ORCID Profile
0000-0003-0073-2431
Current Organisation
Conservation International
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 04-2022
Publisher: University of Queensland Library
Date: 2021
DOI: 10.14264/2DDAD12
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 25-05-2020
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 06-2018
DOI: 10.1016/J.TREE.2018.03.009
Abstract: Climate change is shifting the ranges of species. Simple predictive metrics of range shifts such as climate velocity, that do not require extensive knowledge or data on in idual species, could help to guide conservation. We review research on climate velocity, describing the theory underpinning the concept and its assumptions. We highlight how climate velocity has already been applied in conservation-related research, including climate residence time, climate refugia, endemism, historic and projected range shifts, exposure to climate change, and climate connectivity. Finally, we discuss ways to enhance the use of climate velocity in conservation through tailoring it to be more biologically meaningful, informing design of protected areas, conserving ocean bio ersity in 3D, and informing conservation actions.
Publisher: Research Square Platform LLC
Date: 20-05-2021
DOI: 10.21203/RS.3.RS-421078/V1
Abstract: Marine species are moving rapidly in response to warming, often in different directions and with variations by location and depth. This poses challenges to conventional reserve design. We develop a three-dimensional planning approach for the high seas that conserves bio ersity, minimises exposure to climate change, retains species within reserve boundaries, and reduces fishing conflict. Resultant climate-smart networks cover 11% of the high seas (5% of the ocean) and represent low-regret conservation options that are the first places to designate as new high-seas marine reserves. With the current push to increase the area of ocean under protection to 30%, we must confront the challenges of climate-smart three-dimensional conservation in the 41% of the ocean that is beyond countries’ jurisdictions.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 13-08-2021
Abstract: Climate change is redistributing terrestrial and marine bio ersity and altering fundamental ecological interactions. To conserve bio ersity and promote its long‐term persistence, protected areas should account for the ecological implications of species’ redistribution. Data paucity across many systems means that achieving this goal requires generic metrics that act as proxies for likely responses of multiple taxa to climate change. Climate velocity is one such metric, representing the potential speed and direction of species’ range shifts. Here, we explore three approaches for incorporating climate velocity into the design of marine protected areas and demonstrate their application in the Mediterranean Sea. Our methods are designed to meet the climate‐smart adaptation strategy of protecting climate refugia by selecting slow‐moving climate velocity areas. For our case study, we found that incorporating climate velocity as a cost measure in Marxan best selects slower moving areas, which are robust indicators of climate refugia. However, this approach is unable to accommodate socio‐economic cost data and is thus impractical. Incorporating climate velocity as a boundary or as a feature selects slower moving areas with a lower socio‐economic cost. We recommend incorporating velocity as a boundary, where possible because it is a more flexible approach. The boundary approach considers the climate velocity of all planning units, rather than being limited to a subjective classification of ‘slow‐moving’ planning units when treated as a feature. However, further assessment is required. For different planning scales and for grid structures other than squares, the relative performance of incorporating climate velocity as a boundary or as a feature might vary among case studies. This work presents simple and practical ways of including climate velocity in conservation plans to achieve the key climate‐smart objective of protecting climate refugia, thereby enhancing ecological resilience. Our methods are widely applicable, encouraging researchers and practitioners to advance the field and deliver networks of climate‐smart protected areas by 2030.
Publisher: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Date: 08-06-2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.06.08.139519
Abstract: Climate change is redistributing terrestrial and marine bio ersity and altering fundamental ecological interactions. To adequately conserve bio ersity and promote its long-term persistence, protected areas should account for the ecological implications of species redistribution. Data paucity across many systems means that achieving this goal requires generic metrics that represent likely responses of multiple taxa to climate change. Climate velocity is one such metric, reflecting potential species range shifts at a generic level. Here, we explore four approaches to incorporating climate velocity metrics into the design of protected areas using the Mediterranean Sea as an illustrative ex le. Our methods are designed to meet two climate-smart planning objectives: 1) protect climate refugia by selecting slow-moving climate velocity areas, and 2) maintain the capacity of ecological systems to adapt by representing a suite of climate-velocity trajectory classes. We found that incorporating climate velocity as a cost measure in Marxan is the best approach for selecting slower-moving areas, which are good indicators of climate refugia. However, this approach fails to accommodate socio-economic cost data, and is probably impractical. Incorporating climate velocity as a boundary or as a feature provides both selection of slower-moving areas and solutions with lower socio-economic cost. Finally, we were able to design cost-effective networks of protected areas representing a suite of climate-velocity trajectories classes, which have the potential to help species adapt to a changing climate. This work presents simple and practical ways of including climate velocity in conservation plans on land and in the ocean to achieve the key climate-smart objectives of protecting climate refugia and enhancing ecological resilience.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 18-04-2023
DOI: 10.1002/EAP.2852
Abstract: Climate change is already having profound effects on bio ersity, but climate change adaptation has yet to be fully incorporated into area‐based management tools used to conserve bio ersity, such as protected areas. One main obstacle is the lack of consensus regarding how impacts of climate change can be included in spatial conservation plans. We propose a climate‐smart framework that prioritizes the protection of climate refugia—areas of low climate exposure and high bio ersity retention—using climate metrics. We explore four aspects of climate‐smart conservation planning: (1) climate model ensembles (2) multiple emission scenarios (3) climate metrics and (4) approaches to identifying climate refugia. We illustrate this framework in the Western Pacific Ocean, but it is equally applicable to terrestrial systems. We found that all aspects of climate‐smart conservation planning considered affected the configuration of spatial plans. The choice of climate metrics and approaches to identifying refugia have large effects in the resulting climate‐smart spatial plans, whereas the choice of climate models and emission scenarios have smaller effects. As the configuration of spatial plans depended on climate metrics used, a spatial plan based on a single measure of climate change (e.g., warming) will not necessarily be robust against other measures of climate change (e.g., ocean acidification). We therefore recommend using climate metrics most relevant for the bio ersity and region considered based on a single or multiple climate drivers. To include the uncertainty associated with different climate futures, we recommend using multiple climate models (i.e., an ensemble) and emission scenarios. Finally, we show that the approaches we used to identify climate refugia feature trade‐offs between: (1) the degree to which they are climate‐smart, and (2) their efficiency in meeting conservation targets. Hence, the choice of approach will depend on the relative value that stakeholders place on climate adaptation. By using this framework, protected areas can be designed with improved longevity and thus safeguard bio ersity against current and future climate change. We hope that the proposed climate‐smart framework helps transition conservation planning toward climate‐smart approaches.
No related grants have been discovered for Isaac Brito Morales.