Moving Forward: Southeast Asian Perspectives on Climate Change and Biodiversity 9789812309792

Climate change is a global phenomenon that is being experienced by all levels of society, regardless of race and species

150 32 4MB

English Pages 300 [297] Year 2010

Report DMCA / Copyright


Polecaj historie

Moving Forward: Southeast Asian Perspectives on Climate Change and Biodiversity

Table of contents :
1. Exploring the Link between Climate Change and Biodiversity
2. Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Region
3. Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia: Reflections on Water Resources and Livelihoods
4. Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia
5. Animal Genetic Resource Conservation and Climate Change in Cambodia: Reducing Livestock to Decrease GHG Emission?
6. Malaysia’s Current Policy and Research Initiatives Toward Climate Change: Impacts to Biodiversity
7. Anticipated Impacts of Climate Change on Marine Biodiversity: Using Field Situations that Simulate Climate Change in Singapore
8. Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines: Potential Impacts and Adaptation Strategies
9. Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand
10. The Role of Biodiversity in Climate Change Mitigation in Vietnam: The Red River Estuary - Ba Lat Case Study
11. Implications of the Dutch-Philippines Biodiversity Research on the Impacts, Vulnerability, and Adaptation to Climate Change: The Coastal Ecosystem
12. Biodiversity and Climate Change: Perspectives, Research Needs, and Institutions

Citation preview

Mo ving F orw ar d Moving Forw orwar ard

The Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) is one of the regional research and training centers of the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO), an intergovernmental body founded in 1965 to promote cooperation among Southeast Asian nations through activities in education, science, and culture. SEARCA’s programmes are designed to strengthen institutional capacities in agricultural and rural development in Southeast Asia through graduate education, short-term training, research, and knowledge exchange. SEARCA is hosted by the Philippine Government on the campus of the University of the Philippines Los Baños, which is based in Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines. It is supported by donations from SEAMEO member and associate member states, other governments, and various international donor agencies. The Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS) was established as an autonomous organisation in 1968. It is a regional centre dedicated to the study of sociopolitical, security and economic trends and developments in Southeast Asia and its whole geostrategic and economic development. The Institute’s research programmes are the Regional Economic Studies (RES, including ASEAN and APEC), Regional Strategic and Political Studies (RSPS), and Regional Social and Cultural Studies (RSCS). ISEAS Publishing, an established academic press, has issued more than 2,000 books and journals. It is the largest scholarly publisher of research about Southeast Asia from within the region. ISEAS Publishing works with many other academic and trade publishers and distributors to disseminate important research and analyses from and about Southeast Asia to the rest of the world.

Moving Forward Southeast Asian Perspectives on Climate Change and Biodiversity

Percy E. Sajise Mariliza V. Ticsay Gil C. Saguiguit, Jr. Editors



First published in Singapore in 2010 by ISEAS Publishing Institute of Southeast Asian Studies 30 Heng Mui Keng Terrace Pasir Panjang, Singapore 119614 E-mail: [email protected] Website: and Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) College, Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines 4031 E-mail: [email protected] All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. © 2010 Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore The responsibility for facts and opinions in this publication rests exclusively with the authors, and their interpretations do not necessarily reflect the views or the policy of the publishers or their supporters. ISEAS Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data Moving forward : Southeast Asian perspectives on climate change and biodiversity / edited by Percy E. Sajise, Mariliza V. Ticsay, Gil C. Saguiguit, Jr. 1. Climate changes—Southeast Asia—Congresses.. 2. Biodiversity—Southeast Asia—Congresses. 3. Biodiversity—Climatic factors—Congresses. I. Sajise, Percy E. II. Ticsay, Mariliza V. II. Saguiguit, Gil C., Jr. III. International Conference-Workshop on Biodiversity and Climate Change in Southeast Asia : Adaptation and Mitigation, (2008 : Manila, Philippines) QC903.2 A9M93 2010 ISEAS:

ISBN 978-981-230-977-8 (soft cover) ISBN 978-981-230-978-5 (hard cover) ISBN 978-981-230-979-2 (E-book PDF)

Photo credits: Edwin Robert A. Cortes and Eric John F. Azucena for the book cover; photo on p. 57 was taken from the coverpage of Forest lives: Lessons on Sustaining Communities and Forests from the Small Grants Programme for Operations to Promote Tropical Forests, a joint publication of EU, UNDP, SEARCA, RECOFTC and AFN. Copyeditor, Desktop Artist, and Cover Designer: Leah P. Arboleda Printed in Singapore by Utopia Press Pte Ltd


Contents Tables Figures Foreword Preface Contributors Acronyms

vii ix xv xix xv xxxiii


Exploring the Link between Climate Change and Biodiversity Ahmed Djoghlaf and Delfin J. Ganapin, Jr.




Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Region Rodel D. Lasco Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia: Reflections on Water Resources and Livelihoods Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia Meine Van Noordwijk

11 31



Animal Genetic Resource Conservation and Climate Change in Cambodia: Reducing Livestock to Decrease GHG Emission? Vathana Sann and Bunthan Ngo









Malaysia’s Current Policy and Research Initiatives Toward Climate Change: Impacts to Biodiversity Alona C. Linatoc, Mohd. Noh Dalimin and Maryati Mohammed Anticipated Impacts of Climate Change on Marine Biodiversity: Using Field Situations that Simulate Climate Change in Singapore Chou Loke Ming Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines: Potential Impacts and Adaptation Strategies Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand Amnat Chidthaisong The Role of Biodiversity in Climate Change Mitigation in Vietnam: The Red River Estuary - Ba Lat Case Study Nguyen Huu Ninh, Le Thi Thuyet, and Cao Thi Phuong Ly Implications of the Dutch-Philippines Biodiversity Research on the Impacts, Vulnerability, and Adaptation to Climate Change: The Coastal Ecosystem Wilfredo H. Uy









Biodiversity and Climate Change: Perspectives, Research Needs, and Institutions Percy E. Sajise, Mariliza V. Ticsay, Gil C. Saguiguit, Jr., Rodrigo U. Fuentes and Rodel D. Lasco




Tables 2.1

2.2 3.1 3.2

5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 7.1 7.2 8.1


Summary of climate change impacts on biodiversity, adaptation options, and mitigation potential in Southeast Asian countries based on country papers presented in the 2008 International Conference-Workshop on Biodiversity and Climate Change in Southeast Asia Estimated size of payments for biodiversity services Major rivers of the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia Average annual increase in temperature (units/decade) at different altitudes in the Tibetan Plateau and surrounding areas, 1961-1990 Summary of GHG and precursor emissions from agriculture (Gg) Projection of GHG emissions and removals by sector (Gg) Estimates of global CH4 sources States of Malaysia Major protected areas in Sabah Classification of terpene based on 5-carbon units Comparisons of lifetime properties of terpenes Per cent cover of benthic organisms across transects at Pulau Hantu Lagoon Percentage abundance and distributions of life forms across transects at Pulau Hantu Lagoon Adaptation options to climate variability and extremes for forest lands in the Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed, Philippines Beneficial groups of plants in the mangrove areas of Giao Thuy


23 31 37

91 92 93 103 112 119 120 134 134 158



10.2 10.3 11.1

Global carbon stocks in vegetation and top 1 m of soils (WBGU 1998) Initial economic valuation of the Ba Lat Estuary List of species reported at Mt. Malindang

195 196 214


Figures 2.1 3.1 4.1a





The main drivers of change in biodiversity 20 (Millennium Ecosystems Assessment 2005) Altitude zones of major rivers in Montane Mainland 33 Southeast Asia (MMSEA) (Thomas et al. 2008) A. The forest-agroforest-tree crops-agriculture gradient 57 plays a key role in the causation of climate change (in its expansion mode), and adaptive response and mitigation in stable mode; B. Globally, the areas with highest human sensitivity do not coincide with the areas of greatest biodiversity threat C. The concept of ecological footprint compares 58 to the amount of space needed to provide all the production and environmental services needed per capita, with the amount of space available on planet Earth; data for 2003 indicate overshoot; D. The relationship between total national GHG emissions and population density show large variation in per capita emissions Four pull forces that influence the use of resources 59 and potential trees by rural communities in their management of the landscape Four ‘tension fields’ between the four ‘pull forces’ 60 that influence the use of trees by rural communities in their approach to ‘healthy agriculture’ The pathway of drivers of emissions, consequences 61 for climate, and consequences for human and natural ecosystems require adjustments in both the fossil fuel/industrial emission pathway (adjustment of lifestyles) and the land-based emissions (adjustment of land-use patterns)




4.7 4.8




Relationship between relative agricultural function (RAF) 63 and relative ecological function (REF) of agroecosystems; B. Conceptual diagram of the DIVERSITAS Agrobiodiversity science program Illustration of the hypothesis that the probability 64 of agroecosystems to cope with the challenges of global change depends on the agrodiversity and complexity of current agroecosystems, based on resilience and technology-based adaptation (A). It is likely that systems of intermediate complexity are most vulnerable, but there is high uncertainty on the shape of the curve, as shown by lines I, II, and III (B) Sustainability at any scale can be achieved by either 66 sustainability or sustainagility at the subsystem level Relationship between diversity, provision of goods 66 to support the shop keeping unit (SKU) diversity of urban life, and the provision of environmental services The ecosystem services concept of the Millennium 67 Ecosystem Assessment includes the flow of ‘goods’ as well as ‘environmental services’ A. The intended scope of Reducing Emissions 73 from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) in developing countries is the upper part of the agriculture-forest transition (inverted Kuznetz) curve, while A/R-CDM (afforestation/reforestation Clean Development Mechanism) is restricted to lands deforested before 1990; B. A large share of the actual emissions from the totality of land use and land cover change may be associated with small economic gains (‘abatement cost curve’) C and D. Abatement cost curves for three provinces of 74 Indonesia show most CO2 losses associated with small economic gains, especially those on peat soils









6.1 6.2

Dichotomy in the climate change adaptation debate between situations where plans can be made to address directional change and situations where ‘diversity’ provides the major part of the answer as size and direction of change are uncertain The direct experimental approach to test the diversity-productivity hypothesis has not yielded convincing results; some of the monocultures are as productive as the best mixtures Classification of trees by primary dispersal mode and the differences between natural forest and rubber agroforest species pools (Rasnovi 2006) The Bungo benchmark of the RUPES program in Jambi (Sumatra, Indonesia) and the potential role of rubber agroforests along the rivers to act as the ecological corridor connecting the protected areas; B. Hypothesis of the local and external appreciation of environmental services change with the agriculture-forest transition The curvature of the ‘baseline’ is linked to the ‘efficiency-fairness’ trade-off in using financial incentives for emission reduction; maximizing efficiency (tons of CO2e reduced per US$ invested) will lead to perverse incentives and perceptions of unfairness elsewhere Priority issues and next steps to link global financial transfers for emission reduction to sustainable local benefits Change in the efficiency of live weight gain (LWG), in terms of methane emissions, with increasing rate of LWG of Bos indicus eating grain diets (—) and tropical forage (—) (Source: Minson and McDonald, 1987) Map of Malaysia National institutional arrangement for CDM implementation in Malaysia








102 106



6.4 7.1 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 9.1

9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 10.1 10.2 10.3

Simplified diagram illustrating CDM projects that provide support to sustainable development policies in Malaysia Map of Sabah showing the areas where avoided deforestations are initiated Plan view of Pulau Hantu complex showing location of transects Observed anomalies in the mean annual temperature in the Philippines (1951-2006) Number of typhoons with wind speed of >185 kph occurring in the Philippines from 1980 to 2006 Annual mean sea level in five primary stations (Philippines’ Initial National Communication 1999) The Holdridge Life Zone System of vegetative cover classification (Holdridge 1967) Impacts of rainfall and temperature changes on Philippine forests Analyses of maximum, minimum temperatures and temperature range during the past 50 years in Thailand (Limskul and Goes 2008). The bold bars indicate significant changes in the trends at each measurement station and the hollow bars indicate those that are not significant Records on sea level change at the western seashore of Thailand (after Chinvanno 2007) The approaches applied by the Thailand Research Fund in assessing climate change impacts in Thailand Projected changes in precipitation over Thailand during the 21st century (Chinvanno 2008) Comparisons of carbon inputs and CO2 emission among different land use types (Lichaikul et al. 2007) Map of Vietnam Map of the Red River Delta The Ba Lat Estuary


114 133 143 144 146 151 153 167

169 173 174 176 182 190 191




Map of Mt. Malindang and the location of the different sampling sites of the second-generation studies The different vegetation types in the forest ecosystems of Mt. Malindang and their threatened plant species (Amoroso et al. 2006)




Foreword Climate change is not just a buzz word. It is real. In fact, an overwhelming amount of scientific evidence supports this. Across the globe, we are beginning to experience the effects of climate change. For the most part, climate change is man-made, mostly by industrialised countries. Since the advent of the industrial era, the rate of increase in temperature has been increasing. Because it is man-made, there is optimism that climate change can be managed. Managing it, however, requires nothing less than a concerted global action. There has been much media coverage on the more dramatic threats and consequences of climate change, such as tsunamis, forest fires, floods, severe droughts, and other such calamities. Meanwhile, what needs greater attention are the less dramatic, yet potentially more widespread and long-term consequences of climate change, such as decreasing agricultural yields, increasing water stress, continuing spread of infectious diseases, and persistent changes in the natural ecosystems. All of these consequences threaten the earth’s biological species. The tropics, which holds most of the world’s biodiversity, has been identified as being the most vulnerable to climate change. While the projected negative impacts on biodiversity are well articulated, the contributions of biological resources in reducing the impacts of climate change on people and agricultural production have not been fully appreciated. To address this gap, the Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), in partnership with the ASEAN Center for Biodiversity, World Agroforestry Centre, Bioversity International, and Silliman University, organised a conference in Pasay City, Philippines on February 2008. This conference aimed at establishing the link between climate change and biodiversity in the context of agriculture and food security. The conference informed us on how different countries have adopted and mitigated


the effects of climate change, and how parallel efforts on biodiversity conservation play an important role in this whole effort. As a regional center for agricultural and rural development, SEARCA is keenly interested in knowing how Southeast Asian countries, particularly their rural communities, are coping with the effects of climate change. Such information will help SEARCA to be of better service to the region, particularly its agriculture sector. SEARCA’s foremost concern is that vulnerability to climate change is unequally distributed. The Human Development Report (2007/2008) indicates that it is “the poor who bear the brunt of climate change.” In developing countries, high levels of poverty and low levels of human development limit the capacity of poor households, especially in the rural areas, to manage climate-related risks. With low incomes and meager assets, as well as limited access to formal insurance and safety nets, poor households have to deal with climate-related shocks under highly constrained conditions. The limited strategies for coping with such shocks reinforce deprivation. To promote greater understanding of this multifaceted climate changebiodiversity-agricultural development nexus, we are pleased to present this book containing a number of papers presented at the abovementioned conference in the Philippines. It also includes papers contributed by well-recognised scientists and researchers. We hope that this book will become a useful and handy reference material for policy makers and students of development who seek to better understand the interrelated topic of biodiversity and climate change. Lastly, we are grateful to our conference partners for their continued and unstinting cooperation in the production of this book. We also owe a lot of gratitude to the government of The Netherlands, which, through its Ministry of Development Cooperation (DGIS), worked with SEARCA for more than five years to implement the Biodiversity Research Programme (BRP) for Development in Mt. Malindang, Mindanao. BRP showcased the research-for-development theme. The programme was implemented by Dutch and Filipino scientists/researchers who jointly conducted researches aimed at contributing to the biodiversity conservation efforts in Mt. Malindang. It has underscored the lesson that the problem of biodiversity conservation must not be taken in isolation from other emerging threats, such as climate change, as well as the overarching problems of poverty,


lack of technical and financial capacities, government policies and regulations, and many others. It is this rich experience in conducting BRP that gave SEARCA the impetus to convene the conference, which was likewise financially supported by the Dutch government. Arsenio M. Balisacan Director, SEARCA


Preface Climate change is a global phenomenon that is manifested by significant changes in weather parameters. These changes are mainly due to human activities which significantly increased greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere over many years. Past and current trends of weather parameters were measured using 21 global climate models. These models were based on atmospheric science, chemistry, physics, biology, and at times astrology. They were run using past and present scenarios of GHG emissions. Climate change is inevitable. It will continue to happen even if current emissions of GHGs are stopped. Some areas will become hotter and drier, while other areas will have more rains than usual. There are still changes happening in other places, even in Southeast Asia, but most of these are not documented properly. Some of the predicted changes or manifestations of climate change are increased water availability in most tropics and high latitude areas, and decreased water availability and drought in mid- and low-latitude areas. Global temperatures are likely to increase by 1.1-6.4 oC from 1990 to 2100, with best estimates of 1.8-5.4 oC. Sea level is expected to rise by 22-34 cm between 1990 and 2080. The most revealing demonstration of this effect is in the island atolls of the Pacific. Extreme events will likely manifest such as tropical cyclones, typhoons, and hurricanes, with larger peak wind speeds and heavier precipitation.

THE CONCERN FOR CLIMATE CHANGE Climate change is considered a major constraint in the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) especially if the global community is not prepared for it. Climate change will increase the existing risks and vulnerability of people and ecosystems. The most vulnerable sector will be the


least developed countries in the tropics and sub-tropics, especially the impoverished communities. The 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) indicated evidences that show the decline of mountain glaciers and snow cover in both hemispheres. This decline is contributing to the rise in sea levels, especially in the Pacific island atolls and other coastal areas of small islands. Sea levels rose at an average of 1.8 mm per year from 1961 to 2003. Long-term precipitation trends from 1900 to 2005 also indicated significant increases in the eastern parts of North and South America, Northern Europe, and Northern and Central Asia. The projected impact on agriculture will vary over time and across locations. For example, climate change is predicted to cause shifts in areas that are suitable for the cultivation of many crops, i.e., Northern USA, Canada and most of Europe will have more areas for crop cultivation. On the other hand, Sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean will lose lands suitable for cultivating crops. Countries that will have the least capacity to cope with these drastic changes in the ability to grow food and generate other food needs will suffer most from climate change. There will be significant losses of genetic resources in several regions, especially for less mobile and tolerant animals, plants, and aquatic species. In other words, climate change will have losers and gainers at the local, regional, and global scales. By using models, it is projected that 23 crops will likely suffer from the significant decreases in the suitable areas for growth, e.g. typical cold weather crops such as strawberry, wheat, rye, apple, and oats. However, 20 crops will gain more favorable areas for growth, e.g. pearl millet, sunflower, common millet, chickpea, and soya bean. Many of the gains in crop cultivation areas will occur in regions where these crops are currently not integral components of food security. This would mean significant changes in the exchange of germplasm. These changes need to take place for the crops to cope with climate change. In addition, these changes will create consequent modifications in the food preferences of consumers. The other significant implication of these projected changes that are associated with climate change is the need to broaden the food base, which is very narrow at present. To attain this goal, there is a need to bring in more of the currently underutilised food species into the global food security basket. This means more intensified collection, characterization, conservation, and


utilization of these neglected species, i.e. plants, animals, fishes, arthropods and other useful biological materials. There is also the need to document all indigenous knowledge systems associated with the underutilized food crops and their uses. Documentation should likewise cover local knowledge, social networking schemes, and institutional arrangements being used by local communities to cope and mitigate risks that are associated with climate change. Lovell et al. (2008) strongly suggests that governments should not only proactively invest in producing new and climate-buffered crops, especially for countries in regions that are projected to have the greatest impact on food security due to climate change, e.g. wheat for South Asia, rice for Southeast Asia, and maize for South Africa. These efforts should be complemented by investments to secure water which is projected to become erratic in terms of supply. These tasks are urgent for the global community and it is a race against time! The climate change phenomenon will force humanity to think and take care of the global environment whilst not forgetting that the ultimate challenge will be how to adjust and act locally but also collectively at the national, regional, and global scales.

THE CLIMATE CHANGE AND BIODIVERSITY LINK Climate change will have great impacts on biodiversity in terms of reduction and loss. On the other hand, biodiversity can be used to enhance the mitigation and adaptation of people and environments to climate change. Biodiversity have provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural functions. Hence, the kind of biodiversity to must be promoted should be designed to minimize the negative impacts of climate change on any or a combination of these impaired functions, while considering time and spatial scales. Such type and kind of biodiversity that should be part of a technology or process that reduces resource inputs and emission per unit of output. Meanwhile, when used to enhance adaptation, the type and kind of biodiversity to be deployed should consider human and institutional arrangements, including the knowledge systems associated with it. These support mechanisms would moderate or harness beneficial opportunities in response to the actual or expected risks involved in climate change. Several countries in Southeast Asia are considered megabiodiversity centers as well as biodiversity hotspots. Hence, the pressures on resource use


would further exacerbate the impact of climate change and the inherent vulnerability of the coastal zones and small islands in the archipelagic countries in the region. Moreover, the projected intensification of typhoons and other extreme weather conditions will affect the coastal zones and human communities dependent on them, including the countries connected by major river systems, e.g. the Mekong and Irrawady river systems. These high-risk areas must be identified. National strategies must be developed for these areas to cope with the predicted impacts of climate change. Meanwhile, biodiversity that is needed for food and nutritional security, as well as in promoting ecosystem functions, must be collected, characterised, evaluated, and sustainably used and deployed. National, regional, and global platforms for promoting exchanges of these valuable germplasms, based on accepted access and benefit-sharing arrangements, must be promoted and supported. The relationships of poverty, economic growth, and access and benefit-sharing regimes of these valuable biodiversity must be studied and well understood. These relationships must be provided with the policy and institutional environments which will promote the synergy needed towards enhancing mitigation and adaptation to climate change, while taking into account the high-risk areas and the most vulnerable segment of human society.

THE BOOK’S RELEVANCE This book is a discourse on the general phenomenon of climate change, the importance of biodiversity, and how these two are linked and related. Chapter 1 generally describes the climate change phenomenon, how the prediction of weather changes was obtained, the role of biodiversity in climate change mitigation and adaptation, and the need for partnership and collaboration. Chapters 2, 3 and 4 elucidate on the regional perspectives and crosscutting issues of climate change and biodiversity. The chapters cite the multifunctional role of ecosystems, with both natural and modified biodiversities, and how climate change has affected this role. They also discuss the role of biodiversity and ecosystems in mitigating and enhancing adaptation to climate change. The concept of sustainagility as a complement to sustainability is also introduced in these chapters. Sustainagility is defined as the ability of the system to support future changes.


