Back

Characterizing multiple dimensions of climate hazards for conservation planning: a case study of estuaries in the Pacific Northwest

Marcus, R.; Shackelford, N.; Singh, G. G.

2026-08-04 ecology
10.64898/2026.08.03.741880 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Incorporating the complexities of climate change into conservation planning can be challenging. Climate change is projected to change the mean and variability of temperature and precipitation, and change dynamics of extreme events of many climate variables globally. These changes will all have compounding effects on ecosystems worldwide, affecting species distributions, seasonal timings, and population dynamics. However, most recent climate-informed conservation planning frameworks only focus on changes in mean conditions, leaving out ecologically important information about seasonality and extreme events. Using a case study of estuaries in the Pacific Northwest, this research seeks to answer the question "How can the effects of climate change on estuaries best be modelled and described for practical use in ecological management?" To answer this question, we used downscaled climate projection data to estimate changes in the mean and variability of temperature and precipitation. Applying extreme value theory to these projection data, we also projected changes in the magnitude of extremes in temperature and precipitation for estuaries in the region. Using descriptive statistics and open source data, our results present a novel, holistic method of understanding climate risk, including estimating extreme events, highlighting a key research gap in conservation planning. These results also highlight that trends in the mean, variability, and magnitude of climate extremes are not consistent with each other, further underscoring the importance of considering multiple dimensions of climate change together. Despite uncertainty given by climate models, the methods presented here provide a reasonable approach to plan for conservation management in the face of climate uncertainty.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.