A multi-species modelling approach to examine the impact of alternative climate change adaptation strategies on range shifting ability in a fragmented landscape

An individual-based model of animal dispersal and population dynamics was used to test the effects of different climate change adaptation strategies on species range shifting ability, namely the improvement of existing habitat, restoration of low quality habitat and creation of new habitat. These strategies were implemented on a landscape typical of fragmentation in the United Kingdom using spatial rules to differentiate between the allocation of strategies adjacent to or away from existing habitat patches. The total area being managed in the landscape was set at realistic levels based on recent habitat management trends. Eight species were parameterised to broadly represent different stage structure, population densities and modes of dispersal. Simulations were initialised with the species occupying 20% of the landscape and run for 100 years. As would be expected for a range of real taxa, range shifting abilities were dramatically different. This translated into large differences in their responses to the adaptation strategies. With conservative (0.5%) estimates of the area prescribed for climate change adaptation, few species display noticeable improvements in their range shifting, demonstrating the need for greater investment in future adaptation. With a larger (1%) prescribed area, greater range shifting improvements were found, although results were still species-specific. It was found that increasing the size of small existing habitat patches was the best way to promote range shifting, and that the creation of new stepping stone features, whilst beneficial to some species, did not have such broad effect across different species

Coupled land use and ecological models reveal emergence and feedbacks in socio-ecological systems

Acknowledgements: This work was supported by an EPSRC Doctoral Training Centre grant (EP/G03690X/1). Supplementary material (Appendix ECOG‐04039 at ). Appendix 1.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Emerging Opportunities for Landscape Ecological Modelling

Landscape ecological modelling provides a vital means for understanding the interactions between geographical, climatic, and socio-economic drivers of land-use and the dynamics of ecological systems. This growing field is playing an increasing role in informing landscape spatial planning and management. Here, we review the key modelling approaches that are used in landscape modelling and in ecological modelling. We identify an emerging theme of increasingly detailed representation of process in both landscape and ecological modelling, with complementary suites of modelling approaches ranging from correlative, through aggregated process based approaches to models with much greater structural realism that often represent behaviours at the level of agents or individuals. We provide examples of the considerable progress that has been made at the intersection of landscape modelling and ecological modelling, while also highlighting that the majority of this work has to date exploited a relatively small number of the possible combinations of model types from each discipline. We use this review to identify key gaps in existing landscape ecological modelling effort and highlight emerging opportunities, in particular for future work to progress in novel directions by combining classes of landscape models and ecological models that have rarely been used together

LiDAR-derived topography and forest structure predict fine-scale variation in daily surface temperatures in oak savanna and conifer forest landscapes

In mountain landscapes, surface temperatures vary over short distances due to interacting influences of topography and overstory vegetation on local energy and water balances. At two study landscapes in the Sierra Nevada of California, characterized by foothill oak savanna at 276–481 m elevation and montane conifer forest at 1977–2135 m, we deployed 288 near-surface (5 cm above the surface) temperature sensors to sample site-scale (30 m) temperature variation related to hillslope orientation and vegetation structure and microsite-scale (2–10 m) variation related to microtopography and tree overstory. Daily near-surface maximum and minimum temperatures for the 2013 calendar year were related to topographic factors and vegetation overstory characterized using small footprint LiDAR imagery acquired by the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) Airborne Observation Platform (AOP). At both landscapes we recorded large site and microsite spatial variation in daily maximum temperatures, and less absolute variation in daily minimum temperatures. Generalized boosted regression trees were estimated to measure the influence of tree canopy density, understory solar radiation, cold-air drainage and pooling, ground cover and microtopography on daily maximum and minimum temperatures at site and microsite scales. Site-scale models based on indices of understory solar radiation and landscape position explained an average of 61–65% of daily variation in maximum temperature; site-scale models based on tree canopy density and landscape position explained 65–83% of variation in minimum temperatures. Models explained <15% of variation in microsite-scale maximum temperatures but within-site heterogeneity was significantly correlated with within-site heterogeneity in modeled understory radiation at both landscapes. Tree canopy density and slope explained 33% of microsite-scale variation in minimum temperatures at savanna sites. Our results demonstrate that it is feasible to model site-scale variation in daily surface temperature extremes and within-site heterogeneity in surface temperatures using LiDAR-derived variables, supporting efforts to understand cross-scale relationships between surface microclimates and regional climate change. Improved understanding of topographic and vegetative buffering of thermal microclimates across mountain landscapes is key to projecting microclimate heterogeneity and potential species’ range dynamics under future climate change

Alueelliset toimielimet ja lähidemokratia: johtavien viranhaltijoiden tulkinta alueellisten toimielinten roolista, päätösvallasta ja legitimiteetistä