Chapters 5 to 10 are country papers from Cambodia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. These papers describe the various monitored weather parameters that are associated with climate change over a long period of time, the predicted changes in various parts of the countries, and the national strategies that are being formulated and implemented to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Chapters 8 and 9, papers from the Philippines and Thailand, describe the kind of research that are presently being undertaken to provide the information needed to formulate a national program and serve as basis for best practices in climate change mitigation and adaptation. Chapter 11 is a specific research on biodiversity which is directly linked to development. The approach and methods used to bring this about is described and related to development issues including climate change. Chapter 12 is a synthesis of lessons learned and research gaps. This information can serve as inputs in determining the national and regional priorities for research – i.e. the geographical and social sectors that are most vulnerable to climate change, the areas in Southeast Asia that need more attention because of climate change, and many more. This book is particularly useful for policy makers, scientists, researchers, academicians, students and people who are at the forefront of climate change mitigation and adaptation, and biodiversity conservation. Information is relevant not only in identifying future research areas and setting the policy agenda, but more importantly in implementing critical actions at all levels. All these are required for people, communities, governments, and sectors to move forward in terms of becoming more aware, informed, prepared, and proactive in strengthening the link between climate change mitigation and adaptation and biodiversity conservation. Percy E. Sajise Senior Fellow, SEARCA and Honorary Research Fellow, Bioversity International


Contributors DR. AMNAT CHIDTHAISONG is an Assistant Professor at the Joint Graduate School of Energy and Environment (JGSEE), King’s Mongkut University of Technology Thonburi, an international graduate education and research consortium of five institutions in Thailand. Dr. Amnat holds a PhD degree in Applied Bioscience and Biotechnology from Mie University in Japan. His postdoctoral researches were on microbial ecology at the Max-Planck Institute for Microbial Ecology in Germany, and stable isotope biogeochemistry at the University of California in Irvine, USA. His research fields include carbon cycle greenhouse gas biogeochemistry, and climate change. DR. CHOU LOKE MING is a Professor at the Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore (NUS). He is a coral reef biologist and has focused more on coastal management and reef restoration. He has also been involved with many regional initiatives dealing with the marine environment, including consultancy services to international and regional agencies, such as the United Nations Environment Program-Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia (UNEP-COBSEA). Dr. Chou is a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network of the International Coral Reef Initiative since it was formed in 1996. He served as Chairman of the network from 2003 to 2005. PROF. DATUK DR. MOHD. NOH DALIMIN is a Professor at the Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation, School of Science and Technology, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), Malaysia. Prof. Noh specialises in Solid State Physics and Renewable Energy (Photovoltaic Systems), and his current research focuses on conservation and global climatic changes in relation to the use of renewable energy in tropical ecosystems. Prof. Noh obtained his Master of Science degree from Bedford College, University of London, and his PhD degree from Imperial College, University of London. Prof. Datuk Dr. Mohd. Noh Dalimin served as Vice-Chancellor of UMS from March 2005 to June 2008.


DR. AHMED DJOGHLAF is the Executive Secretary of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity based in Montreal, Canada. He holds the rank of Minister Plenipotentiary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Algeria, and Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations. Dr. Djoghlaf served as General Rapporteur of the Preparatory Committee of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), better known as the Rio Summit, as former ViceChair of the Eleventh Session of the Intergovernmental Committee on Science and Technology for Development, as Vice-President of the Negotiating Committee on the Framework Convention on Climate Change, and Chair of one of two negotiating committees of the Convention to Combat Desertification. Dr. Djoghlaf holds a PhD degree from the University of Nancy, France, as well as four other post-graduate degrees, including Master of Arts in Government and Politics from St. John’s University, New York and a Law Degree from the University of Algiers. MR. RODRIGO U. FUENTES is the current Executive Director of the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) based in Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines. Mr. Fuentes has been working in the field of environment and natural resources for the last 26 years, as consultant and/technical advisor to different intergovernmental and multi-lateral organizations such as the ASEAN, the Asian Development Bank, the United Nations agencies, and the World Bank. Mr. Fuentes holds a Forestry degree and a Masteral degree in Urban and Regional Planning which were both obtained from the University of the Philippines. He specialises in environmental program design and project development, policy and institutional assessment, environmental monitoring, and capacity development. His previous undertakings at the regional and subregional levels included the provision of assistance to governments in complying with the commitments to global agreements, such as the implementation of Agenda 21, the UN Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. He is also credited for developing the Regional Framework program for implementing the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) and the Regional Action programmes for the Asian region.


DR. DELFIN J. GANAPIN, JR. is a forest ecologist trained at the College of Forestry, University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB). He obtained his PhD degree in Environmental Planning and Policy from the State University of New York and Syracuse University in 1987 as a United Nations University and Ford Foundation fellow. He served the Philippine government as the Director of the Environmental Management Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), and then as Assistant Secretary and concurrent OICUndersecretary for Environment and Research of the Department. He later served as Undersecretary for Environment and Program Development. Dr. Ganapin was involved in the negotiations for biodiversity and climate change conventions. He was also the leading senior Philippine environment official to the Earth Summit and succeeding UN Conventions for Sustainable Development. Dr. Ganapin is currently the Global Coordinator of the UN Global Environment Facility (GEF) Small Grants Programme (SGP) based in New York City, USA. DR. RODEL D. LASCO is the Philippine Country Coordinator of the World Agroforestry Centre (formerly the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry or ICRAF), and a Professor of the School of Environment and Management of the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB). He is a Convening Lead Author of Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He holds a PhD degree in Forestry from UPLB, with specialisation on Silviculture and Forest Influences. In 1998, he pioneered forest and climate change researches in the Philippines. MS. ALONA CUEVAS LINATOC is a PhD Candidate and a researcher at the Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation at Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia. She holds a Master of Science degree in Forest Botany from Universiti Putra Malaysia. Her current research focuses on the biogenic volatile organic compounds emission in Malaysian landscapes and its implications to the global carbon cycle. Prior to her work in Malaysia, Ms. Linatoc was a Science Research Specialist/Ecosystem Management Specialist at the ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation (ARCBC), and a Forester in the Laguna Community Environment and Natural Resources Office (CENRO) of the Philippine Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). She is a co-author of Climate Change and the Energy Challenge (2008).


MS. CAO THI PHUONG LY is a Researcher at the Center for Environment Research, Education and Development (CERED) in Hanoi, Vietnam. She obtained a Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from the Vietnam National University, and is currently involved in climate change adaptation projects that are related to policy linkages and poverty reduction in two provinces in Vietnam. Her other research interest is on the economic valuation of coastal habitats. She has co-authored “A Survey on the Resource Use and Economic Valuation of the Coral Reefs and Sea Grass Beds of Phu Quoc, Vietnam.” PROF. DATIN DR. MARYATI MOHAMED is the Dean of the Centre for Postgraduate Studies, Universiti Malaysia Sabah. Prof. Maryati obtained her Bachelor of Science degree in Biology from Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia and a PhD degree in Insect (Aphid) Taxonomy and Ecology at the Queen Elizabeth College, University of London. Her current research interests are on the antinsect group, covering the conservation, traditional knowledge, and ethics aspects. Prof. Maryati is a founding member of BioNET International, based in the UK, and was a member of DIVERSITAS (Montreal). She pioneered the Bornean Biodiversity and Ecosystem Conservation (BBEC) Programme, and was the Founding Director of the Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation (ITBC), Universiti Malaysia Sabah from June 1996 to May 2008. DR. NGUYEN HUU NINH is the Chairman of the Center for Environment Research, Education and Development (CERED) in Hanoi, Vietnam, a Senior Lecturer of the Vietnam National University, and also the Coordinator of the Indochina Climate Change Network. He holds a PhD degree in Biology from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and is a recipient of different international and national awards, including an Honorary Doctor of Science from the University of East Anglia in Norwich, United Kingdom, and the Campaign Medal for Achievement in Education Development from the Vietnam National University. He is the Lead Author Member of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was a recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. An author and co-author of various local and international reports and publications, Dr. Huu Ninh has a wide variety of professional experiences related to climate change, especially with UN organizations.


MR. BUNTHAN NGO is the Vice-Rector of the Royal University of Agriculture (RUA) for Academic Affairs and International Cooperation. Mr. Ngo obtained his degree in Agricultural Engineering from the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) in Thailand. He is actively involved in the modernization of the agricultural curricula of RUA. Through his efforts, numerous international cooperation activities have been established with the University, which provided opportunities to lecturers and researchers to study contemporary issues in agriculture. DR. MEINE VAN NOORDWIJK is an ecologist trained at Utrecht and Wageningen, The Netherlands. He has worked in Southeast Asia since 1993 and is the Regional Coordinator of the Southeast Asian Programme of the World Agroforestry Centre based in Bogor, Indonesia. His work on biodiversity, watersheds, and carbon provides links between the biophysical environment with the policy domains. DR. FLORENCIA B. PULHIN is a Researcher at the Forestry Development Center, Environmental Forestry Programme of the University of the Philippines Los Baños College of Forestry and Natural Resources (UPLB-CFNR). She holds a PhD degree in Forestry from UPLB. Her research involvements for the last 10 years focused on tropical forests and climate change. DR. GIL C. SAGUIGUIT, JR. is the Deputy Director responsible for the administration and financial management of SEARCA. He holds a degree in Rural Economics from the Universite de Montpellier I France. His fields of interest, expertise, and experiences include project management and implementation, rural development and extension, participatory and communitybased approaches, and multidisciplinary research. Dr. Saguiguit also served as SEARCA’s Research and Development (R&D) Manager, before he assumed the position of Deputy Director. Dr. Saguiguit has written and co-authored a number of publications on community-based natural resource management, North-south collaborative research, and agriculture and rural development. DR. PERCY E. SAJISE is now a Senior Fellow at SEARCA, while at the same time serving as an Honorary Research Fellow of Bioversity International and Adjunct Professor at the School of Environmental Science and Management of the University of the Philippines Los Baños. Trained as a plant ecologist at


Cornell University, he has more than 25 years of experience as a scientist who specializes in interdisciplinary work on natural resource management and ecological studies in the uplands of Southeast and South Asia. He spearheaded several regional networks such as the Southeast Asian Universities Agroecosystem Network (SUAN), Asian Association of Agricultural Colleges and Universities (AAACU) and a national network on Environmental Education in the Philippines (EENP). He has been a member of the Executive Committee of the Asia Pacific Association of Forest Research Institutions (APAFRI), and a Board Member of the World Center on Forestry (CIFOR). He was the former Director of SEARCA and the Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific of Bioversity International (formerly the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute). He is a member of the World Academy of Arts and Science. DR. VATHANA SANN is concurrently the Deputy Secretary General of the Council for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD), Council of the Ministers of Russian Federation, and the Coordinator of the Master of Science Program at the Royal University of Agriculture (RUA) in Cambodia. He obtained his PhD degree in International Agriculture, specializing in Animal Science, from Georg-August University of Goettingen in Germany in 2006. As a lecturer and a researcher in the field of livestock production system, Dr. Vathana Sann’s main research interest is on animal genetic conservation and tropical animal welfare. He has published three papers on the characterization of poultry genetic resources in Cambodia, and has caught the attention of the research community because of his researches on the contribution of the livestock sector on greenhouse gas emission and its impacts on climate change. DR. MARILIZA V. TICSAY is a plant-wildlife ecologist trained at the University of the Philippines Los Baños. For more than 15 years, she had served as Manager for a number of foreign-funded environmental projects in the Philippines, including The Conditions of Biodiversity Maintenance in Asia Project, the Environmental and Security Management Programme (ESMP), The Institutional Context of Biodiversity Conservation in Southeast Asia Project, and the Biodiversity Research Programme (BRP0 for Development in Mindanao. She currently works as the Knowledge Management Specialist at ACB, and a Technical Consultant for Programme Development and Implementation at SEARCA, and ACB.


DR. DAVID E. THOMAS is currently a consultant and Country Coordinator for the World Agroforestry Centre, based in Chiang Mai, Thailand. He has a PhD degree on Wildland Resource Science from the University of California, Berkeley, as well as a Masters degree in Pomology, and Bachelor degrees in political science, and soil science and plant nutrition. He has been living in Southeast Asia and working on natural resource management, agriculture, and rural development issues for more than 30 years. He has actively supported the development of MMSEA concepts and the implementation of collaborative research during his 12 years of service as Senior Policy Analyst for the World Agroforestry Centre, and from previous work with the Ford Foundation, the East-West Center, and other organizations. Recent MMSEA research projects, in which he has collaborated in, have been supported by the US National Science Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and various other donors. MS. LE THI THUYET is a Researcher at the Climate Change Section of CERED in Hanoi, Vietnam. Ms. Thi Thuyet obtained her Bachelor of Science degree in Geology from the Hanoi University of Science in 2007. She is currently working at the Integrated Water Resource Management Project in Nam Dinh, Vietnam. DR. WILFREDO H. UY obtained his Master of Science degree in Marine Science from the University of the Philippines Diliman, and his PhD degree in Aquatic Ecology at IHE-Delft and Wageningen University in The Netherlands. Dr. Uy is involved in several research programs in Mindanao, southern Philippines. These include the Marine Protected Area (MPA) Networking and Integrating Fisheries Management Initiatives in Zamboanga del Sur – Iliana Bay, and the Fisheries Assessment for Sustainable Management in Lake Mainit, Surigao del Norte. He was also the Study Leader of the Coastal Component of the Biodiversity Research Programme (BRP) for Mt. Malindang, Misamis Occidental, Mindanao, Philippines. DR. JIAN CHU XU is an ethno-ecologist by training. He has more than 20 years of extensive field experience in mainland Southeast Asia, South Asia and Southwest China. He is a Senior Scientist and the Country Representative of the World Agroforestry Centre, China Program, Beijing, as well as a Professor at the Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Science. He worked as a Program Manager at the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) in Nepal. He was also the Director of the Center for Biodiversity and Indigenous


Knowledge, an NGO, based in Southwest China, that works with indigenous people for cultural survival, forest management, land-use transition, community livelihood, and watershed governance. He also served as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Regional Community Forestry Training Center for Asia and the Pacific, and the scientific steering committee of the Land-Use and Land-Cover Change, International Geosphere-Biosphere Program and International Human Dimension Program of Global Change Program (LUCC-IGBP/IHDP).



- alienable and disposable - Afforestation/Reforestation Clean Development Mechanism - Asian Association of Agricultural Colleges and Universities - ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity - Asian Development Bank - animal genetic resource - Asian Institute of Technology - Aquatic Ecosystems Master Project - ASEAN Member States - Asia-Pacific Network on Climate Study - Fourth Assessment Report - ASEAN Regional Center for Biodiversity Conservation - Association of Southeast Asian Nations


- billion - Bornean Biodiversity and Ecosystem Cooperation - National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology - Philippine-Netherlands Biodiversity Research Programme (BRP) for Development in Mindanao: Focus on Mt. Malindang and its Environs - Biogenic Volatile Organic Compounds


- Council for Agricultural and Rural Development - Convention on Biological Diversity - community-based forest management - climate, community and biodiversity - Canadian Climate Center - Climate Change Enabling Activity Project - Clean Development Mechanism




- Community Environment and Natural Resources Office - Center for Environment Research, Education and Development - Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research - methane - Conservation International - Wolrd Center on Forestry - China National Report on Climate Change - carbon dioxide - Conference of Parties - creditable reductions of emission for deforestation - Coral Triangle Initiative


- DENR Administrative Order - Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Netherlands Ministry of Development Cooperation - Department of Science and Technology


- Environmental Education in the Philippines - ecological footprint - environmental impact assessment - Environment and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources Programme - El Niño Southern Oscillation - Executive Order - Environmental and Security Management Programme - Emission Trading - European Union


- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations


- General Circulation Models - gross domestic product - Global Environment Facility - greenhouse gas/gasses - Geographic Information Systems - glacial lake outburst floods - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technishe Zusammenarbeit - Global Warming Potential



- hectares



- human development index - International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development - World Agroforestry Centre (formerly the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry) - International Coral Reef Action Network - Integrated Coastal Zone Management - information, education and communication - indigenous knowledge systems - Integrated Model to Assess the Greenhouse Effect - Innoprise-Face Foundation Rainforest Rehabilitation Project - Indian Ocean Dipole - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (now Bioversity International) - intellectual property rights - Institute for Tropical Biology and Conservation - International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture - International Union for the Conservation of Nature - Joint Graduate School of Energy and the Environment - Joint Implementation - Japan International Cooperation Agency - Joint Liaison Group


- kilometers per hour


LGUs - local government units LTER - Long-term Ecological Research LUCC-IGBP/IHDP - Land-Use and Land Cover Change – International Geosphere-Biosphere Program and International Human Dimension Program of Global Change Program LUCF - land-use change and forestry LWG - live weight gain



- meters - million - Marine Protected Areas Monitoring and Evaluation - Mapped Atmosphere-Plant-Soil System - microbial biomass - Millennium Development Goals - Millennium Ecosystems Assessment - Mindanao Consortium for Biodiversity - Montane Mainland Southeast Asia - Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment - Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment - Marine Protected Area - MPA Support Network - Mindanao State University


- National Climate Center - National Committee on CDM - National Committee for the Marine Science - National Conservation Strategy - National Disaster Coordinating Council - Natural Environment Research Council Centre for Population Biology - nitrogen-fixing tree product/s - National Integrated Protected Areas System - National Research Council of Thailand - National Steering Committee on Climate Change - National Statistics Office - non-forest timber products - National University of Singapore - natural vegetative strips


- tropospheric ozone - Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Planning


- Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration - Philippine Association of Marine Scientists




- Philippine Area of Responsibility - Philippine Council for Marine and Aquatic Resources Research and Development - Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed - Presidential Decree - Payments for Environmental Services - Participatory (Rapid) Rural Appraisal - research and development - Republic Act - relative agriculture function - Netherlands Development Research Advisory Council - reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation - reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries - relative ecological function - Reduced Impact Logging - Royal University of Agriculture


- short-chain fatty acids - Southeast Asia - Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization - Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture - Socioeconomic and Cultural Studies - Small Grants Programme - UNDP Small Grants Program for Tropical Forests for South and Southeast Asia - shop keeping unit - sea surface temperatures - Southeast Asia Regional Vulnerability to Changing Water Resource and Extreme Hydrological Events Due to Climate Change - Silliman University - Southeast Asian University Agroecosystem Network


- Terrestrial Ecosystems Master Project - Timber License Agreement - Training Needs Assessment - Thailand Research Fund




- United Kingdom - United Nations - United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization - United Nations Convention on Climate Change - United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification - United Nations Conference on Environment and Development UNDP - United Nations Development Programme UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme UNEP-COBSEA - United Nations Environment Program-Coordinating Body on the Seas of Southeast Asia UNESCAP - United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific UNFCC - United Nations Framework on Climate Change USA - United State of America USAID - United States Agency for International Development USD - US dollars VOCs

- volatile organic compounds


- World Health Organization


Exploring the Link Between Climate Change and Biodiversity



Exploring the Link Between Climate Change and Biodiversity Ahmed Djoghlaf and Delfin Ganapin, Jr .

BIODIVERSITY LOSS AND CLIMATE CHANGE* The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Secretariat and the Global Environment Facility (GEF) Small Grants Programme share the belief that the poor and vulnerable communities will bear the worst of biodiversity loss and climate change impacts. These same poor and vulnerable communities are the critical stakeholders that hold the key to making the efforts in biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation and adaptation successful. All of us are joined together. We must thus work together given the dire consequences of the double impacts of biodiversity loss and global warming. A word that comes to mind is ‘extinction.’ This word appropriately links biodiversity loss and global warming. In the past, biodiversity loss is like ’dying with a whimper’ as species are lost and people do not even know what they had lost. The concern was also on specific areas where biodiversity loss is relatively fast. We now call these areas as ‘biodiversity hotspots.’ Global warming, however, drastically changes the equation of extinction. Extinction will not only be just for the rare and endangered species but also for global biodiversity. The ecological feedback goes full circle. Humans, who are most responsible for biodiversity loss and global warming, are likewise directly endangered. There is still confidence that humans will adapt and survive. But there is the definite risk of becoming poorer. Those who are already poor are at risk of further declining to the worst of conditions.

Reproduced from Moving Forward: Southeast Asian Perspectives on Climate Change and Biodiversity edited by Percy E. Sajise, Mariliza V. Ticsay and Gil C. Saguiguit, Jr. (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2010). This version was obtained electronically direct from the publisher on condition that copyright is not infringed.No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior permission of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Individual articles are available at< >


Ahmed Djoghlaf and Delfin Ganapin, Jr.

FACING THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE** According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), if temperature increase exceeds by 1.5-2 ºC, 20-30 per cent of plant and animal species are at risk of extinction. This condition is especially relevant for those species that are already at risk due to low populations, restricted patchy habitats, and limited climatic ranges. Overall, as many as 1 M species may face increased threats of extinction because of climate change. Climate change has already affected the functioning, appearance, composition, and structure of ecosystems. Recently observed changes in the climate have caused consequent changes in species distribution and population sizes, timing of reproduction or migration events, and increase in frequency of pest and disease outbreaks. Other impacts of climate change on ecosystem functions include the widespread bleaching of corals, instances of wetland salinisation and salt water intrusion, the expansion of arid and semi-arid lands at the expense of grasslands and acacia trees, pole ward and upward shifts in habitats, replacement of tropical forests with savannah, and shifting desert dunes. In fact, climate change creates impacts on every ecosystem. These impacts also reflect on the health of biodiversity in surrounding ecosystems. In Asia, for example, up to 50 per cent of biodiversity is at risk [of being extinct] due to climate change, while as much as 88 per cent of reefs may be lost over the next 30 years. Furthermore, as many as 1,522 plant species in China and 2,835 plants in Indo-Burma could become extinct. With regards to agriculture, parties to the Thirteenth Meeting of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, have considered the integration of climate change impact and response activities within the programme of work on agricultural biodiversity. The reasons for doing this initiative are clear. A warming of greater than 3°C is projected to create negative impacts on agricultural production in all regions. Meanwhile, elevated carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are expected to create negative impacts on livestock health, especially among those in low-nitrogen environments. In Southeast Asia, precipitation extremes will increase with shifts in the timing of important precipitation events. In Indonesia, for example, climate change is expected to increase the chance of a 30-day delay in the onset of monsoon rains by as much as 40 per cent by 2050.

Exploring the Link Between Climate Change and Biodiversity


Indigenous and local communities are particularly vulnerable to the negative impacts of climate change. They tend to be among the first to face the adverse consequences of climate change because of their dependence on and close relationship with the environment. The impacts of climate change on indigenous and traditional livelihoods include increased weed infestations in grazing lands throughout the world, and exposure of livestock to diseases. Loss of livelihoods and traditional practices of populations living in vulnerable ecosystems are already significant.

