Skip to main content

Prioritizing climate change adaptation options for iconic marine species

Biodiversity and Conservation volume 24, pages 3449–3468 (2015)Cite this article

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Alderman R, Hobday AJ (in review) Developing a climate adaptation strategy for vulnerable seabirds based on prioritisation of intervention options. Biol Conserv

  • Bowman D (2012) Conservation: bring elephants to Australia? Nature 482:30

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burgman MA (2005) Risks and decisions for conservation and environmental management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers LE, Devney CA, Congdon BC, Dunlop N, Woehler EJ, Dann P (2011) Observed and predicted effects of climate on Australian seabirds. Emu 111:235–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers LE, Altwegg R, Barbraud C, Barnard P, Beaumont L, Crawford R, Durrant JM, Hughes L, Keatley, Low M, Morellato LPC, Poloczanska E, Ruoppolo V, Vansteels R, Woehler E, Wolfaardt A (2013) Changes in southern hemisphere phenology. PLoS One 8:e75514. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0075514

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers L, Patterson TA, Hobday AJ, Arnould JPY, Tuck GN, Wilcox C, Dann P (2014) Determining trends and environmental drivers from long-term marine mammal and bird data: examples from Southern Australia. Reg Environ Change. doi:10.1007/s10113-014-0634-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen I-C, Hill JK, Ohlemuller R, Roy DB, Thomas CD (2011) Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science. doi:10.1126/science.1206432

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin A, Kyne PM, Walker TI, McAuley R (2010) An integrated risk assessment for climate change: analysing the vulnerability of sharks and rays on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef. Glob Change Biol 16:1936–1953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croxall JP, Butchart SHM, Laschelles B, Stattersfield AJ, Sullivan B, Symes A, Taylor P (2012) Seabird conservation status, threats and priority actions: a global assessment. Bird Conserv Int 22:1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson TP, Jackson ST, House JI, Prentice IC, Mace GM (2011) Beyond predictions: biodiversity conservation in a changing climate. Science 332:53–58

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dodge F, Weston MA, Bunce A (2003) Factors that mediate compliance to temporary beach closures: refining a technique to manage human disturbance of shorebirds. In: Straw P (ed) Status and conservation of shorebirds in the East Asian-Australasian Flyway. Proceedings of the Australasian shorebirds conference, 13–15 December 2003, Canberra, pp 32–35

  • Donlan CJ, Wilcox C (2008) Integrating invasive mammal eradications and biodiversity offsets for fisheries bycatch: conservation opportunities and challenges for seabirds and sea turtles. Biol Invasions 10:1053–1060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donlan CJ, Wingfield DK, Crowder LB, Wilcox C (2010) Using expert opinion surveys to rank threats to endangered species: a case study with sea turtles. Conserv Biol 24:1586–1595

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD, Mertig AG, Jones EJ (2000) Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. J Soc Issues 56:425–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlop M, Brown PR (2008) Implications of climate change for Australia’s National Reserve System: a preliminary assessment. Report to the Department of Climate Change

  • Foden WB, Butchart SHM, Stuart SN, Vie´ J-C, Akcakaya HR, Angulo A, DeVantier LM, Gutsche A, Turak E, Cao L, Donner SD, Katariya V, Bernard R, Holland RA, Hughes AF, O’Hanlon SE, Garnett ST, Sekercioglu CH, O’Hanlon SE, Garnett ST, Sekercioglu CH, Mace GM (2013) Identifying the World’s most climate change vulnerable species: a systematic trait-based assessment of all birds, amphibians and corals. PLoS One 8(6):e65427

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuentes MM, Limpus C, Hamann M (2010) Vulnerability of sea turtle nesting grounds to climate change. Glob Change Biol 17:140–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagerman SM, Satterfield T (2014) Agreed but not preferred: expert views on taboo options for biodiversity conservation, given climate change. Ecol Appl 24:548–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hagerman S, Dowlatabadi H, Chan KMA, Satterfield T (2010) Integrative propositions for adapting conservation policy to the impacts of climate change. Glob Environ Change 20:351–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawcroft LJ, Milfont TL (2010) The use (and abuse) of the new environmental paradigm scale over the last 30 years: a meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 30:143–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobday AJ, Lough J (2011) Projected climate change in Australian marine and freshwater environments. Mar Freshw Res 62:1000–1014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobday AJ, Smith ADM, Stobutzki I, Bulman C, Daley R, Dambacher J, Deng R, Dowdney J, Fuller M, Furlani D, Griffiths SP, Johnson D, Kenyon R, Knuckey IA, Ling SD, Pitcher R, Sainsbury KJ, Sporcic M, Smith T, Walker T, Wayte S, Webb H, Williams A, Wise BS, Zhou S (2011) Ecological risk assessment for the effects of fishing. Fish Res 108:372–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobday AJ, Chambers LE, Arnould JPY, Patterson TA, Wilcox C, Tuck GN, Thomson RB (2014) Developing adaptation options for seabirds and marine mammals impacted by climate change. Final Report. FRDC-DCCEE Marine National Adaptation Research Project 2010/0533

