Abstract
Climate change is one of the greatest threats to biodiversity. Although it might adversely impact all of the world in varying magnitudes, tropical biodiversity is expected to be impacted the most. Central and South America (CSA) is among the most biodiverse regions in the world, housing several important areas for conservation due to high levels of diversity and endemism. Thus, because of its disproportionate tropical biodiversity, CSA might be severely vulnerable to climate change in the future. We performed a systematic review to assess how risk projections varied for different aspects of biodiversity in CSA, and the potential benefits of limiting climate change. We evaluated 71 scientific papers, amounting to > 3000 risk projections in the priority areas for conservation in CSA. CSA houses some of the most studied richspots in the world, with a strong bias towards the Atlantic Forest, Mesoamerica and Cerrado hotspots. Our results indicate that up to 85% of risk projections predict negative impacts, with 26% of projections predicting species extinctions. While high emissions scenarios indicate severe adverse impacts for biodiversity in CSA, noteworthy risk reduction arose from mitigation. Considering a climate change mitigation scenario in line with the Paris Agreement, risks for the region could be substantially reduced by over 80%. However, for endemic species, which are predicted to be the most impacted by climate change in CSA, mitigation alone will not suffice to minimize climatic risks. This highlights the urgent need of adaptation measures to increase the resilience of natural systems in the CSA to climate change.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Antonelli A, Sanmartín I (2011) Why are there so many plant species in the Neotropics? Taxon 60(2):403–414. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.602010
Bellard C, Leclerc C, Leroy B, Bakkenes M, Veloz S et al (2014) Vulnerability of biodiversity hotspots to global change. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 12:1376–1386. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12228
Benayas JMR, Newton AC, Diaz A, Bullock JM (2009) Enhancement of biodiversity and ecosystem services by ecological restoration: a meta-analysis. Science 325:1121–1124. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172460
Bonnet X, Shine R, Lourdais O (2002) Taxonomic chauvinism. Trends Ecol Evol 17:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02381-3
Brancalion PHS, Niamir A, Broadbent E, Crouzeilles R, Barros FSM et al (2019) Global restoration opportunities in tropical rainforest landscapes. Sci Adv 5:eaav3223. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav3223
Brooks TM, Mittermeier RA, Fonseca GAB, Gerlach J, Hoffmann M et al (2006) Global biodiversity conservation priorities. Science 313(5783):58–61. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127609
Bustamante MMC, Silva JS, Scariot A, Sampaio AB, Mascia DL et al (2019) Ecological restoration as a strategy for mitigating and adapting to climate change: lessons and challenges from Brazil. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 24:1249–1270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-018-9837-5
Carvalho T, Becker CG, Toledo LF (2017) Historical amphibian declines and extinctions in Brazil linked to chytridiomycosis. Proc R Soc B 284:2012254. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2016.2254
Chausson A, Turner B, Seddon D, Chabaneix N, Girardin CAJ et al (2020) Mapping the effectiveness of nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation. Glob Change Biol 26:6134–6155. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15310
Cohen-Shacham E, Walters G, Janzen C, Maginnis S (eds) (2016) Nature-based solutions to address global societal challenges. IUCN, Gland, p xiii + 97. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2016.13.en
Costello MJ, Wilson S, Houlding B (2012) Predicting total global species richness using rates of species description and estimates of taxonomic effort. Syst Biol 61:871–883. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syr080
Crouzeilles R, Santiami E, Rosa M, Pugliese L, Brancalion PHS et al (2019) There is hope for achieving ambitious Atlantic Forest restoration commitments. Perspect Ecol Conserv 17:80–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.04.003
Cunha FAFS, Börner J, Wunder S, Cosenza CAN, Lucena AFP (2016) The implementation costs of forest conservation policies in Brazil. Ecol Econ 130:209–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.07.007
Deutsch CA, Tewksbury JJ, Huey RB, Sheldon KS, Ghalambor CK et al (2008) Impacts of climate warming on terrestrial ectotherms across latitude. PNAS 105:6668–6672. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0709472105
Dillon ME, Wang G, Huey RB (2010) Global metabolic impacts of recent climate warming. Nature 467:704–706. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09407
Feeley KJ, Stroud JT, Perez TM (2017) Most ‘global’ reviews of species’ responses to climate change are not truly global. Divers Distrib 23:231–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12517
Fontúrbel FE, Lara A, Lobos D, Little C (2018) The cascade impacts of climate change could threaten key ecological interactions. Ecosphere 9(12):e02485. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2485
Frederico RG, Olden JD, Zuanon J (2016) Climate change sensitivity of threatened, and largely unprotected. Amazonian Fishes Aquat Conserv 26(S1):91–102. https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.2658
Grima N, Singh SJ, Smetschka B, Ringhofer L (2016) Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Latin America: analysing the performance of 40 case studies. Ecosyst Serv 17:24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.010
Griscom BW, Adams J, Ellis PW, Houghton RA, Lomax G et al (2017) Natural climate solutions. PNAS 114:11645–11650. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710465114