THE BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE LINK Even if greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were to decrease significantly tomorrow, climate change would continue to affect ecosystems for hundreds of years due to global climate feedback mechanisms. As such, it is critically important that immediate attention is given to adaptation. Biodiversity contributes to many ecosystem services, including the provision of food and fodder, nutrient cycling, and the maintenance of hydrological flows. As such, maintaining biodiversity and associated ecosystem functions is an important component of adaptation. Likewise, biodiversity resources, such as land races of common crops, mangroves and other wetlands, and vegetative cover, can form an integral part of adaptation plans. This is particularly true when considering agricultural ecosystems. In cereal cropping systems, adaptations based on biodiversity resources and sustainable land management, such as changing varieties and planting times, enable the avoidance of an average 10-15 per cent reduction in yield under local temperature increase of 1-2°C. Other biodiversity-based adaptation activities for agricultural systems include the conservation of agricultural genetic resources, the reduction of other threats to agricultural biodiversity, the restoration of degraded lands with native species, the integration of land and water management, implementation of disease control programmes for native livestock, and integration of invasive species management planning. The conservation and the resilience of ecosystems are therefore crucial to climate change adaptations. They constitute the ecosystems’ coping strategies needed to reduce the negative impacts of climate change.


Ahmed Djoghlaf and Delfin Ganapin, Jr.

Biodiversity also contributes to climate change mitigation. Forests account for as much as 80 per cent of the total aboveground terrestrial carbon. Peat lands, meanwhile, which only cover 3 percent of the world’s terrestrial surface, store 30 per cent of all global soil carbon or the equivalent of 75 per cent of all atmospheric carbon. As such, healthy forests and wetland ecosystems have the potential to capture a significant portion of projected emissions. Each year, about 13 M ha of the world’s forests are lost due to deforestation. Deforestation is currently estimated to be responsible for 20 percent of the annual human-induced CO2 emissions. Because of the role of forests in storing carbon and providing essential goods and services, the conservation of forest biodiversity can considerably reduce emissions and has potential co-benefits for adaptation and sustainable development. Moreover, sustainable land management in agricultural areas can increase carbon sequestration in the soil through techniques, such as integrated pest management, conservation tillage, intercropping, and the planting of cover crops. In fact, when cover crops are used in combination with conservation tillage, the soil carbon content can increase annually for a period of up to 50 years. The sustainable management of grazing land can provide similar cobenefits since such lands contain between 10-30 per cent of the world’s soil carbon stocks. Another emerging role of biodiversity in GHG mitigation is the use of bio energy which is derived from renewable sources. Bio energy is considered to be carbon-neutral, since, in theory, the carbon released during combustion can be taken up by growing plants. However, the GHG reduction potential ultimately depends on the type of biomass used and the associated production practices. If produced in a sustainable way, the use of biomass in producing bio energy can efficiently mitigate climate change impacts while enhancing biodiversity, especially on degraded lands.

THE NEED FOR PARTNERSHIP AND COLLABORATION Global warming and its consequences are, therefore, not just the concern of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). CBD is a major partner, together with other international development agencies. CBD is the international framework for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the equitable sharing of its benefits. With 190 Parties,

Exploring the Link Between Climate Change and Biodiversity


the CBD has near-universal participation among countries that have committed to preserving life on earth. CBD seeks to address all threats to biodiversity and ecosystem services, including threats from climate change. Efforts are being done through scientific assessments, development of tools, incentives and processes, the transfer of technologies and good practices, and the full and active involvement of relevant stakeholders, including indigenous and local communities, youth, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and women. As one of the main drivers of change for biodiversity, climate change is reflected in the 2010 biodiversity target to significantly reduce the rate of biodiversity loss. Target 7 aims to maintain and enhance the resilience of the components of biodiversity to adapt to climate change. This target is crucial in the battle against biodiversity loss. CBD’s cross-cutting issues on biodiversity and climate change and the ecosystem approach allow for the comprehensive consideration of the issue at all levels. Traditional knowledge and the perspectives of local and indigenous communities are also considered. The three Rio Conventions—on Biodiversity, Climate Change, and Desertification— were derived directly from the 1992 Earth Summit. They represent a way of contributing to the sustainable development goals of Agenda 21. In 2001, the Conventions established a Joint Liaison Group (JLG) to enhance the exchange of information and explore opportunities for synergistic activities. The activities for enhanced synergies on adaptation, as identified by the JLG, include the provision of focal points of all Conventions with up-todate information on relevant assessments, research programmes and monitoring tools; collaboration on the development of common messages; development of educational materials; and establishment of joint web-based communication tools. More specifically, the CBD and the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNCCC) collaborate on issues related to the Nairobi work program on impacts, vulnerability, and adaptation to climate change. Further collaborative action is being undertaken on reducing emissions from deforestation in developing countries (RED-DC) and approaches to stimulate action. The CBD and the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) are also joining forces with regards to the biodiversity of dry and sub-humid lands. These ecosystems are vulnerable to the combined effects of biodiversity loss, desertification and climate change. Since these areas are usually


Ahmed Djoghlaf and Delfin Ganapin, Jr.

dominated by agricultural activities, there are also significant linkages to the CBD programme of work on agro-biodiversity. But ultimately, strategic global work programmes have to be put into an operational framework and acted upon at national and local levels. This, however, cannot be done by one agency alone. Each network member or partner has the capacity to provide vital parts of the needed expertise and resources, as well as experience in the development, coordination and implementation of regional development programs. Each partner should thus be fully involved. With partnerships, concerted efforts towards the formidable task of addressing both biodiversity and climate change concerns could be effectively implemented. Partners must also strategically focus resources and choose the niche where the best contribution to the overall effort can be made. These are quite ambitious objectives, as they must be. The stakes are enormous and intergenerational. Time is also short. Thus, all of us should bind together as partners across sectors, agencies and countries. ***

NOTES Presented by Dr. Delfin Ganapin Jr., Global Manager of the UNDP GEF Small Grants Programme, New York, USA as an introduction to the keynote message of Dr. Ahmed Djoglaf, Executive Secretary, Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Canada. Dr. Ganapin delivered Dr. Djoglaf’s keynote message during the International Conference-Workshop on Biodiversity and Climate Change in Southeast Asia held in February 2008 in the Philippines. *


Highlights of Dr. Ahmed Djoghlaf’s keynote message.

Presented by Dr. Delfin Ganapin Jr. in conclusion of Dr. Ahmed Djoghlaf’s keynote message. ***

Reproduced from Moving Forward: Southeast Asian Perspectives on Climate Change and Biodiversity edited by Percy E. Sajise,

Mariliza V. Ticsay and Gil C. Saguiguit, Jr. (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2010). This version was obtained electronically direct from the publisher on condition that copyright is not infringed.No part of this publication may be reproduced without the prior permission of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Individual articles are available at < >


Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia



Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia Rodel D. Lasco

Climate change is fast becoming a present reality. The most recent IPCC (2007) report concludes that: “…warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and [the] rising global average sea level… (Denman et al. 2007).” Among the projected impacts of climate change is the loss of thousands of species, as well as changes in natural ecosystems. Indeed, climate change is a real threat to biodiversity. Globally, about 20-30 per cent of species will be at increasingly high risk of extinction, possibly by 2100, as global mean temperatures exceed 2-3°C above pre-industrial levels. Global uncertainty range from 10 to 40 per cent, but varies among regional biota from as low as 1 per cent to as high as 80 per cent (Fischlin et al. 2007). The Millennium Ecosystems Assessment (2005) concluded that in the past 50 years, humans have changed ecosystems more rapidly and extensively than in any comparable period of time in history. These changes have been made mainly to meet the rapidly growing demands for food, fresh water, timber, fiber, and fuel. These changes have resulted in a substantial and largely irreversible loss in the diversity of life on earth. It is expected that climate change will exacerbate existing pressures on biodiversity resources. The Southeast Asian region is among the few countries with the richest biodiversity resources in the world. Although occupying only 3 per cent of the world’s total surface, 20 per cent of all known species live deep in its mountains,


Rodel D. Lasco

jungles, rivers, lakes, and seas. The tropical forests harbor 10 per cent of the world’s floral diversity (Gitay et al. 2002). Three of the world’s 17 mega diversity countries are in the region, particularly in Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines. Southeast Asia also has seven of the world’s 25 recognised biodiversity hotspots or areas that are known to be biologically rich but are under the greatest threat of destruction. There are more than 27,000 endemic species in the region. Nine countries also share many species that are biologically distinct from the rest of the world as these countries share common land or water borders. The rich species diversity of these countries is reflective of the diverse ecosystems represented by the types of natural habitat found in the region – high mountains, evergreen tropical forests, monsoon forests, limestone formations, wetlands, and marine waters. Many of these sites have either World Heritage Site or ASEAN Heritage Park inscriptions. It is understandable that such natural wealth also provides the economic base for many of the communities in this region. The interplay between the state of natural resources, economic growth, and the progress of alleviating poverty has become a critical nexus for the development of the region. Southeast Asia’s biodiversity resources are under severe stress and in danger of being lost to future generations. For example, the region has the highest relative rate of deforestation among major tropical regions. It could lose three quarters of its original forests by 2100 and beyond by up to 42 per cent of its biodiversity (Sodhi et al. 2004). This unprecedented erosion of biodiversity in the region will have dire ecological and socioeconomic consequences. Climate change will add another layer of stress to the many stressors that are already endangering biodiversity in the region. These stressors will be magnified over time. Much uncertainty remains over the magnitude of climate change in Southeast Asian countries and how biodiversity resources will be affected. This chapter provides a comprehensive but concise discussion of the link between climate change and biodiversity in Southeast Asia. Information is drawn largely from the papers presented in the 2008 International ConferenceWorkshop on Biodiversity and Climate Change in Southeast Asia: Adaptation and Mitigation.

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE BIODIVERSITY RESOURCES OF SOUTHEAST ASIA Over the last few decades, Asia’s natural ecosystems and the biodiversity contained therein are under severe pressure to support the ever growing demand for natural resources (UNFCCC 2007; Taylor et al. 1999) The increasing loss of biodiversity in Asia is being attributed to development activities and land degradation (especially overgrazing and deforestation), pollution, overfishing, hunting, infrastructure development, species invasion, land-use change, and the overuse of freshwater (UNEP 2002; Gopal 2003). The most affected areas are coastal and marine ecosystems, forests, and the mountainous regions. Climate change is expected to exacerbate the various stresses facing these ecosystems. Projected elevational shifts of ecosystems are also expected due to climate change. Changes in the distribution and health of rainforest and monsoon forests can also occur, just like in Thailand, where an increase from 45 to 80 per cent in tropical forest cover is expected. This increase in forest cover will subsequently lead to an increase in evapotranspiration and rainfall variability. These increases pose negative effects on the viability of freshwater wetlands (Taylor et al., 1999). Around 1,250 to 15,000 species of higher plants are threatened in India and the scenario is also the same in Myanmar, China, Malaysia, and Thailand (IPCC 2001). The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (Cruz et al. 2007) projects that up to 50 per cent of Asia’s total biodiversity is at risk due to climate change. Large populations of many other species could also be lost due to the synergistic effects of climate change and habitat fragmentation (Ishigami et al. 2003, 2005). Though evidence of climate-related biodiversity loss in Asia remains limited, a large number of plant and animal species are reportedly moving to higher latitudes and altitudes as a consequence of observed climate change impacts in many parts of Asia in recent years (Yoshio and Ishii 2001; IUCN 2003). There are even more limited projections on the impacts of climate change on the biodiversity of Southeast Asia in the IPCC report (2007), reflecting the paucity of data in the region. Among these projections were the estimated extinctions of 105-1,522 plant species and 10-213 vertebrates in Indo-Burma under a doubled-CO2 climate using two General Circulation Models (GCMs) (Malcolm et al. 2006). In the Philippines, modeling work, using the Holdridge Life Zones, show that dry forest types are under threat of being wiped out, even without human intervention, with increasing rainfall that is projected in most


Rodel D. Lasco

of the country, assuming that only climate shift is the driver of change (Lasco et al. 2007; Pulhin and Lasco 2008). It has also been observed that in the past 20 years, the increasing intensity and spread of forest fires in Southeast Asia were largely related to rises in temperature and declines in precipitation, in combination with increasing intensity of land uses (Cruz et al. 2007). Whether this trend persists in the future or not is difficult to ascertain considering the limited literature on how the frequency and severity of forest and brush fires are likely to respond to expected increase in temperature and precipitation in Southeast Asia. The uncertainty lies on whether the expected increase in temperature is enough to trigger more frequent and severe fires despite the projected increase in precipitation. Should the frequency, duration, and intensity of fires increase with climate change? If so, there could be severe impacts on biodiversity resources. The complexity and regeneration of diverse species that are thriving in the forested areas may be reduced. Coral ecosystems are also under dire threat if the climate continues to change. Under some climate change scenario, the loss of reefs in Asia may be as high as 88 per cent in the next 30 years (IPCC 1992; Sheppard 2003; Wilkinson, 2004). The International Coral Reef Action Network (ICRAN) reported that the worldwide massive coral bleaching that occurred in 2002 only ranked second from the 1997-1998 coral bleaching event caused by the El Niño Southern Oscillation, which in turn was caused by climate change (UNEP 2002). If conservation measures could receive increasing attention, large areas of the reefs would recover from the direct and indirect damage of climate change within the next 10 years. However, if abnormally high sea-surface temperatures (SST) continue to cause major bleaching events and reduce the capacity of the reefs to calcify, due to CO2 increase, most human efforts are futile (Kleypas et al. 1999; Wilkinson 2002). Asia is home to 80 per cent of the world’s commercial marine organisms like fish, shrimp, and shellfish. Due to the fluctuating temperatures in the coastal areas, plankton shifts occur, thereby leading to sardine movement towards the Japan Sea (IPCC 2001). At greater than 500 ppm of atmospheric CO2 concentration, it was reported that probably half, and possibly more, of coral-associated fauna are becoming rare or extinct given their dependence on living corals and reef rugosity (Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007). Another study showed that 25 per cent of coral reefs could be destroyed as a result of climate change. The southern part of the Philippines and central Indonesia possessed

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


the top 10 per cent richest location for the four taxa used in the study, which includes fishes, corals, snails, and lobsters (Roberts et al. 2002). Although adaptation strategies exist that aim to reduce the impacts of climate change to natural ecosystems and their biodiversity, these are mainly generic. In forest ecosystems, such strategies include the use of improved technologies for tree plantation development and reforestation, and the improvement of initiatives to protect forests from fires, insects, and diseases. These strategies could reduce the vulnerability of most forests in Asia to climate change and variability (Cruz et al. 2007). Other adaptation measures that IPCC identified include the implementation of comprehensive intersectoral programs that combine measures to control deforestation and forest degradation with measures to increase agricultural productivity and sustainability, extend rotation cycles, reduce the damage to remaining trees, reduce logging waste, implement soil conservation practices, and use wood in a more carbon-efficient way. These strategies would help conserve a large fraction of the carbon in the atmosphere. Climate-risk adaptation practices also exist at the community level in many developing countries. These strategies are primarily designed to cope with climatic variability and extremes at the farm level. In the Philippines, for example, upland farmers are using appropriate species/crops, implementing proper scheduling, adapting to technical innovations (e.g. water conservation measures), participating in capacity building programs, and conducting law enforcement initiatives (Lasco et al. 2007). The range of adaptation options identified by the participants suggests the high degree of awareness on how local communities adjust to climate variabilities and extremes. The country papers in this book highlight the potential impacts of climate change on biodiversity in the various Southeast Asian countries. In Thailand, a study by Roud and Gale (2008) (Chidthaisong 2008) suggests that the number and proportion of detections of Lophura diardi pheasant, which inhabit the lowlands, have significantly increased as compared to the detections of Lophura nycthemera pheasant, which inhabit highly elevated areas. Environmental factors, mediated by the changing climate, are the most plausible explanation for the changing proportion of sightings of the two species. In the Philippines, the study on the potential change in forest ecosystems, using the Holdridge Life Zones system, showed that dry forests are the most vulnerable to climate change as most models show increasing rainfall in the country (Pulhin and Lasco 2008). In coastal ecosystems, several potential impacts were also


Rodel D. Lasco

identified based on global studies (Uy 2008). In Singapore, several analog studies showed the vulnerability of marine ecosystems to climate change (Chou 2008). Some adaptation strategies were also identified to address the impacts of climate change to the biodiversity of Southeast Asian countries. For forest ecosystems, these strategies included protection activities, rehabilitation of degraded forests, and improvement of harvesting technologies (Pulhin and Lasco 2008). For coastal and marine ecosystems, adaptation measures included the implementation of integrated coastal zone management, and the establishment of marine protected areas (Uy 2008; Pulhin and Lasco 2008). The need to mainstream climate change in biodiversity policies and management approaches was also highlighted (Pulhin and Lasco 2008). The above review shows the very limited information on how climate change affects Southeast Asia’s biodiversity. In this region, the key challenge, therefore, is to generate science-based information that could guide policy makers and development workers on how to cope with the impacts of climate change. Without this information, adaptation actions will be fragmented and poorly targeted. A way out of this uncertainty is to focus on no-regrets measures that many agree will help arrest the erosion of biodiversity resources. For instance, the establishment of protected areas seems to be a no-regrets measure that is bound to create positive impacts in allowing ecosystems to adapt to climate change. The tropical region has the largest potential for climate change mitigation through forestry activities. Southeast Asia has the highest potential in terms of reducing deforestation (Nabuurs et al. 2007). At US$272/t CO2, about 109,000 Mt of CO2 emissions will be prevented. The role of natural ecosystems and their biodiversity, in mitigating climate change, is more clearly elaborated in scientific literature, especially for forest ecosystems in Indonesia and the Philippines. Many studies have shown the ability of planted trees to rapidly sequester substantial amounts of carbon in these countries (Murdiyarso 1996; Palm et al. 2007; Lasco et al. 2007; Lasco and Pulhin 2006; and Lasco and Pulhin 2003). There is, in fact, a growing interest in many countries in obtaining carbon finance for forestry projects. Avoiding loss of forests (or deforestation; also known as reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation or REDD), and preventing carbon emissions in the process, are now at the center of climate change negotiations. This interest further highlights the natural ecosystems’ ability to mitigate climate change (Kanninen et al.

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


2007). This increasing interest in the role of forest ecosystems in climate change mitigation is due to the potential financial windfall estimated to run into several billions of US dollars annually. The role of terrestrial ecosystems to mitigate climate change was also discussed by the various country papers. In Cambodia, the destruction of forest ecosystems is the leading cause of GHG emissions. Reducing deforestation can lead to less GHG emissions. In addition, there are mitigation options that exist in cattle raising to reduce CH4 emissions (Sann and Ngo 2008). In Malaysia, the Danum Valley is hosting the Innoprise-Face Foundation Rainforest Rehabilitation Project (INFAPRO) designed to abate the enhanced greenhouse effect by planting and protecting forests. The project aims to rehabilitate 25,000 ha of degraded forests through enrichment planting to increase the capacity of logged-over forests for carbon sequestration (Linatoc et al. 2008). In Thailand, the role of forests in oxidizing CH4 and sequestering carbon was discussed (Chidthaisong 2008). In Vietnam, the role of wetland ecosystems, specifically the Red River Estuary, to mitigate climate change was highlighted (Ninh et al. 2008) (Table 2.1).

CROSS-CUTTING IMPLICATIONS AND ISSUES High Uncertainty in Climate Change Scenarios In almost all of the papers presented in this book, it is clear that climate change scenarios are very uncertain for most countries in Southeast Asia. As a result, the very limited research on climate change impacts on biodiversity are generalisations based on studies elsewhere. “…the limited ability of current climate models to predict inter-annual (and inter-decadal) variability in rainfall patterns and the lack of information on current species-environment relationships makes it difficult to predict [the] impacts of rapid climate change on biodiversity… (Corlett 2003).”


Forests Wetlands Mangroves



Loss of pheasant species

Sedimentation Natural colonization of humanmade habitats Salinity depression Sea surface temperature elevation

Various impacts but not sitespecific



Loss of dry forests










Forest protection rehabilitation of degraded lands Improved harvesting technology Mainstreaming of climate change policies Establishment of marineprotected areas Ecological studies Integrated coastal zone management

Adaption Options

Carbon sink and sequestration

Increase carbon sink in marine environment

Preventive measures against deforestion

Carbon sequestration

Reduce deforestation to decrease GHG Proper cattle management to reduce methane emissions

Mitigation Potentials

Table 2.1 Summary of climate change impacts on biodiversity, adaptation options, and mitigation potential in Southeast Asian countries based on country papers presented in the 2008 International Conference-Workshop on Biodiversity and Climate Change in Southeast Asia

18 Rodel D. Lasco

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


This uncertainty is being addressed in many Southeast Asian countries by implementing various projects. But local climate projections for biodiversity conservation may still take time. Hence, adaptation measures will likely remain embedded and implicit in measures to address more pressing threats to biodiversity loss. There are also implications on how far policy makers in the region will take the threat of climate change to biodiversity seriously. Given the more pressing causes of biodiversity loss, it will be a tough sell to convince the policy makers to allocate local resources to climate change adaptation initiatives. More often than not, the resources needed for adaptation research and development will likely come from external donors.

Climate Change as One of Many Stressors to Biodiversity The Millennium Ecosystems Assessment (2005) report highlights the many drivers of the present state of biodiversity in the world (Figure 2.1). Climate change is just one of these drivers. At present, climate change has a much lower impact than the other drivers, although it will be more important in the future. This fact implies that climate change must not always be blamed for the loss of biodiversity. Habitat change and overexploitation are far more important drivers of biodiversity loss than climate change (Figure 2.1). This situation poses several challenges. Researchers must help elaborate on the additional stress that climate change has on biodiversity resources. They must conduct studies that factor out the additional threats posed by climate change. To do this, researchers must be able to draw upon robust projections of climate change scenarios at the national and sub-national levels. The results of such studies could guide policy makers in determining the amount of additional resources needed to address climate change impacts.

Biodiversity and Climate Change Adaptation Climate change directly and indirectly creates impacts on biodiversity resources. Hence, biodiversity resources need to adapt to a new climate regime. They are also important in enhancing the adaptive capacity of local communities living in and around them. The effects of climate change to biodiversity will therefore


Rodel D. Lasco

Figure 2.1 The main drivers of change in biodiversity (Millennium Ecosystems Assessment, 2005)

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


have a cascading effect on local communities which rely heavily on such resources. For example, most of the 20 M people living in the Philippine uplands rely on natural resources, especially the surrounding forests, to survive. Changes in forest composition and the extent of these changes could have profound effects on the livelihoods of these communities. Changes in vegetative cover could also affect the hydrological properties of watersheds which supply water for power, agriculture, and domestic use. Hardly any assessment of these more indirect climate change impacts has been done in Southeast Asia.

