Title : IAIOES10 REPORT ON THE IAI WORKSHOP ON THE STUDY OF THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON BIODIVERSITY Type : IAI Newsletter NSF Org: GEO Date : August 8, 1995 File : iaioes10 THE INTER-AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH REPORT ON THE IAI WORKSHOP ON THE STUDY OF THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON BIODIVERSITY August 9-12, 1994 Guadalajara, Mexico TABLE OF CONTENTS =09 =46OREWORD 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 I. BACKGROUND 9 =09 II. THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE 11 1. The Americas, a Natural Laboratory 12 2. Extent of the Losses 14 3. Lessons from the Past 15 III. SCIENTIFIC ISSUES AND PRIORITIES 16 1. Beyond Climate Models 16 2. Assessing the Magnitude 17 3. What Species Might Flourish? 18 4. The Human Dimension 18 IV. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH QUESTIONS 20 V. UNDERLYING NEEDS 23 1. Modeling 23 2. The Data Drought 24 =09 VI. THE APPROACH 26 1. At the Species Level 26 2. At the Community Level 26 3. At the Level of Ecosystems 27 4. At the Level of Landscapes and "Seascapes" 27 VII. THE ROLE OF THE IAI 29 1. Fostering Scientific Cooperation 30 VIII. REFERENCES 31 APPENDIX 1: IAI Scientific Themes 33 APPENDIX 2: Acronyms 34 APPENDIX 3: Workshop Participants 35 =46OREWORD The alarming magnitude of current species extinction was the focus of a scientific workshop on the impacts of climate change on biodiversity, attended by some 40 scientists August 9- 12, 1994, at Guadalajara, M=E9xico. The meeting was convened by the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI), and 12 of the organization's 16 member nations were represented. Intense debate marked the one day of plenary sessions and three days of workshops in which participants considered research questions and approaches and discussed the potential role of the IAI in furthering scientific knowledge in the field of biodiversity. The Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research was created in May of 1992 to address the need for advanced study of regionally significant issues pertaining to global change. The IAI is designed to evolve into a network of research facilities throughout the Americas which will augment research capabilities and promote education and training within the scientific fields most important to current and future global change research. At this writing, 16 nations have signed the agreement establishing the Institute, recognizing that no one nation can adequately study the complex, global, environmental mechanisms on this planet. The signatory nations agree that a greater understanding of these mechanisms may be achieved by a regional and international pooling of information. The IAI agreement notes the importance of an evolving scientific agenda that reflects an appropriate balance among the biogeographic areas of scientific importance. It also stresses the need to address in an integral fashion the physical, economic, and social issues relating to global change. Seven broadly defined research topics have been identified as priorities for special focus. To identify the most pressing scientific questions and socio-economic issues within those seven priority topics, a group of physical and social scientists met in Silver Spring, Maryland, in the United States on March 5-6, 1992. The resulting document, the Report of the Meeting of Scientific Experts, provided the basis for a series of seven workshops on scientific program development, intended to advance the science agenda of the IAI. The workshop on biodiversity was the last of the seven workshops. The previous six were: Temperate Terrestrial Ecosystems (Durham, N.C., USA), ENSO and Interannual Climate Variability (Lima, Per=FA), High Latitude Processes (Buenos Aires, Argentina), Ocean/Land/Atmosphere Interactions in the Inter- Tropical Americas (Panam=E1 City, Panam=E1), Tropical Ecosystems and Biogeochemical Cycles (S=E3o Jos=E9 dos Campos, Brazil), and Comparative Studies of Oceanic, Coastal, and Estuarine Processes in Temperate Zones (Montevideo, Uruguay). This report on biodiversity details possible plans for scientific strategies, and suggests as well activities such as further workshops, exchange visits, and development of improved networks for communication. It is only a proposed guide to action. The next step, as stated in the science plan, is to develop an implementation plan, a definite program for the topic. Most sincere thanks must be extended to all who helped in the preparation of this report. Special acknowledgment must be given to the local organizing committee and their institutions for their excellent efforts in managing this important international workshop in Guadalajara. Those committee members were: Arturo Curiel Ballesteros, president of the "Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biol=F3gicas y Agropecu=E1rias (CUCBA) de la Universidad de Guadalajara" (U. de G.); Fernando Alf=E1ro Bustamante, Director of the "Divisi=F3n de Ciencias Biol=F3gicas y Ambientales del CUCBA de la U. de G".; and Mar=EDa Elena Diaz, research professor from the "Departamento of Ciencias del Medio Ambiente de la Universidad de Guadalajara". Also acknowledged with much gratitude are Br=E1ulio =46erreira Dias from the Brazilian Ministry of the Environment, and current member of the IAI Steering Committee for Biodiversity, and Gene Rosenberg from the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA, whose contributions to develop the Science Agenda for this IAI topic allowed the workshop to occur and the working groups chairperson and co-chairperson who coordinated discussions and whose written reports and stimulating verbal contributions ultimately led to the drafting and completion of this report. The names of all participants, who made excellent contributions are listed in Appendix 3. Additionally, I would like to express my most sincere thanks to Dr. Robert Corell (National Science Foundation), Dr. Michael Hall, James Buizer, Lisa Farrow and Claudia Nierenberg (NOAA/OGP) for their constant enthusiasm and support during the development of this workshop. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the commitment, dedication and enthusiasm of my staff members, Raquel Gomes, Marcella Ohira and D=E9lia Levandoski, without whose support in preparing this report would have been impossible to accomplish. Rub=E9n Lara Lara IAI Executive Scientist EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The current, steady loss of biodiversity, that rich mix of plant and animal species that share this planet with Homo sapiens, is regarded by many scientists as one of the most serious problems connected with global change. Species have always passed in and out of the world scene, but the perceived climate change through global warming may be occurring too rapidly to allow species to make adjustments. The increase of our own population with its demands for space and resources also diminishes the habitats of other species, and their ability to migrate with change as they have done in the past. The result may be a massive rate of extinction, before mankind has had time to inventory the species that exist and determine how they might be useful in medicine, crop genetics, and improved materials, or critical to the whole biological system. In fact, aside from philosophical arguments that a species is a unique and irreplaceable result of millions of years of evolutions and not ours to wipe out, there are also arguments of practicality. Like every species, our own is intimately dependent on others for its well-being, and the benefits that we might tap from the others have barely been tapped. The basic question before the three dozen scientists from 12 countries who met to formulate a research agenda for this subject was: "What is the relative effect of climate change on biodiversity, and what can we do about it?" Definition of terms was debated throughout the four days, with participants agreeing on the definition of biodiversity by Javier A. Simonetti, et al, as "a matter of quantity of life and, fundamentally, of biological quality accumulated over time." Discussions of climate change centered on global warming caused by increased CO2 and other greenhouse gases, and therewas general agreement that warming is indeed occurring and at a rate much faster than at any known time in the past. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Extinctions have always occurred, but rarely at the rate foreseen in the coming decades, and not usually attributable to the activities of one species. Global climatic change is likely to have significant effects on the biodiversity of the Americas, given that individual species are sensitive to changes in temperature, rainfall, and gaseous composition of the atmosphere. Exacerbating the potential effects of climate change is the rapid increase in human population over the past century, which continues to alter and preempt habitat for other species. This implies that remaining natural populations will often be constrained in smaller areas which may be unsuitable for the continued viability of individual species. Habitat fragmentation can lead to reduction in total genetic variation, dispersal barriers and in the case of plants, the inability to maintain key biotic interactions with pollinators and dispersal agents. While some species will be affected negatively, others will increase in abundance (Arroyo et al., 1992), leading to significant changes in the ecosystems. Because habitat alteration can occur in a largely unpredictable fashion, its effect on many species is also unpredictable. The number of life forms that share this planet with humanity is not known, not even to the nearest order of magnitude. Less than 1.5 million species have been identified, although the total number could be closer to 10 million and in some estimates runs as high as 80 million. The majority of species are small animals and micro- organisms living in environments that are not yet well-studied such as the tropical forest canopy or the ocean floor. Even a handful of soil from anywhere in the Americas, however, may contain many unidentified species. While our inventory is incomplete, it is clear that biological diversity is collapsing at an astounding rate. SCIENTIFIC ISSUES, PRIORITIES AND THE ROLE OF THE IAI As the sponsoring organization, the Inter-American Institute should take an active role in creating a management plan for global change research. The question to be resolved is: What is the potential impact of global change on biodiversity? The goal is the study of conservation and the use of biodiversity in the face of global change, with the expectation of providing recommendations based on scientific knowledge in the face of global change. A scientific agenda aimed at considering the impact of climate change on biodiversity, the participants decided, should address the following: (1) What are the relative impacts of different aspects of global change, such as differences in regional change, back-feeding effects due to loss of communities, changes in social values? (2) Develop a framework to assess the magnitude of extinctions (3) Define the role of the scientific community in policy making (4) How does IAI fit into existing scientific programs? (5) What direction should future studies take? Scientific Research Questions In the first steps towards achieving a management plan, the IAI should: (1) Promote multidisciplinary research relevant to the sus- tainable development of the Americas; (2) Integrate regional scale analysis with local case studies through comparative studies; (3) For these studies, systematic data sets are needed and IAI should take inventory of existing data, facilitate access to data and identify further need for data gathering; (4) Foster scientific cooperation among scientists and encourage the free flow of information on global change; (5) Sponsor a series of specific workshops and support short- term and doctoral/post-doctoral studies involving multinational- multidisciplinary research. IAI APPROACH Loss of species, which changes biodiversity, is not reversible. Some environmental problems, such as increasing concentrations of