Research priorities for natural ecosystems in a changing global climate

PROF. STEPHEN E WILLIAMS (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-2510-7408) : Research Review Author Manuscript Article type Title: Research priorities for natural ecosystems in a changing global climate Running head: Research priorities for natural ecosystems Authors: Stephen E. Williams1*, Alistair J. Hobday2, Lorena Falconi1, Jean-Marc Hero1,3, Neil J. Holbrook4, Samantha Capon6, Nick Bond7, Scott Ling4 and Lesley Hughes8 Affiliations: 1 National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility – Natural Ecosystems Network, College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811, Australia 2 CSIRO 3 Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS, 7000, Australia. College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia; School of Science and Engineering, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore DC, QLD, 4558, Australia; and Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK 4 Institute 5 ARC for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, TAS, 7001, Australia. Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes, University of Tasmania, TAS, 7001, Australia. 6 Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, 4111, Australia. 7 Centre for Freshwater Ecosystems, La Trobe University, Wodonga, 3690, Australia. 8 Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW, 2109, Australia. *Correspondence to: Stephen.williams@jcu.edu.au Phone: +61 428 690280 This is the author manuscript accepted for publication and has undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi: 10.1111/GCB.14856 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved Abstract: Climate change poses significant emerging risks to biodiversity, ecosystem function and Author Manuscript associated socio-ecological systems. Adaptation responses must be initiated in parallel with mitigation efforts, but resources are limited. As climate risks are not distributed equally across taxa, ecosystems and processes, strategic prioritization of research that addresses stakeholder-relevant knowledge gaps will accelerate effective uptake into adaptation policy and management action. After a decade of climate change adaptation research within the Australian National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, we synthesize the National Adaptation Research Plans for marine, terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. We identify the key, globally-relevant priorities for ongoing research relevant to informing adaptation policy and environmental management aimed at maximizing the resilience of natural ecosystems to climate change. Informed by both global literature and an extensive stakeholder consultation across all ecosystems, sectors and regions in Australia, involving thousands of participants, we suggest 18 priority research topics based on their significance, urgency, technical and economic feasibility, existing knowledge gaps, and potential for cobenefits across multiple sectors. These research priorities provide a unified guide for policy makers, funding organizations and researchers to strategically direct resources, maximize stakeholder uptake of resulting knowledge, and minimize the impacts of climate change on natural ecosystems. Given the pace of climate change, it is imperative that we inform and accelerate adaptation progress in all regions around the world. Graphical Abstract (see attached file – graphical abstract.pptx) The capacity to make informed decisions about environmental policy and management in a changing climate relies on monitoring data, scientific analysis, strategic prioritization of new research and the effective synthesis and communication of technical resources and knowledge. Here we identify the most important research required to address stakeholderrelevant knowledge gaps that will increase their capacity to make the best decisions possible to minimize the impacts of climate change on natural ecosystems. Keywords: This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved global change biology; adaptation; research prioritization; natural ecosystems; marine; terrestrial; freshwater One Sentence Summary: Managing the impacts of climate change is limited by current Author Manuscript knowledge; we identify the highest priority research questions to fill this information gap. Main text: The landmark Paris Climate Agreement emerged from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change COP21 meeting and provided a framework for international action to reduce the impacts of climate change. However, the global emissions reduction pledges and actions made are widely acknowledged as being insufficient to keep global temperatures below a 2 C limit (Brent, McGee, McDonald, & Rohling, 2018). The World Meteorological Organization (WMO, 2019) recently stated that the last four years have been the hottest on record with an average global increase of more than 1C relative to preindustrial levels, currently