Conservation Success through IPBES-Guided Transformative Change

View/ Open
File version
Accepted Manuscript (AM)
Author(s)
Bonebrake, Timothy C
Guo, Fengyi
Dingle, Caroline
Baker, David M
Kitching, Roger L
Ashton, Louise A
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2019
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
In response to our Perspective on integrating proximal and horizon threats to biodiversity [1], Titeux et al. [2] objected to one of our sentences: ‘Titeux et al. [3] specifically highlight the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) as biased towards climate change research.’ To be more precise, Titeux et al. [3] stated in the abstract that ‘biodiversity scenarios mostly focus on the future impacts of climate change’ and that ‘the current state of integration between ecological and land system sciences is leading to biased estimation of actual risks and therefore constrains the implementation ...
View more >In response to our Perspective on integrating proximal and horizon threats to biodiversity [1], Titeux et al. [2] objected to one of our sentences: ‘Titeux et al. [3] specifically highlight the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) as biased towards climate change research.’ To be more precise, Titeux et al. [3] stated in the abstract that ‘biodiversity scenarios mostly focus on the future impacts of climate change’ and that ‘the current state of integration between ecological and land system sciences is leading to biased estimation of actual risks and therefore constrains the implementation of forward-looking policy responses to biodiversity decline.’ They then concluded the paper with a call: ‘IPBES offers a timely opportunity for taking up this challenge, but this independent body can only do so if adequate research efforts are undertaken.’ We appreciate that Titeux et al. [2] felt it necessary to correct our, admittedly, simplified summation of their work. However, we do not believe that this amounted to misrepresentation (although readers can judge for themselves).
View less >
View more >In response to our Perspective on integrating proximal and horizon threats to biodiversity [1], Titeux et al. [2] objected to one of our sentences: ‘Titeux et al. [3] specifically highlight the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) as biased towards climate change research.’ To be more precise, Titeux et al. [3] stated in the abstract that ‘biodiversity scenarios mostly focus on the future impacts of climate change’ and that ‘the current state of integration between ecological and land system sciences is leading to biased estimation of actual risks and therefore constrains the implementation of forward-looking policy responses to biodiversity decline.’ They then concluded the paper with a call: ‘IPBES offers a timely opportunity for taking up this challenge, but this independent body can only do so if adequate research efforts are undertaken.’ We appreciate that Titeux et al. [2] felt it necessary to correct our, admittedly, simplified summation of their work. However, we do not believe that this amounted to misrepresentation (although readers can judge for themselves).
View less >
Journal Title
Trends in Ecology & Evolution
Volume
34
Issue
11
Copyright Statement
© 2019 Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, providing that the work is properly cited.
Subject
Environmental sciences
Biological sciences