Search

We applied a recently developed tool to examine the reduction in climate risk to biodiversity in moving from a 2°C to a 1.5°C target. We then reviewed the recent literature examining the impact of (a) land-based mitigation options and (b) land-based greenhouse gas removal options on biodiversity. We show that holding warming to 1.5°C versus 2°C can significantly reduce the number of species facing a potential loss of 50% of their climatic range. Further, there would be an increase of 5.5–14% of the globe that could potentially act as climatic refugia for plants and animals, an area equivalent to the current global protected area network. Efforts to meet the 1.5°C target through mitigation could largely be consistent with biodiversity protection/enhancement. For impacts of land-based greenhouse gas removal technologies on biodiversity, some (e.g. soil carbon sequestration) could be neutral or positive, others (e.g. bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) are likely to lead to conflicts, while still others (e.g. afforestation/reforestation) are context-specific, when applied at scales necessary for meaningful greenhouse gas removal. Additional effort to meet the 1.5°C target presents some risks, particularly if inappropriately managed, but it also presents opportunities. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.

A wide range of climate vulnerability and risk assessments have been implemented using different approaches at different scales, some with a broad multi-sectoral scope and others focused on single risks or sectors. This paper describes the novel approach to vulnerability and risk assessment which was designed and put into practice in the United Kingdom's Second Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA2) so as to build upon its earlier assessment (CCRA1). First, we summarize and critique the CCRA1 approach, and second describe the steps taken in the CCRA2 approach in detail, providing examples of how each was applied in practice. Novel elements of the approach include assessment of both present day and future vulnerability, a focus on the urgency of adaptation action, and a structure focused around systems of receptors rather than conventional sectors. Both stakeholders and reviewers generally regarded the approach as successful in providing advice on current risks and future opportunities to the UK from climate change, and the fulfilment of statutory duty. The need for a well-supported and open suite of impact indicators going forward is highlighted. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Advances in risk assessment for climate change adaptation policy'.

The papers in this volume discuss projections of climate change impacts upon humans and ecosystems under a global mean temperature rise of 4°C above preindustrial levels. Like most studies, they are mainly single-sector or single-region-based assessments. Even the multi-sector or multi-region approaches generally consider impacts in sectors and regions independently, ignoring interactions. Extreme weather and adaptation processes are often poorly represented and losses of ecosystem services induced by climate change or human adaptation are generally omitted. This paper addresses this gap by reviewing some potential interactions in a 4°C world, and also makes a comparison with a 2°C world. In a 4°C world, major shifts in agricultural land use and increased drought are projected, and an increased human population might increasingly be concentrated in areas remaining wet enough for economic prosperity. Ecosystem services that enable prosperity would be declining, with carbon cycle feedbacks and fire causing forest losses. There is an urgent need for integrated assessments considering the synergy of impacts and limits to adaptation in multiple sectors and regions in a 4°C world. By contrast, a 2°C world is projected to experience about one-half of the climate change impacts, with concomitantly smaller challenges for adaptation. Ecosystem services, including the carbon sink provided by the Earth’s forests, would be expected to be largely preserved, with much less potential for interaction processes to increase challenges to adaptation. However, demands for land and water for biofuel cropping could reduce the availability of these resources for agricultural and natural systems. Hence, a whole system approach to mitigation and adaptation, considering interactions, potential human and species migration, allocation of land and water resources and ecosystem services, will be important in either a 2°C or a 4°C world.