Biodiversity and Climate Change Assessment: Review of Draft Chapters (2025)
Chapter: 3 Comments on Individual Chapters
3
Comments on Individual Chapters
This chapter of the Committee’s report provides comments on individual draft chapters of the BCCA. This material is intended to complement the guidance provided in Chapter 2 of this report.
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Summary
Chapter 1 of the draft BCCA usefully provides the context and background for the assessment. It includes definitions of biodiversity and a summary of the drivers of biodiversity loss. The historical background establishes the foundational evidence of causes of biodiversity loss. The most critical refinement needed for this draft chapter is a restructuring of the conceptual framework to encompass the interactions among climate mitigation, climate adaptation, and biodiversity. This framework would align or be part of a broader assessment conceptual framework approach detailed in Chapter 2 of this report. In addition, an overview of ecosystems in North America, trends in climate and biodiversity, and governance structures would prepare the reader for the detailed chapters in the assessment. The BCCA authors of this chapter would benefit from review of Chapter 2 of this review report, which also discusses some of these topics.
Chapter Comments
The conceptual framework from IPBES applied to this assessment needs refinement to be used most effective in this biodiversity and climate change context. The IPBES framework centers on biodiversity (see draft BCCA Figure 1.1) rather than capturing the full scope of biodiversity and climate. To accurately reflect the scope of the draft BCCA, IPBES materials would be modified to be distinct and depict the multiple interactions among mitigation, adaptation, and conservation. Examples would be particularly helpful to make these abstract concepts more accessible to the intended readers, particularly non-scientific audiences. The conceptual framework in draft BCCA Chapter 1 then serves as the underpinning foundation for the organization of the remaining chapters in the assessment.
While the assessment is not intended to be a complete literature review, BCCA Chapter 1 could be improved by more balanced coverage of the types of ecosystems that exist within North America, including coastal, freshwater, and marine ecosystems, as well as terrestrial ecosystems. In addition to the types of ecosystems present in the focal region, Chapter 1 would benefit from inclusion of their spatial extents (see the Commission
for Environmental Cooperation 2024) and key ecological aspects of the region (e.g., biodiversity hotspots, areas of particularly rapid change). A presentation of the baseline status of these ecosystems and observed trends is also important and helps to establish the value and need for the development of this assessment. Information on the overlap between ecosystem extents and national boundaries (including lands of Sovereign Indigenous Peoples) would be relevant for transboundary issues discussed in the assessment. Balance across all the ecosystems found in North America would also help make the chapter less focused on the U.S. Maps (e.g., the regional map in Figure 1.4) and tables (e.g., Table 1.1) could be modified to orient the reader to the extents and characteristics of these ecosystems. See also the Broad Inclusion of Ecosystems section in Chapter 2 of this report.
More generally, ensuring that the evidence presented in the assessment captures data specifically from the region of interest, the most relevant scale(s), and intended management and policy considerations would help ensure the usability of the assessment content in decision-making. The BCCA could be improved by providing more of this foundational information, particularly in Chapter 1.
Providing the current understanding of how climate change will exacerbate biodiversity loss, which in turn will affect societies’ abilities to mitigate and adapt to climate change, would enable readers to grasp the importance of the assessment. Much of this information is available in IPCC and IPBES reports, which could be referenced and restructured to be specific for North America.
Some information currently in other draft chapters would be better placed in Chapter 1. For instance, information on the general state of knowledge of biodiversity and climate change in Chapters 2 and 8 as well as the text on future emissions scenarios and future climate projections in Chapter 8 would best be concisely summarized and transferred to Chapter 1. To provide the context for BCCA Chapters 2 and 8 that discuss policies in North American nations, a brief overview of the governance context across sovereign territories (including those of Indigenous Peoples) would prepare the reader for the detailed chapters on these topics. A critical issue to discuss is the variability among territories in their governance structures, which sets the context for detailed discussion of transboundary management of biodiversity in the assessment. See the Addressing Mismatches Between Ecosystem-Based and Jurisdictional Boundaries section in Chapter 2 of this report.
It would also be helpful if BCCA Chapter 1 clarified definitions that are used throughout the remainder of the report, with those definitions then applied consistently throughout the assessment. In addition to a definition of biodiversity, accepted definitions of other terms such as Indigenous Knowledge, Local Ecological Knowledge (see Chapter 2 of this report), ecosystems services, types of protection status, and other terms that arise throughout the remainder of the assessment would be appropriate for Chapter 1 and adopted for use by the authors of all BCCA chapters. Additional references suggested for review for inclusion in this chapter include Grim et al. 2013; the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment,1 and USGCRP 2023.
CHAPTER 2: INTRODUCTION
Chapter 2 of the draft BCCA is divided into sections that describe laws and policies separately for Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, and for transboundary issues. The importance of Chapter 2 derives from the importance of demonstrating a solid scientific foundation for effective biodiversity and climate change policies, and the identification by the BCCA leadership of policymakers being one of its primary audiences. The draft BCCA Chapter 2 does not include an introductory section like the other BCCA policy chapter, Chapter 8. A Chapter 2 introduction would offer a useful guide to the national subsections (referred to as chapters in this review) and provide greater consistency with Chapter 8.
Policies within a given nation, as well as those developed to address transboundary issues, are influenced by each nation’s leadership. Canada, the U.S., and Mexico are all experiencing leadership changes during the time-
___________________
frame in which the BCCA is being developed. These changes are expected to influence how each nation chooses to address biodiversity and climate change. The draft BCCA authors are encouraged to carefully consider how to discuss each nation’s relevant current and future policies given these national leadership changes and apply a consistent approach across the assessment, and in particular the policy discussions in Chapters 2 and 8.
CHAPTER 2.A: LAWS AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO BIODIVERSITY, CLIMATE CHANGE, OR BOTH IN CANADA
Summary
Chapter 2.a in the draft BCCA provides a detailed overview of Canadian law and policy related to biodiversity and climate change with comprehensive sections on commitments, plans, and frameworks for each. The chapter includes commentary on how well the policies and legislation have been followed and provides helpful examples relevant to each of the described policies, legislation, protocols, and programs. There is also a relatively thorough and effective description of the inherent rights and sovereignty of Indigenous Peoples in Canada and the relationship of these rights with federal colonial law which could be looked to as a strong example for the draft BCCA Chapters 2.b and 2.c.
Chapter Comments
Generally, terrestrial and marine statutes are well reviewed, however greater attention to freshwater environments is warranted (see the Broad Inclusion of Ecosystems section in Chapter 2 of this report). Freshwater ecosystems are a critical component of the Canadian landscape and changes to biodiversity are being observed in response to climate change impacts (Desforges et al. 2021; Woolway et al. 2022). Canada has 20% of the world’s freshwater resources, 7% of the world’s renewable freshwater, and more lakes than any other country in the world. The Mackenzie River basin is the largest basin and longest river in Canada and the second-largest river basin in North America, while Great Slave Lake is the deepest lake in North America and Great Bear Lake is the largest lake entirely within Canada and the fourth-largest lake in North America. Yet there is little mention of lakes or rivers in the chapter beyond the example of Great Lakes agreements. Rivers and streams can also serve as strong examples for transboundary policy approaches and considerations. There is also opportunity in BCCA draft Chapter 2.a to discuss some of the recent government advances in freshwater science, including the Freshwater Action Plan and the creation of the Canada Water Agency.
Federal frameworks are discussed in ample detail in Chapter 2.a; however, there is less attention paid to the role of provinces and territories in biodiversity protection and climate change, which is the level at which the federal laws are applied. The omission of an extensive summary of provincial and territorial laws and policies is understandable due to the already long length of the chapter. However, the authors acknowledge that the provinces are often at odds with federal policies and programs, particularly those related to climate change. Further, they note that provinces have environmental jurisdiction over Crown lands, thus highlighting provincial and territorial power over land use and environmental issues. This suggests that a greater overview of provincial and territorial policies is needed to improve the strength and relevancy of the chapter. At the very least, it would be useful to have more examples to highlight where there are weaknesses in federal policies and programs when they rely on compliance at the provincial/territorial level.
While Indigenous protected and conservation areas (IPCAs) have great intentions and have gained momentum in recent years, a very small percentage of Canada’s landmass is declared as Indigenous-led protected areas. Additionally, there has yet to be a fully inclusive and holistic process that centers Indigenous Knowledge and experiences for communities seeking to establish IPCAs.
