Idea and Perspective
Reconciling biodiversity and carbon conservation
Article first published online: 20 DEC 2012
DOI: 10.1111/ele.12054
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd/CNRS
Issue

Ecology Letters
Special Issue: Ecological Effects of Environmental Change. Special Issue Editors: Marcel Holyoak and Michael Hochberg. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and Wiley have published this supplement without financial support
Volume 16, Issue Supplement s1, pages 39–47, May 2013
Additional Information
How to Cite
Ecology Letters (2013) 16: 39–47
Publication History
- Issue published online: 16 MAY 2013
- Article first published online: 20 DEC 2012
- Manuscript Accepted: 20 NOV 2012
- Manuscript Revised: 5 OCT 2012
- Manuscript Received: 5 SEP 2012
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- Adaptation;
- biodiversity;
- carbon;
- climate change;
- conservation;
- extinction;
- global;
- protected areas;
- REDD ;
- spatial planning
Abstract
Climate change is leading to the development of land-based mitigation and adaptation strategies that are likely to have substantial impacts on global biodiversity. Of these, approaches to maintain carbon within existing natural ecosystems could have particularly large benefits for biodiversity. However, the geographical distributions of terrestrial carbon stocks and biodiversity differ. Using conservation planning analyses for the New World and Britain, we conclude that a carbon-only strategy would not be effective at conserving biodiversity, as have previous studies. Nonetheless, we find that a combined carbon-biodiversity strategy could simultaneously protect 90% of carbon stocks (relative to a carbon-only conservation strategy) and > 90% of the biodiversity (relative to a biodiversity-only strategy) in both regions. This combined approach encapsulates the principle of complementarity, whereby locations that contain different sets of species are prioritised, and hence disproportionately safeguard localised species that are not protected effectively by carbon-only strategies. It is efficient because localised species are concentrated into small parts of the terrestrial land surface, whereas carbon is somewhat more evenly distributed; and carbon stocks protected in one location are equivalent to those protected elsewhere. Efficient compromises can only be achieved when biodiversity and carbon are incorporated together within a spatial planning process.

1461-0248/asset/olbannerleft.gif?v=1&s=3cdd97f41173d141f3f51773629729a6ad3be0ef)
1461-0248/asset/ele_centre.gif?v=1&s=8f1a28c45a6b32f9407a8bd9efb9c5b2aaffe521)