Taboos and forest governance: informal protection of hot spot dry forest in southern Madagascar

In the dry forest of southern Madagascar, a region of global conservation priority, formally protected areas are nearly totally absent. We illustrate how the continued existence of unique forest habitats in the Androy region is directly dependent on informal institutions, taboos, regulating human behavior. Qualitative interviews to map and analyze the social mechanisms underlying forest protection have been combined with vegetation analyses of species diversity and composition. Of 188 forest patches, 93% were classified as protected, and in Southern Androy all remaining forest patches larger than 5 ha were protected. Eight different types of forests, with a gradient of social fencing from open access to almost complete entry prohibitions, were identified. Transgressions were well enforced with strong sanctions of significant economic as well as religious importance. Analyses of species diversity between protected and unprotected forests were complicated because of size differences and access restrictions. However, since, for example, in southern Androy >90% of the total remaining forest cover is protected through taboos, these informal institutions represent an important, and presently the only, mechanism for conservation of the highly endemic forest species. We conclude that social aspects, such as local beliefs and legitimate sanctioning systems, need to be analyzed and incorporated along with biodiversity studies for successful conservation.     

What determines the current presence or absence of permafrost in the Torneträsk region, a sub-arctic landscape in northern Sweden?

In a warming climate, permafrost is likely to be significantly reduced and eventually disappear from the sub-Arctic region. This will affect people at a range of scales, from locally by slumping of buildings and roads, to globally as melting of permafrost will most likely increase the emissions of the powerful greenhouse gas methane, which will further enhance global warming. In order to predict future changes in permafrost, it is crucial to understand what determines the presence or absence of permafrost under current climate conditions, to assess where permafrost is particularly vulnerable to climate change, and to identify where changes are already occurring. The Tornetr?sk region of northern sub-Arctic Sweden is one area where changes in permafrost have been recorded and where permafrost could be particularly vulnerable to any future climate changes. This paper therefore reviews the various physical, biological, and anthropogenic parameters that determine the presence or absence of permafrost in the Tornetr?sk region under current climate conditions, so that we can gain an understanding of its current vulnerability and potential future responses to climate change. A patchy permafrost distribution as found in the Tornetr?sk region is not random, but a consequence of site-specific factors that control the microclimate and hence the surface and subsurface temperature. It is also a product of past as well as current processes. In sub-Arctic areas such as northern Sweden, it is mainly the physical parameters, e.g., topography, soil type, and climate (in particular snow depth), that determine permafrost distribution. Even though humans have been present in the study area for centuries, their impacts on permafrost distribution can more or less be neglected at the catchment level. Because ongoing climate warming is projected to continue and lead to an increased snow cover, the permafrost in the region will most likely disappear within decades, at least at lower elevations.     

Increasing risks for emerging infectious diseases within a rapidly changing High Asia

The cold and arid mountains and plateaus of High Asia, inhabited by a relatively sparse human population, a high density of livestock, and wildlife such as the iconic snow leopard Panthera uncia, are usually considered low risk for disease outbreaks. However, based on current knowledge about drivers of disease emergence, we show that High Asia is rapidly developing conditions that favor increased emergence of infectious diseases and zoonoses. This is because of the existing prevalence of potentially serious pathogens in the system; intensifying environmental degradation; rapid changes in local ecological, socio-ecological, and socio-economic factors; and global risk intensifiers such as climate change and globalization. To better understand and manage the risks posed by diseases to humans, livestock, and wildlife, there is an urgent need for establishing a disease surveillance system and improving human and animal health care. Public health must be integrated with conservation programs, more ecologically sustainable development efforts and long-term disease surveillance.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13280-021-01599-7.     

Improving dialogue among researchers,local and indigenous peoples and decision-makers to address issues of climate change in the North

Ambio - The Circumpolar North has been changing rapidly within the last decades, and the socioeconomic systems of the Eurasian Arctic and Siberia in particular have displayed the most dramatic...     