The relatively comprehensive nature of Chapter 2.a has resulted in it being incredibly dense, very long, and notably longer than the other national and transboundary laws and policies chapters. Improved organization and prioritization of the most relevant policies could help to address this inconsistency while helping readers to focus on the most pivotal laws and policies for biodiversity and climate change. To shorten this chapter, case studies could be removed and placed in other relevant chapters as examples of the science policy interface. In particular, some examples are described multiple times in the chapter (e.g., carbon offsets and pricing, issues related to right whales, IPCAs). The chapter also includes a lot of detail about international commitments and targets that, although framed in terms of Canadian contributions, would likely be better placed in Chapter 2.d.
The draft BCCA Chapter 2.a authors make an effort to show where both biodiversity and climate considerations exist within a single law or policy. The chapter notes gaps in legislation for industries that impact biodiversity and climate change mitigation, including agriculture, mining and forestry. This is important information to inform future policies and solutions and would be better placed in Chapter 8.a of the BCCA.
Draft Chapter 2.a includes a recommendation that there needs to be more attention to a whole of government approach. This would be better considered in Chapter 8.a with specifics as to how this could be undertaken. For example, the 2030 Nature Strategy includes all relevant government departments, but is only a Strategy as part of Canada’s National Biodiversity and Action Plan and hence not legally binding. Chapter 8.a could expand on what is needed to implement this strategy from a legal perspective. It also concludes that while there are frameworks in place to address biodiversity protection and climate change, the role of the ocean in addressing climate change is lacking within Canadian policy frameworks. Lack of consistent and adequate enforcement and application of laws is also hampering biodiversity protection and more progress on the nexus of biodiversity and climate change is needed. Clear recommendations to fill this gap would be well placed in Chapter 8.a. The role of international commitments is highlighted as being responsible for increasing Canada’s action on both issues.
As discussed in Chapter 2 of this report, a common outline shared by all the national chapters would be valuable, along with stronger coordination across BCCA chapter authoring teams. Additionally, better connection and alignment of the draft BCCA Chapters 2.a with 8.a would make the materials more influential. There are other sections in Chapter 2.a that would be more appropriate to include in 8.a. For example, although not completed yet, craft Chapter 2.a section 9 is focused on the effectiveness of policies and laws and the potential to change them to better address climate change-related pressures, which is wholly within the scope of Chapter 8.a.
Given the intended audiences for this report spanning multiple nations, it would be useful to define terms such as commonwealth and crownland, and to explain relevant sub national differences. For example, the Canadian federal government has jurisdiction over the marine environment allowing for easier implementation of biodiversity and climate laws and policies than in the terrestrial or inland water environments. Finally, more attention to the differences between settled land claims and treaties would be valuable, as well as mapping areas to show land claim status.
CHAPTER 2.B: LAWS AND POLICIES OF THE UNITED STATES RELEVANT TO BIODIVERSITY, CLIMATE CHANGE, OR BOTH
Summary
The draft BCCA Chapter 2.b contains three sections: (1) historical background since the 18th century of a subset of U.S. environmental laws, (2) the Endangered Species Act, (3) an outline of other issues. The first section has extensive text on water law, the relationship between state and federal powers, and the rights of Indian tribes. The draft is incomplete, with the third section, which would cover a substantial part of the chapter content, not yet containing fully written text.
In addition to considering guidance in this section, the draft BCCA chapter authors are encouraged to review Chapter 2 of this report, particularly the Linking Science to Management and Policy section.
Comments
Ideally, a robust assessment of biodiversity and climate change policy would provide comprehensive coverage of the principal laws, agency regulations, and relevant executive actions, concisely summarizing these three types of policy instruments. Draft Chapter 2.b presents a limited subset of issues and misses some essential elements. The chapter focuses primarily on the Endangered Species Act but does not discuss numerous other U.S. laws fundamental to national biodiversity and climate change policy. These include the National Environmental Policy Act (1970); the Wilderness Act (1964); Clean Air Act (1970); Clean Water Act (1972); Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (2007); the Antiquities Act (1906), National Park Service Organic Act (1916), National Marine Sanctuaries Act (1972), and other legislation authorizing U.S. systems of protected areas; the Infrastructure and Jobs Act (2021), which invested in clean energy and transportation; and the Inflation Reduction Act (2022), the largest U.S. Government investment to cut greenhouse gas emissions to date. Discussion of key regulations that implement these laws would strengthen the chapter. These include the listing and protection of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat; environmental impact statements for major federal actions, including timber cutting, mining, and livestock grazing on federal lands and fishing in federal waters; greenhouse gas emissions standards; and air and water quality standards.
Including key executive actions that have established national policies on biodiversity and climate change would add important information to this chapter, although these actions can be rescinded by new leadership. The statement in draft Chapter 2.b that the U.S. has no national policies on climate change or biodiversity is incorrect. U.S. national policies on climate change and biodiversity include: Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3226 (2001), which directed the National Park Service and other agencies to incorporate climate change into planning; Executive Order 13514 (2009), in which President Obama directed the U.S. Government to reduce climate change emissions and plan for adaptation; Department of the Interior Secretarial Order 3289 (2009), which established the Climate Science Centers and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives; the U.S. Climate Action Plan (2013); Executive Order 14008 (2021, rescinded 2025) in which President Biden set for the U.S. the United Nations goals of net-zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, and protection of 30% of the area of lands and waters by 2030; the U.S. America the Beautiful biodiversity strategy (2021); the Long-Term Strategy of the United States: Pathways to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050 (2021). Legislation is a more lasting form of policy since executive actions can be rescinded.
An assessment of the effectiveness of principal laws, regulations, and executive actions would provide information useful for future policy development. This would assess the performance of biodiversity policies that were adopted in the early 20th century, prior to widespread scientific publication of evidence for climate change. Examples include legal analyses of the National Park Service Organic Act (Biber and Esposito 2016) and climate change and the Wilderness Act and climate change (Long and Biber, 2014).
It would also be useful for the assessment to evaluate the incorporation of climate change considerations into implementation of existing biodiversity policies and whether this is leading to effective conservation under climate change and is influencing patterns and processes governing biodiversity and ecosystem services for people. For example, the assessment could evaluate the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries Climate Science Strategy and Regional Action Plans.
It would be beneficial for the draft Chapter 2.b to also address the configuration and management of U.S. systems of protected areas—National Parks, National Forests, National Wildlife Refuges, National Marine Sanctuaries, and other types of federal, tribal, state, and local areas. A key question Chapter 2.b could address
is: How does the configuration of multiple parallel systems with different goals affect effective conservation under climate change?
For consistency with Chapter 8.b, the other policy chapter of the BCCA, it would be good for Chapter 2.b to address natural resource management of individual protected areas, a topic related to, but separate from, national policy. In addition, it would be helpful for Chapter 2.b to assess U.S. progress on international goals including net-zero carbon dioxide emissions by 2050 and protection of 30% of the area of lands and waters by 2030.
Finally, the draft chapter would benefit from editing for clarity and conciseness and rewriting of many passages in language more understandable to the target audience(s) for this assessment. In addition, a clearer structure and organization would make the chapter more easily understood by readers. The chapter could possibly be organized by the policy instruments of laws, regulations and executive actions. Alternatively, it could be organized by theme, such as terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems and endangered species.
CHAPTER 2.C: LAWS AND POLICY DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO BIODIVERSITY, CLIMATE CHANGE, OR BOTH: MEXICO
Summary
Draft Chapter 2.c in the BCCA is intended to provide an overview of national laws and policies of Mexico focused on climate change mitigation and adaptation that may affect biodiversity. The chapter also considers how these laws and policies are put into practice and enforced at national to local levels.
The drafting of this BCCA chapter comes during a political transition in Mexico. The draft reviewed in this report was written before the change of the Mexican Federal Administration that took place in October 2024. Transformations of public policies brought about by this change are expected to have significant influence on biodiversity and climate change policies. While the chapter provides valuable information in its current form, greater prioritization and streamlining of materials is needed, as well as an updating to acknowledge the recent changes in national priorities. In addition to this review section, chapter authors are encouraged to review Chapter 2 in this report, particularly the Linking Science to Management and Policy section.
Comments
Draft Chapter 2.c would benefit from an overarching framework. A short overview of the general situation in Mexico in the context of North America with respect to laws, norms, institutions, and public policies on biodiversity and climate change would improve the chapter. This includes stressing that all jurisdictions not expressly reserved for the Federation by the national Constitution will correspond to the states. Additionally, focus on a clear set of main ideas that flow from diagnostic description of the state of laws and policies, to analysis, to digestion of material leading to synthesis and conclusions would create more coherent messaging in line with expectations for an assessment.
