Today, it is not possible to beat the hammer on the evolution of climate trends — exactly how and where they will occur, and to what degree — but scientific models already predict that biomes around the world will undergo major changes in the composition of their species. In other words, there will be new ecosystems, but there are still uncertainties about which ones will remain, and where on the planet. Therefore, the data we have are difficult to implement in public policies for land use and preservation. In any case, it is urgent to face the challenges with the weapons we have at hand.
And why is climate change endangering species? Because the climate conditions in the regions where they live become unsuitable for their survival. Thus, their livelihoods may depend on them being successful in reaching favorable regions, but this process may be interrupted by landscapes that make it difficult for them to disperse, such as agricultural lands and cities. Given this context, one of the best and least explored options to avoid extinctions resulting from climate change would be to establish a solid network of biological reserves and national parks, among others.
Historically, protected areas are crucial for biodiversity, and should be the main strategy of environmental policymakers and land use managers. The Convention on Biological Diversity, in force since 1993 and today one of the most relevant forums on the planet to discuss environmental issues, supports the protection of areas as a fundamental tool, so much so that it reaffirmed its importance through the goals of the Aichi Treaty.
The problem is that in some cases the reason for protection and conservation of a given area is its scenic beauty, and rarely are they systematically demarcated in places that could facilitate the movement of species or the dispersion of their diaspores (seeds, for example). , especially those considered highly vulnerable. An example in Brazil would be the Sertão Veredas-Peruaçu Mosaic, in northern Minas Gerais. Encompassing public conservation units, private reserves and indigenous lands, the Mosaic works as a true wildlife corridor. However, virtually no national system of protected areas was designed to function as corridors that would facilitate the dispersal of plants as a result of climate change.
If species need to reach new regions as the climate changes, will the current network of protected areas be effective conservation efforts? The answer, perhaps one of the most crucial for managers concerned with natural, urban and agricultural ecosystems, requires the use of massive data (big data), supercomputers and social science approaches that consider the implementation of climate change models and their context of application. After all, decisions about livelihood priorities are made in real-world environments, where biodiversity and its movements are just one set of concerns.
It is possible that there are millions of people on land that would be of interest to conservation policies. How to promote the autonomy and self-determination of the people who call these lands their home? How can they be integrated into efforts to mitigate the impacts of climate change?
Projects for the future must integrate the use of massive biodiversity data and climate change scenarios with stakeholder participation and social science insights already in the design process. This multifaceted approach is in everyone’s interest as it has the potential to optimize the achievement of short- and long-term human well-being goals. But given the huge gap that still exists between ecology, social science and environmental governance, will we get there in time to minimize the impacts of climate change?
*
Danilo Neves is an ecologist and professor at the Federal University of Minas Gerais.
Subscribe to the Instituto Serrapilheira newsletter to keep up with more news from the institute and from the Ciência Fundamental blog.
