Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-12 (section)

==== 12.5.1.3 Adaptation Options to Avert and Reduce Key Risks to Terrestrial and Freshwater Ecosystems ====

<div id="h3-35-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

Research, monitoring systems and other initiatives for knowledge management are promoted in the region on terrestrial and freshwater socioecosystem adaptation ( ''high confidence'' ) (NCs, NDCs and NAPs, https://unfccc.int ). In Chile, for example, the Eco-social Observatory of Climate Change Effects for High Altitude Wetlands of Tarapacá has been collecting information on physical, biological and social variables since 2013 ( [[#Uribe%20Rivera--2017|Uribe Rivera et al., 2017]] ). Other examples in the Andes are the GLORIA-Andes network ( [[#Cuesta--2017a|Cuesta et al., 2017a]] ), the Andean Forest Network ( [[#Malizia--2020|Malizia et al., 2020]] ) and the Initiative of Hydrological Monitoring in the Andes (IMHEA), with measures to optimise watershed management and protection and reduce the risk of water insecurity ( [[#Correa--2020|Correa et al., 2020]] ).

Poverty is a driver of climate-change risk, while the sustainable use of ecosystems fosters adaptation ( [[#Kasecker--2018|Kasecker et al., 2018]] ) ( ''high confidence'' ). Most of the 398 ecosystem-based adaptation hotspots identified in Brazil on this premise are located in some of the ecosystems that are most vulnerable to climate change ( [[#Kasecker--2018|Kasecker et al., 2018]] ). Although conservation and restoration are reported as being effective at reducing risk ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) (Anderson et al., 2010; [[#Borsdorf--2013|Borsdorf et al., 2013]] ; [[#Keenan--2015|Keenan, 2015]] ; [[#Pires--2017|Pires et al., 2017]] ; [[#Ramalho--2021|Ramalho et al., 2021]] ), their effectiveness depends on the integration of conservation actions with enhancements of local socioeconomic conditions ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) ( [[#Scarano--2015|Scarano and Ceotto, 2015]] ; [[#Pires--2017|Pires et al., 2017]] ; [[#Kasecker--2018|Kasecker et al., 2018]] ; [[#de%20Siqueira--2021|de Siqueira et al., 2021]] ; [[#Vale--2021|Vale et al., 2021]] ).

Since AR5, there has been an increase in the number of adaptation measures through natural resource and ecosystem service management. The main approaches are EbA and community-based adaptation (CbA) ( ''high confidence'' ) (NCs, NDCs and NAPs, https://unfccc.int ). IKLK can be very detailed and usually relates to people’s priorities as identified by collective decision-making (Box 7.1) ( [[#Hurlbert--2019|Hurlbert et al., 2019]] , SRCCL Section 7.6.4; SRCCL Cross-Chapter Box 13 ILK; [[#de%20Coninck--2018|de Coninck et al., 2018]] , SR1.5 [[IPCC:Wg2:Chapter:Chapter-4#4.3.5|Section 4.3.5.5]] ). In Manaus, central Amazon, fishermen perceive reductions in fish size, diversity and capture levels caused by droughts, while recognising that floods hinder access to fishing grounds ( [[#Keenan--2015|Keenan, 2015]] ; [[#Camacho%20Guerreiro--2016|Camacho Guerreiro et al., 2016]] ). In the Amazon floodplains, small-scale fisher and farmer communities incorporate their knowledge on natural hydrologic and ecological processes into management systems that reduce climate-change risk and impacts ( [[#Oviedo--2016|Oviedo et al., 2016]] ). Smallholder grain farmers in Guatemala and Honduras implement EbA practices based on local knowledge (e.g., live fences, home gardens, shade trees in coffee plantations, dispersed trees in corn fields and other food insecurity risk reduction practices) ( [[#Harvey--2017|Harvey et al., 2017]] ; [[#Chain-Guadarrama--2018|Chain-Guadarrama et al., 2018]] ). There is, therefore, great potential for terrestrial and freshwater ecosystem adaptation to climate change in CSA, provided the right incentives and sociocultural protective measures are in place ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#12.5.10.4|Section 12.5.10.4]] ; Table SM12.7).