increasing at approximately 0.2 C per decade (WMO, 2019). Increases above 1.5 C will cause widespread and potentially irreversible damage to global ecosystems and biodiversity, and dependent human systems (IPCC, 2018). The catastrophic bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef causing an estimated 50% loss of coral cover and reduced reproductive capacity (Hughes et al., 2017; Hughes et al., 2019), is a stark reminder that the world’s ecosystems are already experiencing significant impacts from anthropogenic climate change. There are now thousands of examples of species, habitat and ecosystem processes responding to the changing global climate in all ecosystems, and in all geographic regions [e.g. (Hoffmann et al., 2018; Pecl et al., 2017; Scheffers et al., 2016)]. Traditional conservation and natural resource management practices are widely acknowledged as being inadequate to prevent species extinctions and habitat degradation, and to conserve the ecosystem services on which human well-being depends. It is critical and urgent that we strategically prioritize global research efforts to help meet this challenge and minimize impacts on global biodiversity and ecosystem function. Minimizing future impacts on biodiversity, ecosystem function and the ecosystem services necessary to human society relies on two, interconnected approaches: (i) Mitigation strategies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and maintain and/or increase carbon storage, and (ii) Adaptation strategies that aim to reduce the impacts of climate change on natural and human This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved systems. The Paris Agreement emphasizes the urgent need for a global effort to increase adaptation efforts that enhance adaptive capacity, strengthen resilience and reduce the vulnerability of natural ecosystems. Even if the ambitious mitigation targets of the Paris Author Manuscript Agreement are achieved, many species and natural systems will still require significant adaptation efforts, as impacts are already widespread and significant, well below the 1.5 ° or 2 °C warming targets (Figure 1). Effective human-mediated adaptation practices are often limited by the lack of knowledge to make informed decisions, presenting an enormous global challenge to environmental management and policy across all ecosystems and societies. Therefore, there is an urgent need for carefully targeted investment in adaptation underpinned by robust vulnerability assessments and adaptation research to inform decisions, policy and actions (Moss et al., 2013; Schindler & Hilborn, 2015). However, there are technical, economic and social barriers and challenges to adaptation in all sectors (e.g. Alistair J Hobday, Chambers, & Arnould, 2015; Lynham et al., 2017). We need to prioritize where scarce resources should be targeted to provide the research, knowledge and societal capacity to make informed decisions about the management of natural ecosystems and the invaluable services they provide to human society. Meeting this challenge and managing natural ecosystems in a changing climate requires: flexible, proactive policy and management approaches informed by existing knowledge, ongoing long-term environmental monitoring and enhanced by strategically prioritized research to fill knowledge gaps; and synthesis and communication of the science to relevant stakeholders (Figure 2). Progress in developing adaptation plans varies around the world, and lessons from regions should be exchanged to enhance the progress of new or reenergized adaptation planning efforts. The Australian Government established the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF) in 2008 to identify and facilitate the research needed to underpin effective decision-making for climate adaptation (www.nccarf.edu.au). National Adaptation Research Networks were developed under the auspices of NCCARF for eight sectors including marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems. Each network was deliberately constructed to include a representative cross-section of researchers and stakeholders that included environmental management practitioners and policy makers within national, state and local governments, resource management groups, community groups, international and regional NGOs, funding agencies and businesses. In the second phase of the NCCARF This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved process (2013-2016), the three ecosystem networks (i.e. marine, freshwater and terrestrial) were consolidated into a single Natural Ecosystems network with over 2000 members across Australia, comprising 48 % scientists /researchers and 52 % stakeholders. All network Author Manuscript outputs and activities involved stakeholder participation and included >50 stakeholder consultation workshops, >40 science workshops, major involvement in 15 scientific conferences, more than 350 presentations, >200 scientific publications and many other outputs aimed at informing climate change adaptation responses and