How does global change affect the strength of trophic interactions?

Recent research has generally shown that a small change in the number of species in a food web can have consequences both for community structure and ecosystem processes. However 'change' is not limited to just the number of species in a community, but might include an alteration to such properties as precipitation, nutrient cycling and temperature, all of which are correlated with productivity. Here we argue that predicted scenarios of global change will result in increased plant productivity. We model three scenarios of change using simple Lotka-Volterra dynamics, which explore how a global change in productivity might affect the strength of local species interactions and detail the consequences for community and ecosystem level stability. Our results indicate that (i) at local scales the average population size of consumers may decline because of poor quality food resources, (ii) that the strength of species interactions at equilibrium may become weaker because of reduced population size, and (iii) that species populations may become more variable and may take longer to recover from environmental or anthropogenic disturbances. At local scales interaction strengths encompass such properties as feeding rates and assimilation efficiencies, and encapsulate functionatty important information with regard to ecosystem processes. Interaction strengths represent the pathways and transfer of energy through an ecosystem. We examine how such local patterns might be affected given various scenarios of 'global change' and discuss the consequences for community stability and ecosystem functioning. (C) 2004 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Combined effects of global change pressures on animal-mediated pollination

Pollination is an essential process in the sexual reproduction of seed plants and a key ecosystem service to human welfare. Animal pollinators decline as a consequence of five major global change pressures: climate change, landscape alteration, agricultural intensification, non-native species, and spread of pathogens. These pressures, which differ in their biotic or abiotic nature and their spatiotemporal scales, can interact in nonadditive ways (synergistically or antagonistically), but are rarely considered together in studies of pollinator and/or pollination decline. Management actions aimed at buffering the impacts of a particular pressure could thereby prove ineffective if another pressure is present. Here, we focus on empirical evidence of the combined effects of global change pressures on pollination, highlighting gaps in current knowledge and future research needs.

The ethical dimensions of global change

This chapter briefly examines the connections between ethics and the politics of global environmental change. I contrast ethical conceptions of the environment with more conventional characterizations of the environmental challenge, in order to indicate some of the core issues and related questions about which ethical theorists engaging with the global environmental change discourse tend to be concerned. I also offer a brief discussion on the key challenge of ethics on global institutional governance of environmental change.

Global change pressures on soils from land use and management

Soils are subject to varying degrees of direct or indirect human disturbance, constituting a major global change driver. Factoring out natural from direct and indirect human influence is not always straightforward, but some human activities have clear impacts. These include land use change, land management, and land degradation (erosion, compaction, sealing and salinization). The intensity of land use also exerts a great impact on soils, and soils are also subject to indirect impacts arising from human activity, such as acid deposition (sulphur and nitrogen) and heavy metal pollution. In this critical review, we report the state-of-the-art understanding of these global change pressures on soils, identify knowledge gaps and research challenges, and highlight actions and policies to minimise adverse environmental impacts arising from these global change drivers. Soils are central to considerations of what constitutes sustainable intensification. Therefore, ensuring that vulnerable and high environmental value soils are considered when protecting important habitats and ecosystems, will help to reduce the pressure on land from global change drivers. To ensure that soils are protected as part of wider environmental efforts, a global soil resilience programme should be considered, to monitor, recover or sustain soil fertility and function, and to enhance the ecosystem services provided by soils. Soils cannot, and should not, be considered in isolation of the ecosystems that they underpin and vice versa. The role of soils in supporting ecosystems and natural capital needs greater recognition. The lasting legacy of the International Year of Soils in 2015 should be to put soils at the centre of policy supporting environmental protection and sustainable development.

Speculative fictions for understanding global change environments: two thought experiments

The purpose of a thought experiment, as the term was used by quantum and relativity physicists in the early part of the twentieth century, was not prediction (as is the goal of classical experimental science), but more defensible representations of present ‘realities’. Speculative fictions, from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein to the Star Wars cinema saga, can be read as sociotechnical thought experiments that produce alternative representations of present circumstances and uncertainties, and anticipate and critique possible futures. In this essay I demonstrate how two examples of popular speculative fictions, Frank Herbert's Dune (1965) and Ursula Le Guin's The Telling (2000), function as thought experiments that problematise global transitions in their respective eras. I argue that critical readings of such stories can help us to anticipate, critique, and respond constructively to social and cultural changes and change environments within nation-states that constitute, and are constituted by, global change processes and their effects.

Global change and health - the good, the bad, and the evidence

Debates over the merits and demerits of globalisation for health are increasingly polarised. Conclusions range from globalisation being essentially positive for health, albeit with a need to smooth out some rough edges, to one of utter condemnation, with adverse effects on the majority of the world's population. Anyone wading into this debate is immediately confronted by seemingly irreconcilable differences in ideology, opinion and interests. Both camps agree that global changes are occurring, and with them many of the determinants of population health status. While some skepticism persists about whether “globalisation” has value beyond being a fashionable buzzword, most agree that we need better understanding of these changes. Two difficult questions arise: (i) What are the health impacts of these changes; and (ii) how can we respond more effectively to them? To move beyond the stand-offs that have already formed within the health community, this paper reviews the main empirical evidence that currently exists, summarises key points of debate that remain, and suggests some ways forward for the research and policy communities. In particular, there is need for an informed and inclusive debate about the positive and negative health consequences of globalisation.