Contrasting futures for ocean and society from different anthropogenic CO2 emissions scenarios

The ocean moderates anthropogenic climate change at the cost of profound alterations of its physics, chemistry, ecology, and services. Here, we evaluate and compare the risks of impacts on marine and coastal ecosystems and the goods and services they provide for growing cumulative carbon emissions under two contrasting emissions scenarios. The current emissions trajectory would rapidly and significantly alter many ecosystems and the associated services on which humans heavily depend. A reduced emissions scenario consistent with the Copenhagen Accord’s goal of a global temperature increase of less than 2°C—is much more favorable to the ocean but still substantially alters important marine ecosystems and associated goods and services. The management options to address ocean impacts narrow as the ocean warms and acidifies. Consequently, any new climate regime that fails to minimize ocean impacts would be incomplete and inadequate.

Transdisciplinary Science: A Path to Understanding the Interactions Among Ocean Acidification, Ecosystems, and Society

The global nature of ocean acidification (OA) transcends habitats, ecosystems, regions, and science disciplines. The scientific community recognizes that the biggest challenge in improving understanding of how changing OA conditions affect ecosystems, and associated consequences for human society, requires integration of experimental, observational, and modeling approaches from many disciplines over a wide range of temporal and spatial scales. Such transdisciplinary science is the next step in providing relevant, meaningful results and optimal guidance to policymakers and coastal managers. We discuss the challenges associated with integrating ocean acidification science across funding agencies, institutions, disciplines, topical areas, and regions, and the value of unifying science objectives and activities to deliver insights into local, regional, and global scale impacts. We identify guiding principles and strategies for developing transdisciplinary research in the ocean acidification science community.

Are Fast Responses More Random? Testing the Effect of Response Time on Scale in an Online Choice Experiment

Scepticism over stated preference surveys conducted online revolves around the concerns over “professional respondents” who might rush through the questionnaire without sufficiently considering the information provided. To gain insight on the validity of this phenomenon and test the effect of response time on choice randomness, this study makes use of a recently conducted choice experiment survey on ecological and amenity effects of an offshore windfarm in the UK. The positive relationship between self-rated and inferred attribute attendance and response time is taken as evidence for a link between response time and cognitive effort. Subsequently, the generalised multinomial logit model is employed to test the effect of response time on scale, which indicates the weight of the deterministic relative to the error component in the random utility model. Results show that longer response time increases scale, i.e. decreases choice randomness. This positive scale effect of response time is further found to be non-linear and wear off at some point beyond which extreme response time decreases scale. While response time does not systematically affect welfare estimates, higher response time increases the precision of such estimates. These effects persist when self-reported choice certainty is controlled for. Implications of the results for online stated preference surveys and further research are discussed.