Biodiversity and Climate Change Mitigation There is high interest on the role of natural ecosystems for climate change mitigation, especially carbon sequestration by trees and forests. The burgeoning carbon market, which now runs to several billions of dollars annually, provide strong incentives for people to venture and take advantage of this opportunity. However there are several issues that Southeast Asian countries need to be wary of. The first issue that needs to be considered is the implication of the rising number of carbon sequestration projects in Southeast Asia. Carbon payments are contingent on the amount of carbon sequestered in trees. The rate of carbon sequestration is typically higher in fast-growing trees as compared to the slow-growing indigenous trees. This situation could spawn the massive planting of exotic, and possibly invasive species, to enhance the financial profitability of these projects. The danger may be enhanced with the entry of the private sector whose main motivation is profit. One way of addressing this risk is to mandate globally accepted standards such as the Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB) standard for forestry projects. The second issue is the increasing focus on forests for climate change mitigation. Forests can maximise carbon stocks and rate of sequestration. However, this role may overshadow the importance of the various flora and fauna that make up the forests’ biodiversity. More attention may be given to the ability of forests to obtain high carbon stocks at the expense of biodiversity protection initiatives. Again, robust standards for climate mitigation projects could be a way to prevent this from happening.


Rodel D. Lasco

The third issue is the availability of financing schemes for climate change mitigation. These schemes could be leveraged for biodiversity conservation.

The Role of Environmental Service Payments Payment for environmental services (PES) is a generic term used to denote a way of creating incentives for forest resources. PES is a voluntary transaction in which a well-defined environmental service (ES), or land use that is likely to secure that service, is being “bought” by at least one ES buyer, from at least one ES provider, if and only if the ES provider secures an ES provision, i.e. conditionality (Wunder 2005). Payments for biodiversity protection exist at the local, national, and international scales. International organisations, foundations, and conservation NGOs are major buyers of biodiversity conservation services. Scherr et al. (2007) estimated that the financial payment for biodiversity protection services is the largest forest ecosystem services that are associated with land use and land-use change, if the conservation easements are included (Table 2.2). The market for biodiversity conservation is highly segmented. Also, a number of different payment systems exist, including the purchase of high-value habitats (e.g. “debtfor-nature swaps”), payment for access to species or habitats, and payment in support of management to conserve biodiversity, tradable rights, and support for biodiversity conservation businesses (Jenkins et al. 2004). The possibility of using PES for biodiversity conservation was highlighted in the paper from the Philippines (Pulhin and Lasco 2008). In Malaysia, the Sabah State Government, in collaboration with an Australian-based forestry investment firm, New Forests Pty Ltd, committed to protect the 34,000 ha of forests in biodiversity-rich Malua Forest Reserve on a commercial basis (Linatoc et al. 2008). The innovative project aims to produce biodiversity credits which are tradable securities that reward activities supporting the conservation and sustainable use of natural ecosystems. It plans to sell endangered species credits to offset the negative impacts of certain activities on those species and their habitats. Biodiversity credits will be primarily marketed to oil palm companies/ producers, energy companies, and other businesses involved in the production of biodiesel.

US$20 million for just offsets

Probably some 50% of global market

(Source: Ecosystem Market matric, ver. 19. Ecosystem Marketplace, 2006)

Government conservation payments and US$3,000 million - just Costa Rice: over US$14 million; Current biodiversity offsets flora and fauna oriented global expenditures on protected areas are programs (excluding water estimated at approx. US$6.5 billion/year and soil conservation)

(Offsets outside the regulatory framework)

Voluntary biodiversity offsets

(Expenditures by NGOs for conservation)

Size and use of easements in developing countries unknown. Roughly US$2 billion/year(McKinsey-WRI-TNC)

US$6,000 million in US alone

Land trust, conservation easements

Estimated Current Size of Payments in Developing Countries (US$ per annum)

Unknown as to ho many species offsets are driven by Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regulation in developing countries

Estimated Current Size of Payments Globally (US$ per annum)

Regulatory-drive species offsets (including US$45 million in the US US Conservation Banking) Program just begun in Australia and possibly similar program in France, size unknown

Ecosystem Payment Types

Table 2.2 Estimated size of payments for biodiversity services Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia



Rodel D. Lasco

Despite significant progress, most payments for biodiversity services remain nascent and, to a large degree, experimental. Major constraints to market development exist, such as the significant transaction costs that are associated with setting up and implementing trades (Jenkins et al. 2004). Most biodiversity conservation services are intangible, making them difficult to package for sale, and rarely consumed by a clearly identifiable clientele. Threshold effects in the service supply make it difficult to portion out services to individual buyers. Examples are the forests that fall below a certain size. Such forests will likely fail to deliver the biodiversity resources demanded from it (Grieg-Gran and Bann 2003).

Research Gaps The country papers in this book reveal the paucity of data on the link of climate change and biodiversity resources in Southeast Asia. Clearly, major gaps in knowledge remain. There is still lack of information on national to sub-national climate scenarios which are considered the starting point of impact assessments. Most of the predicted climate change impacts are thus generic and taken from studies in other countries. A major research effort is needed to fill this gap. Furthermore, “…the limited ability of current climate models to predict inter-annual (and inter-decadal) variability in rainfall patterns, and the lack of information on current species environment relationships, makes it difficult to predict impacts of climate change on forests biodiversity… (Corlett 2003).”

CONCLUSIONS Southeast Asia is an important locus of global biodiversity. The biodiversity resources in this region are facing severe pressures that are approaching an ecological crisis. Climate change adds additional stress to the already fragile ecosystems. This stress is expected to increase over time. Most vulnerable ecosystems include coastal and marine ecosystems and forest ecosystems. Most countries still lack

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


adaptation strategies. For those who have, the strategies are very generic which constrain implementation. Natural ecosystems in the region can play a role in climate change mitigation. This is increasingly being explored especially in forest ecosystems. Major research gaps remain and these gaps must be addressed soon.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author would like to acknowledge Ms. Rizza Karen Veridiano for her assistance in the preparation of this paper.

REFERENCES Corlett, Richard Tahomas. 2003. “Climate change and biodiversity in tropical East Asian forests.” In Global Climate Change and Biodiversity edited by Rhys E. Green, Mike Harley, Lera Miles, Jörn Scharlemann, Andrew Watkinson and Olly Watts. pp 9-10. UK: University of East Anglia, Norwich. Cruz, R., H. Harasawa, M. Lal, S. Wu, Y. Anokhin, B. Punsalmaa, Y. Honda, M. Jafari, C. Li and N. Huu Ninh. 2007. “Asia. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” edited by M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson. pp 469-506. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Denman, K.L., G. Brasseur, A. Chidthaisong, P. Ciais, P.M. Cox, R.E. Dickinson, D. Hauglustaine, C. Heinze, E. Holland, D. Jacob, U. Lohmann, S Ramachandran, P.L. da Silva Dias, S.C. Wofsy and X. Zhang.2007. “Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry.” In Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change edited by Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and USA: New York, NY.


Rodel D. Lasco

Fischlin, A., G.F. Midgley, J.T. Price, R. Leemans, B. Gopal, C. Turley, M.D.A. Rounsevell, O.P. Dube, J. Tarazona, A.A. Velichko. 2007. “Ecosystems, their properties, goods, and services.” In Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change edited by M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson. pp 211-272. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Grieg-Gran, Maryanne and Camille Bann. 2003. “A closer look at payments and markets for environmental services.” In From Goodwill to Payments for Environmental Services, a survey of financing options for sustainable natural resource management in developing countries edited by Pablo Gutman. Switzerland: WWF Macroeconomics for Sustainable Development Programme Office. Gopal, Brij. 2003: “Future of wetlands in Asia. Abstract” In 5th International Conference on Environmental Future, Zürich. abstracts/Gopal.pdf. Hoegh-Guldberg, O., P.J. Mumby, A.J. Hooten, R.S. Steneck, P. Greenfield, E. Gomez, C.D. Harvell, P.F. Sale, A.J. Edwards, K. Caldeira, N. Knowlton, C.M. Eakin, R. Iglesias-Prieto, N. Muthiga, R.H. Bardbury, A. Dubi, and M.E. Hatziolos. 2007. “Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean acidification.” Science. 318:1737-1742. Gitay, Habiba, Suarez, Avelino, Watson, Robert and David Jon Dokken. 2002. “Climate Change and Biodiversity.” Geneva: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001.”Summary For Policymakers Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation, And Vulnerability.” Geneva: IPCC. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1992: “Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report to the IPCC Scientific Assessment.” Edited by J.T. Houghton, B.A. Callander and S.K. Varney. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Ishigami, Yasuhiro, Shimizu Yo and Omasa Kenji. 2003. “Projection of climatic change effects on potential natural vegetation distribution in Japan.” Journal of Agricultural Meteorology, 59, 269-276.

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


Shigami, Yasuhiro, Shimizu Yo and Omasa Kenji. 2005. “Evaluation of the risk to natural vegetation from climate change in Japan.” Journal of Agricultural Meteorology, 61, 69-75. IUCN (The World Conservation Union), 2003a: “Indus Delta, Pakistan: economic costs of reduction in freshwater flows.” Case Studies in Wetland Valuation No. 5, Pakistan Country Office, Karachi, 6 pp. (Accessed 24 January 2007). Jenkins, Michael, Sara Scherr and Mira Inbar. 2004. “Markets for biodiversity services: potential roles and challenges.” Environment, 46 (4) pp 32-42. Kanninen, Markku, Daniel Murdiyarso, Frances Seymour, Arild Angelsen, Sven Wunder, and Laura German. 2007. “Do trees grow on money? The implications of deforestation research for policies to promote REDD.” Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Bogor. Kleypas, Joan, Robert Buddemeier, David Archer, Jean-Pierre Gattuso, Chris Langdon, and Bradley Opdyke. 1999: “Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs.” Science, 284, 118120. Lasco, Rodel, Florencia Pulhin, and Renezita Sales. 2007. “Analysis of leakage in carbon sequestration projects in forestry: a case study of upper Magat watershed, Philippines.” Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 12: 1189-1211. Lasco, Rodel, Rex Victor Cruz, John Pulhin, and Florencia Pulhin. 2007. “Spillovers and Trade-offs of Adaptation in the Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed of the Philippines.” In Climate Change and Adaptation edited by Neil Leary, James Adejuwon, Vicente Barros, Ian Burton, Jyoti Kulkarni and R Lasco. London: Earthscan. Lasco, Rodel and Florencia Pulhin. 2006. “Assessing the role of watershed areas in mitigating climate change in the Philippines: the case of La Mesa watershed.” Journal of Environmental Science and Management 9:19-29. Lasco, Rodel and Florencia Pulhin. 2003. “Philippine forest ecosystems and climate change: Carbon stocks, rate of sequestration and the Kyoto Protocol.” Annals of Tropical Research. 25(2), 37-51. Malcolm, Jay, Canran Liu, Ronald Neilson, Lara Hansen and Lee Hannah. 2006: “Global warming and extinctions of endemic species from biodiversity hotspots.” Conservation Biology, 20, 538–548.


Rodel D. Lasco

McCarthy, James, Osvaldo Canziani, Neil Leary, David Dokken, and Kasey White. 2001. “Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Assessment and Vulnerability. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group II.” United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. “Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis”. Washington, DC: Island Press. Murdiyarso, Daniel. 1996. “Inventory of Asian greenhouse gas emissions and sinks in 1990.” In Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories, edited by Braatz et al., pp. 147-160. Dordrecht.: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Nabuurs, G.J., O. Masera, K. Andrasko, P. Benitez-Ponce, R. Boer, M. Dutschke, E. Elsiddig, J. Ford-Robertson, P. Frumhoff, T. Karjalainen, O. Krankina, W.A. Kurz, M. Matsumoto, W. Oyhantcabal, N.H. Ravindranath, M.J. Sanz Sanchez, X. Zhang. 2007. “Forestry.” In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change edited by B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer Pp 541-584. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and USA: New York, NY. Peng, Shaobing, Jianliang Huang, John Sheehy, Rebecca Laza, Romeo Visperas, Xuhua Zhong, Grace Centeno, Gurdev Khush, and Kenneth Cassman. 2004. “Rice yields decline with higher night temperature from global warming.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:9971–75. Roberts, Callum, Colin McClean, John Veron, Julie Hawkins, Gerald Allen, Don McAllister, Cristina Mittermeier, Frederick Schueler, Mark Spalding, Fred Wells, Carly Vynne, and Timothy Werner. 2002. “Marine Biodiversity Hotspots and Conservation Priorities for Tropical Reefs.” Science 295 128084. Scherr, Sara, Jeffrey Milder, and Carina Bracer. 2007. “How important will different types of compensation and reward mechanisms be in shaping poverty and ecosystem services across Africa, Asia, and Latin America over the next two decades?” ICRAF Working Paper No. 40. Kenya: World Agroforestry Centre. Sheppard, Charles. 2003. “Predicted recurrences of mass coral mortality in the Indian Ocean.” Nature, 425, 294 -297. Tapsoba, Hamado and Jeffrey Wilson. 1997. “Effects of temperature and light on germination of urediniospores of the pearl millet rust pathogen, Puccinia substriata var. indica.” Plant Diseases. 81:1049–52.

Issues on Climate Change and Biodiversity in Southeast Asia


Taylor, David, P. Saksena, Peta Sanderson and K. Kucera. 1999. “Environmental change and rain forests on the Sunda shelf of Southeast Asia: drought, fire and the biological cooling of biodiversity hotspots.” Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 1159-1177. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). 2007. “Climate Change: Impacts, Vulnerabilities And Adaptation In Developing Countries.” Germany: UNFCC, Bonn. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2002. “Global Environment Outlook 3.” London: Earthscan. Watson, Robert, Marufu Zinyowera and Richard Moss. 1998. “The Regional Impacts of Climate Change: An Assessment of Vulnerability.” Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group II. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Waugh, M, Daniel Kim, D. Ferrin, and Michael Stanghellini. 2003. “Reproductive potential of Monosporascus cannonballus.” Plant Diseases. 87:45–50. Wilkinson, Clive, Ed..2004.”Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2004, Volume 1.” Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. Wunder, Sven. 2005. “Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts.” CIFOR Occasional Paper No. 42. Indonesia: Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta. Yoshio, Masanobu and Minoru Ishii. 2001. “Relationship between cold hardiness and northward invasion in the great mormon butterfly, Papilio memnon L. (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in Japan.” Applied Entomolology and Zoology, 36, 329-335.


Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia: Reflections on Water Resources and Livelihoods Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

The mountainous area, which includes Southwest China (Yunnan Province, part of Sichuan and eastern Tibetan Plateau), together with Northern Mainland Southeast Asia, is the source of headwaters and major tributaries leading into seven major rivers that drain into an area of nearly 4 M km2. These water resources have impacts on the lives of more than 696 M people (Table 3.1). The Asia-Pacific plate meets the Indo-European plate to form the Himalayan range and a number of smaller ranges. They run almost parallel with each other from Northern Yunnan through the Southern portion of the province and into the neighbouring countries to the south. The headwaters of the Yangtze, Salween, Table 3.1 Major rivers of the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia River

Basin Area (km2)

Percentage of Glacier Melt in River Flow

Population Density

Population (million)

Water Availability (m3/person/year)












8,934 23,796





























Chao Phraya


~4 million

(Source: Water Resources e-Atlas (WRI, UNEP, IWMI, IUCN), Xu et al., 2008)



Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

Irrawaddy, Mekong, Red, Chao Phraya and Pearl Rivers are located within this montane region. Except for the Yangtze River, which flows through Central China, the other rivers flow through Myanmar, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam (Figure 3.1). This region can be further divided into an alpine zone (above 3,000 m asl), a montane zone (between 300-3,000 m asl), and a lowland zone (less than 300 m asl). The term ‘Montane Mainland Southeast Asia (MMSEA)’ is used loosely to describe the areas in the montane and alpine zones (Thomas et al. 2008). Moreover, the alpine zone, which is dominated by the high altitude Tibetan Plateau, is referred to as the ‘Water Tower of Asia’ (Xu et al. 2008). The montane zone, meanwhile, has been called the ‘Roof of Southeast Asia’ (Thomas et al. 2008). Like other mountain areas the world over, the MMSEA region is particularly vulnerable to global warming. MMSEA has high plateau and mountainous areas that demonstrate a number of noticeable impacts related to global climate change. The most widely reported of these impacts include the rapid reduction in many glaciers in high altitudes, too much water during monsoons, and too little water in mountain watersheds during the dry season (Ma et al. 2008). These conditions clearly have implications on downstream water resources (Nogues-Bravo et al. 2007). Moreover, the mountains in the region have a history of disasters. Climate change can alter the frequencies, distribution, mix, and magnitudes of these disasters - both favourably and adversely. During the past half century, the Yangtze, Red, Mekong, and Chao Phraya Rivers have flooded at an increasing rate (Jacobs 1996; Zhu et al. 2003), causing some of the worst devastation recorded in history. Despite such evidences, high uncertainty exists on the rates, magnitudes, the direction of changes, and the results they bring in terms of changes in precipitation, and impacts on runoff and water availability. At present, very little is known on the dynamics of mountain topographyclimates and hydrological processes, and their response to changing climatic inputs. Water, both too little and too much, can be a good indicator as a reflection of climate change in the mountain region.

MOUNTAIN CLIMATE AND WATER In the mountains, climatic conditions vary more sharply with elevation than with latitude. Mean temperatures, for example, decline about 1 oC per 160 m of elevation, compared with 1oC per 150 km by latitude. Hence, the effects of climate change

Figure 3.1 Altitude zones of major rivers in Montane Mainland Southeast Asia (MMSEA) ( Thomas et al. 2008)

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia 33


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

are expected to intensify in mountain areas. These areas are expected to be uniquely placed to serve as areas for detection of climate change and related impacts (Beniston 2003). Mountainous areas display great climatic variability. Mountains act as barrier to atmospheric circulation for both the summer monsoon and the winter westerlies. The summer monsoon dominates the climate during a six-month period (May-October) in the MMSEA region. Monsoon rainfall is mainly of an orographic nature, resulting in distinct variations in rainfall with elevation, as well as distinct differences between the southern rim of the Himalayas and the rain-shadowed areas of the Tibetan Plateau behind the main mountain range (Mei’e 1985). On the meso-scale, the impacts of climate change are mainly due to local topographic characteristics (Chalise and Khanal 2001), with dry inner valleys resulting from to the lee effect (i.e., more rain on the windward side than on the sheltered side of a mountain). Likewise, the valley bottoms of the deep inner valleys in high mountain areas receive much less rainfall than the adjacent mountain slopes. This situation suggests that currently measured rainfall, which is mainly based on measurements of the valley bottoms, is not representative of these areas. Major underestimates thus result from the use of these data. Temperature decreases, with elevation at a rate of about 0.6 oC per 100 m, and wide ranges of temperatures, are found over short distances. Local temperatures also correspond to season, aspect, and slope. Temperature regimes vary from the tropical region– with average annual temperatures of more than 24°C in eastern Myanmar – to the alpine region in the areas of the Tibetan Plateau and high mountain peaks, where annual average temperatures are below 3 °C (Wyss 1993). Climate controls river flow and glacier mass balance in the alpine region. A substantial proportion of the annual precipitation falls as snow, particularly on the high altitude Tibetan Plateau (above 3000 m). Ice and glaciers cover about 17 per cent of these high altitude areas and provide important short- and long-term water storage facilities. The Tibetan Plateau has the highest glaciated areas outside the polar region, although there is still lack of accurate and detailed data (Owen et al. 2002, Dyurgerov and Meier 2005). Water from both permanent snow and ice, and from seasonal snow-pack is released by melting. They are stored in high altitude wetlands and lakes. This event gives a distinct seasonal rhythm to the annual stream flow regimes in rivers. Contribution of snow and glacial melt to average flows of major rivers in the region ranges from 6.6 per cent, for the Mekong, and 8.8 per cent, for the Salween, to 18.5 per cent, for the Yangtze (Xu et al. 2008).

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


Glacial melt provides the principal water source of dry season water for 25 per cent of the population who are living in western China (Xu 2008).

PRESENT AND PROJECTED EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE Climate change is currently taking place at an unprecedented rate. It is projected to compound the pressures on mountain ecosystems and societies that are already associated with rapid urbanisation, industrialisation, expanding infrastructure, and economic development. It will have potentially profound and widespread effects on the availability of and access to water resources. By 2050, access to freshwater in Southeast Asia, particularly in large basins, is projected to decrease. Coastal areas, especially heavily populated mega-delta regions in South, East, and Southeast Asia, such as the Yangtze Delta and Pearl River Delta in China, and the Mekong Delta and Irrawaddy Delta in Southeast Asia, will be at their greatest risk of being flooded due to increased tropical cyclones, and overflows from rivers originating in the mountain watersheds (Norad 2007).

Rising Temperatures IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (2007) concludes that there is a more than 90 per cent chance that observed warming since the 1950s is due to the emission of GHGs from human activities. Temperature projections for the 21st century suggest a significant acceleration of warming over those observed in the 20th century (Ruosteenoja et al. 2003). In Asia, it is very likely that all areas will get warmer during this century. Recent modeling experiments suggest that warming will be significant in the mountains and highlands of Asia, including the Tibetan Plateau, which has shown consistent trends in overall warming during the past 100 years (Gao et al. 2003; Yao et al. 2006). A noticeable monotonic trend has occurred in the annual temperature pattern in the past four decades (1965-2006). The mountain region also experienced a significant temperature regime shift in 1986. The mean annual temperature increased from 15.5°C to 16.4°C in the Yunnan Province of Southwest China (Ma et al. 2008). This temperature increase also occurred in the mountain ranges of Western Europe (Lenoir et al. 2008).


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

Various studies suggest that warming in the Tibetan Plateau has been much greater than the global average level (IPCC 2007a; Du et al. 2004). Warming in Nepal, for example, was 0.6°C per decade, between 1977 and 2000 (Shrestha et al. 1999). Warming in the mountain regions has been progressively greater with increasing elevation (Table 3.2). An analysis on the observed grid data (New et al. 2001) suggests that progressively higher warming in higher altitudes is a phenomenon prevalent over the Asian highlands. Shi (2001) analysed the data of 97 meteorological stations that are located in the Tibetan Plateau between 1955 and 1996. He found an average decadal rise in temperature of 0.16 o C per decade. This is much higher than the rate of increase for the northern hemisphere as a whole, which increased by a total of 0.4 o C between the 1960s and 1980s. The rate of increase in winter temperatures on the Tibetan Plateau (0.32-0.33o C/decade), which is mainly due to increases in average minimum temperatures, has greatly contributed to the increase in the average annual temperatures (Shi 2001; Niu et al. 2005). Summer temperatures have changed to a lesser degree. On the average, winters in the 1990s were 1.5 o C warmer than in the 1960s, while summer temperatures have only increased by 1.1 o C over the last 40 years (Li 2005). Furthermore, there is also a tendency for the warming trend to increase with elevation on the Tibetan Plateau and its surrounding areas. This trend suggests that the Tibetan Plateau is one of the most sensitive areas in terms of response to global climate change (Liu and Chen 2000). With rising temperatures, the shrinking of glaciers in mountainous areas is likewise accelerating (Liu et al. 2006). To date, China’s glaciers have shrunk 5.5 per cent since the 1960s (Li et al. 2008). In many areas, a greater proportion of total precipitation appears to be falling as rain as compared to previous periods. As a result, the melting of snow begins earlier and the winter is becoming shorter. These changes affect river regimes, natural hazards, water supplies, and people’s livelihoods and infrastructure. The extent and health of high altitude wetlands, green water flows from terrestrial ecosystems, reservoirs, water flow, and sediment transport along rivers and in lakes, are likewise affected. The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) of IPCC (2007a) predicted that the area-averaged annual mean warming would be about 3 ºC in the 2050s, and about 5 ºC in the 2080s over the land regions of Asia. The area-averaged annual mean warming of the Tibetan Plateau, meanwhile, will rise even more (Rupa Kumar et al. 2006) (Table 3.2).


Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia

Table 3.2 Average annual incr ease in temperatur e (units/decade) at differ ent altitudes in the T ibetan Plateau and surr ounding areas, 1961-1990 Altitude (m)

No. of Stations





Annual Average








(Source: Liu and Hou, 1998)

Nogues-Bravo et al. (2007) described the two most divergent scenarios - that of a fossil-fuel incentive world of rapid economic growth combined with the introduction of efficient technologies (A1FI), and an alternative scenario with rapid changes in economic structures but with clean technologies (B1) introduced. In the two scenarios, the region will see a large increase in average temperatures by 2055 - +5.0ºC (+0.62ºC/per decade) for A1FI and +3.6ºC (+0.45ºC/per decade) for B1. These scenarios predict an increase of +8.4ºC (+0.76ºC/per decade) for A1F1 and +4.8ºC for B1 (+0.43ºC/per decade) by 2085 in highland Asia. However, because of the extreme topography and complex reactions of the region to the greenhouse effect, even high-resolution climatic models cannot give specific projections of climate change in the high altitude areas.

Precipitation Trends Long-term paleo-climatic precipitation records provide a useful perspective on present-day conditions and variability. Ice-core studies on the Tibetan Plateau indicate that both wet and dry periods have occurred since AD 960 (Tan et al. 2008) and AD 1600 (Yao et al. 2008). In more recent centuries, the records show weakening monsoons during the 18th century, and then strengthening monsoons between the 19th- to the early 20th century. This was followed again


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

by weakening monsoons from the early 1920s to the present (Duan and Yao 2004). During the last few decades, inter-seasonal, inter-annual and spatial variability in rainfall trends were observed all across Asia. In the mountainous regions, both increasing and decreasing trends have been detected. The increasing trends were found in the Tibetan Plateau’s northeast region (Zhao et al. 2004) and its eastern and central parts (Xu and Liul 2007). Ma et al. (2008b) found that the monthly rainfall in the mountainous region of Yunnan increased by 54.9 per cent and 43.1 per cent in September and May, respectively. Monthly rainfall decreased by 27.6 per cent and 14.4 per cent in June and July, respectively. The increase in rainfall in May indicated the earlier onset of the monsoon season, and the change in monthly rainfall from May to September indicated the variability of the monsoons. Despite these results, there is still a major need for more research on precipitation and hydrological processes in the mountainous region as most studies have excluded this area due to its extreme and complex topography, and lack of adequate rain-gauge data (Shrestha 2000).

Impacts on Water Resources Glacial Retreats in Water Tower: Glaciers in the highlands of Asia store about 12,000 km3 of freshwater. This is the largest body of ice outside the polar caps and the source of water for numerous rivers that flow across Asia (Dyurgerov and Meier 2005). Glaciers, as a source of water, have immediate impacts on human settlements in the mountains and surrounding lowlands. People rely on fresh water for domestic purposes, irrigation, hydropower, and industrial use, as well as environmental flow and other ecosystem functions. Glaciers, together with high altitude wetlands and lakes, are considered ‘water towers.’ They are also considered as good indicators of climate change as they have impacts on sea levels (Meier 1984). It has been estimated that about 30 per cent of water resources in the eastern Himalayas are derived from the melting of snow and ice. As a result of global warming, significant quantities of water are being released from longterm storage as glacier ice. In the short term, this situation may result to an increase in water supply, i.e. higher water levels in high altitude lakes and increased stream flows. But in the long term, as glaciers disappear, the water supply from the melting of glaciers likewise decline.

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


Water is necessary for all life forms, but it also can be dangerous and destructive (Weingartner et al. 2003). In the last half century, 82 per cent of the glaciers in western China have retreated (Liu et al. 2006). On the Tibetan Plateau, the glacial area has decreased by 4.5 per cent over the last 20 years, and by 7 per cent over the last 40 years (China National Report on Climate Change or CNRCC 2007). The length of the glaciers in the Tibetan Plateau is shorter than 4 km. They are projected to disappear with a 3 ºC rise in temperature without changes in precipitation. If current warming rates are maintained, the glaciers that are located over the Tibetan Plateau are likely to shrink at very rapid rates - from 500,000 km2 in 1995 to 100,000 km2 by the 2030s (IPCC 2007b). Hence, it may be concluded that with a 2 ºC increase in temperature by 2050, 35 per cent of the glaciers today will disappear. With this disappearance is the increase in runoff which will reach its peak between 2030 and 2050 (Qin 2002). Research results in the Tibetan Plateau and the Himalayan Mountains suggest that glacier retreat is due to the precipitation decrease combined with temperature increase. This would shrink the glaciers in this region, thereby speeding up climatic warming and drying (Ren et al. 2003). In addition, most scenarios suggest that water scarcity will turn into catastrophic proportions by the 2050s as a result of population growth, climatic change, and the increase of water consumption (Oki 2003).

Increasing Runoff in Mountain Watersheds: With mountain regions providing more than 50 per cent of global river runoff, and with more than onesixth of the Earth’s population relying on glaciers and seasonal snow packs for their water supply, the effects of climatic change is of tremendous importance to the densely populated lowland regions that depend on mountain watersheds for their domestic, agricultural, and industrial needs (Barnett et al. 2005; Graham et al. 2007). Processes that determine the conversion of precipitation into runoff and downstream flows are many and complex. Changes in precipitation type (rain, snow) and its amount, intensity, and distribution over time and space, have direct impacts on total and peak river runoff, potentially moving it away from agricultural and dry season demands and towards monsoon flash floods. Evapotranspiration rates, linked to temperature, have an effect on the amount of water available for runoff.


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

Two of the main concerns of climate change in MMSEA, however, are glacier retreat at high altitudes, and too much or too little water in upland or mountain watersheds. Both these concerns cause water variability downstream. The resulting effects, particularly those on food production and economic growth, are likely to be unfavorable. The situation in the region may appear to remain normal for several decades to come. It may even bring increased water availability to satisfy the demands of the dry season. However, water shortage can occur abruptly. Water systems can go from being plentiful to scarce in a few decades or less. If the warming trend continues, some of the most populated areas in the world may experience water shortage which may continue for several more decades (Barnet et al 2005).

Water-Related Hazards: The intense seasonal precipitation during the monsoon season in Asia can trigger hazardous events in the different elevation zones. While snow avalanches and glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) predominate at very high elevations (>3500 m), landslides, debris flows, and flash floods are common in the mid-elevation mountains (500-3500 m). Floods are the principal hazards in the lower valleys and plains. Flooding may also become a major development issue. It is projected that more variable and increasingly direct rainfall-runoff will lead to more downstream flooding. Floods are likely to occur downstream in the Mekong Basin. Perhaps most seriously, climate change also involves changes in the frequency and magnitude of extreme weather events. There is widespread consensus that global warming is associated with these extreme fluctuations, particularly in combination with intensified monsoon circulations. Although many other factors are involved, the growing incidence and toll of related natural disasters, such as floods and drought, is of particular concern. Yet the lack of high frequency observed data and poorly coordinated data exchange prevent the comprehensive assessment of changes in extreme climatic events in MMSEA. Available studies, however, suggest indications of changes in climatic pattern and increases in extreme events. An increase in the frequency of high-intensity rainfall is observed in Yunnan (Ma et al. 2008), and high-intensity events can lead to flash floods and landslides. Monsoons in Asia are related to large-scale climatological

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


phenomena, such as El Niño and La Niña, which leads to less and higher than average monsoon and precipitation, respectively (Dhar and Nandargi 2003). El Niño and La Niña are in turn influenced by climate change. The magnitude of deviations in monsoon precipitation is likely to increase, resulting in the increased occurrence of droughts and floods. The shift from a snowdominated to a rain-dominated precipitation regime is a commonly perceived phenomenon in the high mountains. In the eastern Tibetan Plateau, the melting glaciers that are associated with climate change, particularly atmospheric warming, has led to the formation of glacial lakes in open areas behind exposed end moraines. These changes are causing great concern because many of these high-altitude lakes are potentially dangerous. Moraine dams are comparatively weak and can suddenly break, leading to the sudden discharge of huge volumes of water and debris. Resulting GLOFs can cause catastrophic flooding downstream, with serious damage to life, property, forests, farms, and infrastructure. The mountain ranges in the region have a history of disasters that are triggered by some or all of the cryogenic processes discussed above. Climate change can alter their frequencies, distribution, mix, and magnitudes – both favourably and adversely. Due to the limited investigation into these processes and their relationship to climate, our understanding of how climate change can affect them, at different sub-regions, is still limited. Thus, there should be caution in making predictions, especially alarming ones. However, there is a need to emphasise that there is still cause for concern. Valuable infrastructure, such as hydropower plants, roads, bridges, and communication systems, are increasingly at risk from climate change. The entire hydropower generation systems, established on many rivers, are in jeopardy if landslides and flash floods increase and if there is a decrease in the already low water flows during the dry season. Mountain engineers have to consider how to respond to extreme events in the mountain context (OECD 2003).

Impacts on Mountain Biodiversity Global climate change impacts could be tracked by biological indicators such as phenology (Menzel et al., 2006) and distribution of species (Lenoir et al. 2008). There is an evident sign of advanced unfolding, blossoming, and ripening


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

of the leaves and fruits of wild plants; and of the hibernation, migration, and breeding of wildlife in mountain regions. Throughout China, the phenology of events has become two to four days earlier than in the 1980s (Zheng et al. 2002). Previous synchronous relationships between predators and prey, as well as those between insects and plants, are breaking down, creating negative consequences for both the individual species and their ecosystems (Parmesan 2006). As temperatures rise and glaciers retreat, the species shift their ranges to follow their principal habitats and climatic optima. There is strong evidence that forest plant species, and many vertebrate and invertebrate species, have already followed the pace of climate change by shifting their distributions to higher altitude. This is a significant upward shift in tree line at a rate of 5-10 m per decade (Baker and Moseley 2007), and in species optimum elevation that averages at 29 m per decade (Lenoir et al. 2008) in alpine ecosystems. Within a species, there may be significant variations in climate tolerance among individuals. This variation can result in the evolution of new phenotypes, and even in the formation of novel species’ associations and other ecological surprises. The disappearance of some extant climates increases the risk of extinction for species with narrow geographic or climatic distributions, and the disruption of existing communities. Most endemic plant species are unable to respond successfully as the rate of climate change increases (McCarty 2001). The resultant invasions of weedy and exotic species from lower elevations also bring accompanying problems. There is increasing concern on the possibility of alterations in the overall albedo, water balance, and surface energy balance in high-altitude grasslands with increasing degradation and desertification in the arid areas. Evidences of the effects of climate change on the grasslands have been documented from the northeast Tibetan Plateau where the Kobresia sedge and alpine turf communities are changing to semi-arid alpine steppe (Ma and Wang 1999; Miller 2000). The location and areas of natural vegetation zones on the Tibetan Plateau would substantially change under projected climate change scenarios. The areas of temperate grassland and cold temperate coniferous forests could expand, while temperate desert and ice-edge deserts may shrink. The vertical distribution of vegetation zone can move to higher altitudes. Climate change may result in boundary shifts of the farming-pastoral transition region to the south in Northeast China. This shift can increase the scope of grassland areas

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


and provide more favourable conditions for livestock production. However, the transition area of the farming-pastoral region is also the area of potential desertification. Hence, desertification may still occur if protection measures are not taken in the new transition area (Li and Zhou 2001; Qiu et al. 2001). More frequent and prolonged droughts, as a consequence of climate change combined with other anthropogenic factors, would result in the increasing trends of desertification in Asia.

LIVELIHOODS, VULNERABILITY, AND ADAPTATION Water provides life and supports livelihoods. However, water also causes disasters, such as flash floods and landslides, in the mountainous region. Vulnerability is defined as the “degree to which individuals and systems are susceptible to or unable to cope with the adverse effects of climate change” (Smit and Pilifosova 2001). The future potential impacts are either avoidable or unavoidable. Adaptation to climate change is about water. Effective adaptation in the water sector includes both the establishment of effective institutional arrangements and the implementation of adaptive capacity – awareness, governance, and knowledge about water resources from the local to the river basin levels. Adaptation involves the change of behaviour, practices, and livelihoods, according to new conditions (Mirza 2007), including too much and too little water. In practice, adaptation includes a multitude of options that are associated with different scales, contexts, and approaches. Thus, there may be options at the local or regional scales that are influenced by different contexts. These various influences include the new rural farming practices or urban water demand management, and the focus of different initiatives to address poverty alleviation, enhance transparency in decision making, or empower women. In order to reduce the negative effects of climate change, society must adapt and structural inequalities must be addressed. It is important to note, however, that the poor and marginalized communities already face most of the difficulties that are usually associated with climate change. This is nothing new to these communities. Examples include poor health, susceptibility to floods and landslides, and a lack of adequate shelter, food, and water. It is not enough to focus only on approaches, such as flood-safe housing or new types


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

of pest-resistant crops. The focus must also include enhanced capacity to adapt, thereby implying a more comprehensive approach. Thus,… “an adaptation strategy to reduce [the] vulnerability [of communities] to future climate change [impacts] needs to be incorporated into regulatory procedures, integrated natural resources management, and other development planning procedures” (UNDP-GEF 2007). Considering that poverty is still widespread in the mountainous regions, the empowerment of poor people to adapt to climate change is critical. Examples of adaptation at different levels may include good water governance, and the mainstreaming of climate change into development and institutional reforms (Mirza 2007), general political reforms, associated openness (ibid), health education programmes (WHO 2001), participatory watershed and sub-basin management organizations, and the development of early warning systems for floods and droughts. Impacts of climate change on mountain ecosystems are not understood sufficiently to estimate the full scale of downstream impacts from reduced snow and ice coverage, runoff, and river flow fluctuations. While in-depth studies of glaciers, snow pack, and permafrost have been conducted in some highland areas, they have been scattered widely in space and time. Few detailed investigations of snow and ice response to climate warming have taken place in most portions of the highlands of Asia. There are also insufficient studies of mountain watershed dynamics, especially the hydrological responses, to increase human activities as well as responses to climate changes. There is still lack of baseline studies for most areas There have been very few initiatives on the longterm monitoring of climatic variables, runoff, and hydrology, in the context of the extraordinary heterogeneity of mountain topography (Liu and Chen 2000; Rees and Collins 2006; Messerli et al. 2004). In addition, the one common feature that all mountainous areas share - which is a complexity that result from topography – causes variabilities, especially in temperature and precipitation, over very short distances (Becker and Bugmann 1997). These variabilities make projections difficult. Most models and predictions for high-altitude areas are dependent upon extrapolation from climate and stream-gauging stations at comparatively low altitudes. They are also based on assumptions based on other extrapolation

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


of the better-studied parts of the world (Rees and Collins 2004), which might not be suitable for the mountain regions in Asia. The importance of the most widespread cryogenic processes – avalanches, debris flows, rock glaciers, alpine permafrost, and surging glaciers – has been recognized, and their incidences have been recorded for certain areas. Yet, there are almost no basic scientific investigations of these cryogenic processes that have taken place in the region, despite the region’s involvement in significant hazards — the patterns and intensities of which are affected by climate fluctuations that may increase or decrease risks in given areas. Few model simulations have attempted to address the issues that are related to future climatic change in mountainous regions. This situation is primarily due to the current spatial resolution of the used models. They are too crude to adequately represent the topographic and land-use details (Beniston et al. 2003). Thus, the immense diversity of cascade effects, which are found within the region, should be recognised. These effects include the diversity of climates and topo-climates, hydrology and ecology, and, above all, human cultures and activities. Before effective responses can be made, much work has to be conducted to identify and predict the possible cascade effects of climate change across different systems, from glaciers to water resources, from biodiversity to food production, from natural hazards to human health, and all those that are filtered through such diverse contexts. In particular, there has thus far been little engagement with local populations to learn from their knowledge and experience in adapting to unique and changing environments and to address their concerns and needs (Xu and Rana 2005). Most importantly, the downstream effects of changing water flow regime in the large Southeast Asian rivers are to a great extent still unknown. It is likely that these changes would have major, but today, largely unknown impacts on downstream societies. Impacts on water resources would differ depending on the importance or influence of different sectors and interest groups, such as tourism, irrigated agriculture, industry and resource extraction, as well as ecosystem conservation or mitigation measures that reduce water-induced hazards. There are also substantial variations within and among these sectors and interest groups in different countries and valleys. Glaciation in low latitudes has the potential to play an important role in the global radiation budget. A positive climatic feedback mechanism for highland glaciation indicates that a higher glacier-free or high albedo surface


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

has a cooling effect over the Tibetan Plateau, and a warming effect over the Persian Gulf and the Arabian peninsula (Bush 2000). Mountainous regions are also important carbon sinks, particularly due to the carbon storage of soils in grasslands, wetlands, and forest lands. Wang et al. (2002) estimates that the organic carbon content of soils subtending grasslands on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau total to 33.5 Pg. This figure represents almost a quarter of China’s total organic soil carbon and 2.5 per cent of the global pool of soil carbon. Climatic variables influence soil carbon stocks through their effects on vegetation, and their influence on the rates of decomposition of soil organic matter. In grassland ecosystems, the net ecosystem productivity, in terms of the amount of carbon sequestered, is very small as compared to the size of fluxes. Hence, there is a great potential for changes that affect these fluxes to change the overall net flow of carbon. Grasslands may thus shift from being a CO2 sink to a CO2 source (Jones and Donnely 2004). This situation thereby contributes to further global warming.

CONCLUSIONS As one of the most economically dynamic regions in the world, the GMS is vulnerable to global warming and increased human activities. Uncertainties about the rate and magnitude of climate change and their potential impacts prevail. Yet, there is no question as to the influence of climate change in gradually and powerfully altering the ecological and socioeconomic landscape in the region, and particularly in relation to water. It is thus imperative to revisit and redesign the research agenda, development policies, management and conservation practices, and appropriate technologies. Given the level of uncertainty in scientific knowledge, the policies need to be ‘adaptation friendly.’ The mitigation of carbon emissions should be a responsibility that is shared among citizens and the private sector in the mountains as elsewhere. Adaptation and mitigation measures, that are intended to cope with climate change, can create opportunities, as well as offset the dangers of a warming planet. But these measures must be identified and adopted ahead of, rather than in reaction to, the dangerous trends. Climate change is not new for mountain people. The tectonic uplift and quaternary climate changes, including recovery from the last major glacial

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


period and Little Ice Age, mean that every aspect of life has been adapted to, or stressed by, changing temperature regimes, water availability, and extreme events. Mountain farmers and herders have a long history of adapting to these uncertainties, and other related and unrelated environmental changes, as well as ecological surprises. Adaptations have come through the mobility of people and land uses, as well as through the flexibility in livelihood strategies and institutional arrangements. Mountain people have lived with and survived great hazards, such as flash floods, avalanches, and droughts for millennia. Building the capacity to adapt and strengthen the socioecological systems, in the face of climate change, is doubly important, and a key step towards achieving sustainable livelihoods. Supporting and maintaining resilience, and encouraging strategies to cope with surprises and long-term changes, are the new adaptive mantras, unlike earlier notions of improving people’s adaptations in the context of relatively stable and known habitats. Climate change, as a public and global issue, has evolved from a narrow interest within the hydro-meteorological sciences to a broad recognition that both the social consequences and response policies have implications on all aspects of human development. Adaptive policies and major efforts to reverse the human drivers of climate change have to be incorporated into all sectors: land use, water management, disaster management, energy consumption, and human health. Hazard mapping can help both decision-makers and local communities improve their understanding of the current situation. Hazard mapping can thus increase the possibilities of these sectors to anticipate or assess their flexibility in adapting to future changes through proper planning and technical designs. Good science, based on credible, salient, legitimate knowledge, can often lead to good policies, in the context of climate change and mountain specificities. Credibility means that knowledge, which has been derived from field observations and tested by local communities, implies that salient information is immediately relevant and useful to policy makers. Legitimate information is unbiased in its origins and creation, and is both fair and reasonably comprehensive in its treatment of opposing views and interests. Policy is a formula that is used for the power and application of knowledge and resources to accomplish an objective. The question then is who has the power, who has the (scientific or local) knowledge, or who has both the power and the knowledge.


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

Scientific knowledge is useful, but limited and full of uncertainties at the complex regional scale. Hence, the ‘Nobody Knows Best’ becomes the model (Lebel et al. 2004). Alternative perspectives carry their own set of values and perceptions about who should be making the rules, where the best knowledge lies as guide in making decisions, and what additional knowledge is needed. Moreover, four contrasting perspectives – state, market, civil society (and the ‘greens’), and the locals – must all find a way to debate and ultimately merge together in decision-making processes. In order to help become better informed of such processes, scientists must generate new knowledge with reduced uncertainties, and facilitate dialogues among stakeholders with balanced perspectives. In such processes, international cooperation is essential in transferring the technology from the global level and outside sources to the local level. This transfer of technology helps build regional cooperation in climate change mitigation and adaptation.

REFERENCES Baker, B.B., R. K. Moseley. (2007) Advancing Treeline and Retreating Glaciers: Implications for Conservation in Yunnan, P.R. China. In Artic, Antarctic and Alpine Research, 39 (2): 200-209. Barnett, T.P., J.C. Adam, D.P. Lettenmaier. (2005) ‘Potential Impacts of a Warming Climate on Water Availability in a Snow-dominated Region.’ In Nature, 438(17): 303-309. Becker, A., H. Bugmann. (1997). Eds.: Predicting global change impacts on mountain hydrology and ecology: integrated catchment hydrology/altitudinal gradient studies. Workshop Report. IGBP Report 43. Stockholm, 61 pp. Beniston, M. (2003) ‘Climatic Change in Mountain Regions: A Review of Possible Impacts’. In Climatic Change, 59: 5-31. Bush, A.B.G. (2000) A positive climate feedback mechanism for Himalayan glaciation. Quaternary International 65-66: 3-13. Chalise, S.R., N.R. Khanal. (2001) ‘An Introduction to Climate, Hydrology and Landslide Hazards in the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Region’. In Tianchi, L.; Chalise, S.R.; Upreti, B.N. (Eds) Landslide Hazard Mitigation in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas, pp 51-62. Kathmandu: ICIMOD. Chaulagain, N.P. Impact of Climate Change on Water Resources of Nepal. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Flensburg, Flensburg, 2006.

