Author: Aline Soterroni (Oxford). This article was originally published in Nature Based Solutions Initiative website.
To play and to learn
The complexity of societal challenges like climate change, biodiversity loss and air pollution, require interdisciplinary research to address them effectively. Models and scenarios, particularly integrated assessment models (IAMs), offer valuable insights into these complex problems and play a crucial role in informing decision-making. Despite significant scientific advances, key gaps remain.
The study ‘Integrated modelling of nature’s role in human well-being: a research agenda’, led by Rebecca Chapling-Kramer from WWF in collaboration with world-class modellers for integrated assessment, including NbSI research fellow Aline Soterroni, identifies to five critical research areas for enhancing the integration of biodiversity and ecosystem services into global Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs).
A key area identified by the authors is the downscaling the impacts of direct and indirect drivers on ecosystems. Current IAMs operate at broad scales, which inadequately capture fine-scale ecological processes such as water quality and pollination. It is essential to understand the specific locations where human pressures affect nature and its contributions to people, as the location of these pressures greatly influences their impact. Thus, incorporating detailed, localised data into models is necessary to better represent these critical ecological processes.
Incorporating feedbacks within and between ecosystems is also essential. To assess the long-term impacts of our decisions, it is important to understand how these impacts cascade through interconnected systems. Without accounting for these cascading effects, models cannot accurately predict the broader implications of ecological changes over time. Therefore, developing models that capture these feedbacks is vital for effective long-term planning.
Linking ecological impacts to human well-being is also critical. Although there have been significant advancements in ecosystem service modelling, these models often fall short of translating biophysical changes into values that resonate with decision-makers. IAMs need to more effectively integrate the impacts of changes in biodiversity and ecosystems on various social and economic dimensions of well-being to provide a clearer picture of their true value.
Disaggregating outcomes for distributional equity is another important research area. Understanding average impacts on people is insufficient because averages can mask significant inequalities. Those most dependent on nature—often the most vulnerable—face disproportionate impacts. IAMs must address these disparities by disaggregating outcomes based on socio-economic characteristics such as gender, age, and income to ensure that policy measures promote equity and address the needs of the most affected groups.
Incorporating dynamic feedbacks of ecosystem services on the socio-economic system represents the final critical frontier that actually integrates the previous research areas, offering a comprehensive view of how ecological changes feedback into social and economic systems. Without linking outcomes back to the drivers, models are limited to static snapshots and fail to anticipate how ecological degradation impacts the broader economy and society.
A key policy question requiring an integrated social-economic-ecological assessment is the full benefits and costs of nature-based solutions for climate mitigation and adaptation, as well as their resilience to future climate change impacts. When comparing nature-based solutions with technological alternatives, it is important to include the broad range of non-market environmental and social benefits that nature provides. Evaluating the long-term resilience of nature-based solutions also requires assessing the security of these investments under climate change and determining how to maintain the ecosystems that deliver essential benefits.
IAMs are powerful tools for exploring linkages and feedbacks among social, economic, and ecological systems, but further development is needed for them to more effectively inform policy and practice.