Brooke Cassandra
WWF-Australia, GPO Box 528, Sydney, New South Wales 2001, Australia.
Conserv Biol. 2008 Dec;22(6):1471-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01031.x. Epub 2008 Aug 28.
The need to adapt to climate change has become increasingly apparent, and many believe the practice of biodiversity conservation will need to alter to face this challenge. Conservation organizations are eager to determine how they should adapt their practices to climate change. This involves asking the fundamental question of what adaptation to climate change means. Most studies on climate change and conservation, if they consider adaptation at all, assume it is equivalent to the ability of species to adapt naturally to climate change as stated in Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Adaptation, however, can refer to an array of activities that range from natural adaptation, at one end of the spectrum, to sustainability science in coupled human and natural systems at the other. Most conservation organizations deal with complex systems in which adaptation to climate change involves making decisions on priorities for biodiversity conservation in the face of dynamic risks and involving the public in these decisions. Discursive methods such as analytic deliberation are useful for integrating scientific knowledge with public perceptions and values, particularly when large uncertainties and risks are involved. The use of scenarios in conservation planning is a useful way to build shared understanding at the science-policy interface. Similarly, boundary organizations-organizations or institutions that bridge different scales or mediate the relationship between science and policy-could prove useful for managing the transdisciplinary nature of adaptation to climate change, providing communication and brokerage services and helping to build adaptive capacity. The fact that some nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are active across the areas of science, policy, and practice makes them well placed to fulfill this role in integrated assessments of biodiversity conservation and adaptation to climate change.
适应气候变化的必要性日益明显,许多人认为生物多样性保护的做法需要改变以应对这一挑战。保护组织急于确定应如何使其做法适应气候变化。这涉及到提出一个根本性问题,即适应气候变化意味着什么。大多数关于气候变化与保护的研究,即便考虑到适应,也假定它等同于《联合国气候变化框架公约》第2条所述的物种自然适应气候变化的能力。然而,适应可以指一系列活动,从一端的自然适应到另一端的人类与自然耦合系统中的可持续性科学。大多数保护组织应对的是复杂系统,在这些系统中,适应气候变化涉及在面对动态风险时就生物多样性保护的优先事项做出决策,并让公众参与这些决策。诸如分析性审议等话语方法有助于将科学知识与公众认知及价值观相结合,尤其是在涉及重大不确定性和风险的情况下。在保护规划中使用情景分析是在科学与政策界面建立共同理解的一种有用方式。同样,边界组织——连接不同尺度或调解科学与政策关系的组织或机构——可能被证明对管理适应气候变化的跨学科性质、提供沟通和中介服务以及帮助建设适应能力很有用。一些非政府组织活跃于科学、政策和实践领域,这一事实使它们在生物多样性保护和适应气候变化的综合评估中非常适合发挥这一作用。