015. "Economic Growth and Biodiversity: An Overview Conservation Policies in Africa," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(2), pages 196-196, February.
    7. Di Pirro, E. & Sallustio, L. & Capotorti, G. & Marchetti, M. & Lasserre, B., 2021. "A scenario-based approach to tackle trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and land use pressure in Central Italy," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 448(C).
    8. McLane, Adam J. & Semeniuk, Christina & McDermid, Gregory J. & Marceau, Danielle J., 2011. "The role of agent-based models in wildlife ecology and management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(8), pages 1544-1556.
    9. Jessica L. Needham & Karen F. Beazley & Victoria P. Papuga, 2020. "Accessing Local Tacit Knowledge as a Means of Knowledge Co-Production for Effective Wildlife Corridor Planning in the Chignecto Isthmus, Canada," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-38, September.
    10. Ramel, Cindy & Rey, Pierre-Louis & Fernandes, Rui & Vincent, Claire & Cardoso, Ana R. & Broennimann, Olivier & Pellissier, Loïc & Pradervand, Jean-Nicolas & Ursenbacher, Sylvain & Schmidt, Benedikt R., 2020. "Integrating ecosystem services within spatial biodiversity conservation prioritization in the Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    11. Mazdak Irani & Saeed Banihashemi, 2022. "Impact of Knowledge, Tendency and Perceived Threats of Climate Change on Adaptation Strategies: The Case of Tehran Architects," Energy and Environment Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, June.
    12. Lewis, David J. & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Nelson, Erik & Polasky, Stephen, 2011. "The efficiency of voluntary incentive policies for preventing biodiversity loss," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 192-211, January.
    13. Latinovic, Zoran & Chatterjee, Sharmila C., 2024. "Value co-creation: Balancing B2B platform value and potential reverse-value effects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    14. James Fitzsimons & Michael Heiner & Bruce McKenney & Kei Sochi & Joseph Kiesecker, 2014. "Development by Design in Western Australia: Overcoming Offset Obstacles," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-21, February.
    15. Merrill Baker-Médard & Katherine Concannon & Courtney Gantt & Sierra Moen & Easton R. White, 2024. "Socialscape Ecology: Integrating Social Features and Processes into Spatially Explicit Marine Conservation Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-20, July.
    16. Vera, Ivan & Wicke, Birka & Lamers, Patrick & Cowie, Annette & Repo, Anna & Heukels, Bas & Zumpf, Colleen & Styles, David & Parish, Esther & Cherubini, Francesco & Berndes, Göran & Jager, Henriette & , 2022. "Land use for bioenergy: Synergies and trade-offs between sustainable development goals," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Egoh, Benis & Rouget, Mathieu & Reyers, Belinda & Knight, Andrew T. & Cowling, Richard M. & van Jaarsveld, Albert S. & Welz, Adam, 2007. "Integrating ecosystem services into conservation assessments: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 714-721, September.
    18. Ochoa-Ochoa, Leticia M. & Flores-Villela, Oscar A. & Bezaury-Creel, Juan E., 2016. "Using one vs. many, sensitivity and uncertainty analyses of species distribution models with focus on conservation area networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 372-382.
    19. Gaglio, M. & Aschonitis, V. & Pieretti, L. & Santos, L. & Gissi, E. & Castaldelli, G. & Fano, E.A., 2019. "Modelling past, present and future Ecosystem Services supply in a protected floodplain under land use and climate changes," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 403(C), pages 23-34.
    20. Mónica de Castro Pardo & Pascual Fernández Martínez & José Manuel Guaita Martínez & José María Martín Martín, 2020. "Modelling Natural Capital: A Proposal for a Mixed Multi-criteria Approach to Assign Management Priorities to Ecosystem Services," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 14(1), March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:snk95_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.