Search

Background: Previous studies focusing on urban, industrialised regions have found that excess heat exposure can increase all-cause mortality, heat-related illnesses, and occupational injuries. However, little research has examined how deforestation and climate change can adversely affect work conditions and population health in low latitude, industrialising countries., Methods: For this modelling study we used data at 1 km 2 resolution to compare forest cover and temperature conditions in the Berau regency, Indonesia, between 2002 and 2018. We used spatially explicit satellite, climate model, and population data to estimate the effects of global warming, between 2002 and 2018 and after applying 1·0°C, 1·5°C, and 2·0°C of global warming to 2018 temperatures, on all-cause mortality and unsafe work conditions in the Berau regency, Indonesia., Findings: Between 2002 and 2018, 4375 km 2 of forested land in Berau was cleared, corresponding to approximately 17% of the entire regency. Deforestation increased mean daily maximum temperatures by 0·95°C (95% CI 0·97-0·92; p<0·0001). Mean daily temperatures increased by a population-weighted 0·86°C, accounting for an estimated 7·3-8·5% of all-cause mortality (or 101-118 additional deaths per year) in 2018. Unsafe work time increased by 0·31 h per day (95% CI 0·30-0·32; p<0·0001) in deforested areas compared to 0·03 h per day (0·03-0·04; p<0·0001) in areas that maintained forest cover. With 2·0°C of additional future global warming, relative to 2018, deforested areas could experience an estimated 17-20% increase in all-cause mortality (corresponding to an additional 236-282 deaths per year) and up to 5 h of unsafe work per day., Interpretation: Heat exposure from deforestation and climate change has already started affecting populations in low latitude, industrialising countries, and future global warming indicates substantial health impacts in these regions. Further research should examine how deforestation is currently affecting the health and wellbeing of local communities., Funding: University of Washington Population Health Initiative., Translation: For the Bahasa translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Cumulative pressures from global climate and ocean change combined with multiple regional and local-scale stressors pose fundamental challenges to coral reef managers worldwide. Understanding how cumulative stressors affect coral reef vulnerability is critical for successful reef conservation now and in the future. In this review, we present the case that strategically managing for increased ecological resilience (capacity for stress resistance and recovery) can reduce coral reef vulnerability (risk of net decline) up to a point. Specifically, we propose an operational framework for identifying effective management levers to enhance resilience and support management decisions that reduce reef vulnerability. Building on a system understanding of biological and ecological processes that drive resilience of coral reefs in different environmental and socio-economic settings, we present an Adaptive Resilience-Based management (ARBM) framework and suggest a set of guidelines for how and where resilience can be enhanced via management interventions. We argue that press-type stressors (pollution, sedimentation, overfishing, ocean warming and acidification) are key threats to coral reef resilience by affecting processes underpinning resistance and recovery, while pulse-type (acute) stressors (e.g. storms, bleaching events, crown-of-thorns starfish outbreaks) increase the demand for resilience. We apply the framework to a set of example problems for Caribbean and Indo-Pacific reefs. A combined strategy of active risk reduction and resilience support is needed, informed by key management objectives, knowledge of reef ecosystem processes and consideration of environmental and social drivers. As climate change and ocean acidification erode the resilience and increase the vulnerability of coral reefs globally, successful adaptive management of coral reefs will become increasingly difficult. Given limited resources, on-the-ground solutions are likely to focus increasingly on actions that support resilience at finer spatial scales, and that are tightly linked to ecosystem goods and services., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Improving land tenure security (LTS) is a significant challenge for sustainable development. The Sustainable Development Goals and other recent global initiatives have renewed and increased the need to improve LTS to address climate change, biodiversity loss, food security, poverty reduction, and other challenges. At the same time, policymakers are increasingly interested in evidence‐based policies and decisions, creating urgency for practitioners and researchers to work together. Yet, incongruent characterizations of LTS (identifying the key components of LTS) by practitioners and researchers can limit collaboration and information flows necessary for research and effective policymaking. While there are systematic reviews of how LTS is characterized in the academic literature, no prior study has assessed how practitioners characterize LTS. We address this gap using data from 54 interviews of land tenure practitioners working in 10 countries of global importance for biodiversity and climate change mitigation. Practitioners characterize LTS as complex and multifaceted, and a majority of practitioners refer