Search

Restoring ecosystems is an imperative for addressing biodiversity loss and climate change, and achieving the targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. One form of restoration, rewilding, may have particular promise but may also be precluded by requirements for other forms of land use now or in the future. This opportunity space is critical but challenging to assess. We explored the potential area available for rewilding in Great Britain until the year 2080 with a multisectoral land-use model with several distinct climatic and socioeconomic scenarios. By 2080, areas from 5000 to 7000 km 2 were either unmanaged or managed in ways that could be consistent with rewilding across scenarios without conflicting with the provision of ecosystem services. Beyond these areas, another 24,000-42,000 km 2 of extensive upland management could provide additional areas for rewilding if current patterns of implementation hold in the future. None of these areas, however, coincided reliably with ecosystems of priority for conservation: peatlands, ancient woodlands, or wetlands. Repeatedly, these ecosystems were found to be vulnerable to conversion. Our results are not based on an assumption of support for or benefits from rewilding and do not account for disadvantages, such as potential losses of cultural landscapes or traditional forms of management, that were beyond the modeled ecosystem services. Nevertheless, potential areas for rewilding emerge in a variety of ways, from intensification elsewhere having a substantial but inadvertent land-sparing effect, popular demand for environmental restoration, or a desire for exclusive recreation among the wealthy elite. Our findings therefore imply substantial opportunities for rewilding in the United Kingdom but also a need for interventions to shape the nature and extent of that rewilding to maintain priority conservation areas and societal objectives., (© 2024 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.)

Addressing climate change vulnerability requires an understanding of both the level of climate impacts and the capacity of the exposed population to cope. This study developed a methodology for allowing users to explore vulnerability to changes in ecosystem services as a result of climatic and socio-economic changes. It focuses on the vulnerability of Europe across multiple sectors by combining the outputs of a regional integrated assessment (IA) model, the CLIMSAVE IA Platform, with maps of coping capacity based on the five capitals approach. The presented methodology enables stakeholder-derived socio-economic futures to be represented within a quantitative integrated modelling framework in a way that changes spatially and temporally with the socio-economic storyline. Vulnerability was mapped for six key ecosystem services in 40 combined climate and socio-economic scenarios. The analysis shows that, whilst the north and west of Europe are generally better placed to cope with climate impacts than the south and east, coping could be improved in all areas. Furthermore, whilst the lack of coping capacity in dystopian scenarios often leads to greater vulnerability, there are complex interactions between sectors that lead to patterns of vulnerability that vary spatially, with scenario and by sector even within the more utopian futures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding cross-sectoral impacts is important in developing appropriate adaptation strategies to climate change, since such insight builds the capacity of decision-makers to understand the full extent of climate change vulnerability, rather than viewing single sectors in isolation. A regional integrated assessment model that captures interactions between six sectors (agriculture, forests, biodiversity, water, coasts and urban) was used to investigate impacts resulting from a wide range of climate and socio-economic scenarios. Results show that Europe will be significantly influenced by these possible future changes with between 79 and 91 % of indicator-scenario combinations found to be statistically significantly different from the baseline. Urban development increases in most scenarios across Europe due to increases in population and sometimes GDP. This has an indirect influence on the number of people affected by a 1 in 100 year flood which increases in western and northern Europe. Changes in other land uses (intensive farming, extensive farming, forests and unmanaged land) vary depending on the scenario, but food production generally increases across Europe at the expense of forest area and unmanaged land to satisfy increasing food demand. Biodiversity vulnerability and water exploitation both increase in southern and Eastern Europe due to direct effects from climate and indirect effects from changes in land use and irrigation water use. The results highlight the importance of considering non-climatic pressures and cross-sectoral interactions to fully capture climate change impacts at the regional scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Integrated cross-sectoral impact assessments facilitate a comprehensive understanding of interdependencies and potential synergies, conflicts, and trade-offs between sectors under changing conditions. This paper presents a sensitivity analysis of a European integrated assessment model, the CLIMSAVE integrated assessment platform (IAP). The IAP incorporates important cross-sectoral linkages between six key European land- and water-based sectors: agriculture, biodiversity, flooding, forests, urban, and water. Using the IAP, we investigate the direct and indirect implications of a wide range of climatic and socio-economic drivers to identify: (1) those sectors and regions most sensitive to future changes, (2) the mechanisms and directions of sensitivity (direct/indirect and positive/negative), (3) the form and magnitudes of sensitivity (linear/non-linear and strong/weak/insignificant), and (4) the relative importance of the key drivers across sectors and regions. The results are complex. Most sectors are either directly or indirectly sensitive to a large number of drivers (more than 18 out of 24 drivers considered). Over twelve of these drivers have indirect impacts on biodiversity, forests, land use diversity, and water, while only four drivers have indirect effects on flooding. In contrast, for the urban sector all the drivers are direct. Moreover, most of the driver-indicator relationships are non-linear, and hence there is the potential for 'surprises'. This highlights the importance of considering cross-sectoral interactions in future impact assessments. Such systematic analysis provides improved information for decision-makers to formulate appropriate adaptation policies to maximise benefits and minimise unintended consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides an overview of the development of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ – a user friendly software tool designed to allow stakeholders to perform integrated assessments of the effects of climate and/or socio-economic change on the important sectors and resources of two contrasting UK regions. This includes the assessment of agriculture, water resources, biodiversity and coastal and river flooding. The tool arose from the need to further develop the methods applied in the earlier RegIS project, which was the first local to regional integrated assessment in the UK. The limitations of RegIS included very long run times, a limited number of simulations, incomplete linkages between models and no allowance for scenario uncertainty. Based upon the stakeholder needs identified within RegIS, a series of guiding principles were developed with Steering Committee stakeholders, which informed the concept of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ including functionality, appearance and complexity. An Integrated Assessment Methodology based upon the Drivers-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework facilitated the integration of multiple models, scenarios and datasets within the software interface. The development of the ‘Regional Impact Simulator’ provides a test-bed for further studies of stakeholder-led, regional, integrated assessment, and provides an opportunity to learn the many lessons in undertaking such studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increasing evidence that areas with high concentrations of species tend to have high concentrations of human activities. Would this tendency be altered with projected environmental changes? We investigate this possibility using the most extensive available dataset on species distributions in Europe, providing data for 3143 species. Observed land uses were utilised to generate three indicators of anthropogenic ‘pressure’ for 1971–2000: urbanisation, cropland and grassland use intensities. Storylines describing alternative development pathways were used to create four land-use scenarios for 2021–2050. Exposure of biodiversity to human activities was measured as changes in the degree of pressure recorded in hypothetical reserve networks selected to maximize the representation of plant, breeding bird, mammal, amphibian, and reptile species. In all socio-economic scenarios there was a tendency for increasing urbanisation and decreasing cropland intensities within selected conservation areas. Pressures arising from increasing grassland use were variable across scenarios and taxa. Our results challenge the idea that a single development strategy might provide reduced impacts in all regions and taxonomic groups. We show that impacts are likely to be complex and that tradeoffs might exist among development strategies. Nevertheless, results are contingent on the data, scale, and type of analyses conducted and further research is required to assess the impacts of alternative human-development scenarios. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]