Further, improved prioritization of the most relevant materials would benefit this chapter. As currently written, the detailed listing of a great deal of information dilutes the importance of the key issues. Discussion of the National Development Plan 2018 – 2024 does not highlight that the Plan does not reference climate change and in doing so, prevents the topic from being incorporated in the Federal Administration sectoral or trans-sectoral programs beyond the strict provisions of the law. Similarly, Table 2, intended to synthesize the responsibilities of institutions, is a valuable effort but not central to the intent of this chapter. At the same time, there are some key issues that are missing or would benefit from more detailed discussion. For instance, Payment of Environmental Services, broadly used in Mexico until recently, is a valuable instrument with some transformative implications for biodiversity and climate change and could be explained more fully.
Updating this draft chapter to reflect how the new Administration is shaping policies for biodiversity and climate change will make this chapter more relevant and influential. This includes examining policies elevating acknowledgement of Indigenous Peoples, as they tie to biodiversity and cultural diversity conservation and sustainable management, and climate change policy. More generally, the draft Chapter 2.c would benefit from firmer grounding in the practicalities of implementation of the laws and policies. For instance, the text overlooks the state of enforcement of many legal provisions in Mexico and in doing so implies that every obligation included in a normative instrument will automatically be met, which is not the case. Discussion of the limitations and opportunities for addressing biodiversity and climate change for Indigenous protected areas and various ecosystem types (terrestrial, marine [including fisheries], freshwater) is needed. For example, the forest management programs at Ixtlán, in the Sierras of Oaxaca, includes the sustainable extraction of timber while maintaining areas for conservation of coniferous forest.
There is an opportunity to better interweave discussion of challenges as well. The analytical value of draft Chapter 2.c could increase considerably if “challenges and incentives” currently discussed in Table 4 (beginning on page 174) were brought into the main text as part of the presentation of each of the related elements. Other tables in the chapter could also be better utilized. The other table labeled as Table 4 (beginning on page 164) would be more effective if it focused on a critical approach to instruments, such as land use planning, environmental impact assessment, the Units of Environmental Management, among others. Table 3 omits relevant organizations that bear administrative responsibilities and therefore have the power to influence the deployment of better practices of institutions such as the Comisión Nacional del Agua or the Mexican oil company Pemex. The inter-secretariat commissions that are detailed largely reflect commissions that are purely formal and do not meet regularly if at all (e.g., Comisión Intersecretarial de Cambio Climático), while others were underfunded considerably during the last administration (e.g., CONABIO).
CONABIO has been a strong model for how to compile scientific knowledge and make it available for public use in the biodiversity context. One valuable function that could be highlighted in the chapter is the satellite detection of heat spots indicating the outbreak of wildland fires. There are signs that the new administration will be supporting CONABIO (e.g., re-hiring of technical personnel)—an aspect that could be highlighted in the chapter. Further, CONABIO’s publications include a wealth of successful case studies that could be drawn on for this assessment, as well as a 4-volumne assessment of the country’s natural capital.
Finally, Chapter 2.c should be reviewed closely for factual mistakes. For instance, there are some obligations to report GHG emissions in Mexico in specific cases and they are not restricted to authorities. Also, the national territory covers 1,960,189 km2, which is not the area presented in the draft chapter. The chapter would also benefit from reference to any Mexico-related outcomes of the November 2024 Convention on Biological Diversity and the recent United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of the Parties. For broader guidance and continuity across Mexico-focused sections, chapter authors are encouraged to also read the review of Chapter 8.c, in Chapter 3 of this report.
CHAPTER 2.D: OUTLOOK OF THE TRANSNATIONAL/TRANSBOUNDARY POLICY AND INTERNATIONAL LAW APPLICABLE TO ADDRESS THE NEXUS BETWEEN BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE IN CANADA, MEXICO, AND THE UNITED STATES
Summary
The BCCA draft Chapter 2.d is a core component and valuable opportunity to examine transboundary responses to threats of climate change and biodiversity loss. A fundamental characteristic shared by the two threats (and their combined interactions) is their transboundary nature. While many “policy solutions” are con-
ceived of and implemented at a national level, individualistic responses are likely to be inadequate to address the overall transboundary threats posed by climate change, biodiversity loss, and the interactions thereof.
This chapter reviews multilateral agreements, regional agreements and initiatives, bilateral agreements and initiatives, and trade agreements and biodiversity. It concludes by distinguishing between the laws and policies of the three governmental structures, emphasizing that the differences make for “weak follow-up on regional agreements and limited public engagement in both the outcomes and the continuity of actions.” The transboundary situation of these issues will be framed by the final status of regional agreements that are currently under discussion.
As it stands, this chapter provides a wealth of information on transboundary responses to the combined threats of climate change and biodiversity loss, although it has room for a narrower focus that would facilitate greater synthesis of information. Review materials relevant to BCCA Chapter 2.d are also discussed in Chapter 2 of this report, particularly the Linking Science to Management and Policy section.
Comments
The early stage of development draft Chapter 2.d was in at the time of review made it difficult to identify and assess overarching issues. The chapter is currently not coherently sewn together and misses important subsections. Consequently, this chapter review provides feedback primarily on key issues of the included subsections.
The introductory section nicely outlines a focus on transboundary governance, biodiversity conservation, and mitigation of climate change. This narrow focus is effective and would be influential if applied throughout the rest of Chapter 2.d. Instead, succeeding sections try to summarize all policy instruments that influence these 3 key areas, which is a monumental task. The key message of section 2.d.1 comes in the final paragraph. It depends on the broader context within which this section is placed, but the authors could consider beginning this section with the information in this final paragraph and using that to help with framing the chapter while also adhering to a broader conceptual framework of the full assessment (discussed in Chapter 2 of this report).
Section 2.d.2 would benefit from linkage between the outlined 9-section structure of what is to be covered in the section and the main chapter text which does not appear to apply this structure. Instead, it is largely a compendium of treaties and laws that relate to transboundary governance, biodiversity, and/or climate change.
As the text for this chapter is further developed, greater attention to clarity is also warranted. For instance, in section 2.d.3, authors note they will “… assess [key elements of] existing efforts and their fit for purpose to address the nexus between biodiversity and climate change…” Authors then list eight “key elements” that will be “applied to treaties,” but it is unclear whether and how the subsequent text adequately addresses these key elements.
The draft Chapter 2.d sections focused on treaties, legislation, and policy would benefit from greater focus on North America (e.g., the extensively developed trade section in 2d.2). As with other sections in this chapter, there is a list of all the legal and policy instruments that have relevance without attention given to prioritization or synthesis of the information. An alternative approach to this would be to identify a series of nature-based solutions that operate at a transboundary scale and affect biodiversity conservation and climate change. This could be explored through references such as relevant reports from IPBES and IPCC and might include initiatives such as protecting and restoring woodlands and waterways, implementing biodiversity and climate change friendly agriculture, establishing interconnected protected and conserved areas, and managing “renewables” and energy technologies in ways that negatively impact biodiversity. Then a more focused analysis could be to examine the policy and legal instruments that affect these initiatives.
More broadly across Chapter 2.d, careful consideration to balancing content that connects to different types of ecosystems would improve the chapter. Ocean ecosystems are an important element of transboundary policy considerations, particularly international agreements that have biodiversity implications. See the Broad Inclusion of Ecosystems section in Chapter 2 of this report for more on this topic.
CHAPTER 3: DIRECT EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON BIODIVERSITY
Summary
Draft BCCA Chapter 3 provides an account of the direct effects of climate change on biodiversity. It covers the impacts of climate change on different aspects of biodiversity, from genes to ecosystems, structured into four sections. The literature covered is extensive, resulting in a long and complex chapter that includes some redundancy without synthesis or clear key messages. Some key themes and important references are also notably absent, along with a clear conveyance of the urgency of addressing the topics discussed and rigorous assessment of detection and attribution.
Comments
Draft Chapter 3 would benefit from clear framing for why this is an important chapter to have, with human-induced climate change discussed in the introduction rather than pointing readers to IPBES assessments. Discussion of what the implications are of observed changes as well as synergies between Indigenous Knowledge, Local Ecological Knowledge, and Western science would strengthen this chapter.
Further, a proper synthesis of the connections between biodiversity and climate change, covering both impacts of climate change on biodiversity and biodiversity influence on climate change, would provide a more complete picture of linkages between them (see also Chapter 2 Connections Between Biodiversity and Climate subsection in this report). Assessment of the impacts and risks at the ecosystem level (e.g., biome shifts, tree mortality, wildfire, ocean acidification, coral bleaching, and others [IPCC 2022]) would also improve this chapter. Other key areas where more attention would be valuable include discussion of mass extinction, or the magnitude of the current extinction crisis (see, e.g., Ceballos et al. 2015); the effects of climate change on species interactions and trophic webs, including role on physiology of keystone and dominant species; and discussion of other types of diversity beyond genetic diversity (which is the primary focus of this draft chapter), or an explanation to why the focus is on genetic diversity. See also the discussion of functional diversity in the review of draft Chapter 5 later in this chapter.