policies. Comprehensive literature reviews on impacts and adaptation options within each of the three ecosystems were followed by extensive stakeholder engagement across Australia to ascertain the knowledge required by stakeholders to inform policy and management decisions. Each network then produced a National Adaptation Research Plan (NARP) to identify ongoing knowledge gaps, guide research to fill these gaps, strengthen linkages between researchers and stakeholder/end-user groups, reduce duplication, and maximize return on public investment in research (e.g. Ling & Hobday, 2018). The NARPs were updated twice between 20102017: for more detail see the individual NARPs (Capon et al., 2017; Hobday et al., 2017; Williams et al., 2017) and NCCARF website resources. Adaptation to a changing climate is critical for the conservation of natural ecosystems and the preservation of links between ecological and socio-economic systems (Figure 1c) (Pecl et al., 2017). Therefore, increasing our knowledge about effective adaptation strategies is essential. However, research to provide this knowledge must be strategically prioritized to maximize cost-effectiveness and address the needs of environmental managers and policy makers. So where should governments and funding agencies strategically direct resources to address this issue? To answer this question, we synthesize a decade of climate adaptation research in Australian marine, freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems, and identify the key, globallyrelevant priorities for ongoing research. These priorities have been informed by the extensive stakeholder consultation process described above. Grouped within four major research themes, we suggest 18 Research Priorities based on their significance, urgency, technical and economic feasibility, existing knowledge gaps, and the potential for co-benefits across multiple sectors (Table 1 and supplementary text). These priorities provide a unified guide for policy makers, funding organizations and researchers to strategically direct resources, maximize the uptake of the resulting knowledge and minimize the impacts of climate change on natural ecosystems. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved The 18 Research Priorities were identified by initially collating and classifying research priorities identified within each of the three latest editions of the National Adaptation Author Manuscript Research Plans in a workshop. The overall synthesis and assessment process consisted of four steps (below) with steps 2-4 being completed in a workshop by the authors as representative experts from each ecosystem network, all with previous high-level involvement in producing the three separate National Adaptation Research Plans: 1. Nine years of extensive stakeholder consultation across each of the three ecosystem networks resulting in the three ecosystem-based Australian National Adaptation Research Plans (NARPs); 2. Synthesizing the research questions from each ecosystem NARP into a single set of high-level questions relevant to all natural ecosystems; 3. Selection of six criteria for ranking and prioritizing research based on best practice approaches aimed at facilitating the effective uptake of research prioritization into policy (Rudd, 2011) and factors identified by the extensive stakeholder consultation processes conducted within the NCCARF over the previous 10 years (Capon et al., 2017; Hobday et al., 2017; Williams et al., 2017). We then applied a scoring system designed to capture the likely overall impact/benefit from investment in each question based on six criteria (significance, urgency, technical and economic feasibility, existing state of knowledge, and benefits to multiple sectors), and; 4. Ranking each synthesis research question for each ecosystem based on the prioritization criteria. Summarized results are presented in Table 1 with more detailed descriptions and full scores in Supplementary text and table. The Priority Research questions identified can be categorised into four broad themes: (1) General goals, policy and implementation strategies for conservation and resource use Climate change presents an enormous challenge to conservation practice, not only because of the biophysical impacts but because it requires reframing the general principles that underlie conventional approaches. We need to develop guiding principles for conservation based on a fundamentally different paradigm of managing This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved ecosystem change that emphasizes a proactive (predictive) and spatially/temporally dynamic approach, rather than the traditional, reactive paradigm that relied largely on managing existing threats and protecting high value areas. Author Manuscript (2) Integrated (ecosystem-based) management and adaptation Traditional protected area strategies are no longer sufficient for the conservation of biodiversity across diverse and multi-use land, water and seascapes. Sustainable management of natural ecosystems in the