Framework to assess the impacts of climate change on species.

<p>Combinations of the three dimensions of climate change vulnerability, namely sensitivity, exposure and low adaptive capacity describe four distinct classes of climate change vulnerable species, each with particular implications for conservation prioritisation and strategic planning. Species that are ‘highly climate change vulnerable’ (1), being sensitive, exposed and of low adaptive capacity, are of greatest concern. They are the first priority for monitoring responses to climate change and for assessment of the interventions needed to support them. ‘Potential adapters’ (2) are sensitive and exposed (but high adaptive capacity) species that may be able to mitigate negative climate change impacts by dispersal or microevolution, although close monitoring is needed to verify this. ‘Potential persisters’ (3) have low adaptive capacity and are exposed (but are not sensitive) so may be able to withstand climate change <i>in situ</i> by themselves, but again, monitoring is needed to ensure that the assumptions about insensitivity are realized in practice. Finally, species of ‘high latent risk’ (4) have low adaptive capacity and are sensitive (but are not exposed). Although not of immediate concern if climate change projections and emissions scenarios are accurate, they could become climate change vulnerable if exposed beyond selected time frames (e.g., 2050).</p

Climate change vulnerability under different emissions scenarios.

<p>Red, black, and blue lines represent the percentages of highly climate change vulnerable species under high (A2), mid-range (A1B) and low (B1) emissions scenarios for birds (A), amphibians (B) and corals (C) for 1975–2050 and 1975–2090. Optimistic and pessimistic estimates for missing biological trait data are represented by solid and dashed lines respectively.</p

Concentrations of species that are both climate change vulnerable and threatened by non-climate stressors.

<p>Areas with high concentrations of species that are climate change vulnerable only are in yellow, threatened species (according to the IUCN Red List) only are in blue, and areas with high concentrations of both are shown in maroon. The log of total numbers of these birds, amphibians and corals are represented by A, B and C respectively (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0065427#pone.0065427.s006" target="_blank">Figure S6</a> for maps of the proportions of these species relative to species richness). Grey areas show where species are present but concentrations of species that are either climate change vulnerable or threatened are low; colours increase in intensity as species concentrations increase. These results are based on the moderate A1B emissions scenario for 2050 and assume optimistic assumptions for missing trait information.</p

Concentrations of climate change vulnerable species.

<p>Areas with greatest concentrations of species with high sensitivity and low adaptive capacity only are shown in blue, and those with high exposure to climatic change only are in yellow. Areas with high concentrations of species that have high sensitivity and low adaptive capacity species, as well as of highly exposed species, are shown in maroon; they correspond with areas of high overall climate change vulnerability. Total numbers of climate change vulnerable birds, amphibians and corals are shown in A, C and E respectively, while B, D and F show the proportions of species occurring in a region that are climate change vulnerable. Grey areas show where species are present, but concentrations of focal species groups are low; colours increase in intensity as total numbers (for A, C and E) and proportions (for B, D and F) of focal species increase. These results were based on the moderate A1B emissions scenario for 2050 and assume an optimistic scenario for missing trait information.</p

Summary of relative climate change vulnerability in birds, amphibians and corals.

<p>This includes the total numbers and percentages of species in the climate change vulnerability categories highlighted in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0065427#pone-0065427-g001" target="_blank">Figure 1</a>, as well as those in each climate change vulnerability dimension alone. To represent the uncertainty resulting from missing biological trait data, vulnerability was calculated assuming optimistic and pessimistic extremes for missing values. It is important to note that scores represent relative measures within each taxonomic groups and comparisons between groups are not meaningful.</p

Assessing the Cost of Global Biodiversity and Conservation Knowledge

<div><p>Knowledge products comprise assessments of authoritative information supported by standards, governance, quality control, data, tools, and capacity building mechanisms. Considerable resources are dedicated to developing and maintaining knowledge products for biodiversity conservation, and they are widely used to inform policy and advise decision makers and practitioners. However, the financial cost of delivering this information is largely undocumented. We evaluated the costs and funding sources for developing and maintaining four global biodiversity and conservation knowledge products: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems, Protected Planet, and the World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas. These are secondary data sets, built on primary data collected by extensive networks of expert contributors worldwide. We estimate that US$160 million (range: US$116–204 million), plus 293 person-years of volunteer time (range: 278–308 person-years) valued at US$14 million (range US$12–16 million), were invested in these four knowledge products between 1979 and 2013. More than half of this financing was provided through philanthropy, and nearly three-quarters was spent on personnel costs. The estimated annual cost of maintaining data and platforms for three of these knowledge products (excluding the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems for which annual costs were not possible to estimate for 2013) is US$6.5 million in total (range: US$6.2–6.7 million). We estimated that an additional US$114 million will be needed to reach pre-defined baselines of data coverage for all the four knowledge products, and that once achieved, annual maintenance costs will be approximately US$12 million. These costs are much lower than those to maintain many other, similarly important, global knowledge products. Ensuring that biodiversity and conservation knowledge products are sufficiently up to date, comprehensive and accurate is fundamental to inform decision-making for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Thus, the development and implementation of plans for sustainable long-term financing for them is critical.</p></div

Development status of the four knowledge products included in this study.

<p>A brief description of each knowledge product is available in [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0160640#pone.0160640.ref007" target="_blank">7</a>].</p

Sources of funding (midpoints of estimates) until 2013 for all knowledge products.

<p>Others include multilateral donors and financial institutions.</p

Categories, subcategories and funding sources classification used to categorise costs.

<p>Categories, subcategories and funding sources classification used to categorise costs.</p

Estimated costs to reach pre-defined baselines by 2020 for each knowledge product.

<p>Estimated costs to reach pre-defined baselines by 2020 for each knowledge product.</p