A multitude of factors can cause changes in ecosystems and biodiversity, including, among many others, deforestation, agricultural expansion, urbanization, timber harvesting, overfishing, livestock grazing, oil and methane drilling, harbor and water channel dredging, air and water pollution and, most relevant to the BCCA and this draft chapter, anthropogenic climate change. Disentangling and quantifying the damage of climate versus non-climate stresses on biodiversity is a key component of developing effective solutions to conserve ecosystems. The titles suggest that BCCA Chapter 3 will focus on climate change and Chapter 4 on non-climate change factors. As such, it is important that BCCA Chapter 3 discuss observed biodiversity changes detected and attributed to anthropogenic climate change and changes primarily due to non-climate change factors be covered in Chapter 4. Alternatively, Chapters 3 and 4 could be combined or more closely aligned because of their inherent connection. See the Analyzing and Presenting Evidence subsection in Chapter 2 of this report for more detailed discussion of detection and attribution.
Improvements to this chapter should include or expand upon the following: (1) information ranging from species, specific ecosystem, biome, or ecoregion level impacts, (2) how native/non-native/invasive species are treated in the assessment, (3) a consideration of indirect and cascading effects of the drivers the chapter addresses, (4) inclusion of impacts to microorganisms and plants, and (5) the current understanding of extinction rates in relation to climate change and related drivers. Draft Chapter 3 would also benefit from a summary table or diagram that captures overarching takeaways. Key messages are currently difficult to pull out of the many specific examples detailed in the draft chapter.
Greater care for the treatment of uncertainty would improve this chapter. This includes making a case for levels of certainty when the results are so mixed or limited. The authors often remark on little data or few publications, which reduces the strength of the statements as opposed to discussing gaps in knowledge. Statements such as “we do not know enough” and “a few documented cases” are misleading and create an incorrect conclusion. There are many publications objectively documenting the negative effects of climate change in biodiversity. This makes it difficult to effectively convey information to intended audiences and to use the information in a decision-making context. See also the Treatment of Uncertainty subsection in Chapter 2 of this report. Additionally, there are missing definitions of concepts such as environmental goods and services, opportunities to reduce the use of jargon, and a lack of consistency in language and terminology to be addressed.
CHAPTER 4: INTERACTIONS OF CLIMATE CHANGE WITH OTHER DRIVERS OF BIODIVERSITY CHANGE
Summary
Chapter 4 in the draft BCCA examines how climate change interacts with other human-driven factors causing biodiversity loss in North America. It explains that climate change should not be viewed in isolation, as various stressors differ by region and time and that climate change can amplify or moderate the impacts of land-use changes, pollution, direct exploitation, invasive species, and certain climate mitigation efforts. The chapter aims to clarify the relationship between climate change and other biodiversity loss drivers, how human actions can alter these patterns, and the need for environmental management strategies that address biodiversity and climate adaptation together. Further, it emphasizes the importance of incorporating Indigenous Knowledge, Local Ecological Knowledge, and Western science into nature-based solutions that address both biodiversity protection and climate mitigation.
Comments
Draft Chapter 4 effectively conveys key messages that align with both its purpose and content. The authors have selected case studies and use references that address critical issues associated with climate-induced loss of biodiversity. The chapter clearly explains the complexity of the topic, emphasizing that biodiversity and climate change must be considered together. The authors also focus on different levels of biological organization in their consideration of biodiversity and that is a strength of this chapter. The chapter focuses on actionable and relevant measures, balancing local and regional perspectives with a global context. This was a welcome characteristic and could be employed across other chapters. The use of clear, real-world examples—such as “nature’s garden,” rice fields, and fishing—effectively demonstrates the tangible impacts of disrupted Indigenous Knowledge and stewardship on biodiversity and resilience.
The draft chapter addresses important issues from an Indigenous Knowledge and stewardship perspective on biodiversity and resilience. It discusses the erosion of food sovereignty, explaining how this destabilizes
Indigenous lifeways and links to broader biodiversity challenges. The chapter emphasizes the need to actively involve Indigenous Peoples in conservation and management processes to achieve meaningful and equitable outcomes. The example of caribou decline is effective in illustrating the interconnectedness of climate change, habitat loss, and cultural significance, and highlights how competing interests, such as energy development, exacerbate biodiversity loss. The draft chapter also makes a strong argument for adaptive, place-based conservation approaches that restore ecological resilience through locally tailored and culturally appropriate methods.
The organizational structure of draft Chapter 4 makes sense and is easy to follow. The key messages listed at the beginning of the chapter were especially helpful. The idea to frame the entire chapter around answering specific questions was also an effective approach to support chapter organization and readability. This chapter could serve as a strong model for structuring other chapters in the report, providing a basis for a universal chapter framework that is much easier to read.
The draft chapter would be improved by refined framing of the focal questions and thorough review of the chapter to ensure alignment with its key points and overarching themes. Certain sections, such as those exploring the interactions among climate, biodiversity, and disease, can be improved with further development. Careful review of examples and case studies to clearly illustrate the connections between biodiversity and climate change in relation to the chapter’s central framing question would be useful. For instance, the discussion on redlining, native biodiversity, and climate-related hazards could be clarified to better highlight these interrelationships. Additionally, BCCA Chapter 4 needs a clear synthesis to connect its examples and ideas, especially where discussions on restoration and climate resilience strategies are incomplete. It currently renders potential solutions unclear. Highlighting Indigenous Knowledge as an important component in building ecological and social resilience and supporting Indigenous-led conservation in land management are essential for promoting environmental stewardship and sustainability. The term “stewardship” should be used in reference to the traditional practices of Indigenous Peoples, while the term “integrate” should be avoided when discussing Indigenous Knowledge due to its problematic historical connotations. See also the Adoption of Consistent and Current Terminology subsection in Chapter 2 of this report.
Many of the changes in species interactions that are being observed are trophic (i.e., implying consumption relationships across the food chain, from top predators to decomposers) in nature. There is a large body of literature on this for caribou, for instance. The BCCA Chapter 4 authors are encouraged to include a discussion on how changes in species trophic interactions, driven by the combined effects of direct human impacts and climate change, shape biodiversity patterns and affect the goods and services they provide to humans. In general, the references are relevant and appropriate, but additional citations will be needed to address some of the concerns outlined in the review.
CHAPTER 5: CONSEQUENCES OF CLIMATE-DRIVEN BIODIVERSITY CHANGE FOR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES AND OTHER NATURE’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO PEOPLE
Summary
The draft BCCA Chapter 5 examines how climate change affects nature’s contributions to people (NCP) in North America, focusing on the relationship between biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and human well-being. Eighteen specific NCPs are analyzed, based on the IPBES framework, and include habitat creation, pollination, climate regulation, water quality, soil health, and cultural values, among others. For each NCP, the chapter discusses its significance, regional variations, contributions to human well-being, and the impacts of climate change. It also highlights other human-induced environmental disturbances, such as pollution and land-use change, that interact with climate change to affect these contributions. The chapter emphasizes the need
for adaptive strategies to address climate impacts on NCPs. These include amplifying available Indigenous Knowledge and Local Ecological Knowledge, promoting sustainable biodiversity and land-use practices, restoring ecosystems, and addressing cultural and spiritual values alongside material contributions. It concludes by identifying gaps in research and the importance of inclusive policies to mitigate climate risks and support human and ecological resilience.
Comments
This draft chapter includes a great deal of information and several insightful perspectives. However, it would benefit from clearer structure, better incorporation of its key themes to create cohesion, and more concise language to make materials more accessible and useful to decision makers and for use by other audiences. The draft chapter is overly long and unfocused, making it difficult for readers to identify the main objectives or messages. Key points, including the chapter’s purpose, are embedded within the text and are not clearly highlighted, causing confusion about its overall aims. Discussion of multiple elements (e.g., biocultural and seascape discussions, expert survey results, and IPBES review) are not synthesized, resulting in separate, disconnected sections rather than one unified, cohesive chapter. Additionally, dividing ecosystems strictly into biocultural landscapes and seascapes leaves no clear place for inclusion of freshwater systems and draft Chapter 5 would benefit from expanded attention to this critical ecosystem type, as well as to plants and fungi, and more broad consideration of general concepts that apply to most ecosystems (see also the Broad Inclusions of Ecosystems section in Chapter 2 of this report). Coverage of agrobiodiversity focused narrowly on biodiversity and climate is a NCP that would improve this chapter given the serious impacts from the predominance of industrial agriculture and stewardship methods (e.g., cultural burning, ethnopedology).