  • Hoegh-Guldberg O, Hughes L, McIntyre S, Lindenmayer DB, Parmesan C, Possingham HP, Thomas CD (2008) Assisted colonization and rapid climate change. Science 321:345–346

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007) Summary for policymakers. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ Hanson CE (eds) Climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 7–22

  • IPCC (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds) Climate Change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–32

  • IUCN (2001) 100 of the worlds’ worst invasive species: a selection from the global invasive species database (http://www.issg.org/booklet.pdf)

  • Koehn JD, Hobday AJ, Pratchett MS, Gillanders BM (2011) Climate change and Australian marine and freshwater environments, fishes and fisheries: synthesis and options for adaptation. Mar Freshw Res 62:1148–1164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lascelles BG, Di Sciara GN, Agardy T, Cuttelod A, Eckert S, Glowka L, Hoyt E, Llewellyn F, Louzao M, Ridoux V, Tetley MJ (2014) Migratory marine species: their status, threats and conservation management needs. Aquat Conserv 24(Suppl. 2):111–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lunney D (2010) A history of the debate (1948–2009) on the commercial harvesting of kangaroos, with particular reference to New South Wales and the role of Gordon Grigg. Aust Zool 35:383–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch TP, Alderman R, Hobday AJ (2015) A high-resolution panorama camera system for monitoring colony-wide seabird nesting behaviour. Methods Ecol Evol. doi:10.1111/2041-210X.12339

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin TG, Burgman MA, Fidler F, Kuhnert PM, Low-Choy S, McBride MF, Mengersen K (2012) Eliciting expert knowledge in conservation science. Conserv Biol 26:29–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mawdsley JR (2011) Design of conservation strategies for climate adaptation. WIREs Clim Change 2:498–515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mawdsley JR, O’Malley R, Ojima DS (2009) A review of climate-change adaptation strategies for wildlife management and biodiversity conservation. Conserv Biol 23:1080–1089

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald-Madden E, Runge MC, Possingham HP, Martin TG (2011) Optimal timing for managed relocation of species faced with climate change. Nat Clim Change 1:261–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInnes KL, Macadam I, Hubbert GD, O’Grady JG (2009) A modelling approach for estimating the frequency of sea level extremes and the impact of climate change in southeast Australia. Nat Hazards 51:115–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser SC, Ekstrom J (2010) A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:22026–22031

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ng CF, Possingham HP, McAlpine CA, de Villiers DL, Preece HJ, Rhodes JR (2014) Impediments to the success of management actions for species recovery. PLoS One 9(4):e92430

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Poloczanska ES, Babcock RC, Butler A, Hobday AJ, Hoegh-Guldberg O, Kunz TJ, Matear R, Milton D, Okey TA, Richardson AJ (2007) Climate change and australian marine life. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 45:409–480

    Google Scholar 

  • Poloczanska ES, Brown CJ, Sydeman WJ, Kiessling W, Schoeman DS, Moore PJ, Brander K, Bruno JF, Buckley LB, Burrows MT, Duarte CM, Halpern BS, Holding J, Kappel CV, O’Connor MI, Pandolfi JM, Parmesan C, Schwing F, Thompson SA, Richardson AJ (2013) Global imprint of climate change on marine life. Nat Clim Change. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1958

    Google Scholar 

  • Priddel D, Carlisle N, Wheeler R (2006) Establishment of a new breeding colony of Gould’s petrel (Pterodroma leucoptera leucoptera) through the creation of artificial nesting habitat and the translocation of nestlings. Biol Conserv 128:553–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid TA, Hindell MA, Wilcox C (2012) Environmental determinants of the at-sea distribution of encounters between flesh-footed shearwaters Puffinus carniepes and fishing vessels. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 447:231–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts BJ, Eby P, Catterall CP, Kanowski J, Bennett G (2011) The outcomes and costs of relocating flying-fox camps: insights from the case of Maclean, Australia. In: Law B, Edy P, Lunney D, Lumsden L (eds) The biology and conservation of Australasian bats. Royal Zoological Society of NSW, Mosman, NSW, pp 277–287