Griscom BW, Busch J, Cook-Patton SC, Ellis PW, Funk J et al (2020) National mitigation potential from natural climate solutions in the tropics. Philos Trans R Soc 375:20190126. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0126
Hannah L, Roehrdanz PR, Marquet PA, Enquist BJ, Midgley G et al (2020) 30% land conservation and climate action reduces tropical extinction risk by more than 50%. Ecography 43:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecog.05166
IPCC (2007) Global climate projections. In: Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, et al (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
IPCC (2013) Annex I: Atlas of global and regional climate projections [van Oldenborgh GJ, Collins M, Arblaster J, Christensen JH, Marotzke J, et al (eds.)]. In: Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker TF, Qin D, Plattner GK, Tignor M, Allen SK, et al (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, RK Pachauri and LA Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp
IPCC (2018) Summary for policymakers. In: Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte V et al (eds.)]. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1–32
IPCC (2021) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate change 2021: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In press
Jones HP, Hole DG, Zavaleta ES (2012) Harnessing nature to help people adapt to climate change. Nat Clim Change 2:504–509. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1463
Khaliq I, Hof C, Prinzinger R, Böhning-Gaese K, Pfenninger M (2014) Global variation in thermal tolerances and vulnerability of endotherms to climate change. Philos Trans R Soc 281:20141097. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1097
Kosmus M, Bruner A, Koning F, Diaz W, Felix M et al (2012) TEEBcase: a long-term financial mechanism for conservation agreements in the Ecuadorian Chocó. Available at: TEEBweb.org
Lenton TM, Rockström J, Gaffney O, Rahmstorf S, Richardson K et al (2019) Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against. Nature 575:592–595. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03595-0
Locatelli B, Evans V, Wardell A, Andrade A, Vignola R (2011) Forests and climate change in Latin America: linking adaptation and mitigation. Forests 2(1):431–450. https://doi.org/10.3390/f2010431
Loyola RL, Lemes P, Nabout JC, Trindade-Filho J, Sagnori MD et al (2012) A straightforward conceptual approach for evaluating spatial conservation priorities under climate change. Biodivers Conserv 22:483–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0424-x
Mace GM, Barrett M, Burgess ND, Cornell SE, Freeman R et al (2018) Aiming higher to bend the curve of biodiversity loss. Nat Sustain 1:448–451. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0130-0
Mackey B, Kormos CF, Keith H, Moomaw WR, Houghton RA et al (2020) Understanding the importance of primary tropical forest protection as a mitigation strategy. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 25:763–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-019-09891-4
Malcolm JR, Liu C, Neilson RP, Hansen L, Hannah L (2006) Global warming and extinctions of endemic species from biodiversity hotspots. Conserv Biol 20(2):538–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00364.x
Manes S, Costello MJ, Beckett H, Debnath A, Devenish-Nelson E et al (2021) Endemism increases species’ climate change risk in areas of global biodiversity importance. Biol Conserv 257:109070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109070
Manes S, Vale MM, Pires APF (2022) The effectiveness of climate action and land recovery across ecosystems, climatic zones and scales. Reg Environ Change 22:5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-021-01866-z
Mittermeier RA, Gil PR, Roffman M, Pilgrim J, Brooks T et al (2004) Hotspots revisited: Earth’s biologically richest and most endangered terrestrial ecoregions. CEMEX, Agrupacion Sierra Madre, SC
Mittermeier RA, Turner WR, Larsen FW, Brooks TM, Gascon C (2011) Global biodiversity conservation: the critical role of hotspots. In: Zachos F, Habel J (eds) Biodiversity hotspots. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20992-5_1
Myers N, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Fonseca GAB, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858. https://doi.org/10.1038/35002501
Nabout JC, Carvalho P, Prado MU, Borges PP, Machado KB et al (2012) Trends and biases in global climate change literature. Nat Conserv 10(1):45–51. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.22713
Narins PM, Meenderink SW (2014) Climate change and frog calls: long-term correlations along a tropical altitudinal gradient. Proc Royal Soc B 281(1783):20140401. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.0401
Noss RF, Platt WJ, Sorrie BA, Weakley AS, Means DB et al (2015) How global biodiversity hotspots may go unrecognized: lessons from the North American Coastal Plain. Divers Distrib 21(2):236–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12278
Nunez S, Arets E, Alkemade R, Verwer C, Leemans R (2019) Assessing the impacts of climate change on biodiversity: is below 2°C enough? Clim Change 154:351–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-019-02420-x
Olson D, Dinerstein E (2002) The global 200: priority ecoregions for global conservation. Ann Missouri Bot Gard 89(2):199–224. https://doi.org/10.2307/3298564
Pimm SL, Jenkins CN, Joppa LN, Roberts DL, Russell GJ (2010) How many endangered species remain to be discovered in Brazil. Nat Conserv 8:71–77. https://doi.org/10.4322/natcon.00801011
Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D (2020) nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 3.1-147. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme
Pires APF, Soto CR, Scarano FR (2021) Strategies to reach global sustainability should take better account of ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 49:101292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101292
