Exposure, sensitivity, or adaptive capacity? Reviewing assessments that use only two of three elements of climate change vulnerability

IF 2.8 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Amanda A. Hyman, Erin R. Crone, Abigail Benson, Jason Dunham, Abigail J. Lynch, Laura Thompson, Meryl C. Mims
{"title":"Exposure, sensitivity, or adaptive capacity? Reviewing assessments that use only two of three elements of climate change vulnerability","authors":"Amanda A. Hyman,&nbsp;Erin R. Crone,&nbsp;Abigail Benson,&nbsp;Jason Dunham,&nbsp;Abigail J. Lynch,&nbsp;Laura Thompson,&nbsp;Meryl C. Mims","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>As climate change accelerates, understanding which species are most vulnerable and why they are vulnerable will be vital to inform conservation action. Climate change vulnerability assessments (CCVAs) are tools to assess species' responses to climate change, detect drivers of vulnerability, and inform conservation planning. CCVAs are commonly composed of three elements: exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Incorporating all three elements can be challenging, and including only two of the three elements may be a more feasible approach in many systems. Although two-element CCVA approaches have become more common, their utility and procedures remain poorly documented. We conducted a literature review to explore the scope, methods, and rationale of CCVAs that use a two-element approach to assess vertebrate vulnerability. Despite the potential to expand CCVAs into understudied systems, two-element assessments had similar geographic and taxonomic biases as those previously detected in CCVAs in general. Methods varied, yet we found that variables used in two-element studies could be condensed into standardized categories to enhance comparability. Finally, limitations in data availability and computational resources were common rationales for using a two-element approach. By clarifying the purposes, opportunities, and limitations of two-element assessment, this review can aid in selecting appropriate methods for CCVAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13293","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13293","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As climate change accelerates, understanding which species are most vulnerable and why they are vulnerable will be vital to inform conservation action. Climate change vulnerability assessments (CCVAs) are tools to assess species' responses to climate change, detect drivers of vulnerability, and inform conservation planning. CCVAs are commonly composed of three elements: exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Incorporating all three elements can be challenging, and including only two of the three elements may be a more feasible approach in many systems. Although two-element CCVA approaches have become more common, their utility and procedures remain poorly documented. We conducted a literature review to explore the scope, methods, and rationale of CCVAs that use a two-element approach to assess vertebrate vulnerability. Despite the potential to expand CCVAs into understudied systems, two-element assessments had similar geographic and taxonomic biases as those previously detected in CCVAs in general. Methods varied, yet we found that variables used in two-element studies could be condensed into standardized categories to enhance comparability. Finally, limitations in data availability and computational resources were common rationales for using a two-element approach. By clarifying the purposes, opportunities, and limitations of two-element assessment, this review can aid in selecting appropriate methods for CCVAs.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Conservation Science and Practice
Conservation Science and Practice BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
240
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信