Natural Capital Germany – TEEB DE | Umweltbundesamt

The project is based on the latest information on the potential climate change (IPCC 5th Assessment Report

Other parameters that can affect species and habitats

up to 2100

The geographical distribution of animals and plants is - in addition to the availability of suitable habitats - limited by climatic parameters. Small- or large-scale changes in climatic conditions, affects the composition of flora and fauna of an ecosystem and accordingly the interactions between species and the processes and products of which people benefit: the ecosystem services.

There are various connections and interdependencies between climate change, the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services:

•  Climate change is one of the major drivers of biodiversity loss. It affects biodiversity directly by changing the conditions of life for animals and plants, but also indirectly by the design of climate policy (actions on climate change or to adapt to climate change).
•  Measures for mitigation and adaptation to climate change instituted by the climate policy are often associated with changes in land use (e.g. conversion natural areas in those for energy production, construction of dikes), which may affect the biodiversity and ecosystem services as well. This may lead to conflicts between climate policy, nature conservation and biodiversity policy.

Ecosystem-based approaches make use of nature`s services for adaptation to climate change. They create opportunities for a climate policy that strengthens the adaptability to climate change of land use systems while maintaining and promoting biodiversity and ecosystem services. Thus the flexibility of ecosystems to adapt to climate change can be strengthened significantly.

To illustrate this, studies and case studies have been collected, demonstrating the efficiency of nature-friendly or nature conservation measures. These are presented online in a searchable database and an active map. In many cases these case studies can also serve to climate adaptation.

Example for a case study: Facilitating rivers to flow and saving costs:

Natural flood protection with ecological services at the Elbe

Unimpaired river flood plains provide valuable habitats for a highly diverse flora and fauna. In addition, they serve as natural buffer against floods and they help to decrease nutrient loads in our rivers. Therefore, costs for building expensive dike systems and water treatment plants can be saved. Due to climate change the number of flood events is likely to increase over the next years. Thus, cheap solutions for flood control have to be found. Cost-benefit-analyses have shown that dike relocation with flood plains is a cost-efficient protection against flood damages and it can simultaneously support ecosystem services.

Additionally, options are shown to improve the integration of nature´s value into private and public decisions, to obtain a careful use of scarce natural resources.

Some instruments of the climate and energy policy can have a negative impact on nature and ecosystem services. Analyses of synergies and potential conflicts between climate policy and nature conservation can be improved by identifying and economic assessment of climate-related (and others) nature’s services.

Economic recommendations for taking advantage of synergies between climate- and biodiversity policies include such as the conservation of ecosystems with high storage and sink potential (establishment of the No Net Loss concept concerning the carbon storage), the rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems and a land utilization which is more climate protection oriented.

Up to now there is no comprehensive climate policy goal for emission reductions in the agricultural sector that is backed up with measures.

For taking advantage of synergies between climate protection and biodiversity conservation two objectives need to be considered in particular:

• Concerning the conservation of grassland a quantitative purpose for high-quality grassland should be sought since there is a particularly high potential for synergies.
• Revision of the funding practices in bioenergy (German Action Plan 2020, amendment of the German Renewable Energy Act of January 2012).

Regarding the sector of forestry there is no coherent concept yet as well. Concerning the mitigation it appears to be hardly possible to increase the existing synergies between biodiversity conservation and climate protection in forest management, due to the interactions of carbon storage in forests, harvested wood and substitution of greenhouse products.

There is therefore a high demand for research in this field. The degree of substitution in terms of timber products could be increased by expanding the cascaded utilization and by giving priority to the material use.