to de jure terms (e.g., titling) when characterizing it. Notably, in our data just one practitioner characterized LTS in terms of perceptions of the landholder, contrasting the recent emphasis in the academic literature on landholder perceptions in LTS characterizations. Researchers should be aware of incongruence in how LTS is characterized in the academic literature when engaging practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Average ambient temperatures are 2.6–8.3 °C cooler in forests than open areas. • Work shifts, breaks, and thus risks of heat stress differ between those working only in open areas (74%) and those working in forests and open areas (26%). • Increasing temperatures affect the working behavior of 98% of our sample via greater heat exposure and more frequent breaks. • Those working in both forests and open areas more are impacted more by hotter temperatures and will take more steps to adapt in the future. • Exposure above the Threshold Limit Value can be up to 6.5 h a day for those working only in open areas. Climate change and land use change are increasing average and extreme temperatures. Hotter temperatures can detrimentally affect workers' health and their economic productivity and livelihoods, especially in rural areas in industrializing countries that may be more vulnerable and less resilient. A growing literature has examined these factors at large spatial scales, yet few studies have done so at finer scales. Micro-level data from developing regions is needed to understand the extent of heat exposure, as well as current and future adaptation strategies of working, healthy, and rural populations. We fill this gap using objective environmental measurements from 3M TM Questemp TM 46 Heat Stress Monitors, as well as survey data from working, healthy, and rural communities in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Our data contain two groups: those who work in only open areas, and those who work in both forests and open areas. We document workers' livelihood strategies, work schedules, perceptions of how temperatures impact their work, and future adaptation strategies for even hotter days. Ambient temperatures are 2.6–8.3 °C cooler in forests compared to open areas, indicating the temperature effects of deforestation can be immediate and significant. Those working only in open areas face up to 6.5 h of exposure to temperatures above the accepted Threshold Limit Value for worker well-being. Workers adapt to hotter temperatures by altering the timing of their work shifts and breaks, indicating our sample is already adapting to increasing temperatures from climate and land use change. We also find differential adaptation strategies between those working only in open areas compared to those working in both forests and open areas, suggesting current acclimatization may be a factor in how people adapt. Our results suggest the need for adaptation and mitigation policies tailored to the unique constraints of rural workers that specifically incorporate extant adaptation strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights • 477 villages throughout Kalimantan were surveyed about forest health benefits. • The most frequent answer was maintenance of cool local temperatures. • Perceptions were driven by deforestation and local temperature. • Results point to possible threat of heat impacts on health. • Policy should incorporate human health when considering land use. Abstract The combined effects of changes in climate and land cover expose millions of people to an increased likelihood of heat illness. Impacts of heat stress on health have primarily been quantified for urban environments, particularly in developed countries. Far less is known in other settings, including the effects of ongoing tropical deforestation on local temperature and its consequences for people living in these rapidly changing landscapes. Here, we explore links between deforestation and self-reported human health and well-being in the tropical landscapes of Borneo. We use extensive social surveys from nearly 500 villages throughout Kalimantan (Indonesian Borneo) that asked whether forests were important for health, and why. The most frequent answer viewed forests as important for maintaining cool local temperatures (volunteered by 28% of 4634 respondents). Using boosted regression tree analysis incorporating spatial metrics of deforestation and temperature, we found that villagers were more likely to report this cooling effect if they were from villages with higher or more variable temperatures, and in recently deforested or fragmented landscapes. Our results highlight the role of forests in regulating the local climate. This ecosystem service is highly threatened, and yet increasingly vital for avoiding heat illness and enabling adaptation to global climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Convention on Biological Diversity requires that member nations establish protected area networks that are representative of the country's biodiversity. The identification of priority sites to achieve outstanding representation targets is typically accomplished through formal conservation assessments. However, representation in conservation assessments or gap analyses has largely been interpreted based on a static view of biodiversity. In a rapidly changing climate, the speed of changes in biodiversity distribution and abundance is causing us to rethink the viability of this