Login / Signup

Biodiversity can benefit from climate stabilization despite adverse side effects of land-based mitigation.

Haruka OhashiTomoko HasegawaAkiko HirataShinichiro FujimoriKiyoshi TakahashiIkutaro TsuyamaKatsuhiro NakaoYuji KominamiNobuyuki TanakaYasuaki HijiokaTetsuya Matsui
Published in: Nature communications (2019)
Limiting the magnitude of climate change via stringent greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation is necessary to prevent further biodiversity loss. However, some strategies to mitigate GHG emission involve greater land-based mitigation efforts, which may cause biodiversity loss from land-use changes. Here we estimate how climate and land-based mitigation efforts interact with global biodiversity by using an integrated assessment model framework to project potential habitat for five major taxonomic groups. We find that stringent GHG mitigation can generally bring a net benefit to global biodiversity even if land-based mitigation is adopted. This trend is strengthened in the latter half of this century. In contrast, some regions projected to experience much growth in land-based mitigation efforts (i.e., Europe and Oceania) are expected to suffer biodiversity loss. Our results support the enactment of stringent GHG mitigation policies in terms of biodiversity. To conserve local biodiversity, however, these policies must be carefully designed in conjunction with land-use regulations and societal transformation in order to minimize the conversion of natural habitats.
Keyphrases
  • climate change
  • human health
  • quality improvement
  • public health
  • computed tomography
  • magnetic resonance imaging
  • risk assessment
  • adverse drug