Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-2
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== 2.5.1.2 Risk Assessment and Non-Modelling Approaches ==== <div id="h3-30-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div> In order to add realism and reliability to risk assessments at the species and community levels, non-modelling approaches, based on known biological traits or processes as well as on expert opinion ( [[#Camac--2021|Camac et al., 2021]] ), are used to temper model outputs with ground-based validation. Trait-based assessment approaches use species’ biological characteristics as predictors of sensitivity, adaptive capacity and extinction risk due to climate change. Climate exposure can be estimated using GIS-based modelling, statistical programs or expert judgment ( [[#Chin--2010|Chin et al., 2010]] ). These trait-based approaches are widely applied to predict responses of biodiversity to climate change because they do not require modelling expertise or detailed distibutional data ( [[#Pacifici--2015|Pacifici et al., 2015]] ; [[#Willis--2015|Willis et al., 2015]] ). Most of these methods have not been independently validated and do not allow direct comparison of vulnerability and risk across taxonomic groups. Some studies have combined two or three approaches for the assessment of climate change risk to biodiversity, in order to capture the advantages of each and avoid their limitations. [[#Warren--2013|Warren et al. (2013)]] used combinations of SDMs and trait-based approaches to estimate the proportions of species losing their climatically suitable ranges under the various future scenarios of climate and dispersal rate. Similarly, spatial projections of exposure to climate change were combined with traits to assess the vulnerability of sub-Saharan amphibians ( [[#Garcia--2014|Garcia et al., 2014]] ). [[#Laurance--2012|Laurance et al. (2012)]] combined 31 functional groups of species and 21 potential drivers of environmental change, in order to assess both the ecological integrity and threats to protected tropical areas on a global scale. [[#Keith--2014|Keith et al. (2014)]] used a combination of three approaches (SDMs–trait–mechanistic) to determine how long before extinction a species would become eligible for listing as threatened, based on the IUCN Red List criteria. <div id="2.5.1.3" class="h3-container"></div> <span id="risk-of-species-extinctions"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-2
(section)
Add languages
Add topic