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


CNRCC (2007) China National Report on Climate Change 2007 (in Chinese). Beijing: China National Committee on Climate Change Dhar, O.N., S. Nandargi. (2003) Hydrometeorological aspects of floods in India. Natural Hazards 28, 1-33. Du, M.Y., S. Kawashima, S. Yonemura, X.Z. Zhang, S.B. Chen. (2004) ‘Mutual Influence between Human Activities and Climate Change in the Tibetan Plateau during Recent Years’. In Global and Planetary Change, 41: 241249. Duan, K., Yao, T. (2004). Low-frequency of southern Asian monsoon variability using a 295—year record from the Dasuopu ice core in the central Himalayas. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 31. Dyurgerov, M.D., M.F. Meier. (2005) Glaciers and Changing Earth System: A 2004 Snapshot, p117. Boulder (Colorado): Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, University of Colorado. Gao, X.J., D.L. Li, Z.C. Zhao, and F. Giorgi, (2003): Climate change due to greenhouse effects in Qinghai-Xizang Plateau and along the Qianghai-Tibet Railway. Plateau Meteorol., 22(5), 458–463. Graham, L.P., S. Hagemann, S. Jaun, and M. Beniston (2007). On interpreting hydrological change from regional climate models. Clim. Change, doi:10.1007/s10584-006-9217-0. Hofer, T. and B. Messerli. (2006) Floods in Bangladesh: History, Dynamics and Rethinking the Role of the Himalayas. New York: United Nations University Press. Hu, Z., Y. Song, R. Wu. (2003) ‘Long-term Climate Variations in China and Global Warming Signals’. In Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(D19): 4614. IPPC (2001). Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). J. T. Houghton, Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P. J. van der Linden and D. Xiaosu (Eds.) IPCC (2007a). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (Eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 996 pp. IPCC (2007b). Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 976pp. IUCN; IWMI; Ramsar Convention and WRI (2003) Water Resources Atlas. Available online at, accessed on 12 June 2007. Jacobs, J.W. (1996) Adjusting to climate change in the Lower Mekong. Global environmental change 6(1):7-22. Lebel, L., A. Contreras, S. Pasong, P. Garden. (2004) ‘Nobody Knows Best: Alternative Perspectives on Forest Management and Governance in Southeast Asia’. In International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 4(2): 111-127. Lenoir, J., J.C. Gegout, P.A. Marquet, P. de Ruffray, H. Brisse. 2008. A significant upward shift in plant species optimum elevation during the 20th Century. Science 320:1768-1771. Li, X., G. Cheng, H. Jin, S. Kang, T. Che, R. Jin, L. Wu, Z. Nan. 2008. Cryospheric change in China. Global and Planetary Change 62:210-218. Liu, X., P. Hou. 1998. Qingzang Gaoyuan jiqi linjin diqu jin 30 nian qihou biannuan yu haiba gaodu de guanxi. Gaoyuan Qixiang 17(3): 245-249. Liu, S.Y., Y.J. Ding, J. Li, D.H. Shangguan, Y. Zhang. 2006. ‘Glaciers in Response to Recent Climate Warming in Western China.’ In Quaternary Sciences, 26(5): 762-771. Liu, X., B. Chen. (2000) ‘Climatic Warming in the Tibetan Plateau during Recent Decades’. In International Journal of Climatology, 20: 1729-1742. Ma, X., J.C. Xu, J. Qian. (2008a) Water resource management in a middle mountain watershed. Mountain Research and Development 28(3-4):286291. Ma, X., J.C. Xu, Y. Luo, S.P. Aggarwal, J.T. Li. (2008b) Response of hydrological processes to land cover and climate change in Kejie Watershed, Southwest China. Hydrological Process (In Press). Mei’e R., Y. Renzhang, B. Haoshend. (1985). An outline of China’s physical geography. Beijing: Foreign Language Press. Messerli, B., D. Viviroli, R. Weingartner. (2004) ‘Mountains of the World: Vulnerable Water Towers for the 21st Century’. In Ambio, 13: 29-34. Mi, D.; Z. Xie. (2002) Glacier Inventory of China. Xi’an: Xi’an Cartographic Publishing House.

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


Mirza, M. (2007). Climate change, Adaptation and Adaptative Governance in Water Sector in South Asia. Adaptation and Impacts Research Division (AIRD), Department of Physical and Environmental Sciences, University of Totonot at Scarborough, Canada. Nogues-Bravo, D., M.B. Araujo, M.P. Errea, J.P. Martinez-Rica. (2007). Exposure of global mountain systems to climate warming during the 21st Century. Global Environmental Change 17(2007):420-428. Norad. 2007. Factsheet: Climate Change 2007". Synthesis Report. The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate Change Factsheet no. 6. OECD (2003) Development and Climate Change: Focus on Water Resources and Hydropower. Paris: Organization for Co-operation and Development. Oki, T. (2003) ‘Global Water Resources Assessment under Climatic Change in 2050 using TRIP’. In Water Resources Systems—Water Availability and Global Change (Proceedings of symposium HS02a held during IUGG2003 in Sapporo, July 2003). IAHS Publ. No. 280. Fontainebleau (France): IAHS. Owen, L.A., R.C. Finkel, M.W. Caffee (2002) A note on the extent of glaciation throughout the Himalaya during the global last glacial maximum. Quaternary Science Reviews 21:147-157. Qin D.H. (2002) ‘Glacier Inventory of China (Maps)’. Xi’an: Xi’an Cartographic Publishing House. Rees, G.H; D.N. Collins. (2004) An Assessment of the Impacts of Deglaciation on the Water Resources of the Himalaya. Wallingford: Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Rees, G.H., D.N. Collins. (2006) ‘Regional Differences in Response of Flow in Glacier-fed Himalayan Rivers to Climate Warming’. In Hydrological Processes, 20: 2157-2167. Ren, J.W., D.H. Qin, S.C. Kang, S.G. Hou, J.C. Pu, Z..F. Jin (2003). Glacier variations and climate warming and drying in the central Himalayas. Chinese Science Bulletin, 48(23): 2478-2482. Ruosteenoja, K., T.R. Carter, K. Jylhä and H. Tuomenvirta, (2003: Future climate in world regions: an inter comparison of model-based projections for the new IPCC emissions scenarios. The Finnish Environment 644, Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, 83 pp. Rupa Kumar, K., A.K. Sahai, K. Krishna Kumar, S.K. Patwardhan, P.K. Mishra, J.V. Revadkar, K. Kamala, G.B. Pant. (2006) ‘High Resolution Climate


Jian Chu Xu and David Thomas

Change Scenario for India for the 21st Century’. In Current Science, 90: 334-345. Shi, Y.F., 2001. Ke yujian de Qingzang Gaoyuan huanjing da bianhua (zaiyao). Yanhu Yanjiu 9(1): 2-3. Shrestha, A.B., C.P. Wake, P.A. Mayewski, J.E. Dibb. (1999) ‘Maximum Temperature Trends in the Himalaya and Its Vicinity: An Analysis Based on Temperature Records from Nepal for the Period 1971-94’. In Journal of Climate, 12: 2775-2787. Shrestha A.B, C.P. Wake, J.E. Dibb, P.A. Mayyewski. (2000). Precipitation fluctuations in the Nepal Himalaya and its vicinity and relationship with some large-scale climatology parameters. International Journal of Climatology 20: 317–327. Thomas, D.E., B. Ekasingh, M. Ekasingh, L. Lebel, et al., (2008). Comparative assessment of resource and market access of the poor in upland zones of the Greater Mekong Region. Published by World Agroforestry Centre, ICRAF Chiang Mai. Thompson, M., G. Gyawali. (2007) ‘Introduction: Uncertainty Revisited’. In Thompson, M., Warburton, M., Hatley, T. (eds) Uncertainty on a Himalayan Scale. Kathmandu: Himal Books. UNDP-GEF (2007). Climate change impacts, Vulnerability and adaptation in Asia and the Pacific. A background note for the Training Workshop on Environmental Finance and GEF Portfolio Management 22-25 May 2007, Amari Watergate, Hotel, Bangkok, Thailand. Wang Xin, Xie Zi-chu, Feng Qing-hua, et al. (2005). Response of Glaciers to Climate Change in the Source Region of the Yangtze River. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 2005, 27(4): 498-502. Wilkes, A. (2008). Towards mainstreaming climate change in grassland management Policies and practices on the Tibetan Plateau. Working Paper no. 68. Wu, Q.B., X. Li, W.J. Li. (2001) ‘The Response Model of Permafrost along the Qinghai -Tibetan Highway under Climate Change.’ In Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 23(1): 1-6. Wyss, M. (1993). Approach to a regionalisation of the Hindu Kush-Himalayan Mountains. In Xie Z, Feng Q, Liu C. 2001. A modelling study of the variable glacier system- using southern Tibet as an example. Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology 24(1), 16-27.

Climate Change in the Montane Mainland Southeast Asia


Xu, J., G.M. Rana. (2005) ‘Living in the Mountains’. In Jeggle, T. (Ed) Know Risk, p196-199. Geneva: UN Inter-agency secretariat of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Xu Y., Z-C Zhao, D. Li. (2005). Simulations of climate change for the next 50 years over Tibetan Plateau and along the line of Qing-Zang Railway, Plateau Meteorology, 24(5).698-707. Xu, J.C. (2008) The Highlands: A Shared Water Tower in a Changing Climate and Changing Asia. Working Paper No. 67. World Agroforestry Centre. Xu, Z., T. Gong, C. Liu. (2007). Detection of decadal trends in precipitation across the Tibetan Plateau. Methodology in Hydrology (Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Methodology in Hydrology held in Nanjing, China, October–November 2005). IAHS Publ. 311, 2007. 271 276. Yao, T.D., Y.Q. Wang, S.Y. Liu, J.C. Pu, Y.P. Shen. (2004) ‘Recent Glacial Retreat in High Asia in China and Its Impact on Water Resources in Northwest China’. In Science in China Ser. D Earth Science, 47(12): 10651075. Yao, T.D., X.J. Guo, T. Lonnie, K.Q. Duan, N.L. Wang, J.C. Pu, B.Q. Xu, X.X. Yang, W.Z. Sun. (2006)’ ä18O Record and Temperature Change over the Past 100 years in Ice Cores on the Tibetan Plateau’. In Science in China: Series D Earth Science, 49(1): 1-9. Zhao, L.; C.L. Ping, D.Q. Yang, G.D. Cheng, Y.J. Ding, S.Y. Liu. (2004) ‘Change of Climate and Seasonally Frozen Ground over the Past 30 Years in QinghaiTibetan Plateau, China’. In Global and Planetary Change, 43: 19-31. Zhu, C., T. Nakazawa, J. Li, L. Chen. 2003. The 30–60 day intraseasonal oscillation over the western North Pacific Ocean and its impacts on summer flooding in China during 1998. Geophys. Res. Lett. 30 (18), 1952.

Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia



Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia Meine Van Noordwijk

AGROFORESTRY AS PART OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION/ADAPTATION NEXUS The IPCC (2007) has compiled strong scientific evidence that the global climate is changing at rates not seen in recent geological history. This change is causally linked to changes in the composition of the atmosphere. This in turn is largely caused by an increase of the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) effect due to emissions of CO2 that had been stored in the past as energy-rich organic compounds or as calcium carbonate. The CO2 are released by use of fossil fuel or cement. About 20 per cent of the increase in GHGs gasses is caused by the release of CO2 that has been stored for hundreds or thousands of years, in aboveground forest biomass or peat soils. International agreement on emission reduction is hard to reach mainly due to the large differences in per capita emissions between countries. Countries with high historical emissions do not want to accept equal per capita emission rights. While the Kyoto accord related emission reduction targets to the 1990 emission levels, a further reduction will have to provide a pathway towards globally equitable emissions, not exceeding the carrying capacity of the atmosphere and oceans. Rapid increases in the GHG effect can lead to positive feedback loops by triggering the release of CO2 and CH4 from boreal zones, reduction of uptake capacity by the oceans, and/or changes in the circulation patterns of oceans (the ‘conveyor belt’ that links all oceans) or atmosphere (‘tropics’). Indonesia will be affected by climate change, but it is also co-responsible for the change. If the recent estimates of emissions from peat soils and forest fires are correct (Figure 4.1), the per capita emissions of Indonesia are 30 per cent higher than most European countries, but still below those of the USA, the only Annex-I


Meine Van Noordwijk

country that has not ratified the Kyoto agreement. Published Ecological Footprint (EFP) data (Figure 1C; data source: World Wildlife Fund 2006) provide an indicator of the level of simplicity of the Human Development Index (HDI) or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). EFP is a resource management tool that measures how much land and water area a human population requires to produce the resources it consumes and to absorb its wastes under prevailing technology. Today, humanity’s EFP is 23 per cent higher than what the planet can regenerate. In other words, it now takes more than one year and two months for the Earth to regenerate what have been used in a single year, or by early October, the resource recovery potential for the year will be depleted. The EFP also allows assessment of the absolute sustainable carrying capacity of the Earth at current land-use practices and technology. If the sustainable footprint is shared equally among all humans, 1.8 ha is available. If 0.8 HDI is the target, there is no country at present that can meet the combined criteria. The Millennium Development Goal of sustainable development thus needs substantial change by all countries of the world. Unless we make the target of EFP < 1.8 ha plus HDI > 0.8 achievable, the end of poverty is not in sight. Further analysis of the current relationship between HDI and EFP is needed. In the new millennium, agroforestry, the deliberate use of trees in the agricultural landscape, is responding to four different ‘pull’ factors (Figure 4.2): 1. Rural poverty, the provision of local food, fiber, energy, and medicinal sources that reduce dependence on external inputs and provide a safety net; 2. Markets and its opportunities for economic growth, based on processing and sale of non-forest timber products (NTFPs) and nitrogen-fixing tree products (NFTPs) and tree crops; 3. The ecological footprint of human resource use and the potential mitigating effect of trees that provide environmental services; and 4. Governance systems that have rules for ‘forest’ and ‘agriculture,’ but not for the intermediate forms of land use, and that are in various stages of decentralisation, and increase of transparency and devolution of control over resource use.

Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia


Forest Agroforest Tree crops Agriculture

Figure 4.1a A. The forest-agroforest-tree crops-agriculture gradient plays a key role in the causation of climate change (in its expansion mode), and adaptive response and mitigation in stable mode; B. Globally, the areas with highest human sensitivity do not coincide with the areas of greatest biodiversity threat.


Meine Van Noordwijk

Figure 4.1b C. The concept of ecological footprint compares to the amount of space needed to provide all the production and environmental services needed per capita, with the amount of space available on planet Earth; data for 2003 indicate overshoot; D. The relationship between total national GHG emissions and population density show large variation in per capita emissions

Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia


Figure 4.2 Four pull forces that influence the use of resources and potential trees by rural communities in their management of the landscape

These four ‘pull forces’ on the trees, that people plant and take care of, are setting up four ‘tension’ fields (Figure 4.3): A. The opportunities of poverty reduction, via ‘trees for markets,’ versus the importance of trees for local use; B. Economic growth versus the need to maintain environmental services that do not yet have market value; C. Land-use zoning and rules for resource access, often in the name of ‘forest environmental services,’ that restrict agroforestry; and D. Capacity building of farmers and governance institutions and their access to up-to-date knowledge and skills. The main opportunities to deal with the overshoot, as indicated in Figure 4.1, lie in controlling the further increase of the global population (primarily through an increase in HDI, as schooling of women is a major determinant), reducing the per capita consumption patterns (which tend to increase with HDI), and by primarily reducing the footprint intensity of consumption, while increasing the overall bioproductivity of the land (and countering existing trends of land degradation). A major opportunity that may be missed in current footprint calculations is that of the ‘multifunctionality’ of the land. A hectare of land can contribute to more than one of the consumption patterns.


Meine Van Noordwijk

Figure 4.3 Four ‘tension fields’ between the four ‘pull forces’ that influence the use of trees by rural communities in their approach to ‘healthy agriculture’ Multifunctionality of land use, as a form of integration of functions, is the traditional basis of land-use practices called agroforestry. In parallel with the analysis of ‘intercropping,’ the combination of functions is efficient if the trade-off curve between the function is convex, while a combination of monocultures (singlefunction solutions) is more efficient if the trade-off curve is convex. Thus, a major question is the degree to which the CO2 re-absorption capacity of the land is compatible with the functions of food production and the production of forest fiber and fuelwood. At the level of annual carbon sequestration, annual crops and pasture are no less than most forest vegetation. However, there is no onsite storage, apart from gradual and generally limited carbon storage in soils. Maintaining the carbon sequestration capacity is thus an issue on the fate of photosynthesis products – with the direct use of crop residues or crop products for biofuel as the obvious approach to the carbon neutrality of energy use. The current use of forest cover and protected area fraction, as indicators for Millennium Development Goal 7, is not directly relevant in this perspective. Rather, we need to keep track of the part of crop products that decomposes onsite and/or through processes that do not substitute for fossil fuel use.

Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia


The main challenge for reducing overshoot, apart from long-term investments on the multifunctionality of the land, is to link consumption patterns to footprint intensity. At the moment, there is at least a four-fold variation between countrylevel ecological footprint per unit economic activity, as measured in GDP. Within countries, there is undoubtedly further substantial variation. Only if the global issue of shortfalls in biocapacity is linked to the individual decisions on consumption pattern can we expect to find creative solutions. Maintaining the resource base, as well as human resourcefulness, for adaptive responses is essential. Current approaches to reduce net anthropogenic emissions of GHGs fall far short of what are needed to stabilise the climate. The relation between HDI and ecological footprint may be used as baseline for setting reachable targets: to reduce net emissions to a globally equitable share (‘birthright’) of the ecological space for the developed countries, to get development compensation from the underutilised space for developing countries that need to

Figure 4.4 The pathway of drivers of emissions, consequences for climate, and consequences for human and natural ecosystems require adjustments in both the fossil fuel/industrial emission pathway (adjustment of lifestyles) and the land-based emissions (adjustment of land-use patterns).


Meine Van Noordwijk

meet their Millennium Development Goals (1 to 6), and to increase the HDI of these developing countries. Agroforestry is thus presented as a key component of the multifunctionality of landscapes - linking climate change mitigation and adaptation (Verchot et al. 2007).

AGRODIVERSITY: PAST, CURRENTLY FUNCTIONAL, AND FUTURE OPTIONS In general, biodiversity suffers from efforts to increase agricultural productivity. However, forest/agriculture trajectories may lead to a large loss of biodiversity for small gains (or even loss) of productivity – leaving behind degraded lands in which win-win solutions are feasible. This can only bring us back to the overall biodiversityproductivity envelope. It is likely that critical agrobiodiversity thresholds do exist at near-maximum agricultural productivity, and a second degradation stage has wiped out past (agri) cultures (Figure 4.5). The simplification of agroecosystems is only feasible if it is combined with an externalisation of its diversity in the form of ex-situ gene banks. The human factors that govern access to the genetic resources conserved off-farm become major determinants of risk.

Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia


2. Agrodiversity: past/remnant, currently functional, future options





.2 (ij




0 0

Q) Q)

> ~

Critical Loss of ~ ecologicalftmctions. E

. -- . . . ,..



Relative agricultural function (RAF)


Ecosystem quality Biodiversity

Environmental services Low

,··a t.. '

~~IvE ~!.!!.!.,_

Agricu ltural productivity: goods

~ • • Pathways to be avoided

Socially desirable pathway

Figure 4.5 A. Relationship between relative agricultural function (RAF) and relative ecological function (REF) of agroecosystems; B. Conceptual diagram of the DIVERSITAS Agrobiodiversity science program


Meine Van Noordwijk


Figure 4.6 Illustration of the hypothesis that the probability of agroecosystems to cope with the challenges of global change depends on the agrodiversity and complexity of current agroecosystems, based on resilience and technology-based adaptation (A). It is likely that systems of intermediate complexity are most vulnerable, but there is high uncertainty on the shape of the curve, as shown by lines I, II, and III (B)

Climate Change, Biodiversity, Livelihoods, and Sustainagility in Southeast Asia


SUSTAINAGILITY FOR PEOPLE The high-level definition of ‘sustainable development,’ meeting current needs without compromising the future, is fine. However, when ‘sustainability’ is defined for sub-systems, such as agriculture, a cropping system, or the use of a specific genotype of a crop or domesticated animal, the criteria for sustainability focuses on the persistence of the current system rather than an evaluation of the options for future change. Persistence is measurable, while change is subject to speculation. The concept of ‘sustainagility,’ the ability of the system to support future change, was defined as a complement to ‘sustainability,’ which is to recognise the dynamic dimension in adaptation (Figure 4.10; Verchot et al. 2007). ‘Sustainagility’ is the capacity of a system to sustain the agility of managers to deal with challenges to the sustainability of the status quo. It finds underutilised resources or new ways to use existing resources to reduce critical shortfalls and negative side effects (Verchot et al. 2007). If applied to a nested hierarchy of scales, sustainability at any scale can be achieved by either sustainability of the subsystem, or by sustainagility at the current scale. For example, sustainable livelihoods for rural people can be achieved either by sustainable rural livelihoods, or by options to migrate to better lives in cities. Sustainable rural livelihoods can be based on sustainable agriculture or alternative rural economic activities. Sustainable agriculture can be based on sustainability of current cropping practices, or the availability of alternative productive land use. So far, it is assumed that sustainability of subsystems is a necessary and sufficient condition for sustainability at higher scales. This assumption tends to ignore opportunities for development and associate conservation with conservatism. Linked to ‘sustainagility’ is the idea that “the climate change soup won’t be eaten as hot as it is being served.” In the global change debate, the issue of adaptation and winners in the climate shift issue, has long been seen as a distractor to the efforts of convincing the global community of the urgency of mitigation and emission control action. The concept of ‘sustainagility’ is explicitly multi-scale, and links the global scale climate issue with its regional dimension (‘climate shift’) and local climate change. Coping strategies rely on genetic diversity for ‘de novo’ adaptation, social networks for germplasm and technology exchange, and shifts in global markets and their suppliers (one area’s loss may be another area’s gain).


Meine Van Noordwijk

Sustainagility E: human migration Sustainagility D: shift to non-ag sectors

Figure 4.7 Sustainability at any scale can be achieved by either sustainability or sustainagility at the subsystem level.