Disarticulation between policy and implementation is a common problem. Ecuadorian climate public policy points towards a CbA approach, but it is often downsized when implemented ( [[#Calispa--2018|Calispa, 2018]] ). Important adaptation actions have been undertaken in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay, both in policymaking and institutional arrangements, but they tend to be poorly coordinated with policies on development, land planning and other sectoral policies ( [[#Ryan--2012|Ryan, 2012]] ). Some type of community participation mechanisms is present in most country strategies, but their levels of implementation vary considerably ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) ( [[#Ryan--2012|Ryan, 2012]] ; [[#Pires--2017|Pires et al., 2017]] ; [[#Calispa--2018|Calispa, 2018]] ).

There is an ecosystem bias in adaptation priorities for research and implementation, hindering the development of comprehensive adaptation programmes. Most scientific research on adaptation in Peru focuses on the highlands and coastal regions, while mitigation research focuses on forests ( [[#Chazarin--2014|Chazarin et al., 2014]] ). Combined adaptation and mitigation strategies can produce positive results, but they are often disconnected ( [[#Locatelli--2015|Locatelli et al., 2015]] ). Most reviewed cases in agriculture and forestry in Latin America (84% of 274 cases) reported positive synergies between adaptation and mitigation. Nevertheless, research on Latin American forests tend to focus on mitigation, while studies on agriculture are usually oriented towards adaptation ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Locatelli--2015|Locatelli et al., 2015]] , 2017).

Rural communities in the Cusco region, Peru, ground their ability to adapt to climate change on four cultural values, known in Quechua as ''ayni'' (reciprocity), ''ayllu'' (collectiveness), ''yanantin'' (equilibrium) and ''chanincha'' (solidarity), but policies oriented towards so-called modernisation undermine these traditional mechanisms. Adaptation strategies could benefit from integrating these and other insights from traditional cultures, fostering risk reduction and transformational adaptation towards intrinsically sustainable systems ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) ( [[#Walshe--2016|Walshe and Argumedo, 2016]] ).

Protected areas have become an important component as enablers of national climate-change adaptation strategies. They increase ecosystems’ adaptive potential, reducing climate risk and delivering numerous ecosystem services and sustainable development benefits while playing an important role in climate-change mitigation ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Mackey--2008|Mackey et al., 2008]] ; [[#Dudley--2010|Dudley et al., 2010]] ; [[#Gross--2016|Gross et al., 2016]] ; [[#Bebber--2017|Bebber and Butt, 2017]] ; [[#Dinerstein--2019|Dinerstein et al., 2019]] ; [[#IPCC--2019a|IPCC, 2019a]] ). CSA already has a greater percentage of land (24.1%) under protected status than the world average (14.7%) ( [[#UNEP-WCMC%20and%20IUCN--2020b|UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2020b]] ). Some countries, including Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Venezuela, have already met or surpassed the 30% CDB and IUCN goal ( [[#Dinerstein--2019|Dinerstein et al., 2019]] ), and others, like Costa Rica and Honduras, are very close to doing so. In some cases, the establishment of protected areas not accompanied by collective decision-making processes has displaced local people or denied them access to natural resources, increasing their vulnerability to climate change ( [[#Brockington--2015|Brockington and Wilkie, 2015]] ).

In addition to better managing and expanding protected area networks, other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs), recently defined by the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity ( [[#Dudley--2018|Dudley et al., 2018]] ), could also enhance ecosystem resilience ( ''low confidence'' ). Private protected areas in the mountain regions of the Americas (e.g., Andes) play an important role in closing the gaps in fragmented biomes and expanding protection in underrepresented areas ( [[#Hora--2018|Hora et al., 2018]] ). In Brazil, there is also huge potential for conservation and sustainable management in private areas, as roughly 53% of the country’s native vegetation is within private land ( [[#Lapola--2014|Lapola et al., 2014]] ; [[#Soares-Filho--2014|Soares-Filho et al., 2014]] ).

Large-scale restoration is also seen as pivotal to limiting both climate change ( [[#IPCC--2019a|IPCC, 2019a]] ) and species extinction ( [[#IPBES--2018a|IPBES, 2018a]] ) ( ''very high confidence'' ). A new multi-criteria approach to optimising multiple restoration outcomes (for biodiversity, climate-change mitigation and cost), for example, indicate that SA has the greatest extension of converted lands, evenly distributed in the top 50% of global priorities ( [[#Strassburg--2020|Strassburg et al., 2020]] ).

<div id="12.5.2" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="ocean-and-coastal-ecosystems-and-their-services"></span>