  • Roe E, van Eeten M (2001) Threshold-based resource management: a framework for comprehensive ecosystem management. Environ Manag 27(2):195–214

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross JV, Pollett PK (2007) On costs and decisions in population management. Ecol Model 201:60–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumann N, Gales NJ, Harcourt RG, Arnould JPY (2013) Impacts of climate change on Australian marine mammals. Aust J Zool 61(2):146–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small C, Waugh SM, Phillips RA (2012) The justification, design and implementation of ecological risk assessments of the effects of fishing on seabirds. Mar Policy 37:192–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stafford-Smith M, Horrocks L, Harvey A, Hamilton C (2011) Rethinking adaptation for a 4 C world. Philos Trans R Soc A 369:196–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein BA, Staudt A, Cross MS, Dubois NS, Enquist C, Griffis R, Hansen LJ, Hellmann JJ, Lawler JJ, Nelson EJ, Pairis A (2013) Preparing for and managing change: climate adaptation for biodiversity and ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 11(9):502–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson I, Boutilier RG (2011) Social license to operate. In: Darling P (ed) SME mining engineering handbook. Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Littleton, pp 1779–1796

    Google Scholar 

  • Thresher RE, Kuris AM (2004) Options for managing invasive marine species. Biol Invasions 6:295–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thresher RE, Guinotte JM, Matear RJ, Hobday AJ (2015) Options for managing impacts of climate change on a deep-sea community. Nat Clim Change. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE2611

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracey SR, Buxton CD, Gardner C, Green B, Hartmann K, Haward M, Jabour J, Lyle JM, McDonald J (2013) ‘Super trawler’ scuppered in Australian fisheries management reform. Fisheries 38(8):345–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2014) Indigenous people’s rights and the role of free, prior and informed consent. A good practice note endorsed by the United Nations Global Compact Human Rights and Labour Working Group on 20 February 2014 (prepared by A. K. Lehr). https://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/issues_doc/human_rights/Human_Rights_Working_Group/FPIC_Indigenous_Peoples_GPN.pdf

  • Wilkinson IS, Priddel D (2011) Rodent eradication on Lord Howe Island: challenges posed by people, livestock, and threatened endemics. In: Veitch CR, Clout MN, Towns DR (eds) Island invasives: eradication and management. . Gland, IUCN: 508-514

  • Williams JW, Jackson ST, Kutzbach JE (2007) Projected distributions of novel and disappearing climates by 2100 AD. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:5738–5742

    PubMed Central  CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research contributed to the project ‘Human adaptation options to increase resilience of conservation-dependent seabirds and marine mammals impacted by climate change’, which was supported by NCCARF and funding from the FRDC-DCCEE on behalf of the Australian Government. We appreciate the support of many seabird and mammal researchers, managers and policy experts for participation in our workshops and discussions and members of the public for their survey responses. The survey work was approved under CSIRO ethics agreement 087/14. Thank you to Roan Plotz and Ross Daley for their reviews of the draft manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, GPO Box 1538, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia

    Alistair J. Hobday

  2. Research and Development Branch, Australian Bureau of Meteorology, GPO Box 1289, Melbourne, VIC, 3001, Australia

    Lynda E. Chambers

  3. School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia

    John P. Y. Arnould

Authors
  1. Alistair J. Hobday
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lynda E. Chambers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John P. Y. Arnould
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alistair J. Hobday.

Additional information

Communicated by Dirk Sven Schmeller.

Appendix 1

Appendix 1

Phases and elements scored in SAPS Stage 3, Barriers to implementation. Each statement is scored from 1–5, where 1 indicates disagreement (low barriers), and 5 indicates agreement (high barriers). Adapted from Moser and Ekstrom (2010).

  • Phase 1: Knowledge

    1. (1)

      Detecting a signal will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

    2. (2)

      Gathering/using information will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

    3. (3)

      Defining the problem will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

  • Phase 2: Planning

    1. (4)

      Developing options will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

    2. (5)

      Managing the process will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

    3. (6)

      Selecting options will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

  • Phase 3: Implementation

    1. (7)

      Implementation will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy

    2. (8)

      Monitoring the outcomes will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

    3. (9)

      Evaluating effectiveness will be a barrier for this adaptation strategy?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hobday, A.J., Chambers, L.E. & Arnould, J.P.Y. Prioritizing climate change adaptation options for iconic marine species. Biodivers Conserv 24, 3449–3468 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-015-1007-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-015-1007-4

Keywords

  • Climate change
  • Marine mammals
  • Seabirds
  • Conservation
  • Social license
  • Prioritization