Correction to: Keeping pace with forestry: Multi-scale conservation in a changing production forest matrix

Ambio - In the original published article, the sentence “Nevertheless, semi-natural forest remnants continue to be harvested and fragmented (Svensson et al. 2018; Jonsson et al. 2019), and...     

Synthesis of effects in four Arctic subregions

An assessment of impacts on Arctic terrestrial ecosystems has emphasized geographical variability in responses of species and ecosystems to environmental change. This variability is usually associated with north-south gradients in climate, biodiversity, vegetation zones, and ecosystem structure and function. It is clear, however, that significant east-west variability in environment, ecosystem structure and function, environmental history, and recent climate variability is also important. Some areas have cooled while others have become warmer. Also, east-west differences between geographical barriers of oceans, archipelagos and mountains have contributed significantly in the past to the ability of species and vegetation zones to relocate in response to climate changes, and they have created the isolation necessary for genetic differentiation of populations and biodiversity hot-spots to occur. These barriers will also affect the ability of species to relocate during projected future warming. To include this east-west variability and also to strike a balance between overgeneralization and overspecialization, the ACIA identified four major sub regions based on large-scale differences in weather and climate-shaping factors. Drawing on information, mostly model output that can be related to the four ACIA subregions, it is evident that geographical barriers to species re-location, particularly the distribution of landmasses and separation by seas, will affect the northwards shift in vegetation zones. The geographical constraints--or facilitation--of northward movement of vegetation zones will affect the future storage and release of carbon, and the exchange of energy and water between biosphere and atmosphere. In addition, differences in the ability of vegetation zones to re-locate will affect the biodiversity associated with each zone while the number of species threatened by climate change varies greatly between subregions with a significant hot-spot in Beringia. Overall, the subregional synthesis demonstrates the difficulty of generalizing projections of responses of ecosystem structure and function, species loss, and biospheric feedbacks to the climate system for the whole Arctic region and implies a need for a far greater understanding of the spatial variability in the responses of terrestrial arctic ecosystems to climate change.     

Uncertainties and recommendations

An assessment of the impacts of changes in climate and UV-B radiation on Arctic terrestrial ecosystems, made within the Arctic Climate Impacts Assessment (ACIA), highlighted the profound implications of projected warming in particular for future ecosystem services, biodiversity and feedbacks to climate. However, although our current understanding of ecological processes and changes driven by climate and UV-B is strong in some geographical areas and in some disciplines, it is weak in others. Even though recently the strength of our predictions has increased dramatically with increased research effort in the Arctic and the introduction of new technologies, our current understanding is still constrained by various uncertainties. The assessment is based on a range of approaches that each have uncertainties, and on data sets that are often far from complete. Uncertainties arise from methodologies and conceptual frameworks, from unpredictable surprises, from lack of validation of models, and from the use of particular scenarios, rather than predictions, of future greenhouse gas emissions and climates. Recommendations to reduce the uncertainties are wide-ranging and relate to all disciplines within the assessment. However, a repeated theme is the critical importance of achieving an adequate spatial and long-term coverage of experiments, observations and monitoring of environmental changes and their impacts throughout the sparsely populated and remote region that is the Arctic.     

Enhanced science–stakeholder communication to improve ecosystem model performances for climate change impact assessments

In recent years, climate impact assessments of relevance to the agricultural and forestry sectors have received considerable attention. Current ecosystem models commonly capture the effect of a warmer climate on biomass production, but they rarely sufficiently capture potential losses caused by pests, pathogens and extreme weather events. In addition, alternative management regimes may not be integrated in the models. A way to improve the quality of climate impact assessments is to increase the science–stakeholder collaboration, and in a two-way dialog link empirical experience and impact modelling with policy and strategies for sustainable management. In this paper we give a brief overview of different ecosystem modelling methods, discuss how to include ecological and management aspects, and highlight the importance of science–stakeholder communication. By this, we hope to stimulate a discussion among the science–stakeholder communities on how to quantify the potential for climate change adaptation by improving the realism in the models.