title: Conservation planning with uncertain climate change projections.
abstract: Climate change is affecting biodiversity worldwide, but conservation responses are constrained by considerable uncertainty regarding the magnitude, rate and ecological consequences of expected climate change. Here we propose a framework to account for several sources of uncertainty in conservation prioritization. Within this framework we account for uncertainties arising from (i) species distributions that shift following climate change, (ii) basic connectivity requirements of species, (iii) alternative climate change scenarios and their impacts, (iv) in the modelling of species distributions, and (v) different levels of confidence about present and future. When future impacts of climate change are uncertain, robustness of decision-making can be improved by quantifying the risks and trade-offs associated with climate scenarios. Sensible prioritization that accounts simultaneously for the present and potential future distributions of species is achievable without overly jeopardising present-day conservation values. Doing so requires systematic treatment of uncertainties and testing of the sensitivity of results to assumptions about climate. We illustrate the proposed framework by identifying priority areas for amphibians and reptiles in Europe.
authors: Metapopulation Research Group, Department of Biosciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
authors: Heini
authors: H
authors: Kujala
authors: Atte
authors: A
authors: Moilanen
authors: Miguel B
authors: MB
authors: Araújo
authors: Mar
authors: M
authors: Cabeza
mesh_terms: D044822:Biodiversity; D057231:Climate Change; D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources / Q000379:methods*; D003657:Decision Making; D005060:Europe; D035501:Uncertainty
references: Ecol Lett. 2009 May;12(5):420-31
references: 19379136
references: Ecol Lett. 2008 Nov;11(11):1135-1146
references: 18713269
references: Glob Chang Biol. 2014 Dec;20(12):3593-4
references: 25200514
references: Ecol Appl. 2011 Jul;21(5):1419-26
references: 21830691
references: Environ Manage. 2005 May;35(5):527-43
references: 15920667
references: Ecol Appl. 2009 Jun;19(4):817-28
references: 19544726
references: Nature. 2006 Jan 12;439(7073):161-7
references: 16407945
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Sep 30;100(20):11474-7
references: 14500914
references: Ecol Appl. 2008 Jul;18(5):1200-11
references: 18686581
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2007 Jan;22(1):42-7
references: 17011070
references: Conserv Biol. 2002 Feb;16(1):264-268
references: 35701969
references: Ecol Lett. 2011 May;14(5):484-92
references: 21447141
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2006 Jun;21(6):329-33
references: 16769433
references: Conserv Biol. 2006 Dec;20(6):1688-97
references: 17181804
references: Nature. 2001 May 3;411(6833):17-9
references: 11333950
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2005 Sep 22;272(1575):1885-91
references: 16191593
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 May 15;104(20):8352-6
references: 17449638
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2007 Nov;22(11):583-92
references: 17981360
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Apr 22;276(1661):1415-20
references: 19324811
references: Nature. 2004 Jul 1;430(6995):1 p following 33; discussion following 33
references: 15237465
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2001 May 1;16(5):242-248
references: 11301153
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2007 Jan 22;274(1607):253-60
references: 17148254
references: Science. 2008 Apr 11;320(5873):222-6
references: 18403708