face of climate change will be enhanced by integrated approaches that incorporate activities such as biodiversity conservation, carbon storage/emissions abatement and sustainable resource use. There is an urgent need for increased understanding of how landscape configuration can be managed to optimize biodiversity conservation, while simultaneously promoting productivity in sectors such as agriculture, aquaculture, fishing and tourism. (3) Managing threats and stressors Synergistic interactions between climate change and other human pressures likely pose the most important threats to global biodiversity. Understanding the impacts of such interactions across multiple scales will assist in allocating resources between ameliorating existing stressors and implementing new adaptive strategies that specifically address climate change (e.g. species translocations). The best solution may not be the optimum for any individual stressor but rather one that maximizes the benefits across multiple stressors. (4) Managing natural assets and dependent human systems Public support is often most strongly aligned with protecting particular iconic species and, as a result, much conservation effort and adaptation action has been driven by species-level concerns important for a subset of stakeholders. In contrast with the previous themes, therefore, this area encompasses research questions regarding the management of specific biodiversity assets, primarily species, including those that support human activities, such as fishing and tourism. Synthesis across the three ecosystem realms revealed strong commonalities in knowledge gaps and research prioritization (Table 1; see Supplementary Table S1 and text for more detail on the comparison across ecosystems). Of the 18 Priority Research questions, the highest priorities identified through our assessment process were: 1) social barriers to This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved adaptation; 2) transformational adaptation in management, planning, policy, law and institutional structures to enable processes that are flexible, dynamic and proactive; 3) extreme events and their thresholds of impact 4) vulnerability of species, processes, services Author Manuscript and ecosystems; 5) long-term environmental monitoring systems; and, 6) connections across ecosystems, especially with respect to integrating adaptation and mitigation actions. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved Generally, there was close agreement across the different ecosystem realms about the highest 2 priority research questions (see supplementary Table S1 for individual scores for each realm). 3 There were, however, a few noteworthy differences among realms. For example, addressing 4 social and institutional changes in marine systems was perceived as a lower priority than in 5 the other two realms as it has already been investigated to a greater degree in marine 6 management and policy (e.g. Creighton, Hobday, Lockwood, & Pecl, 2016). There was also a 7 greater perceived priority for strategic selection of protected areas to increase ecosystem 8 resilience within the terrestrial realm. The importance of environmental monitoring systems 9 was ranked as being of highest importance in all three realms; the only factor that lowered the 10 overall score of this priority was the relatively high economic costs involved, thereby 11 lowering the economic feasibility score. 12 Author Manuscript 1 13 An example of the successful outcomes possible from combining stakeholder needs, 14 biodiversity analyses and networking is provided by the Queensland Government Landscape 15 Resilience program (Vanderwal, Williams, Atkinson, & Reside, 2015; Williams, Falconi, 16 Scheffers, 2015). As described in Figure 2, long-term research and monitoring, data 17 compilation, synthesis and analysis, strategic research prioritization, policy and conservation 18 goals were explicitly linked to stakeholder needs via the NCCARF network and collaboration 19 with the Queensland State Environment Department to identify locations with the highest 20 potential to protect the most species into the future. The Queensland Government 21 subsequently created more than 10 new National Parks in an ongoing program aimed at 22 maximizing future landscape resilience under a changing global climate. This outcome was 23 only possible due to the increased capacity within the Queensland Government to make 24 informed decisions based on the integrated approach described in Figure 2 and facilitated by 25 the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility and biodiversity research carried 26 out within the Australian Wet Tropics World Heritage Area (Williams & Falconi, 2015). 27 28 Our synthesis demonstrates strong commonalities across the different ecosystem realms in 29 the knowledge gaps we need to fill to advance climate change adaptation in natural systems. 30 This work represents the culmination of a substantial investment across the natural ecosystem 31 science, management and policy sectors of Australia, and can serve as a model for other 32 regions tackling ecosystem adaptation in a changing climate. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved 33 Summary 35 There is clear evidence of climate-driven change in all ecosystems globally (Pecl et al., 2017; 36 Smale et al., 2019) and an urgent global need for strategic research that supports policy and 37 environmental management to facilitate effective adaptation (Moss et al., 2013; Schindler & 38 Hilborn, 2015). This synthesis of the three ecosystem-based National Adaptation Research 39 Plans in Australia and assessment of the highest priorities across ecosystems clearly 40 demonstrate strong commonalities. This analysis has filtered, refined and synthesized existing 41 knowledge about adaptation research priorities for natural ecosystems, and then reassessed 42 this knowledge based on a decade of research and shifting societal priorities. Research 43 prioritization is an important strategic step to enable governments, other research funding 44 agencies, and research providers to advance knowledge that targets the needs of stakeholders 45 in the most efficient manner possible. The NCCARF effort in Australia provides a valuable 46 model that can be applied globally to formulate policy, strategically direct research effort, 47 and maximize the adaptive capacity of ecosystem managers. Although this synthesis has an 48 Australian context, the process of research prioritization and the high-priority research 49 questions identified here are globally relevant. Addressing these priority questions in the next 50 decade is critical, particularly given the accelerating impacts predicted above 1.5 C and the 51 increasing likelihood global warming will significantly exceed the Paris target of +2 C this 52 century. 53 54 55 Author Manuscript 34 56 Acknowledgements: We would like to acknowledge the support, funding and staff of the 57 National Climate Change and Adaptation Research Facility and the Australian Department of 58 the Environment and Energy. Significant financial and in-kind support was also provided by 59 James Cook University and thank you to all of our affiliated organizations for enabling the 60 considerable contribution of time necessary for involvement in this long-term initiative. 61 Comments from two anonymous reviewers improved the structure of this submission. 62 63 References: 64 Brent, K., McGee, J., McDonald, J., & Rohling, E. J. (2018). International law poses problems for negative 65 emissions research. Nature Climate Change, 8(6), 451. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved 66 Capon, S., Chambers, J., Barmuta, L., Bino, G., Bond, N., Costelloe, J., . . . Thompson, R. (2017). National 67 Climate Change Adaptation Research Plan for freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity. Gold Coast: 68 National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility. 69 Creighton, C., Hobday, A. J., Lockwood, M., & Pecl, G. T. (2016). Adapting management of marine environments to a changing climate: a checklist to guide reform and assess progress. Ecosystems, 71 19(2), 187-219. 72 73 74 Author Manuscript 70 Hobday, A. J., Chambers, L. E., & Arnould, J. P. (2015). Prioritizing climate change adaptation options for iconic marine species. Biodiversity and Conservation, 24(14), 3449-3468. Hobday, A. J., Ling, S. D., Holbrook, N. J., Caputi, N., McDonald Madden, E., McDonald, J., & Munday, P. 75 (2017). National Climate Change Adaptation Research Plan Marine Biodiversity and Resources. Gold 76 Coast, Australia: National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility. 77 Hoffmann, A. A., Rymer, P. D., Byrne, M., Ruthrof, K. X., Whinam, J., McGeoch, M., . . . Joseph, L. (2018). 78 Impacts of recent climate change on terrestrial flora and fauna: Some emerging Australian examples. 79 Austral Ecology. 80 Hughes, T. P., Kerry, J. T., Álvarez-Noriega, M., Álvarez-Romero, J. G., Anderson, K. D., Baird, A. H., . . . 81 Berkelmans, R. (2017). Global warming and recurrent mass bleaching of corals. Nature, 543(7645), 82 373. 83 84 Hughes, T. P., Kerry, J. T., Baird, A. H., Connolly, S. R., Chase, T. J., Dietzel, A., . . . Jacobson, M. (2019). Global warming impairs stock–recruitment dynamics of corals. Nature, 568(7752), 387. 85 IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II 86 to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental panel on Climate Change. Cambridge U.K.: 87 Cambridge University Press. 88 IPCC. (2018). Summary for Policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the 89 impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas 90 emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, 91 sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty Retrieved from 92 93 Ling, S. D., & Hobday, A. J. (2018). National research planning accelerates relevance and immediacy of climate adaptation science. (in press). Marine and Freshwater Research. 