Download Extension to ACCELERATES: Climate Change Impacts and

Extension to ACCELERATES: Climate Change Impacts
and Responses on the United Kingdom
Executive Summary
The overall aim of this project was to assess the vulnerability of European
agroecosystems to environmental change in support of the conventions of
climate change and biological diversity. This was achieved through the
assessment of:



the rate, extent and dynamics of agricultural land use change arising from
climate, policy and socio-economic pressures;
the impact of agricultural land use and climate change on biodiversity
the vulnerability of agroecosystems in terms of both their sensitivity and
capacity to adapt to change.
The project was undertaken at the scale of the European Union, and within
the UK case study region in parallel with ACCELERATES. The Europeanscale work assessed the change in agroecosystems and the impact of this on
the distribution of natural habitats and species. This assessment was
undertaken through the further development and coupling of existing models
of land use change and species’ distribution within the framework of a GIS.
The model runs were driven by scenarios of plausible, future changes in the
climatic and socio-economic baselines (Chapter 2). Environmental change
scenarios for the time-slices 2020, 2050 and 2080 were used. These
scenarios included estimates not only of changes in the climate, but also
estimates of possible future changes in socio-economics, and where possible
were directly linked to the climate change scenarios through the common
societal and political assumptions that underpin each scenario. The scenarios
prioritised for application with the species and agricultural land use models
were: two GCM (HadCM3 and PCM), two SRES (A2 and B1) and three timeslices (2011-2020, 2041-2050 and 2071-2080). For the agricultural modelling
a period of 10 years before the target years of 2020, 2050 and 2080 was
chosen to reflect that farmers’ decisions are based on previous experience
with weather. In addition to the ACCELERATES scenarios, four of the
UKCIP02 scenarios were applied at the national scale to enable the results to
be compared with related UKCIP projects. The Low and High Emissions
scenarios were used for the 2020s and 2050s time-slices; these correspond
to the B1 and A1FI SRES scenarios, respectively, used with the
ACCELERATES scenarios. European socio-economic scenarios (SES) have
been produced by ATEAM and ACCELERATES to nest within the SRES and
these are used to drive land use.
The regional case study in East Anglia allowed a more detailed analysis of the
specific issues and processes affecting land use dynamics and species at a
local level, notably, species dispersal within fragmented landscapes. The
impacts and vulnerability of agroecosystems were examined using two
modelling approaches. An existing model, Spatial Estimator of the Climate
Impact on the Envelope of Species (SPECIES) formed the basis for the
simulation of the impacts of climate change on terrestrial species. The
modelling methodology is described in Chapter 3. The different scales used in
this project led to the use of different models and inputs, as at the macroscale climate is thought to be the most important factor affecting species’
distribution, while at the regional scale, factors like habitat availability, as
reflected in land cover, also are relevant. A vulnerability index was also
devised and created for use at the European and national resolution, using
the outputs from the SPECIES modelling.
Two habitats of conservation interest (BAP priority habitats) were chosen,
lowland heath and fens, from which a total of eight species were selected for
modelling: Carex elata, Panurus biarmicus, Phragmites australis, Upupa
epops and Vertigo moulinsiana (fen), and; Sylvia undata, Ulex europaeus,
Parnassia palustris (lowland heath). The lowland heath species all show
potential losses of climate space from southern Europe (though here they are
not associated with heathland) – most significantly under the HadCM3 A2
scenarios. P. palustris will lose climate space from all of Spain and Greece,
most of France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Poland by the 2080s; U.
europaeus will lose space from southern Spain, France, Italy and Greece; for
S. undata space will be lost largely from central and southern Spain. These
results suggest that the predicted losses of climate envelope within Europe for
both U. europaeus and S. undata could become an important conservation
issue. The fen species modelled showed the same general south-west to
north-east shift trend: those of concern for Spanish conservation are P.
australis, U. epops and P. biarmicus, specifically under the HadCM3
scenarios; the first two are also relevant to Greece. C. elata and V.
moulinsiana are most likely to be of concern to French conservation interests
as they are predicted to lose most of their space here; C. elata will also lose
space in northern Italy.
At the UK scale, the model results showed that the lowland heath plant
species will persist, while the bird species, S. undata, will lose some climate
space in parts of East Anglia, but there is still a large amount of suitable area
into which it could disperse. For the fen species, there will be little change in
the climate suitability for P. australis, and V. moulinsiana, while C. elata and
the birds will lose space; this is a more sensitive habitat. The lowland heath
and fen species most vulnerable to climate change in East Anglia are Vertigo
moulinsiana and the three bird species, although at the UK scale S. undata
and U. epops become less vulnerable as their new climate space expands.
This shows the importance of scale, both for climate scenario impacts and for
assessing vulnerability.
The modelling outputs give some indication of the ability of the species to
undertake autonomous adaptation to climate change and the results of the
dispersal model suggest that most non-bird species have limited capacity to
track the changes in their suitable climate space. These species will be more
dependent on planned adaptation to secure their future if they are vulnerable.
This adaptation can take many forms including restoration of former
conditions through appropriate management. In the case of lowland
heathland, appropriate burning regimes or even fire suppression can be used
to favour particular groups of species, while for fenland species, appropriate
adaptive management may involve cutting vegetation to increase light
availability, or increasing nutrient levels.
The results show that climate change could be an issue for both the EU
commitment to biodiversity conservation, for example through the Convention
on Biological Diversity and its own target to halt the loss of biodiversity by
2010 and in the UK, where fens and lowland heathland are both BAP priority
habitats, but that it is habitat- and species-dependent. The nature of the main
factors affecting lowland heath at present, as listed in the HAP, indicate that
protection from loss and appropriate management will be important in its
future maintenance. It also suggests that climate change is not a major threat
to its dominant species in East Anglia, although aspects of heathland quality
might be affected through species’ loss in certain areas, e.g., P. palustris. The
HAP target of encouraging the re-establishment by 2005 of a further 6,000 ha
of heathland, particularly where this links separate heathland areas, would
increase connectivity and assist species as they adapt to climate change
through dispersal.
For the fens, management of the vegetation, as well as water quality and
quantity are important in their maintenance. It is the latter which is of particular
concern in East Anglia, given the potential future demand for water for
agriculture and domestic consumption, as well as climate change. The HAP,
in its review, needs to think carefully about climate change impacts. Given the
sensitivity of a number of the East Anglian fen species to climate change,
management of water resources will need to play an increasing role in
assisting species adapt in this region. A clear strategy is needed to manage
these competing demands for water and to ensure that wetland habitats do
not lose out.
This ACCELERATES extension has been important in adopting an integrated,
multi-scalar approach to the issues of climate and land use change. The
modelling results support the view that socio-economic drivers are stronger
than environmental ones and that habitat and species sensitivity and
response to such changes is individualistic. These outputs have important
implications for conservation policy through changing species’ vulnerability,
and with consequences for the habitats they represent by identifying both
habitats and species at risk from climate and land use change and agricultural
areas at risk from biodiversity loss. In East Anglia, it is the fens which are
generally more sensitive to these changes, although responses are species
specific. In the light of these research results, the ability to meet the
requirements of the EU Directives and national policies will be compromised
by climate and land use change. Much thought, therefore, needs to be given
to long-term strategic conservation planning and conservation areas need to
be seen in the broader landscape context. Thus a more holistic, inter-national
strategy for conservation is critical for sustaining biodiversity in the context of
climate change.