Volume 21, Issue 1 p. 5-18

Scenarios for investigating risks to biodiversity

Joachim H. Spangenberg,

Corresponding Author

UFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Strasse 4, 06120 Halle/Saale, Germany

Sustainable Europe Research Institute SERI Germany e.V., Vorsterstrasse 97-99, 51103 Cologne, Germany

Joachim H. Spangenberg, Sustainable Europe Research Institute SERI Germany e.V., Vorsterstrasse 97-99, 51103 Cologne, Germany. E-mail: Joachim.Spangenberg@gmx.deSearch for more papers by this author
Alberte Bondeau,

Potsdam Institute for Climate Change Research, Telegrafenberg, PO Box 60 12 03, D-144 12 Potsdam, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Timothy R. Carter,

Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Box 140, Mechelininkatu 34a, FI-00251 Helsinki, Finland

Search for more papers by this author
Stefan Fronzek,

Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE), Box 140, Mechelininkatu 34a, FI-00251 Helsinki, Finland

Search for more papers by this author
Jill Jaeger,

SERI Sustainable Europe Research Institute GmbH, Garnisongasse 7/21, A-1090 Vienna, Austria

Search for more papers by this author
Kirsti Jylhä,

Finnish Meteorological Institute, Climate Research and Applications, PO Box 503, FI-00101 Helsinki, Finland

Search for more papers by this author
Ingolf Kühn,

UFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Strasse 4, 06120 Halle/Saale, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Ines Omann,

SERI Sustainable Europe Research Institute GmbH, Garnisongasse 7/21, A-1090 Vienna, Austria

Search for more papers by this author
Alex Paul,

Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Isabelle Reginster,

UCL – Department of Geography, Place Pasteur, 3, B- 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

Present address: IWEPS – Institut Wallon de l'Evaluation, de la Prospective et de la Statistique, Rue Fort de Suarlée, 1, B-5001 Namur, Belgium.

Search for more papers by this author
Mark Rounsevell,

Centre for the Study of Environmental Change and Sustainability, School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Drummond Street, Edinburgh EH8 9XP, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Oliver Schweiger,

UFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Strasse 4, 06120 Halle/Saale, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
Andrea Stocker,

SERI Sustainable Europe Research Institute GmbH, Garnisongasse 7/21, A-1090 Vienna, Austria

Search for more papers by this author
Martin T. Sykes,

Department of Earth and Ecosystem Sciences, Lund University, Sölvegatan 12, 223 62 Lund, Sweden

Search for more papers by this author
Josef Settele,

UFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser-Strasse 4, 06120 Halle/Saale, Germany

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 12 December 2011
Citations: 48

ABSTRACT

Aim This paper describes a set of integrative scenarios developed in the ALARM (Assessing LArge-scale environmental Risks for biodiversity with tested Methods) project. The ultimate aim of ALARM was to develop and test methods and protocols for the assessment of large-scale environmental risks to biodiversity and to evaluate mitigation options. Scenarios provide a tool for exploring such risks and the policy options to mitigate them; therefore they play a central role within the ALARM project.

Methods Three integrative scenarios (liberalization, business as might be usual, sustainability) were developed and illustrated using the econometric model described in a subsequent paper. They are contextualized with projections from climate models and provide the input for model-based assessments of biodiversity trends. Additionally, three shock scenarios were developed (Gulf Stream collapse, peak oil, pandemic) to demonstrate the limits of linear extrapolation. As these extend beyond model capabilities, they are discussed semi-quantitatively based on modelling insights.

Results Although the policy impacts on biodiversity are different for different pressures, biomes and species groups, some general trends could be identified. An extension of current EU policies will act as a brake on current trends by slowing down the loss of biodiversity in many cases and in most biomes, but it will be capable of neither halting nor of reversing the loss. Liberalization has the effect of accelerating biodiversity loss across the board, with few exceptions. A coherent sustainability scenario is clearly the most effective at preserving biodiversity, but the variant tested here still does not halt losses in all cases.

Main conclusions Current EU policies for protecting biodiversity appear to be insufficient to reverse ongoing losses. Coherent sustainability strategies are effective at conserving biodiversity, but in order to assess losses and then reverse them, measures would need to be introduced that extend beyond the steps tested in the ALARM sustainability scenario.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.