M.arke~b~e go~ds (

) Biological diversity

SKU -d1vers1ty

::::::•:op. Industrial






Average Total Annual Precip itation in MillimetetS









Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines










_______ .. TROPICAL


Figure 8.4 The Holdridge Life Zone System of vegetative cover classification (Holdridge, 1967)


Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco

For rainforests, a development of up to 365,000 ha was observed at 50 per cent increase in rainfall, and a 10C increase in temperature. However, this area, occupied by the rainforests, was observed to slightly decrease once the temperature is increased by 1.5 0C and 2 0C, under the same rainfall scenario (50% increase). At 100 per cent increase in precipitation, moist forests declined by 50 per cent, rainforests increased by to 2 M ha, and wet forests increased by 32 per cent (Figure 8.5). Results indicated that increases in temperature have very little drying effect on the life zones in the Philippines. This situation can be attributed to two factors: (i) the large increases in precipitation nullify the potential effect of temperature increases; and (ii) the prevailing biotemperature in the Philippines, which is always greater than 24 0C, falls within the tropical belt under the Holdridge Life Zone system. Furthermore, of the four types of forests, the dry forests are the most vulnerable to climate change as it disappears even at 25 per cent rainfall increase. Rainforests, on the other hand, are favored once rainfall increased. The results obtained from this study are consistent with the findings of the Second and Third Assessment Reports of the IPCC. Based on the reports, the net primary productivity (NPP) of the trees increases as temperature increases. However, rainfall must be sufficient to avoid water stress (IPCC 1996). In the IPCC Third Assessment Report, an increase in the annual mean night temperature will result to a decrease in the growth of trees. However, in the lowland humid tropics, the increase in temperature will have no significant effect because it is already close to the optimum temperature (IPCC 2001). The question of whether the tropical forests will increase or decrease remains unanswered because of the different results provided by the global vegetation models such as BIOME, Mapped Atmosphere-Plant-Soil System (MAPSS), and Integrated Model to Assess the Greenhouse Effect (IMAGE). However, these models agree that the distribution of the vegetation changes as the amount of precipitation changes. Under enhanced CO2, it is likely that the tropical evergreen broadleaf forests are established after deforestation. Aside from the impacts on the distribution of forest types, climate change is likely to reduce the area of forested lands which can, in turn, affect biodiversity. This is brought about by the opening of more forest lands because of migration of lowland farmers to the uplands for farming or other livelihood opportunities. Agricultural areas, especially at the tail end of the irrigation system or in flood-prone regions, would become unsuitable for crop production

3c: +100%

PrecipHation, +2 deg C 3b: +100% Precipitaticn, +1.~degC

3a: +100% Precipitaticn, •1 deg C 2c: +50% Precipitation, +2 deg C 2b: +50% Precipitatior, +1.5degC

2a: +SO% Precipitatior, •1 deg C 1c: +25% Precipitation, •2 deg C

1b: + 25% Precipitatior, +1.5 deg C 1a: + 25% Precipitatior, •1 deg C

Figure 8.5 Impacts of rainfall and temperature changes on Philippine forests


Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines


Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco

because of the increased occurrence of droughts or floods associated with ENSO events. As dry months become drier with climate change, grasslands and brushlands are at greater risk to fire. If these ecosystems are frequently subjected to fires, it is more difficult to rehabilitate them. Likewise, if these areas are subjected to prolonged droughts and increased temperature, desertification may occur. In grasslands, productivity decreases with climate change. In terms of biodiversity, Cruz (1998) mentioned that there may be loss of a few species of plants and animals in areas were there are significant increases in temperature and decreases in rainfall. Also, the occurrence of pests and diseases, associated with climate change, may alter the species composition, structure, and functions of the forest ecosystems. Coastal areas: The coastal areas are continuously put at risk because of the projected increase in siltation due to soil erosion. Serious soil erosion in degraded forest lands and watershed areas is expected to occur with projected increase in precipitation, especially during the wet season. Silted coastal areas will reduce seagrass beds and coral reefs, which are important components in maintaining diversity in coastal waters. Moreover, coral reefs will be adversely affected by sea level rise due to increase in water depth. Higher sea level will reduce the amount of light reaching the bottom of the sea where the corals are located. The growth of the corals is dependent on the amount of light penetrating the water. Mangrove forests, habitats for numerous coastal organisms, would be severely affected by future changes in rainfall pattern, runoff, salinity, and sediment deposition. Mangroves grow well in areas where there is high rainfall and upstream runoff, and moderately saline environment (Philippines Initial National Communication 1999). Reduction of mangrove forests will likely affect the biodiversity of coastal species. Climate change can lead to the frequent occurrence of El Niño events and affect ocean currents, sea level, sea water temperature, salinity, wind speed and direction, strength of upwelling, the mixing layer thickness, and predator response. These impacts would significantly affect breeding habitats and food supply for fish, thereby reducing fish production (IPCC 2001). The distribution of estuarine flora and existing habitat will likewise be altered because of the projected increased occurrence of extreme climatic events (Cruz et al 2007).

Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines


POTENTIAL ADAPTATION STRATEGIES Risk and Vulnerability Assessment The risk and vulnerability of biodiversity to climate variability and extremes must be assessed by establishing long-term monitoring plots. Baseline data is needed to provide the basis for the biodiversity status of an area prior to the occurrence of a climatic event. Once a climatic event (ENSO events, typhoons, prolonged rain, etc.) occurs, biodiversity assessment must be undertaken. The assessment will help identify the vulnerable ecosystems and species which are more at risk to climate-related events, including their locations. To determine the risk and vulnerability of biodiversity to future climate change, such as the disappearance of species or population, extent of species or population loss, and the possibility of habitat loss or gain, the assessment of such impacts must also be undertaken through the use of models. In South Africa, von Maltitz and Scholes (2007) investigated the migratory corridors required for individual species to track climate change. As mentioned, Lasco et al. used the Holdridge Life Zone to determine the vulnerability of forest types to changes in rainfall and temperature. However, more refined climate change scenarios, that use downscaling techniques, are needed to better estimate future changes in precipitation and temperatures.

Enhancing Biodiversity Management to Reduce Risk and Vulnerability Protection of the remaining forests: Biodiversity can be preserved by protecting and conserving the remaining natural forests from all forms of destructive activities, such as illegal logging, timber poaching, shifting cultivation and forest fires. This can be done by increasing the capacity of the DENR personnel and the multisectoral forest protection committees to protect the forests by providing sufficient training on forest protection and gadgets which are needed in patrols, i.e. communication, transportation, and fire fighting equipment. Likewise, efforts to reduce poverty among local people must be put in place by increasing the natural, social, human, physical, and financial capitals. This would require the provision of alternative livelihood, roads, and bridges that links communities to markets and other support services, the building or


Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco

strengthening of the community’s link to markets, the provision of technical assistance on sustainable farming, and many others. The protection of the remaining natural forests (old-growth, mossy, and second-growth forests), which cover about 6.1 M ha, will not only conserve biodiversity but also prevent the release of carbon stored in these ecosystems. Lasco and Pulhin (2000) estimated that 685 Mt are contained in these remaining natural forests. At present, the government is engaged in activities that promote biodiversity, i.e. the conservation of remaining forests in the National Integrated Protected Areas Systems (NIPAS) sites and watershed areas. Rehabilitation of degraded forestlands: Vast forest areas in the Philippines need rehabilitation. There are at least 1.12 M ha of grassland areas that must be reforested to increase biodiversity, help control floods and droughts, minimise soil erosion, improve hydrology, and sequester carbon from the atmosphere. Assuming a carbon fixation rate of 4.4 t/ha/yr (Lasco 1997), for Philippine plantations, a minimum of 5.2 Mt of carbon can be sequestered every year if such grassland areas are reforested (Lasco and Pulhin 2000). This rate is already equal to 15 per cent of the total current annual carbon emissions by the entire Philippines. Improvements in harvesting technologies: This adaptation strategy involves the use of low-impact logging activities to minimise the number of trees that are damaged during logging operations. According to Froehlich et. al. (1981) and Hendrison (1990), logging damage can be substantially reduced through directional felling and the planned extraction of timber on properly constructed and carefully utilized skid trails. Reducing the damage to forests, during logging operations, does not only reduce the impact of logging on biodiversity but also prevent the emission of carbon in the atmosphere from wastes. In the Philippines, Lasco et al. (2000), found that carbon in the logs, produced from timber harvesting was only 28 per cent of the original total carbon contained in the forest stands. Adaptation strategies undertaken by stakeholders: While local stakeholders in the watershed have little awareness on climate change issues, they have rich experiences in terms of coping with climate variability and

Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines


extremes. Through focus group discussions, strategies that were undertaken by the stakeholders in the Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed (PCW) to adapt to such climatic events were determined. These strategies could form part of the adaptation options to help address the impacts of climate change. A total of 30 participants, representing the different stakeholders within the Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed, namely, the National Power Corporation, National Irrigation Authority, local government units, nongovernmental organisations, and people’s organisations, attended the workshop. Table 8.1 shows the adaptation strategies undertaken by the stakeholders in each land use in forest lands. For tree plantations, the focus was on the use of appropriate species/crops, schedule of planting, silvicultural practices, protection, and supplemental watering. For natural forests, adaptation strategies mainly dealt with their protection. In grasslands, adaptation options included reforestation, the management of the ecosystem, through community-based forest management, intensive information dissemination campaigns among stakeholders, and the use of drought-resistant species. These adaptation options indicate the need for a high level of awareness among the stakeholders to cope with the impacts of climate variability and extremes. In general, the adaptation options identified are consistent with those recommended by the Philippines Initial National Communication (1999) and the IPCC TAR (2001). Implementation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM): ICZM is a “process of governance consisting of the legal and institutional framework necessary to ensure that the development and management of the coastal zones are integrated with environment and socioeconomic goals in a community-participatory process” (Post et al. 1996 as cited by Perez 1998). ICZM involves the wise-use of resources that promotes conservation and the sustainable multiple use of the coastal zones. Consequently, ICZM promotes the conservation of biodiversity. In the Philippines, there are already a number of areas where ICZM is being implemented.


Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco

Table 8.1 Adaptation options to climate variability and extr emes for forest lands in the Pantabangan-Carranglan W atershed, Philippines Land Use

Adaptation Options

Tree plantation

Adjust silvicultural treatment schedules Plant species that can adjust to variable clmate situations Proper timing of tree planting projects or activities Implement proper silvicultural practices Construction of firelines Controlled burning Supplemental watering

Natural forest

Safety net measures for farmers by local and national government Cancellation of logging permits (total logging ban)


Reforestation- adaptation of contour farming in combination to organic farming Promote community based forest management Increase fund for forest protection, regeneration from national government Increase linkage building of LGU-GO-NGO Introduction of drainage measures Controlled burning Introduction of drought resistant species Intensive information dissemination campaign among stakeholders

(Source: Lasco et al., 2007)

Mainstreaming Climate Change in Biodiversity Management Policies and programmes: Policies and programmes for biodiversity management must integrate climate change to enhance the capacity of the country to adapt to its impacts. At present, there are policies that contain the use and conservation of forest resources in the Philippines. These include:

y Presidential Decree (PD) 705 of 1975, or the Revised Forestry Code of the y

Philippines, which is a law that embodies the general mandate of the Constitution in managing and conserving forest resources; DENR Administrative Order (DAO) No. 24 Series of 1991, which promotes the use of secondary forests as the source of logs instead of old-growth forests effective as of 1992;

Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines


y Republic Act (RA) No. 7586, or the NIPAS Act of 1992, which promotes

y y y

the conservation of biodiversity through the management, protection, sustainable development, and rehabilitation of protected areas, except for some natural forests; RA No. 8371, or the Indigenous People’s Rights Act of 1997, which recognises the vested rights of indigenous peoples over their ancestral lands within forest lands, including that of secondary forests; Executive Order (EO) No. 363 of 1995, which adopts community-based forest management (CBFM) as the national strategy to ensure the sustainable development of the country’s forests and promote social justice; and EO 318 of 2004, or the policy promoting sustainable forest management in the Philippines, which was revised to PD 705, aims to attain sustainable forest management in the country’s production forests.

Similarly, there is no existing policy that directly addresses climate change in the coastal resources. However, there are laws and regulations that tackle the use, protection, and exploitation of coastal resources. These include:

y PD 600/PD 979 (Marine Pollution Law); y PD 604 (Revision and Consolidation of all Laws Affecting Fishing and Fisheries);

y RA 5173 (Creation of the Philippine Coast Guard); y PD 1998 (Restoration and Rehabilitation of Areas Subject to the y

Development, Exploration, and Exploitation, to their Original Conditions); and RA 7160 (Coastal Resources Management in the Local Government Code).

These policies may have to be re-examined and amended, if necessary, to focus on how the forests and coastal resources could be better managed to enhance biodiversity. Likewise, the current and proposed programs must also integrate climate change strategies. For instance, in the National Strategy and Action Plan on Philippine Biodiversity, climate change and the identification and mapping of areas that are highly vulnerable to climate variability and extremes must be included in the programme “Ecosystems Mapping and Data Validation,” of Strategy 1. Moreover, in the awareness programme under Strategy V of the Action Plan, the current knowledge of the different stakeholders on climate change should also be assessed.


Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco

Planning: The issue of climate change must be incorporated in the management plans for biodiversity conservation. At present, climate change is not emphasised in biodiversity management plans because resource managers are more focused on the current state of biodiversity in the country. Since climate change is another stressor that could exacerbate the current state of biodiversity, it should thus be mainstreamed in action plans to enhance its adaptation. Updated and reliable information on the extent of biodiversity, and the identification of extinct, threatened, and vulnerable species is needed to draft biodiversity management plans. The more urgent concern is to save the remaining forests from human exploitation which is the more imminent threat. Monitoring: Changes in biodiversity, through time, should be determined by establishing long-term monitoring plots in different biodiversityrich areas, which are also vulnerable to climate change. While this may be a tedious task, the data that can be generated from this activity will provide a sound basis in making more informed decisions for biodiversity management that incorporates climate change considerations.

Securing Sustainable Financing Mechanism Biodiversity management can be effective and sustainable if long-term financial support is assured. While many donor agencies have already poured financial support to a lot of biodiversity projects in the country, they are unable to address the problem of financial sustainability. Once the project and financial support ends, conservation activities are hardly sustained. Previous conservation efforts are likewise wasted. Thus, the long-term sustainable funding of environmental and natural resource protection and management is needed. One possible source of financing biodiversity management is the payment for environmental services scheme (PES). PES is the compensation received by the stakeholders for protecting and conserving biodiversity in an area that provides them with environmental services.

Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines


CONCLUSIONS The Philippines is endowed with a very rich biodiversity. However, its current state is alarming as many of the species are already threatened or extinct. Many stressors (e.g. overpopulation, deforestation, unsustainable livelihood, development, etc.) greatly contribute to the erosion of biodiversity in the country. With climate change, biodiversity is expected to be threatened further. In addition, biodiversity is also affected by the response of the vulnerable sectors, such as the local communities, to the impacts of climate change. The income from the current livelihood activities of local communities, settled around biodiversity habitats, will be adversely affected by climate change. As a result, the local communities will exert more pressure and utilise more of the forest land and coastal resources. To conserve biodiversity, adaptation strategies need to be undertaken. Among these are the assessment of risks and vulnerabilities, enhancement of biodiversity management activities to reduce risks and vulnerabilities, mainstreaming of climate change to biodiversity management plans, and attainment of secured sustainable financing mechanisms.

REFERENCES Albay Province Official Website. URL: damage report.htm. (Retrieved 22 February 2008). Amadore, L.A. 2005. Crisis or opportunity: climate change impacts and the Philippines. Greenpeace Southeast Asia in the Philippines. Quezon City, Philippines. 58pp. URL: (Retrieved 19 September 2007). Asian Development Bank. 2004. Country environmental analysis for the republic of the Philippines. Manila, Philippines. 110 pp. Australian Greenhouse Office, Department of Environment and Heritage. 2005. Climate change risk and vulnerability: promoting an efficient adaptation response in Australia. 159 pp. Final Report. URL: http:// (Retrieved 22 February 2008).


Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco

Boado, E.L. 1988. Incentive policies and forest use in the Philippines. In: R. Repetto and M. Gillis. (Eds.), Public policies and the misuse of forest resources. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. pp 165-204. Canlas, F.M. and C.F Cruz. 2004. Philippine agricultural crop production cycle: evidenced and determinants. Paper submitted to the University of the Philippines School of Economics in part fulfillment of the requirements for Economics 1999. URL: . 2005/2005_sicat_award_1st_best_cruz-canlas.pdf . 95pp. (Retrieved 22 February 2008). Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund. 2001. Ecosystem profile: the Philippines hotspot. URL: final_2ephilippines_2eep_2epdf/v1/final.philippines.ep.pdf. (Retrieved 31 January 2008). Cruz, R.V., H. Harasawa, M. Lal, S. Wu, Y. Anokhin, B. Punsalmaa, Y. Honda, M. Jafari, C. Li and N. Huu Ninh, 2007: Asia. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson (Eds), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 469-506. Cruz, R.V.O. 1998. Adaptation and mitigation measures for climate change impacts on the forestry sector. In: Pulhin, F.B. and R.D. Lasco (Eds) Consultation meeting for the international conference on tropical forests and climate change: status, issues and challenges. Environmental Forestry Programme. College of Forestry and Natural Resources. University of the Philippines Los Baños. College, Laguna. pp 27-52. DENR/UNEP (Department of Environment and Natural Resources /United Nations Environment Program). 1997. Philippine biodiversity: an assessment and action plan, Makati City, Philippines, Bookmark Inc. 298 pp. URL: http:/ / (Retrieved 5 February 2008). Fernando, E.S., D.A. Lagunzad, L.L. Co, D.A. Madulid, J.L. De Leon, A.B. Lapis, I.C. Pangga, L.M. Liao, C.C. Custodio, M. Mendoza, A. Meniado, N.M. Molinyawe, P.M. Zamora, G.I. Texon, and W.S. Pollisco. 2003. Framework for Philippine plant conservation: strategy and action plan. Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau, Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

Climate Change and Biodiversity in the Philippines


Food and Agricultural Organization. 2005. Gateway to land and water information: Philippine National Report. URL: swlwpnr/reports/y_ta/z_ph/ph.htm. (Retrieved 22 February2008). Froehlich, H.A., D.E. Aulerich, and R. Curtis. 1981. Designing skid trail systems to reduce soil impacts from tracked logging machines. Research Paper 36. Forest Research Lab. Corvallis, Oregon. Hendrison, J. 1990. Damage-controlled logging in managed rain forest in Suriname. Agricultural University. Wageningen. The Netherlands. Holdridge, L.R. 1967. Life zone ecology (Revised Edition). Tropical Science Center, San Jose, Costa Rica. 206pp. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1996. Climate Change 1995. The Science of climate change. Contribution of the Working Group I to the Second Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. IPCC Working Group II. 2001. Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. The Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 1032pp. Kummer, D.M. 1992. Deforestation in the postwar Philippines. Ateneo de Manila University Press. Quezon City, Philippines. 178pp. Lasco, R.D. and F.B. Pulhin. 2000. Forest land-use change in the Philippines and climate change mitigation. Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change Journal. Vol.5 No. 1. Kluwer Publishers. Netherlands. pp81-97. Lasco, R.D. and F.B. Pulhin. 2000. Philippine forestry and carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration: opportunities for ,mitigating climate change. The Philippine Lumberman. Vol. 46. No. 3. pp 18-25. Lasco, RD, FB Pulhin, R.G. Visco, D.A. Racelis, I.Q. Guillermo, and R.F. Sales. 2000. Carbon stocks assessment of Philippine forest ecosystems. In: Proc. Science-Policy Workshop on Terrestrial Carbon Stocks Assessment for Possible Carbon Trading. Bogor, Indonesia. Lasco, R..D, F. Pulhin, R.V.O. Cruz, J. Pulhin, S. Roy and P. Sanchez. 2007. Forest responses to changing rainfall in the Philippines. In: N. Leary, C. Conde, J. Kulkarni, A. Nyong and J. Pulhin (Eds.) Climate change and vulnerability. Earthscan. UK and USA. pp 49-66. Lasco, R.D., K.G. MacDicken, F.B. Pulhin, I.Q. Guillermo, R.F. Sales and R.V.O. Cruz. 2006. Carbon stocks assessment of a selectively logged dipterocarp forest and wood processing mill in the Philippines. Journal of Tropical Forest Science. Vol 18 No. 4. pp. 212-221.


Florencia B. Pulhin and Rodel D. Lasco

Mc Devitt, T. and V.H. Bourne. 1996. Philippines: population trends. Bureau of the Census, Economics and Statistics Administration , U.S. Department of Commerce. US Bureau of Census. URL: prod/ppt92-11.pdf. (Retrieved 22 February 2008). National Disaster Coordinating Council, 2000. URL: and (Retrieved 18 January2008). National Statistics Office.2000. Census of population and housing highlights. URL: . (Retrieved 22 February 2008). Perez, R.T. 1998. Adaptation and mitigation Measures for climate change impacts on the coastal resources. In: F. B. Pulhin and R. D. Lasco (Eds.) Consultation meeting for the international conference on tropical forests and climate change: status, issues and challenges. Environmental Forestry Programme. College of Forestry and Natural Resources. University of the Philippines Los Baños. College, Laguna. pp 27-52. Perez, R.T. 2007. Philippine climate: trends and projection. Paper presented during the FORESPI National symposium on climate change. November 28, 2007. Sulo Hotel, Quezon City. FORESPI. URL: events.html. (Retrieved 1 February 2008). Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). URL: . (Retrieved 5 February2007). Philippines’ Initial Communication on Climate Change. 1999. Pulhin, J.M. 1996. Community forestry: paradoxes and perspectives in development practice. Ph.D. Thesis. Australian National University. Canberra, Australia. 252 pp. Von Maltitz, G..P and R.J. Scholes. 2008. Vulnerability of Southern African biodiversity to climate change. In: N. Leary, C. Conde, J. Kulkarni, A. Nyong and J. Pulhin (Eds.) Climate Change and Vulnerability. Earthscan. UK and USA. pp 33-48. URL: . (Retrieved 18 January 2008).

Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand



Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand Amnat Chidthaisong

Recent reports of the IPCC (2007) reiterate that global climate change is real and has been affecting many parts of the planet and various weather components. Climate change varies in time and space. To assess the impacts of climate change at the regional or local level, such as in the Southeast Asia region, details and careful investigations on the regional-, or even local-scale climate change and variability is urgently needed. This is a requisite if climate change adaptation and mitigation measures at these levels are established. Realising this necessity, the Thailand Research Fund (TRF) launched its Climate Change and Impacts Program in 2006. The methodology starts from a detailed evaluation of the climate change situation in Thailand. In this step, questions on the aspects of climate change that have been observed, the level of confidence on the data observed, and whether there is a need for other evidences were considered. Based on the analysis and synthesis of such knowledge, the methodology then proceeds to assess the impacts, the vulnerabilities resulting from such changes, the adaptive measures that are in place, the effectiveness of these measures, and any additional measures that should be adopted. This chapter reviews the current knowledge status on climate change and the future plans on climate change research in Thailand. It is hoped that such approach and the data generated could serve as basis for research on climate change, including its impacts on biodiversity.