Osallistumisen edistäminen on tärkeä osa hallinnon toimintaa 2010-luvulla. Julkishallinnon muuttuessa verkostomaiseksi hallinnaksi kansalaiset ovat nousseet hallinnon kumppaneiksi. Käytännössä osallistumishankkeiden vaikutukset jäävät kuitenkin usein epäselviksi. Osallistumistutkijat ovat havainnet huolestuttavan ilmiön: samalla kun hallinto tarjoaa entistä enemmän osallistumismahdollisuuksia kansalaisten usko niiden vaikuttavuuteen on heikentynyt. Kuntaliitokset kasvattavat painetta luoda uusia lähidemokratian käytäntöjä. Kuntaliitokset ovat luoneet maantieteellisesti suuria kuntia, jotka sisältävät entistä heterogeenisempiä alueita. Usein kuntaliitosten jälkeen kunnanvaltuustot ovat entistä pienempi otos kuntalaisista, koska kunnanvaltuustojen koko ei ole kasvanut samassa suhteessa kasvaneen väkiluvun kanssa. Kunnanvaltuustojen edustuksellisuus on siis ohentunut. Tämä on laadullinen tutkimus alueellisista toimielimistä. Tutkimuksen tapauksina ovat Raahen ja Mikkelin kuntaliitosten yhteydessä muodostetut alueelliset toimielimet. Tutkimusaineisto koostuu näiden kaupunkien johtavien viranhaltijoiden teemahaastatteluista. Tutkimus perustuu osallistuvan ja edustuksellisen demokratian teorioihin. Tutkimuksen tulosten mukaan johtavat viranhaltijat pitävät kuntalaisten osallistumista tärkeänä. He ovat valmiita käyttämään aikaa ja resursseja kuntalaisten osallistumiseen. Viranhaltijat toivovat, että alueellisten toimielinten kanssa syntyisi tulevaisuudessa kumppanuus, joka mahdollistaisi hallinnon ja asukkaiden yhteistyön. Haastateltujen viranhaltijoiden demokratiatulkinta painottaa edustuksellista demokratiaa. Demokratiatulkinnasta johtuen viranhaltijat suhtautuvat varauksellisesti merkittävän päätöksentekovallan delegoimiseen pois kunnanvaltuustolta ja lautakunnilta. Viranhaltijat näkevät alueelliset toimielimet ennen kaikkea paikallisen tiedon ja mielipiteiden välittäjänä hallinnon päätöksenteon tueksi. Alueellisille toimielimille ei olla halukkaita antamaan merkittävää päätösvaltaa. Viranhaltijoiden tulkinta alueellisten toimielinten legitimiteetistä on epäselvä. He ovat epävarmoja alueellisten toimielinten jäsenten edustavuudesta ja osaamisesta. Puolueiden edustajien roolista alueellisissa toimielimissä on ristiriitaisia mielipiteitä. Viranhaltijoiden näkemyksen mukaan alueelliset toimielimet ajavat alueen omia etuja kunnan kokonaisedun kustannuksella. Alueellisten toimielinten legitimiteettiongelmista johtuen viranhaltijat tulkitsevat aktiivisesti osallistujien mielipiteitä hallinnon omista lähtökohdista. Kunnissa tarvitaan perusteellista keskustelua demokratian merkityksistä, osallistumiselle annettavasta roolista ja osallistumisen hallinnan tavoista. Tärkeää on määritellä legitimiteetin muodostumisen periaatteet sekä luoda tasapuoliset osallistumismahdollisuudet koko kunnan alueelle. Tämä on välttämätöntä, jotta kuntalaisten osallistumista päätöksentekoon voitaisiin vahvistaa

Data from: Coupled land use and ecological models reveal emergence and feedbacks in socio‐ecological systems

Understanding the dynamics of socio‐ecological systems is crucial to the development of environmentally sustainable practices. Models of social or ecological sub‐systems have greatly enhanced such understanding, but at the risk of obscuring important feedbacks and emergent effects. Integrated modelling approaches have the potential to address this shortcoming by explicitly representing linked socio‐ecological dynamics. We developed a socio‐ecological system model by coupling an existing agent‐based model of land‐use dynamics and an individual‐based model of demography and dispersal. A hypothetical case‐study was established to simulate the interaction of crops and their pollinators in a changing agricultural landscape, initialised from a spatially random distribution of natural assets. The bi‐directional coupled model predicted larger changes in crop yield and pollinator populations than a unidirectional uncoupled version. The spatial properties of the system also differed, the coupled version revealing the emergence of spatial land‐use clusters that neither supported nor required pollinators. These findings suggest that important dynamics may be missed by uncoupled modelling approaches, but that these can be captured through the combination of currently‐available, compatible model frameworks. Such model integrations are required to further fundamental understanding of socio‐ecological dynamics and thus improve management of socio‐ecological systems

Data from: Coupled land use and ecological models reveal emergence and feedbacks in socio‐ecological systems

Understanding the dynamics of socio&#x2010;ecological systems is crucial to the development of environmentally sustainable practices. Models of social or ecological sub&#x2010;systems have greatly enhanced such understanding, but at the risk of obscuring important feedbacks and emergent effects. Integrated modelling approaches have the potential to address this shortcoming by explicitly representing linked socio&#x2010;ecological dynamics. We developed a socio&#x2010;ecological system model by coupling an existing agent&#x2010;based model of land&#x2010;use dynamics and an individual&#x2010;based model of demography and dispersal. A hypothetical case&#x2010;study was established to simulate the interaction of crops and their pollinators in a changing agricultural landscape, initialised from a spatially random distribution of natural assets. The bi&#x2010;directional coupled model predicted larger changes in crop yield and pollinator populations than a unidirectional uncoupled version. The spatial properties of the system also differed, the coupled version revealing the emergence of spatial land&#x2010;use clusters that neither supported nor required pollinators. These findings suggest that important dynamics may be missed by uncoupled modelling approaches, but that these can be captured through the combination of currently&#x2010;available, compatible model frameworks. Such model integrations are required to further fundamental understanding of socio&#x2010;ecological dynamics and thus improve management of socio&#x2010;ecological systems.,All_ResultSummaryData file containing all simulation results. Column &quot;Group&quot; represents the group classification for each value, used to subset data for different analyses. &quot;SimID&quot; uniquely identifies each simulation&#39;s parameterisation (represented by the parameters: &quot;Coupled&quot;, &quot;NoPolliYield&quot;, &quot;Rmax&quot;, &quot;CarryingCapacity&quot;, &quot;DispersalType&quot;).,</span