Pörtner HO, Scholes RJ, Agard J, Archer E, Arneth A, et al (2021) IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored workshop report on biodiversity and climate change; IPBES and IPCC. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4782538
R Core Team (2019) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org
Ramalho Q, Tourinho L, Almeida-Gomes M, Vale MM, Prevedello JA (2021) Reforestation can compensate negative effects of climate change on amphibians. Biol Conserv 260:109187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2021.109187
Resende FM, Cimon-Morin J, Poulin M, Meyer L, Joner DC, Loyola R (2021) The importance of protected areas and Indigenous lands in securing ecosystem services and biodiversity in the Cerrado. Ecosystem Services 49:101282
Rezende CL, Scarano FR, Assad ED, Joly CA, Metzger JP et al (2018) From hotspot to hopespot: an opportunity for the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Perspect Ecol Conserv 16:208–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.10.002
Scarano FR (2017) Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change: concept, scalability and a role for conservation science. Perspect Ecol Conserv 15:65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2017.05.003
Scheele BC, Pasmans F, Skerratt LF, Berger L, Martel A et al (2019) Amphibian fungal panzootic causes catastrophic and ongoing loss of biodiversity. Science 363(6434):1459–1463. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav0379
Taheri S, Naimi B, Rahbek C, Araújo MB (2021) Improvements in reports of species redistribution under climate change are required. Sci Adv 7:eabe1110. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abe1110
Tedesco PA, Oberdorff T, Cornu JF, Beauchard O, Brosse S, Durr HH, Grenouillet G, Leprieur F, Tisseuil C, Zaiss R, Hugueny B (2013) A scenario for impacts of water availability loss due to climate change on riverine fish extinction rates. Journal of Applied Ecology 50:1105–1115
Tourinho L, Sinervo B, Caetano GHO, Vale MM (2021) A less data demanding ecophysiological niche modeling approach for mammals with comparison to conventional correlative niche modeling. Ecol Model 457:109687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109687
Troudet J, Grandcolas P, Blin A, Vignes-Lebbe R, Legendre F (2017) Taxonomic bias in biodiversity data and societal preferences. Sci Rep 7:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-09084-6
Urban MC (2015) Accelerating extinction risk from climate change. Science 348(6234):571–573. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa4984
Urban MC (2020) Climate-tracking species are not invasive. Nat Clim Chang 10:382–384. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0770-8
UNEP (2019) Emissions gap report 2019 - executive summary. United Nation Environmental Programme. Available at: https://unepdtu.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/un-egr19-es-4e-extra.pdf. Accessed Aug 2021
UNFCCC (2015) Paris Agreement. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Available at: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf. Accessed Aug 2021
Vale MM, Arias PA, Ortega G, Cardoso M, Oliveira BFA et al (2021) Climate change and biodiversity in the Atlantic Forest: best climatic models, predicted changes and impacts, and adaptation options. In: Marques MCM, Grelle CEV (eds) The Atlantic Forest: history, biodiversity, threats and opportunities of the mega-diverse forest. Springer Nature Switzerland, Switzerland, pp 253–269
Wang CJ, Wan JZ, Zhang ZX (2017) Expansion potential of invasive tree plants in ecoregions under climate change scenarios: an assessment of 54 species at a global scale. Scand J for Res 32:663–670. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6479
Warren R, Price J, VanDerWal J, Cornelius S, Sohl H (2018) The implications of the United Nations Paris Agreement on climate change for globally significant biodiversity areas. Clim Change 147:395–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2158-6
Winter M, Fiedler W, Hochachka WM, Koehncke A, Meiri S et al (2016) Patterns and biases in climate change research on amphibians and reptiles: a systematic review. R Soc Open Sci 3:160158. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160158
Xenopoulos MA, Lodge DM, Alcamo J, Marker M, Schulze K et al (2005) Scenarios of freshwater fish extinctions from climate change and water withdrawal. Glob Change Biol 11:1557–1564. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2005.001008.x
Williams KJ, et al (2011) Forests of East Australia: The 35th Biodiversity Hotspot. In: Zachos F. & Habel J. (eds) Biodiversity Hotspots. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Wickham H, et al (2019) Welcome to the tidyverse. J. Open Source Softw 4(43):1686
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. Aliny P. F. Pires for her always valuable and insightful contributions on analysis.
Funding
SM received a fellowship from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES, Grant no. 001) and by the Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ, Grant Doutorado Nota 10). MMV received fellowships from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq, Grant ID: 304309/2018–4). This paper was developed in the context of the Brazilian Research Network on Climate Change, supported by FINEP (Grants ID: 01.13.0353–00) and the National Institutes for Science and Technology in Ecology, Evolution and Biodiversity Conservation, supported by CNPq (Grant ID: 465610/2014–5) and FAPEG (Grant ID: 201810267000023).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Wolfgang Cramer.
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Manes, S., Vale, M.M. Achieving the Paris Agreement would substantially reduce climate change risks to biodiversity in Central and South America. Reg Environ Change 22, 60 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-022-01904-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-022-01904-4