[ad_1]
Deceptive measures to stop the risk of global warming affecting sensitive habitats for animals and plants, and vice versa. SMHI and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency warn against this in a new report. – It is important to realize this, so that you can take a collective approach and make well-thought-out decisions, says Henrik Smith, professor of zooecology.
The harvested energy forest provides fossil-free fuel, but a local environment that does not benefit biodiversity. Stock Photography.
The purpose of the report is to translate the global findings of the UN IPCC climate panel and the biodiversity panel, IPBES, into local Swedish conditions.
– It is largely about being able to analyze these problems at the same time. There are contradictions, where managing one issue affects the possibility of being able to handle the other, says Henrik Smith, professor of zooecology at Lund University and co-author of the new report that the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and SMHI are now presenting.
– The most controversial is the balance between increasing the extraction of the forest to, for example, produce biofuels or replace materials that affect the climate, while preserving biological diversity.
For Sweden, this applies mainly to measures in forestry, agriculture and other land uses. Globally, these sectors account for about 23 percent of total human greenhouse gas emissions, according to the IPCC.
– We have seen a sharp decline in biodiversity in agriculture. Actually, this applies to all Swedish land use, says Henrik Smith.
But there are ways of using land that reduce climate emissions while promoting biodiversity, says Markku Rummukainen, SMHI’s climate advisor:
– There are developed methods, but they require a bit of innovation. For example, plowless farming can increase soil carbon storage and create good conditions for microorganisms, while reducing the need for fertilizers and increasing productivity, says Markku Rummukainen.
In the report, the researchers point to several similar examples of what they call good synergy effects; where measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions also promote biodiversity. One important area that stands out is wetland recreation. It is a method that reduces greenhouse gas emissions and benefits a large number of species that live in, on and just above the surface of the water.
– Historically, we have seen a great loss of wetlands in Sweden. So there are great opportunities here, which mean a huge amount of biodiversity and at the same time are an effective climate measure, says Henrik Smith.
But no matter how you turn it around, certain weather changes cannot be avoided, notes Henrik Smith. They are already here and it is important to adapt society to them to mitigate the consequences. Even then, it is important to avoid actions that collide with each other.
An example is the construction of hard levees to protect areas threatened by floods as the sea rises. It can have negative effects in sensitive beach environments. According to the new report, an alternative method could be to replant seagrass beds, which slow down the movements of the sea close to land, form a nursery for fish and at the same time bind more carbon.
– There are many of these ecosystem-based solutions that we must learn to use in the right way and in the right place, says Henrik Smith.
– But at the same time, we probably have to realize that nature conservation efforts are not enough. Both the IPCC and IPBES write in their reports that radical social change is needed. At the same time, we must switch to sustainable production and consumption if we really want to achieve these goals, he adds.
Overall goals in the Swedish harvest
The report “Climate Change and Biodiversity” is a collaboration between SMHI and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and has been compiled by researchers from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and Lund University.
The purpose is to provide an overview of how climate change interacts with biodiversity in Sweden. The researchers have drawn on the comprehensive global reports from the UN IPCC climate panel and the IPBES biodiversity panel and translated the findings into Swedish conditions.
An important conclusion is that climate change and biodiversity are closely intertwined. Climate change affects biodiversity and the rich biodiversity helps to counteract the effects of climate change.
In some cases, measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can have negative consequences for habitats and biodiversity. Therefore, according to the authors of the report, it is important to be aware of such conflict of objectives and to strive to adopt measures that, instead, provide synergistic effects.
Source: Report “Climate change and biodiversity”, Climatic Totology No. 56 2020