It would be valuable for the chapter authors to consider diversity of functional traits, as reflected in the diversity of life forms (in the case of plants) or functional groups (in the case of animals). Functional diversity, independently of species (taxonomic) diversity, is critical for ecosystems’ ability to provide services. Consider, for example, a North American ecosystem with 20 species of bats, all of which are insectivores. This may be regarded as having lower biodiversity than one with 10 species that includes insectivores, frugivores, piscivores, blood feeders, etc., let alone an ecosystem with 20 species, most of them belonging to different functional groups. Related to this, the loss or decline of top predators or scavengers—critical components of food chains in North American ecosystems—has been shown to cascade down to the rest of the food chain, leading to the increase of herbivore and overgrazing on saplings or juvenile trees in forests, or to the accumulation of organic matter with consequences for carbon emissions and disease spillovers, respectively. Changes in functional diversity due to species invasions can also affect the benefits and hazards people derive from ecosystems. For example, interactions between extreme drought and the invasion of shrubs alter water cycling by intensifying transpiration rates in water-stressed systems (Caldeira et al. 2015).
Draft Chapter 5 would also benefit from simplification and thorough labeling of figures that tie explicitly to the chapter’s key messages and organizational questions. In the draft chapter, Figures 5.1, 5.X (framework of certainty), and 1 (underwater view of kelp forests) are not well connected to the text, making it unclear what their value is to the chapter. Regarding the case studies, several of the choices are not practical/feasible in the real world. For instance, choice 1 (return to past) and choice 3 (never before seen state) are unlikely and choice 2 (do nothing) is untenable.
Draft Chapter 5 would also benefit from consistent use of terminology that is well defined at the start of the chapter (or the assessment; see also Chapter 2 of this report). A few terms noted for review/revision include using Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge (widely recognized as Indigenous TEK) throughout rather than Traditional Knowledge or local knowledge; defining ecosystem services when first used; and expanding
the definition of biocultural to include urban, agricultural, and other human landscapes and seascapes, noting that the term ecocultural is also used and is important to mention when defining biocultural (ecocultural is most often used in the recent literature specifically to describe Indigenous landscapes).
Finally, the BCCA chapter authors are encouraged to consider how NCPs—framed around material things that humans can obtain from nature—can be most meaningfully discussed alongside an Indigenous worldview, where humans have a moral obligation to contribute to sustain the natural world through stewardship. A strength of the chapter is the opening with values being instrumental and intrinsic to ecosystems services, relational to Earth, which could be a starting point for strengthening the connections between different ways of knowing. Additionally, there is recent literature demonstrating the long Indigenous presence in North America that led to the domestication of numerous plants and animals, and the sustained process of co-evolution of plant and animal species with humans. This literature provides important foundational knowledge for understanding and addressing current anthropogenic impacts and the inextricable interactions between biodiversity and climate change.
CHAPTER 6: INTERACTIONS AMONG CLIMATE MITIGATION, CLIMATE ADAPTATION, AND BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Summary
The BCCA draft Chapter 6 addresses an important and crucial topic for any assessment focused on biodiversity and climate; it addresses how different ecosystems across North America can contribute to climate mitigation and adaptation, and how biodiversity conservation intersects with these goals. The draft chapter would be improved by a more balanced discussion of the interactions between these two topics, with more specific discussion of the impacts of biodiversity on climate change adaptation and mitigation. This would include clear discussion of the multiple dimensions of adaptation across ecosystems and species, as well as mitigation benefits and tradeoffs. Greater synthesis and inclusion of the most up-to-date information would also improve the chapter.
Comments
Draft Chapter 6 would be strengthened by having a clear thesis, a conceptual framework (aligned with or part of a broader assessment framework), and in-depth analysis that adheres to the basic requirements of assessments in terms of aggregation and analysis of content (see Chapter 2 of this report for expanded discussion). This includes a clear organizational framework that describes the boundaries of the problem: interactions of biodiversity and climate change across the ecosystems of North America specifically, and related policy implications. The draft BCCA Chapter 6 is currently organized as a list of habitats and some descriptions without organizing principles, trends, or patterns. It also misses the opportunity to provide summations of information (e.g., total area of forests in North America and their carbon sequestration potential). Improving the overarching framing would help readers understand the complexities, variation in impacts, differences in the human element, projected future scenarios, and/or gaps in policy and research. Additionally, incorporating a few carefully selected case studies into the framework would provide a way to clearly tie that material to the broader chapter narrative. A few illustrative examples that highlight shared species or habitats among the 3 countries would be useful and could allow for policy or management comparisons.
A summary, perhaps with an overview table or figure, focused on both biodiversity and climate that describes how the interactions between the two topics play out among major habitats, would be an effective
chapter introduction. Many of the sections in this chapter do not address interactions between biodiversity and climate change and are more about impacts of climate change on ecosystems. This creates redundancy with the content of BCCA draft Chapters 3 and 4 and misses the important finding that there are very few examples of addressing biodiversity that would not also have climate benefits, but the reverse is not true (see also the Connections Between Biodiversity section in Chapter 2 of this report). Biodiversity enhances resilience to climate change and extremes, while restoration of ecosystems can sequester carbon from the atmosphere (IPCC 2022). The topic of “interactions” is very complex, requiring clear framing to describe the different interaction mechanisms in the context of biodiversity and climate change. Framing around interactions like tipping points or tradeoffs can be effective, with a robust body of evidence cited to support findings.
When draft Chapter 6 discusses interactions, it is almost entirely about nature-based solutions or ecosystem-based adaptation, which captures a subset of knowledge, and presents a global rather than North American focus. Biotic interactions and synergisms (disease, pollination, seed dispersal, predation, competition) and how they are affected by climate and biodiversity loss would be a valuable addition. A clear distinction between nature-based solutions aimed at adaptation for society versus strategies for ecosystem adaptation, with strong ties to available literature, is also warranted. Discussion of the use of nature to help humans adapt to climate change and the need to make nature more resilient to enable species and species assemblages to adapt should be treated equally.
The chapter would also benefit from a more even treatment of ecosystem types and increased discussion of species and populations as elements of ecosystems. Freshwater and marine habitats are some of the most sensitive habitats to climate change and are suffering some of the highest levels of biodiversity loss yet are not discussed in detail (see Broad Inclusion of Ecosystems in Chapter 2 of this report).
Broadly generalizing to the habitat/ecosystem scale misses the opportunity to convey important details on how different kinds of forests (or grasslands or wetlands, for instance) in different regions or at different elevations (e.g., southeastern longleaf, fire adapted redwoods, montane, tropical, etc.) will respond. These sorts of details are essential for an assessment to be useful to policymakers. For example, the BCCA authors could discuss whether forests of different types respond to climate change in the same way if located at the same elevation, or whether forests of the same type respond in the same way to climate change at different latitudes or elevations. These kinds of comparisons would be helpful in indicating potential for adaptation or migration by species and populations. Further, focus on species and populations more readily connects to conservation policies in much of North America which use these as the primary units (e.g., the U.S. Endangered Species Act).
Another approach to framing this comparison would be explicit recognition of the longitudinal gradient of the North American continent and the comparison to responses across latitudes. This could include a description of what evidence exists that would help to predict likely response of biodiversity to climate change (and how biodiversity might influence climate change) across major biological, climatic, geopolitical, and human elements. This would allow for recognition of the biological and climatic gradients, discussion of projected differences in polar vs. tropical regions (e.g., migration and range shifts), and differences in human activities (e.g., related to Indigenous Knowledge and management, policies, or land use). One way to represent those differences might be a graph or diagram that synthesizes general trends.
A systematic approach to the subsections in section 6.3 could be beneficial, with focus on the scope of the ecosystem and details on regional differences, carbon sequestration potentials, existing pressures (e.g., how much area is currently protected), needs and efforts at restoration, and key policies managing interactions. Incorporating the interactions among adaptation and mitigation and biodiversity loss or gain into each kind of bioregion and/or ecosystem rather than listing separately would also make the chapter more influential.
The policy section would be more effective with fewer priority policies and focus on those looking closely at the role of biodiversity in mitigating climate change and evaluation of effectiveness, costs, etc. A more critical
examination of climate mitigation efforts that may trade-off with biodiversity would strengthen the chapter. This includes specific examples from North America, such as implementation and issues with bioenergy and with bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS)—bioenergy and BECCS are important issues with threats to biodiversity as a result of land use expansion and greater attention and critical evaluation in BCCA Chapter 6 is encouraged. More attention on ways to incorporate biodiversity into low carbon energy systems, or at least to mitigate the impact of biodiversity loss from energy sources such as solar or wind, is also warranted. Care is also needed to provide policy relevant materials without being policy prescriptive.
