You are not logged in.

Prioritizing climate change adaptation options for iconic marine species

Hobday, Alistair J., Chambers, Lynda E. and Arnould, John P. Y. 2015, Prioritizing climate change adaptation options for iconic marine species, Biodiversity and conservation, vol. 24, no. 14, pp. 3449-3468, doi: 10.1007/s10531-015-1007-4.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Prioritizing climate change adaptation options for iconic marine species
Author(s) Hobday, Alistair J.
Chambers, Lynda E.
Arnould, John P. Y.ORCID iD for Arnould, John P. Y. orcid.org/0000-0003-1124-9330
Journal name Biodiversity and conservation
Volume number 24
Issue number 14
Start page 3449
End page 3468
Total pages 20
Publisher Springer
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2015-12-01
ISSN 0960-3115
1572-9710
Keyword(s) Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Biodiversity Conservation
Ecology
Environmental Sciences
Biodiversity & Conservation
Environmental Sciences & Ecology
Climate change
Marine mammals
Seabirds
Conservation
Social license
Prioritization
FRESH-WATER ENVIRONMENTS
AUSTRALIAN MARINE
SEA-TURTLES
MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIES
FRAMEWORK
PARADIGM
THREATS
Summary © 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. Adaptation options in response to climate impact scenarios for marine mammals and seabirds were developed based on the IPCC vulnerability framework. Under this framework, vulnerability to the physical effects of climate change can be reduced by adaptation options that reduce exposure of individuals, reduce the sensitivity of individuals, and increase the adaptive capacity of individual/species to cope with climate change. We evaluated options in each vulnerability category with three screening tools collectively forming an approach we term sequential adaptation prioritization for species. These tools were designed to evaluate (i) technical aspects (cost-benefit-risk, CBR), (ii) institutional barriers, and (iii) potential social acceptability. The CBR tool identified which adaptation options were high cost and low benefit, might be discarded, and which were high benefit and low cost, might be rapidly implemented (depending on risk). Low cost and low benefit options might not be pursued, while those that are high cost, but high benefit deserve further attention. Even with technical merit, adaptation options can fail because of institutional problems with implementation. The second evaluation tool, based on the conceptual framework on barriers to effective climate adaptation, identifies where barriers may exist, and leads to strategies for overcoming them. Finally, adaptation options may not be acceptable to society at large, or resisted by vocal opponents or groups. The social acceptability tool identifies potentially contested options, which may be useful to managers charged with implementing adaptation options. Social acceptability, as scored by experts, differed from acceptability scored by the public, indicating the need to involve the public in assessing this aspect. Scores from each tool for each scenario can be combined to rank the suite of adaptation options. This approach provides useful tools to assist conservation managers in selecting from a wide range of adaptation strategies; the methodology is also applicable to other conservation sectors.
Language eng
DOI 10.1007/s10531-015-1007-4
Field of Research 0501 Ecological Applications
0502 Environmental Science And Management
0602 Ecology
060205 Marine and Estuarine Ecology (incl Marine Ichthyology)
050202 Conservation and Biodiversity
Socio Economic Objective 970106 Expanding Knowledge in the Biological Sciences
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2015, Springer
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30080519

Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 4 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 6 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 90 Abstract Views, 1 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 06 Jan 2016, 16:25:12 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.