94 Lynham, J., Halpern, B., Blenckner, T., Essington, T., Estes, J., Hunsicker, M., . . . Selkoe, K. (2017). Costly 95 stakeholder participation creates inertia in marine ecosystems. Marine Policy, 76, 122-129. 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 Moss, R. H., Meehl, G., Lemos, M. C., Smith, J., Arnold, J., Arnott, J., . . . Busalacchi, A. (2013). Hell and high water: practice-relevant adaptation science. Science, 342(6159), 696-698. Pecl, G. T., Araújo, M. B., Bell, J. D., Blanchard, J., Bonebrake, T. C., Chen, I.-C., . . . Williams, S. E. (2017). Biodiversity redistribution under climate change: Impacts on ecosystems and human well-being. Science, 355(6332). doi:10.1126/science.aai9214 Rudd, M. A. (2011). How research‐prioritization exercises affect conservation policy. Conservation Biology, 25(5), 860-866. Scheffers, B. R., De Meester, L., Bridge, T. C., Hoffmann, A. A., Pandolfi, J. M., Corlett, R. T., . . . Dudgeon, 104 D. (2016). The broad footprint of climate change from genes to biomes to people. Science, 354(6313), 105 aaf7671. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved 106 107 108 Schindler, D. E., & Hilborn, R. (2015). Prediction, precaution, and policy under global change. Science, 347(6225), 953-954. Smale, D. A., Wernberg, T., Oliver, E. C., Thomsen, M., Harvey, B. P., Straub, S. C., . . . Donat, M. G. (2019). Marine heatwaves threaten global biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services. Nature Climate 110 Change, 1. 111 112 113 114 115 Author Manuscript 109 Vanderwal, J., Williams, S. E., Atkinson, I., & Reside, A. (2015). Science can influence policy and benefit the public – here’s how. The Conversation. Williams, S. E., & Falconi, L. (2015). Climate change could empty wildlife from Australia’s rainforests. The Conversation. Williams, S. E., Falconi, L., Lowe, A., Bowman, D., Garnett, S., Kitching, R., . . . Isaac, J. (2017). National 116 Climate Change Adaptation Research Plan Terrestrial biodiversity. Gold Coast, Australia: National 117 Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility: NCCARF. 118 119 120 121 Williams, S. E., Falconi, L., & Scheffers, B. (2015). Let's get serious about protecting wildlife in a warming world. The Conversation. WMO. (2019). WMO Statement on the State of the Global Climate in 2018. World Meteorological Organization(WMO-No. 1233). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved 126 each criterion as low (1), medium (2) or high (3) priority within each separate ecosystem realm (terrestrial, freshwater and marine) and then 127 summed (max score = 9). For detailed descriptions of each research question and individual scoring for each question and criteria, see 128 Supplementary Table S1 and Supplementary text. Research Themes Priority Research Questions/Topics 1. General goals, 1. What are the main social barriers and opportunities for effective policy and adaptation and how do we overcome them? implementation 2. How do we ensure conservation and natural resource management strategies for goals, policies and practices are flexible, dynamic and proactive in the conservation and face of a rapidly changing world? resource use 3. How can adaptation and mitigation strategies be optimized to include the connections and synergies between terrestrial, freshwater This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved Priority Score knowledge gap, technical and economic feasibility, urgency, and potential for co-benefits across multiple sectors. Each question was ranked for Co-benefits 125 Urgency priority research topics relevant to all three natural ecosystems. Rankings were based on six criteria: the significance of the research, the existing Feasibility - Economic 124 Feasibility - Technical of Australia’s National Adaptation Research Plans for terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems. These questions represent the highest State of Knowledge 123 Significance Table 1. Priority research themes and questions on climate change adaptation in natural ecosystems based on a synthesis and expert assessment Author Manuscript 122 8 8 9 9 8 9 51 9 7 9 9 8 8 50 9 7 6 8 8 9 47 Author Manuscript and marine ecosystems? 4. How should we ensure that the existing legal, policy and institutional architecture is aligned for more effective and flexible management of ecosystems, natural resources and production systems (agriculture, 7 4 8 9 8 8 44 9 5 7 6 8 9 44 6 4 9 9 6 6 40 9 9 9 3 8 9 47 8 7 7 6 9 9 46 8 6 7 6 7 8 42 9 7 5 6 6 8 41 5 7 9 9 4 5 39 fisheries, aquaculture)? 5. How can we better communicate the importance of effective adaptation aimed at protecting the values and services of natural ecosystems? 6. How can adaptation planning be embedded within, and take advantage of, major human demographic and economic trends? 2. Integrated 7. What conceptual models and long-term observation/monitoring (ecosystem systems are needed to facilitate effective and dynamic natural resource based) management? management and 8. How can emission reduction initiatives be designed to enhance adaptation biodiversity benefits and ecosystem services? across diverse 9. How can we incorporate climate change adaptation into on-ground and multiuse natural resource management practices? land, water and 10. What principles should guide ecosystem-based adaptation and the seascapes design of land, water and seascapes? 