There are missed opportunities to include and weave in available Indigenous Knowledge and Local Ecological Knowledge throughout Chapter 6 sections (e.g., a focus on how Indigenous stewardship can help build ecosystem resilience). For policy, statements like “actions must comply with human rights goals, particularly those of Indigenous Peoples” are most appropriate when grounded in specific policies (e.g., obligations that the 3 countries have).
It is important throughout the chapter to consider the full body of evidence to support findings and not rely on single papers (see the Key Features of Robust Scientific Assessments section in Chapter 2). The chapter would be improved by inclusion of the most up-to-date references cited throughout and care to focus on literature and examples from North America.
CHAPTER 7: BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT
Summary
The BCCA draft Chapter 7 examines how climate change impacts biodiversity and NCPs across the borders of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico. To frame the discussion, the chapter presents a conceptual model of how climate change affects the “flows” of species, resources, people, economic activity, and information across national borders. The chapter authors propose a typology of flows (biotic, physical, human movement and trade, sociopolitical) and examine how climate change influences each. It discusses the challenges and strategies for managing these flows and explores the implications of biodiversity loss and climate change on justice and equity, particularly for historically marginalized populations. Finally, it identifies knowledge gaps in understanding and managing transboundary flows. The approach of using flows is a useful methodology to describe the movement of entities like species and resources across national boundaries. However, it does not yield an adequate understanding of how policies, laws, and regulations, for instance, engage with one another across borders, and how these influence the effects of climate change on biodiversity loss and vice-versa.
Comments
Draft Chapter 7 would benefit from a conceptual framework around which to organize that aligns with a broader assessment framework (see the Develop a Strong Conceptual Framework section in Chapter 2 of this report). This conceptual framework would be useful in describing, comparing, and forecasting biodiversity and climate change across national boundaries. Linkages between biodiversity and climate change could be placed in a broader international context by considering the policy linkages between the two as explored in IPBES, IPCC, and World Economic Forum assessments; evidence for changes and shifts outside of North America; and the emerging understanding of ecosystem management and governance adaptations as a result of climate change in an international context.
The current approach to framing this chapter around flows is unidirectional and limiting. The incomplete analysis present in the draft reviewed makes it difficult to fully evaluate this approach, however the chap-
ter authors state that “we found very few examples focusing on the intersection of climate, biodiversity and cross-border flows in North America.” This absence of information on flows raises questions about the utility of the approach for the intended focus of this chapter. Further, this analysis does not capture how policies, laws, and regulations engage with one another across borders (both Canada-U.S. and U.S.-Mexico), where many examples are available. For instance, in the marine context, there are multiple international agreements and programs that include Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. These include the United Nations Straddling Fish Stocks Agreement; United Nations General Assembly resolutions on vulnerable marine ecosystems and associated Food and Agriculture Organization guidelines; Sustainable Fisheries commitments; the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdictions Agreement under the Law of the Sea Treaty; transboundary population management under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act for ground fish, salmonids, and halibut; and bilateral agreements such as the Canada-U.S. Pacific Salmon Treaty.
In addition to flows, shifts in the range of species and ecosystems as a result of climate change, and resulting shifts in economic activities and resource availability, could be explored. These shifts might have consequences for the utility of protected areas and other land governance and management regimes. A revised approach could also allow for greater synthesis of available Indigenous Knowledge and Local Ecological Knowledge (Trosper 2022). The BCCA Chapter 7 authors make a case for a rich flow of knowledge across boundaries in the sociopolitical flows discussion (section 7.4.4), though conclude limited peer-reviewed literature to support these flows.
This chapter primarily focuses on the effects of climate change on biodiversity and how that can be managed (as clearly presented in Figure 7.2.1.) and provides examples to support presented materials. Some examples, such those in section 7.4.1. on biotic flows classified by native species, diseases, and invasive species are effective in demonstrating climate change effects, though focusing on examples from North America would be most appropriate for this assessment. However, there is little discussion of the reverse: how biodiversity conservation can be used to mitigate and adapt to climate change in an international context. A well-developed exception is the case study of the Yellowstone to Yukon initiative, which details landscape-scale conservation actions across Canada and the U.S. Draft Chapter 7 also provides an opportunity to discuss ways to enhance cooperation across the three countries to promote ecosystem-based approaches to climate mitigation and adaptation, for example in cross border ecosystems like marine fisheries and river systems. See the Connections Between Biodiversity and Climate section in Chapter 2 of this report and also the review of draft BCCA Chapter 6 earlier in this chapter.
Finally, draft BCCA Chapter 7 could be improved by greater attention to presenting materials in language tailored for the intended audience(s). The analysis of flows is very academic, making the material accessible to a relatively narrow audience and not well aligned with the intended audiences of this assessment.
CHAPTER 8: POLICY OPTIONS AND SOLUTIONS IN A COMPLEX AND CHANGING ENVIRONMENT
Summary
The draft BCCA Chapter 8 Introduction focuses on theories of actionable knowledge, theories of transformative change, and scenarios. The draft section reviewed is incomplete, with some of the chapter, including most of the scenarios discussion, in outline form. The importance of Chapter 8 derives from the need for a solid scientific foundation for effective biodiversity and climate change policies and from the identification by the BCCA of policymakers as one of its primary audiences. In addition to this section of the Committee’s review, BCCA Chapter 8 authors are encouraged to review the Linking Science to Management and Policy Section in Chapter 2 of this report.
Comments
A North American assessment of biodiversity and climate change policy would effectively introduce the topic by discussing key issues and themes common across countries and setting the stage for the national and transboundary chapters that follow. The draft Chapter 8 Introduction, however, selects a limited number of issues to discuss in detail, omitting many important subjects. Furthermore, it concentrates on theory, with little empirical information relevant to policymakers and natural resource managers. The draft text provides theoretical background on several questions: “What is an assessment?”, “What is actionable knowledge?”, “What is transformative change?” The utility of these sections for natural resource managers, policymakers, and broader audiences is unclear. While explanations of various methods (assessments, generating actionable knowledge, transformative governance) are detailed, the draft Chapter 8 Introduction does not ground the discussion in the key issues and themes to which the methods can be applied. Only occasionally are they related to policy issues in North America.
The draft section would benefit from shifting coverage from theoretical questions to critical conservation issues. A possible approach would be to discuss key emerging issues and themes common across countries and assess policy and management options to address these issues. These policy issues could include: incorporating climate change into protected areas management; transboundary management to enhance resilience to climate change; policies to protect species threatened or endangered under climate change; controlling invasive species under climate change; conserving biological integrity at the ecosystem level from, for example, biome shifts, tree mortality, increased wildfire, coral bleaching, and ocean acidification; the social cost of carbon; and the social value of biodiversity. Also, the text could include discussion of gaps in current practice to better provide actionable knowledge for policy. The draft Chapter 8 Introduction would start the discussion of key issues, and the subsequent national and transboundary sections of Chapter 8 would assess country-specific cases.
The draft Chapter 8 Introduction contains information on emissions scenarios applicable across the entire assessment. The draft BCCA Chapter 1 offers a more appropriate location for a concise summary of the scenarios. The discussions of governance types in the Chapter 8 Introduction and transformative governance in Chapter 8.d are complementary and could be better harmonized between the two sections.
The draft introduction would be improved with editing for clarity and conciseness and from rewriting of many passages in language more understandable to non-specialists. Also, while not explicitly stated, it appears that the BCCA generally divides law and policy material into historical background and existing policies in Chapter 2 and future options in Chapter 8. It would be helpful if the BCCA clearly states this decision. In addition, a clearer structure and organization would make the introduction more easily understood by readers. The section could possibly be organized by the key emerging issues and common themes listed earlier in this review of the introduction, grouping policy issues related to conservation of individual species and, separately, issues related to management at the ecosystem level.
CHAPTER 8.A: POLICY OPTIONS AND SOLUTIONS IN A COMPLEX AND CHANGING ENVIRONMENT: CANADA
Summary
Draft BCCA Chapter 8.a is intended to provide an overview of the future of climate change and biodiversity policy in Canada, including discussions of social and cultural considerations and the challenges, gaps, and opportunities to improve policies in the future. The authors summarize several policies and laws in Canada and outline frameworks and considerations for guiding policy directions. The chapter concludes with the challenges and considerations for the future of Canadian biodiversity and climate change policy.