approach. Here we describe three explicit strategies for climate change adaptation as part of national conservation assessments: conserving the geophysical stage, identifying and protecting climate refugia, and promoting cross-environment connectivity. We demonstrate how these three approaches were integrated into a national terrestrial conservation assessment for Papua New Guinea, one of the most biodiverse countries on earth. Protected areas identified based on representing geophysical diversity were able to capture over 90% of the diversity in vegetation communities, suggesting they could help protect representative biodiversity regardless of changes in the distribution of species and communities. By including climate change refugia as part of the national conservation assessment, it was possible to substantially reduce the amount of environmental change expected to be experienced within protected areas, without increasing the overall cost of the protected area network. Explicitly considering environmental heterogeneity between adjacent areas resulted in protected area networks with over 40% more internal environmental connectivity. These three climate change adaptation strategies represent defensible ways to guide national conservation priority given the uncertainty that currently exists in our ability to predict climate changes and their impacts. Importantly, they are also consistent with data and expertise typically available during national conservation assessments, including in developing nations. This means that in the vast majority of countries, these strategies could be implemented immediately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coral reefs have exceptional biodiversity, support the livelihoods of millions of people, and are threatened by multiple human activities on land (e.g. farming) and in the sea (e.g. overfishing). Most conservation efforts occur at local scales and, when effective, can increase the resilience of coral reefs to global threats such as climate change (e.g. warming water and ocean acidification). Limited resources for conservation require that we efficiently prioritize where and how to best sustain coral reef ecosystems. Methodology/Principal Findings: Here we develop the first prioritization approach that can guide regional-scale conservation investments in land- and sea-based conservation actions that cost-effectively mitigate threats to coral reefs, and apply it to the Coral Triangle, an area of significant global attention and funding. Using information on threats to marine ecosystems, effectiveness of management actions at abating threats, and the management and opportunity costs of actions, we calculate the rate of return on investment in two conservation actions in sixteen ecoregions. We discover that marine conservation almost always trumps terrestrial conservation within any ecoregion, but terrestrial conservation in one ecoregion can be a better investment than marine conservation in another. We show how these results could be used to allocate a limited budget for conservation and compare them to priorities based on individual criteria. Conclusions/Significance: Previous prioritization approaches do not consider both land and sea-based threats or the socioeconomic costs of conserving coral reefs. A simple and transparent approach like ours is essential to support effective coral reef conservation decisions in a large and diverse region like the Coral Triangle, but can be applied at any scale and to other marine ecosystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two concurrent trends are contributing towards a much broader view of forest conservation. First, the appreciation of the role of forests as a nature-based climate solution has grown rapidly, particularly among governments and the private sector. Second, the spatiotemporal resolution of forest mapping and the ease of tracking forest changes have dramatically improved. As a result, who does and who pays for forest conservation is changing: sectors and people previously considered separate from forest conservation now play an important role and need to be held accountable and motivated or forced to conserve forests. This change requires, and has stimulated, a broader range of forest conservation solutions. The need to assess the outcomes of conservation interventions has motivated the development and application of sophisticated econometric analyses, enabled by high resolution satellite data. At the same time, the focus on climate, together with the nature of available data and evaluation methods, has worked against a more comprehensive view of forest conservation. Instead, it has encouraged a focus on trees as carbon stores, often leaving out other important goals of forest conservation, such as biodiversity and human wellbeing. Even though both are intrinsically connected to climate outcomes, these areas have not kept pace with the scale and diversification of forest conservation. Finding synergies between these 'co-benefits', which play out on a local scale, with the carbon objective, related to the global amount of forests, is a major challenge and area for future advances in forest conservation. Zuzana Buřivalová and colleagues review advances in forest conservation, in particular the remote monitoring of forests and biodiversity within them and discuss how forest conservation can achieve benefits beyond carbon storage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]