11. How should new protected areas be selected to maximize the resilience of ecosystems and natural resources? This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved 12. What are the implications of novel ecosystems for conservation and 129 Author Manuscript natural resource management? 3. Managing 13. How can we identify critical biological thresholds that may be threats and exceeded during extreme events to design effective adaptation stressors strategies? 5 6 3 6 3 3 26 9 9 7 6 9 9 49 9 6 5 3 9 9 41 9 5 9 9 8 7 47 9 9 6 5 8 6 43 6 5 5 7 8 8 39 9 5 5 5 6 9 39 14. What will be the synergies, interactions and cumulative impacts of existing stressors and climate change on natural ecosystems and what are the implications for managing ecosystems and natural resources? 4. Managing 15. How do we identify and prioritize species/communities that should natural assets be the focus of investment in climate change adaptation? and dependent 16. How do we optimize cost-benefit analyses of adaptation actions aimed human systems at protecting biodiversity assets? 17. How should current on-ground management actions for protecting priority species / communities and managing problem species be modified in the context of a rapidly changing climate? 18. What opportunities are there for human dependent systems to adapt to climate change effects through changing focal species and management regime, risk management, or industry diversification, relocation or divestment? This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved 130 Figure Captions 131 Figure 1. Reducing the already evident impacts of climate change on natural systems (A) 133 will require mitigation efforts that limit the warming (B), and adaptation efforts that seek to 134 reduce the exposure and sensitivity and/or increase the adaptive capacity of natural systems 135 and decrease the resource dependency and/or increase the adaptive capacity of the linked 136 human component of natural systems (C). If mitigation efforts achieve the 2°C limit, 137 adaptation efforts will still require significant effort (Bi); if warming is kept below 2°C, less 138 adaptation will be required (Bii), but if mitigation efforts are unsuccessful with regard to the 139 target, more interventionist adaptation will be needed, and there may be a gap (Biii). Colour 140 bars in B represent the vulnerability of natural systems to global warming, modified from 141 IPCC (IPCC, 2007) Fig 11.4. 142 143 Author Manuscript 132 144 Figure 2. Informed adaptation and capacity building leads to better policy and management. 145 Diagrammatic representation of the essential components of adaptation that need to be 146 integrated for effectively informing policy makers and environmental managers concerned 147 with avoiding species extinctions and habitat degradation. Long-term monitoring is vital for 148 providing spatial and temporal data on species distributions and abundance, environmental 149 conditions and trends over time; Biodiversity Science encompasses many aspects of 150 describing and understanding the drivers of spatial patterns of biodiversity, providing 151 knowledge on the spatial location of potential refugia, significant biodiversity hotspots, and 152 geographic patterns of vulnerability; Research Facilitation includes many aspects of strategic 153 prioritization and allocation of funds informed by stakeholder needs, thereby maximizing 154 uptake of the research; Information Exchange increases the speed of adaptation knowledge 155 uptake and communication of successful strategies to other stakeholders while also 156 decreasing duplication of research and increasing the effectiveness of funding; Synthesis and 157 Meta-analysis emphasize the use of existing knowledge and the integration of data sets, 158 thereby increasing the power of subsequent analyses and the overall robustness of the 159 knowledge. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved Author Manuscript gcb_14856_f1.png This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved Author Manuscript gcb_14856_f2.png This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne Author/s: Williams, SE; Hobday, AJ; Falconi, L; Hero, J-M; Holbrook, NJ; Capon, S; Bond, NR; Ling, SD; Hughes, L Title: Research priorities for natural ecosystems in a changing global climate Date: 2020-02-01 Citation: Williams, S. E., Hobday, A. J., Falconi, L., Hero, J. -M., Holbrook, N. J., Capon, S., Bond, N. R., Ling, S. D. & Hughes, L. (2020). Research priorities for natural ecosystems in a changing global climate. GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 26 (2), pp.410-416. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14856. Persistent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/286640 File Description: Accepted version