The concept and intention of Chapter 8.a is sound; however, there is redundancy and a lack of cohesion across sections of the chapter and no connection to the concepts discussed in other chapters. There is also inconsistency in the main messages across sections. Several topics in the chapter are too broad and not directly applicable to Canadian laws and policies, as described in more detail later in this section. In addition to this section of the Committee’s review, Chapter 8.a authors are encouraged to review the Linking Science to Management and Policy Section in Chapter 2 of this report as well as the review of draft BCCA Chapter 2.a earlier in this chapter.
Comments
Draft Chapter 8.a would be improved by greater ties to information provided in other chapters of the assessment and a more cohesive narrative across sections within the chapter. The draft chapter currently reflects sections written with different voices and with different levels of organization, clarity, and relevance. Much of the discussion of social considerations, ecological novelty, and theory of change is too academic to reach the assessment’s intended audiences and is not framed in terms of Canadian laws and policies.
This chapter would be improved if it built on the overview of Canadian policies and legislation in BCCA Chapters 2.a and materials in Chapter 7, while considering the relevant climate change drivers and interactions and their effect on biodiversity and ecosystem services introduced in Chapters 3-6. Given that draft Chapter 8.a is intended to discuss how policy can move forward, it is critical to carefully review and frame the discussion around the content of Chapter 2.a. The discussions of laws and policies provided in sections 8a.3 and 8a.4 (and subsections therein) contain a number of redundancies with Chapter 2.a, including repetition of some specific examples (e.g., right whale). Greater collaboration between the authors of these chapters would help to ensure information is provided where it is most appropriate and relevant, to reduce redundancy and to ensure there is a clear flow of concepts from one chapter to the next.
An effective discussion that could be used as a model across Chapter 8.a is the subsection on invasive species in section 8a.3.1. This example briefly describes the concern/issue and relates it to relevant laws and policies, then discusses changes that might be needed to policies as climate change impacts become more evident. This approach can be used to draw the important and necessary connections to earlier chapters, relating the issue to the laws and policies outlined in Chapter 2.a, and then providing information about the need for change in light of climate change impacts discussed in Chapters 3-6 (with references to these earlier chapters to avoid redundancy in text).
Draft Chapter 8.a would be improved by more balanced attention to a variety of ecosystem types. The chapter focuses primarily on terrestrial and marine ecosystems with no discussion of inland waters (though there is a placeholder for a possible discussion of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement). Inclusion of inland waters would allow for discussion of important ongoing and developing programs and laws within Canada that are aimed at addressing some of the relevant issues for freshwater. For example, there was no mention of the Canada Water Act or of the Freshwater Action Plan (2017) that is a cornerstone freshwater program of the newly established Canada Water Agency. The draft chapter provides only a mention of the Impact Assessment Act, which is relevant for more than just freshwater (despite ongoing amendments to this act following the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2023 that parts of the act were unconstitutional). Each of these is highly relevant to the developing policy landscape for biodiversity and climate change in Canada. See also the Broad Inclusion of Ecosystems section in Chapter 2 of this report.
Draft Chapter 8.a generally omits mention of Arctic issues, despite the large area of Canada that is within the Arctic, the ongoing effects of climate change in this region (warming at nearly four times the global rate; Rantanen et al. 2022), and the potential for loss of Arctic endemic species that are important ecologically and culturally and spiritually for Indigenous Peoples of the region (see state of Arctic marine, freshwater, and ter-
restrial biodiversity reports by the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program). Canada has also played a leadership role in international efforts relevant to biodiversity and climate change including the Arctic Council and the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program and its associated assessments, which are relevant to mention in this chapter.
The draft chapter would benefit from more concise discussion directly tied to the chapter scope. Several topics are discussed in a way that was not specific to Canada and read as more of a general academic discourse about the topic rather than relevant discussion of Canadian laws and policy. These include long sections on ecological novelty and the science behind behavioral change, and a section on theory of change that is out of place with unclear value to the chapter. The ecological novelty text warrants careful review and consideration for inclusion by the chapter authors. As written, the language and direction of the discourse appear to suggest that the “new normal” should be accepted. The message this sends to policymakers could be one of supporting a “no action” approach to climate change, which runs contrary to the rest of the chapter, which speaks more to opportunities to improve relevancy and effectiveness of laws and policies in the face of continued climate change impacts. The ideas put forth and the positivity conveyed by the final recommendations are contrary to the message in the ecological novelty section, but a welcome and constructive view of the way forward.
Additional references that could be considered for this chapter include Aronsson et al. 2021; Barry et al. 2023; CAFF 2017; Jones et al. 2019 and Lento et al. 2019.
CHAPTER 8.B: POLICY OPTIONS AND SOLUTIONS IN A COMPLEX AND CHANGING ENVIRONMENT: THE USA
Summary
Draft BCCA Chapter 8.b covers issues related to current and future management and policy measures for biodiversity conservation under climate change in the U.S. The importance of Chapter 8.b derives from the need for a solid scientific foundation for effective biodiversity and climate change policies and from the identification by the BCCA of policymakers as one of its primary audiences. The inclusion in Chapter 8.b of natural resource management measures in addition to national policies effectively increases the relevance of the chapter for advancing biodiversity conservation. The draft also addresses some key scientific issues relevant to future biodiversity policies under climate change, including historical ranges of variation, species migrations, and habitat corridors to facilitate population movements. In addition to this section of the Committee’s review, Chapter 8.b authors are encouraged to review the Linking Science to Management and Policy Section in Chapter 2 of this report.
Comments
Addressing gaps on certain key issues would strengthen the draft Chapter 8.b. While the chapter includes some discussion of national policy and protected areas management, it could more comprehensively offer options for national policies, including laws, regulations, and executive actions. Additionally, the draft focuses mainly on individual species and would benefit from assessment of impacts and risks at the ecosystem level, including biome shifts, tree mortality, wildfire, ocean acidification, coral bleaching, and others. Furthermore, more discussion of policies for marine and freshwater ecosystems would make the chapter more influential (see also the Broad Inclusion of Ecosystems section in Chapter 2 of this report). This could include discussion of community (citizen) science programs operated in collaboration with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
A comparative assessment of the performance of biodiversity policy options would provide key insights into potential future effectiveness of the options and information useful for policy decisions. Comparison of the different climate change approaches of the principal natural resource management agencies—National Park Service, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration—would also offer useful information for management and policy decisions. The information on climate trends and projections in the section is applicable across the entire assessment and better suited for inclusion in BCCA Chapter 1.
A clearer structure and organization would make the chapter more accessible to the intended audiences. The chapter could possibly be organized by management and policy categories: (1) Laws, (2) Regulations, (3) Executive actions, and (4) natural resource management actions. Alternatively, it could be organized by theme: terrestrial, freshwater, marine, endangered species. More generally, adoption of a strong conceptual framework consistent with that used across the entire assessment would be valuable (see Key Features of Robust Scientific Assessments section in Chapter 2 of this report). The draft chapter generally explains complex topics in terms understandable to non-specialists, facilitating communication to natural resource managers and policymakers, though editing for conciseness would be valuable. The use of examples in boxes is effective.
One option for the assessment to effectively communicate management and policy options would be to link BCCA Chapters 2.b and 8.b and use parallel outlines for each. In this way, a user would be able to read in Chapter 2 about the historical background of an issue and easily find in Chapter 8 current and future policy options for that same issue. This is discussed in more detail of Chapter 2 of this review report.
CHAPTER 8.C: POLICY OPTIONS AND SOLUTIONS IN A COMPLEX AND CHANGING ENVIRONMENT: MEXICO
Summary
Draft Chapter 8.c of the BCCA discusses policy approaches taken to address the intertwined challenges of biodiversity conservation and climate change in Mexico. The chapter employs a theory of change methodology to evaluate existing policies and programs, examining lessons learned from both biodiversity and climate change initiatives. The chapter places particular emphasis on the recognition of Indigenous Knowledge and rights.
The current draft chapter provides comprehensive coverage of key areas where biodiversity and climate intersect, particularly in addressing governance structures, financing mechanisms, and Indigenous rights. It identifies critical challenges facing Mexico, including urban expansion, ecosystem degradation, and the need for integrated policy approaches. A major limitation of the chapter is that the analysis places more emphasis on the effects of climate change on biodiversity and not so much of the opposite—the effects of biodiversity loss on climate change. Highlighting the lack of policy directed to tackle the intertwined nature of these issues would notably increase the value of this chapter. See also Chapter 2 of this report, particularly the Connections Between Biodiversity and Climate and the Linking Science to Management and Policy sections.