Amnat Chidthaisong

CLIMATE CHANGE TRENDS IN THAILAND Temperature Trends Records of temperature in Thailand have been carried out regularly by the Department of Meteorology and other agencies. The data available went as far back as the 1950s, which revealed various aspects of temperature changes. Records from over 50 monitoring stations showed that the maximum temperature had increased at an average of 0.56°C during the past 50 years (Limskul and Goes 2008). This temperature increase was consistent with the information reported by IPCC (2007) on global temperature increases during the same period. The 50-year records also showed that the warmest five years were observed in the 1990s, with 1998 as the warmest year, followed by 1997, 2005, 2004, 2003, and 1991 (Sitthicheevapak 2007). The average minimum temperature increased twice as fast than that of the maximum temperature. The observed rate was 1.44°C during the past 50 years. As a result, the gap between the maximum and minimum temperatures was found to be narrowing towards the time, at -1 to -2.2°C per 50 years. This is consistent with the observed changes in the global average temperature (Figure 9.1).

Precipitation Trends In the past 50 years, the average total amount of precipitation and the number of rainy days in Thailand showed decreasing trends. Large variations among monitoring stations were observed. This suggests difficulty in determining a common trend of precipitation change as there may be multiple drivers, both at the local and regional scales, which influence variations in precipitation.

Sea Level Trends Very little data and analyses are available on sea level change covering the 50year period. It is thus difficult to evaluate the trends and its relationship to current climate change scenarios. However, some measurement data in the Andaman Sea showed that sea levels were likely to be increasing from 1993 to

Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand


Figure 9.1 Analyses of maximum, minimum temperatures and temperature range during the past 50 years in Thailand (Limskul and Goes, 2008). The bold bars indicate significant changes in the trends at each measurement station and the hollow bars indicate those that are not significant.


Amnat Chidthaisong

2003 (Figure 9.2). The rate of sea level rise, in this case, was about 7.2-8.7 mm per year. In the Gulf of Thailand, Vongvisessomjai (2006) analysed the 56-year data of tide records and concluded that sea levels were only falling slightly or not changing. More data and detailed investigations are needed to evaluate sea level trends and impacts on coastal and marine ecosystems.

Future Scenarios TRF supported a project that aimed at evaluating future climate change scenarios for Thailand. The project used various regional climate models and involved many scientists from Thailand. Preliminary results, based on IPCCC SRES A2, ECHAM4 global data set and the PRECES regional climate model, agreed with trends in the past 50 years. The results indicated that the present temperature will be increasing at about 1-2°C. Winter will be shortened by one to two months, and summer will be lengthened by one to two months. Total precipitation is likely to increase by 10-20 per cent as compared to the average values between 1960 and 1989 (Chinvanno 2008). It should be noted, however, that these are only preliminary results. Detailed analyses and comparisons with results from other models are needed before reaching any concrete conclusions.

CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON THAILAND Impacts on Watershed and Agriculture In the past few years, there have been advances in researches that assess the impacts of climate change on Thailand. Such research projects are supported by various funding agencies such as TRF, the National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT), Global Change System for Analysis, Research and Training (START) -Southeast Asia Regional Research Center, and the Asia-Pacific Network on Climate Study (APN). These research works generated data and provided images on the impacts of climate change in Thailand. For example, the Office

Figure 9.2 Records on sea level change at the western seashore of Thailand (after Chinvanno, 2007)

Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand 169


Amnat Chidthaisong

of Natural Resources and Environment Planning (ONEP) reported that climate change impacts on forest ecosystems would likely result in a decrease in the subtropical life zone from 50 per cent to 12-22 per cent. In the south, the tropical life zone will increase from 45 to 80 per cent. Meanwhile, the subtropical dry forests would likely disappear and be replaced with subtropical very dry forests. START studied the impacts of climate change under 1xCO2 (360 ppm), 1.5xCO2 (540 ppm), and 2xCO2 (720 ppm) scenarios, using the CCAM climate model at 10-km resolution. Results suggested that, under the 2xCO2 scenario, the Songkharm River Basin in northeastern Thailand would face a long flooding period and deeper water level during the rainy season. Meanwhile, there was no clear difference on the impacts of flooding between the 1xCO2 and the 1.5xCO2 scenarios (Chinvanno 2007). Jintrawet et al. (2005) applied CCAM with crop model CERES-rice to evaluate the effects of climate change on rice productivity under the abovementioned scenarios. The results indicated that rice yields in northeastern Thailand would dramatically decrease. The areas were found susceptible to water shortage, as almost no irrigation system was available in most parts. However, there were differences still observed between rice yields and those simulated by models in some locations and under certain cultivation practices, such as water management (e.g. rainfed vs. irrigation and urea fertilisation rate). Under the 2xCO2 scenario, meanwhile, rice yield would likely increase by 7-17 per cent, depending on fertilisation rate and water management. Higher urea fertilisation, with irrigation, would lead to higher grain yields.

Impacts on Biodiversity Thailand has well-established databases on biodiversity. The Thailand Biodiversity Center and the National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (BITEC) are maintaining and managing databases for a long time. These databases revealed that Thailand has approximately 15,000 species of plants, which account for 8 per cent of the estimated total number of plant species found globally (ONEP, 1992). Thailand also has an estimated 1,721 species of terrestrial vertebrates (mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians) (Theerakupt and Panha 2002).

Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand


Since the Indo–Malaysian region is the center of distribution for marine organisms, Thai waters have served as habitats for enormously diversified marine organisms. It supports more than 2,000 marine fish species, which accounts for 10 per cent of the total fish species estimated worldwide (Wongratana 1989). Thailand also has approximately 2,000 marine mollusk species and 11,900 species of marine invertebrates (Pasuk 1993). Like other countries, Thailand is also facing biodiversity loss. This is mainly due to overexploitation, illegal trading of animal and plant species, and disturbance and loss of natural habitats. Biodiversity is considered renewable resources as they are able to reproduce, and thus continue to address the needs of humans for survival. In the past, though, overhunting had resulted in the reduction of both the populations and variety of wildlife. Bunpapaong et al. (2005) reported that five species of fresh water fish (Balantiocheilus melanopterus, Platytropius siamensis, Cyclocheilichthys lagleri, Longiculture caihi and Oxygaster williaminae) in Thailand are now extinct. There are also an estimated 30 species of fresh water fish that are considered endangered. Most of these species have been captured for food or to supply the aquarium business. Catlacarpio siamensis, Hilsa toli, Cirrhinus microlepsis, Ceratoglanis scleronema and Pangasius sanitnougeei are species that are captured for consumption, while Botia sidthimunlei, Tetrodon baileyi, Dadnoides microlepis, Notopterus blanci and Scleropages formosus are popular fish species for aquarium. Likewise, many plant species in Thailand are now placed on the endangered or rare list. Thailand was once famous for the presence of over 1,000 species of orchids (ONEP 1992). Today, however, a number of local orchid species, such as Paphiopedilum niveum, Paphiopedilum sukhakuluii, Rhynchostylis coelestis, Rhynchostylis gigentea, Vanda coerulea, Vanda denisoniana, Dendrobium scabrilingue, Dendrobium tortile, and others, are considered endangered (Chayamarit 1989). Vatida diospyroides, which is a large tree with sweet-smelling flowers, is now regarded as a rare species (Nanakorn 1993). At present, there are 107 endemic species, 400 endangered species, and 600 rare species of plants in Thailand (ONEP 1992, after Bunpapaong, 2005). The loss of biodiversity in Thailand may be attributed to climate change. However, studies on the direct interactions between biodiversity and climate change in Thailand are rare. Recent reports by Roud and Gale (2008) may be


Amnat Chidthaisong

the very first to indicate the implications of climate change on bird diversity in Thailand. In that study, the authors analysed a 25-year sequence of records of two species of Lophura pheasants - the Siamese Fireback, L. diardi, and the Silver Pheasant L. nycthemera in Khao Yai, Thailand’s oldest national park. The data suggested that the number and proportion of detections of L. diardi, which inhabit the lowlands, have significantly increased as compared to the detections of L. nycthemera, which inhabit the highly elevated areas. Environmental factors, mediated by the changing climate, are the most plausible explanation for the changing proportion of sightings of the two species. Meanwhile, W.Y. Brockelman (Pers. Comm. 2007) found that the species composition of plants, at the Mo-singto long-term biodiversity research plot in Khao Yai National Prak, had changed, which may be due to climate change factors. Further work is still needed to explore the relationship between changes in biodiversity and climate.

Current Initiatives on Impact Studies In 2006, stemming from the severe effects of smoke from the forest fires in northern Thailand in March 2007, the National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) supported a research that explored the relationship between climate change and air pollution. TRF also implemented the most comprehensive program on climate change in Thailand in the same year. The approaches that TRF implemented are illustrated in Figure 9.3. Several groups of researchers are investigating climate change scenarios in Thailand using IPCC SRES A2, A1B, and B2, four regional climate models (PRECIS, RegCM 3, GCM – GFDL– R30 and MM5), various GCMs and different downscaling methods. The spatial resolution in all these studies ranged from 20x20 km to 50x50 km. The investigation aimed at achieving high-resolution climate change scenarios that are sufficient in applying for subsequent impact studies at regional or local levels. Future projects include impact studies on agriculture, water resources and management, coastal zones, and forestry. The programme also includes the application of climate change scenarios in assessing the socioeconomic impacts of climate change in Thailand. Outputs from this programme would be used as basis for vulnerability assessments, and the

Research Initiatives on Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation in Thailand


Figure 9.3 The approaches applied by the Thailand Research Fund in assessing climate change impacts in Thailand

consequent formulation of appropriate adaptation measures. Final outputs would be policy recommendations. Preliminary results from model projections of climate conditions at the end of the 21st century indicate an increase in both temperature and precipitation (Figure 9.4). However, detailed model evaluation, adjustment, comparison, and other analyses are still needed before the results are used for impact studies. In addition, past records also revealed that temperature in Thailand had been increasing since 50 years ago. It is thus important to investigate whether such changes have affected biodiversity in Thailand, and to what extent. According to IPCC (2007), if warming exceeds 1.5-2.5 oC, (relative to 1980-99, IPCC AR4 2007), 20-30 per cent of species are likely to be at risk of extinction. This projection implies that biodiversity may have been altered because of increasing global warming.


en 0






q,• "·4. 4.


-P~ ..S'c"'t'



.s ~






$'~ ".s-~

G$US$5). Carbon emission abatement strategies, particularly financial incentives, need to be complemented by other sources of payments, forms of incentives, or use of appropriate regulatory measures, such as the implementation of land-use plans. On the other hand, there’s a great potential for carbon sequestration at a much cheaper price or at no cost at all. That is, increased areas under fallow also increased the employment of farmers in labor-intensive corporate banana farms. Another potential is the accounting results expected from the emerging shift of non-tree based land uses, such as mixed agriculture, to agroforestry or coffee production, as off-farm employment in agribusiness increases. ICRAF is also assisting NGOs, indigenous peoples, and the private sector in accessing carbon finance, such as the Kyoto market, through forestry

Biodiversity and Climate Change: Perspectives, Research Needs, and Institutions


projects. Some of these projects could lead to biodiversity conservation. For example, in Quirino Province, Philippines, Conservation International is developing a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) project aimed at helping to conserve the biodiversity of the Northern Sierra Madre Biodiversity Corridor. At the same time, ICRAF is working with national institutions, such as the Philippine Senate and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the local government units (LGUs), particularly in Albay Province, and local institutions, such as the Landcare groups, to promote climate change adaptation measures through trees and forests. It has helped draft the bill filed in the Senate to mainstream climate change. It has helped organise the first national conference on climate change adaptation in Albay province. In the Manupali Watershed, ICRAF is studying the climate adaptation strategies of the farmers in the protected area buffer zones.

REFERENCES ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity, 2008. ACB Organizational Strategic Framework (unpublished). ACB Philippines, College, Laguna. 25 pp. ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation, 2004. ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Project Completion Report. ACB Philippines, College, Laguna. 30 pp. Cramb, R. A., D. Catacutan, Z. Culasero-Arellano and K. Mariano . 2007. The ‘Landcare’ approach to soil conservation in the Philippines: an assessment of farm-level impacts. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47, 721–726. Garrity, Dennis P., Victor B. Amoroso, Samuel Koffa, Delia Catacutan, Gladys Buenavista, Paul Fay, and William Dar. 2002. Landcare on the PovertyProtection Interface in an Asian Watershed. Conservation Ecology 6(1):12. Lasco, Rodel D., Adrian Albano, Jerome Alano, Sonya Dewi, Rafaela Jane Delfino, Delia Catacutan, Agustin Mercado Jr, and Florencia B. Pulhin, 2008. The economics of abating carbon emissions through avoided deforestation: the case of Manupali watershed, Philippines. ASB Working paper, ICRAF Philippines, College, Laguna. 22pp. Mercado, A. Jr. D.P. Garrity, and M. Patindol. 2000. The Landcare experience in the Philippines: Technical and institutional innovations for conservation


Percy Sajise, Mariliza Ticsay, Gil Saguiguit, Jr ., Rodrigo Fuentes, and Rodel Lasco

farming. Paper presented at the Landcare International Conference, Melbourne Convention Centre, Melbourne, Australia, March 2-4, 2000. Sonak, Sangeeta, Wijesurya, W., Acharya, B. 2005. Role of Institutions in global Environmental Change. Final report submitted for Asia-Pacifc Network for Global Change Research (APN project 2005-02-CMY-Sonak). India pp13. URL: (Retrieved June 2008). Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2008. OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030. OECD, Paris.



Index Symbols 2-methyl-butane 118–129 9th Malaysia Plan 104–129

A A/R CDM 70–84 Acrisols 141–164 Agreement on the Mekong Basin Sustainable Development 185–194 agricultural biodiversity 5–8 agricultural genetic resources 5–8 agro-biodiversity 8, 233–254 Agrodiversity 62–84, 64 alienable and disposable (A&D) 141–164 allylic isomer dimethylallyl diphosphate 118–129 Amazon of the Seas 123–129 Ramsar Convention 185–194 anemones 133–140 angiosperms 147–164 Animal genetic resources 95–99 anthropogenic sources 117–129 anthropogenic VOCs 118–129 Aquatic Ecosystem Master Project (AMP) 211–227 arenosols 141–164 ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) 245– 254 ASEAN Member States (AMS) 245–254 ASEAN Natural Heritage Parks 246–254 ASEAN Regional Centre for Biodiversity Conservation 245–254 Asia-Pacific Network on Climate Study (APN) 168–180 Atmospheric Chemistry 117–129 atmospheric CO2 14–29

Ba Lat Estuary 189–194 benthic community 136–140 benthic community diversity 136–140 benthic organisms 134 biodiesel 22–29 biodiversity 4–8 biodiversity credits 22–29 biodiversity degradation 187–194 biodiversity hotspots 12–29 Biodiversity Information and Database Sharing Platform 246–254 Biodiversity Research Programme (BRP) 209–227 biodiversity services 24–29 biogenic volatile organic compounds (BVOCs) 117–129 biogeochemical cycles 194–195 biosocial resilience 240–254 biota 77–84, 240–254 biotemperature 150–164 bivalves 133–140 Blast fishing 149–164

C cambisols 141–164 Canadian Climate Center (CCC) 147–164 carbon dioxide (CO2) 4–8 carbon finance 252–254 carbon sequestration 6–8, 60–84 carbon sinks 194 carbon stock 194–195 CDM Energy Sector 110–129 certified emission reduction (CER) 72–84 CH4 92–99 Charcoal making 149–164 Chek Jawa 137–140 Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 253–254 Climate change 4–8, 231–254 climate change soup 65–84 climate-buffered biological materials 233– 254 Climate-risk adaptation practices 15–29 CO2 emissions 16–29

256 CO2 sink 46–53 CO2 source 46–53 coastal reclamation 131–140 Conference of Parties 70–84 Conservation International (CI) 147–164 conservation tillage 6–8 Convention on Biodiversity 185–194 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 3–8, 232–254 coral bleaching 14–29 Coral ecosystems 14–29 coral reefs 154–164 Coral Triangle Initiative (CTI) 123–129 CRED 80–84 Crustose coralline algae 218–227

D Danum Valley Conservation Area 113–129 debt-for-nature swaps 22–29 deforestation 6–8 Department of Meteorology 166–180 desertification 7–8, 104–129 dredged spoils 135–140

E ecological classification system 150–164 Ecological Footprint (EFP) 56–84 Ecological studies 240–254 ecosystem services 5–8 El Niño 41–53 elevational shifts of ecosystems 13–29 Emission Trading (ET) 105–129 ENSO 142–164 Department of Science and Technology (DOST) 222–227 evergreen tropical forests 12–29

F farnesyl diphosphate synthase 118–129 First Cambodia National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 90–99 First-Generation Projects 210–227 fluvisols 141–164 food chain 187–194 Fourth, IPCC’s Assessment Report 35

freshwater wetlands 13–29

G gastropods 133–140 GIS 150–164 glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) 40–53 Glaciation 45–53 gleysols 141–164 Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) 246–254 Global Environment Facility (GEF) Small Grants Pro 3–8 Global uncertainty 11–29 global warming 175–180 golden-capped fruit bat 147–164 greenhouse gas (GHG) 5–8 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) 56–84 gymnosperms 147–164

H Halophila 133–140 herbivory or facultative functions 118–129 Philippine Association of Marine Scientists (PAMS) 221–227 Holdridge Life Zone 150–164 Holdridge Life Zones 13–29 Human Development Index (HDI) 56–84 hydrodynamics 219–227 hydroids 133–140 hydrological flows 5–8

I information, education, and communication (IEC) 236–254 Innoprise-Face Foundation Rainforest Rehabilitation 17–29, 113–129 Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) 157–164 Integrated Model to Assess the Greenhouse Effect 152–164 integrated pest management 6–8 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4–8 International Conference-Workshop on Biodiversity 237–254

257 International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources 232–254 International Union for the Conservation of Nature 201–205 invasive species management 5–8 IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report 35–53 isopentenyl diphosphate 118–129 isoprene 118–129 isoprene (C5) 119–129

J Japanese Government through the Japan International Cooperation Agency 116–129 Joint Implementation (JI) 105–129

K Kitanglad Range Natural Park 251–254 Knowledge Gap 234–254 knowledge management 244–254 Knowledge Systems 233–254 Kyoto Protocol 104–129, 125–129, 223– 227

L La Niña 41–53 land-based ecosystems 240–254 Land-use planning 205–208 life zone 150–164 limestone formations 12–29 live weight gain (LWG) 96 Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) 224– 227

M macroalgae 135–140 macrobenthos 137–140 Malaysian Development Plan 110–129 mangrove forests 149–164 Mapped Atmosphere-Plant-Soil System (MAPSS) 152–164 Marine Microbes 217–227 Marine Protected Area (MPA) 222–227 Mekong and Irrawaddy Rivers 239–254 Mekong River Delta 181–194

microbial biomass (MB) 87–99 Millennium Development Goal 56–84 Millennium Development Goal 7 60–84 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 67, 67– 84 Millennium Ecosystems Assessment 11–29 Mindanao State University 222–227 Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment 105–129 Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environmen 105–129 monoterpene production 119–129 monoterpenes (C15) 119–129 monsoon forests 12–29 Montane Mainland Southeast Asia (MMSEA) 32–53 MPA Support Network (MSN) 222–227 Mt Malindang 222–227

N National Climate Center (NCC) 105–129 National Committee for the Marine Science (NCMS) 222–227 National Committee on CDM 107–129 National Conservation Strategy (NCS) 184– 194 National Integrated Protected Areas Systems (NIPAS) 156–164 National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) 168–180 natural biodiversity 233–254 Natural colonization 132–140 natural vegetative strips 250–254 Negros naked-backed fruit bat 147–164 net primary productivity (NPP) 152–164 Netherlands Ministry of Development Cooperation (D 209–227 nitrogen oxides 118–129 nitrogen-fixing tree products (NFTPs) 56–84 non-forest timber products (NTFPs) 56–84 nutrient cycling 5–8 nutrient loading 131–140


O OP3-Danum-08 Project 122–129 oxidant phytochemistry 119–129

P Pantabangan-Carranglan Watershed (PCW) 157–164 Participatory planning and monitoring 241– 254 Participatory Resource Appraisal (PRA) Studies 210–227 Payment for environmental services (PES) 22–29, 160–164, 68–84 Peat lands 6–8 Philippine Area of Responsibility (PAR) 145–164 Philippine Council for Aquatic and Marine Research and Development 222–227 Philippine Eagle 148–164 Philippine National Seagrass Committee 222–227 Plankton 218–227 polychaetes 133–140 potential evapotranspiration ratio 150–164 precipitation 150–164 Precipitation patterns 231–254 Pulau Hantu 132–140 Pulau Hantu Besar 132–140 Pulau Hantu Kechil 132–140 ‘pull’ factors 56–84 ‘pull forces’ 59–84


quaternary climate changes 46–53

R Red River Delta 181–194 Red River Estuary 181 Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) 72–84, 252–254, 16–29 Regime of Rain 192–194 relative agricultural function (RAF) 63 relative ecological function (REF) 63 Relative humidity 142–164

residual forests 150–164 Rio Conventions 7–8 RUPES 78

S Sabah Biodiversity Project 115–129 salinity 240–254 salt beds 149–164 salt water intrusion 4–8, 131–140 SANREM Program 250–254 Sea dike systems 197–198 Seagrass 218–227 Second-Generation Studies 210–227 sedentary osmotic-conforming species 137– 140 Sedimentation 135–140 Seriatopora hystrix 136–140 sesquiterpenes (C15) 119–129 sessile 137–140 shop keeping unit (SKU) 66 short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) 87–99 siltation 240–254 Socioeconomic and Cultural Studies Master Project 211–227 SEARCA 234–254 SEAMEO 234–254 stressors 12–29 Sungei Buloh 136–140 Sungei Punggol 137–140 sustainability 65–84 sustainable development 65–84 sustainable land management 5–8 sustainagility 65–84 Systems Analysis Approach 234–254

T tamaraw 147–164 tectonic uplift 46–53 ‘tension fields’ 60 terpenoids 118–129 Terrestrial biodiversity 148–164 Terrestrial Ecosystem Master Project (TEMP) 211–227 Thailand Research Fund (TRF) 165–180 The Netherlands Development Assistance Research Co 209–227

259 Third Malaysian Development Plan 104– 129 Tibetan Plateau 34–53 Tidal flat sediments 192–194 Training Needs Assessments (TNA) 246–254 trophic levels 240–254 Tunicates 133–140

U UNFCCC 71 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development 87–99 United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNCCC) 7–8 United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification 7–8 United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization 141–164 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 6–8

V Visayan spotted deer 147–164 volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 117– 129 Vulnerability 43–53

W wetland salinisation 4–8 Wetlands 194–195 World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) 249–254 World Bank 186–194

Z zoanthids 133–140