Comments
Draft Chapter 8.c successfully explains the origins of biodiversity and climate change policy at the federal level in Mexico, but it is lengthy and difficult to follow. This complexity is partially attributed to the ongoing changes in Mexico’s governmental and legal framework, noted in the review of draft Chapter 2.c. Draft Chapter 8.c would benefit from an overview of the legal and policy setting system and discussion of more recent
policy developments at lower governmental levels. Notably, several municipalities have developed their own biodiversity and climate change policies which warrant inclusion in this analysis. Inclusion of key Mexican institutions, particularly CONABIO, would also improve the chapter. CONABIO has established itself as an exemplary model throughout Latin America for compiling reliable information on the country’s biodiversity, curating it in a rich database with accurate information based on the correct identification and location of the species, and making such scientific information on biodiversity broadly useful and accessible to the public. Discussing CONABIO’s 4-volume analysis of the country’s natural capital and the extensive collection of successful case studies across various ecosystem types and Indigenous protected areas would significantly enhance the chapter’s content and value to the intended audiences. Clearer distinction between different types of regulatory instruments—specifically laws, plans, and programs—and their respective legally binding status would also strengthen Chapter 8.c. Additional clarity regarding the application of land use planning in this context would also be valuable.
The theory of change methodology adopted for this chapter could be replaced by the broadly accepted complex systems approach (while adhering to an overarching assessment framework), which allows for a mutual defining of terms and intertwines the discussion of the functions of each of the components within a larger system.
Recent constitutional changes are reshaping the political landscape in ways that can affect biodiversity and climate change policies. Among other aspects, the changes decrease or minimize the autonomy of the judiciary, reinforcing the role of the executive branch of the State. These changes, already approved by the Congress, may affect the legal structure and support of biodiversity and climate change policies and their implementation. In that respect, the range of constitutional and legal changes and their implications and consequences still have to be closely analyzed. It would be valuable for the chapter authors to acknowledge these developments.
Draft Chapter 8.c would be strengthened by inclusion of strong practical examples, such as the case of jaguar habitat protection, which demonstrates how local community initiatives can create dual benefits for both human populations and other species. Another example that could be highlighted is the invaluable efforts of Indigenous Peoples to continue developing landraces of maize adapted to a wide range of climatic conditions, as well as the need for policy to address these relationships.
The chapter presents eight clear priorities that address urgent needs like monitoring systems, protection of vulnerable ecosystems, and institutional capacity building. Some gaps that would be valuable to incorporate include Mexico-focused discussion of emerging threats (e.g., invasive species and shifting disease vectors); exploration of ecosystem tipping points and irreversible biodiversity losses; examination of the trade-offs between different policy options (and specific examples of successful, integrative biodiversity-climate policies); and articulation of the need for policy to consider the impacts of the synergy between biodiversity loss and climate change.
To be effective in reaching the assessment’s intended audience(s), draft Chapter 8.c would benefit from text that is less dense and limited in the use of technical terminology, with sufficient explanations provided when materials may be less accessible. The inclusion of summaries from previous chapters detracts from the chapter’s focus and could be removed. Thorough editing to reduce long, complex sentences is warranted as well as attention to more consistent formatting to foster greater readability. Improved use of graphics to convey information would also improve the chapter. For instance, the theory of change graphic is difficult to follow and a graphical representation of the bi-directionality of biodiversity-climate change interactions in the Mexico context (or one adopted for the broad assessment and pointed to in this chapter) would be of considerable benefit to the readers of this chapter. For broader guidance and continuity across Mexico-focused sections, chapter authors are encouraged to also read the review of BCCA draft Chapter 2.c, provided earlier in this chapter of this report.
8.D: TRANSNATIONAL/TRANSBOUNDARY POLICY OPTIONS AND SOLUTIONS IN A COMPLEX AND CHANGING ENVIRONMENT
Summary
Draft Chapter 8.d focuses on “robust transboundary policies to combat climate change and biodiversity loss.” It begins with an emphasis on the need to apply transformative governance in order to achieve effective societal responses to the threats of biodiversity loss and climate change. Discussions include those on transboundary options in and across issues, goals and sectors, as well as transboundary issues related to sustainable landscapes, marine and coastal cooperation, freshwater, energy and infrastructure, and sustainable economies.
In the manner that the authors have currently structured draft Chapter 8.d, with subsections focused on landscapes, waterscapes, freshwater, infrastructure, and economies, it provides the reader with a considered, insightful, and helpful approach to transboundary issues. There is a strong focus on Indigenous governance and management throughout the draft chapter, which is a strength. The chapter would be improved by a clear description of the chapter goals, some reorganization, and synthesis of presented materials.
Comments
Draft Chapter 8.d is long and could use a stronger conceptual framing to guide readers through the material that is aligned with or part of a broader assessment conceptual framework (see also the Develop and Strong Conceptual Framework section in Chapter 2 of this report). The chapter’s title may lead readers to expect more expansive coverage of policy options and solutions than the chapter provides. As written, the focus on transformative governance in this chapter limits the scope of discussion. While focus on transformative governance as an appropriate policy solution, it is one of many possible policy options that could be explored. Each of the components of transformative governance (integrative, informed, adaptive, and inclusive) are also policy options. Relatedly, the section on transformative governance overlaps somewhat in content with the discussion of different kinds of governance in the draft Chapter 8 Introduction. It would benefit both sections to have complementary discussions of this topic. Finally, the discussion of transformative governance would be better placed either after section 8.d3, or at the end of the chapter.
The Subnational and Indigenous Peoples’ Engagement subsection could be elevated to a section. The subsection currently focuses on Indigenous communities rather than subnational entities such as provinces, states, counties, cities, metropolitan areas, and municipalities and could be renamed to reflect the contents. Within the Transboundary Options section, expanded treatment of the issues touched on would strengthen this chapter.
A more thorough discussion of the role of biodiversity in climate change mitigation and adaptation to biodiversity balanced with coverage of climate change impacts on biodiversity would improve the chapter (see also Connections Between Biodiversity and Climate Change in Chapter 2 of this report). Aside from the treatment of greenhouse gas emissions in the section on Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture, the draft chapter does not provide much information on transboundary policy efforts and opportunities. See also the discussion of mitigation and adaptation in the review of draft BCCA Chapter 6. Care should be given throughout draft Chapter 8.d to provide appropriate and consistent levels of detail, up to date information, and materials focused on the chapter’s primary topics. Some of the sections are highly detailed, including those on the Great Lakes and Columbia River Basin. While interesting, it is unclear how the high level of detail in these case studies might illuminate broader North American themes. The section on the Buffalo Treaty is out of date and does not reflect the current status and published literature on this topic. There are also some topics included that are not clearly connected to the primary chapter topic, such as sustainable and resilient agriculture and mining.
Chapter 8.d authors are also encouraged to review the Addressing Mismatches Between Ecosystem-Based and Jurisdictional Boundaries and Linking Science to Management and Policy sections in Chapter 2 of this report.
CHAPTER 9: SYNTHESIS, KNOWLEDGE GAPS, AND OUTLOOK
Summary
The BCCA draft Chapter 9 is intended to be a synthesis chapter for the full assessment. Given the relatively early stage of development of the draft assessment at the time of the Committee’s review, Chapter 9 was just beginning to take shape. As the BCCA draft chapters are finalized, this synthesis chapter can be most useful by focusing specifically on North America and linking back to the conceptual framework in BCCA Chapter 1 that would ideally be a framework adopted throughout the entire assessment.
Comments
The draft Chapter 9 intends to synthesize insights from the assessment and provide options for decision-makers. The current draft chapter provides a list of possible points emerging from other chapters that, understandably, are disconnected from the content of the earlier chapters. These points are generic in outlining the need to preserve biodiversity and possible approaches (e.g., land management).
Recognizing that this chapter will undergo revisions as the other chapters are revised, the synthesis chapter can be most relevant by focusing more specifically on North American ecosystems (including terrestrial, riverine, coastal, and marine systems—see the Broad Inclusion of Ecosystems section in Chapter 2 of this report) and guidance for decision makers. For example, the chapter could discuss which ecosystems are experiencing rapid climate change where biodiversity could reduce negative impacts; opportunities and experiences with transboundary collaborations to maintain biodiversity; how available Indigenous Knowledge and Local Ecological Knowledge practices aid in mitigation or adaption to climate change; measures that are most promising to address biodiversity and climate goals; and opportunities and challenges for the varying governance structures to address the linkages between biodiversity and climate in North America.
The BCCA synthesis chapter can also usefully highlight uncertainties identified in the other chapters. The uncertainties can point towards research needs, as well as aid managers and decision-makers about how to navigate these uncertainties with biodiversity and climate. See also the Write for Intended Audiences subsection in Chapter 2 of this review report for guidance on use of the summary and introductory synthesis chapters in a complementary manner to reach the intended audiences of the assessment.