chlorofluorocarbons or carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, can be reversed, but once an element in biodiversity is lost, it is lost forever. Therefore the need for human intervention is essential. The mechanisms for action in Latin America, however, are different than they are in the U.S. and Canada, and that should be taken into account. The Latin American countries are at a different stage of development, so it is critical that before local action can be taken, local people must be convinced that they can make up lost income. Steps should be taken to demonstrate that conservation and development can be compatible. The state of biodiversity in the Americas must be examined at a number of different levels. A proposal for a multi-level approach follows: I. At the Species Level; II. At the Community Level; III. At the Level of Ecosystems; IV. At the Level of Landscapes and "Seascapes". RESEARCH QUESTIONS Over the last three days the participants divided into three study groups which met in work sessions then re-united periodically in plenary to compare their findings. On the final morning all groups reached agreement that the IAI's scientific agenda on this subject should include the following priority research questions: 1.What is the relative importance of biodiversity change due to global change (esp. climate change) on a regional scale throughout the Americas? --Assess the relative vulnerability of biodiversity to global change in all biomes of the Americas; --Identify indicators of changes in biodiversity. 2. What have been the historical changes in biodiversity in the Americas and how can we predict future changes? --Facilitate the integration and standardization of historical and current data bases and information management systems (e.g. conservation data centers, Internet, etc.) 3. How quickly do ecosystems adapt to natural and anthropogenically induced climate/global change? --Assess the relative vulnerability and rate of change of biodiversity in each country (e.g. multi-national transect studies, etc.) and identify "hot spots" for conservation action; -- Develop criteria for evaluating the relative importance of the reduction of biodiversity in major ecosystems in the Americas; --Facilitate the networking of interdisciplinary scientists to understand the rates of change; --Ensure that special cases such as migratory populations are included in all assessments; --Explore the possibility of slowing or reversing ecosystem degradation. 4. How do we assess the cultural and economic value of bio- diversity and transmit it to policy makers and the public? --Facilitate interactions between economists, social scientists, and indigenous cultures to assess the spiritual, cultural and economic value of our natural resources; --Enhance the education and training opportunities on the subject of biodiversity; --Develop and expand operational linkages between science and policy in the public and private sectors to develop inte- grated action plans for conserving biodiversity (e.g. Biodiver- sity and Climate Change conventions); --Encourage studies on the impact of global change in causing reduction of cultural diversity in the Americas; --Valuate biodiversity using social-cultural and economic para- meters with respect to global change. 5. What are the interactions between global change and biodiversity? --Evaluate the quality and rate of change in biodiversity due to global change throughout the Americas; --Study the effects of changes in biodiversity throughout the Americas on the rate and extent of global change; --Encourage studies that address the integrated effects of global change and their relative impact on biodiversity (e.g. UV-B, climate variability, pollutants, land-use changes); --Encourage studies on land-use changes and greenhouse gas emissions; --Encourage studies on the combined effects of climate change and UV-B on biodiversity; --Develop the methodology to measure the reductions in biodiversity using ecological, cultural, climatological, and economic indices. 6. How can we formulate and develop cost-effective actions that will conserve biodiversity in the face of global change? --Promote increased in situ conservation action in the region; --Promote increased ex situ conservation action in the region; --Facilitate monitoring program for key conservation areas; --Evaluate the quality and rate of change in biodiversity due to global change throughout the Americas; --Study the effects of changes in biodiversity throughout the Americas on the rate and extent of global change. Participants suggested that IAI could facilitate the above research questions by undertaking the following activities: *integrating multidisciplinary research relevant to the sustainable development of the Americas *integrate regional scale analysis with local case studies through comparative studies *inventory the existing data, facilitate access to it, and determine gaps that need filling by further data gathering *convene scientific workshops and short-term doctoral/post- doctoral studies involving multi-national, multidisciplinary research I. BACKGROUND Extinctions have always occurred, but rarely at the rate foreseen in the coming decades, and not usually attributable to the activities of one species. Global climatic change is likely to have significant effects on the biodiversity of the Americas, given that individual species are sensitive to changes in temperature, rainfall, and gaseous composition of the atmosphere. Exacerbating the potential effects of climate change is the rapid increase in human population over the past century, which continues to alter and preempt habitat for other species. This implies that remaining natural populations will often be constrained in smaller areas which may be unsuitable for the continued viability of individual species. Habitat fragmentation can lead to reduction in total genetic variation, dispersal barriers and in the case of plants, the inability to maintain key biotic interactions with pollinators and dispersal agents. While some species will be affected negatively, others will increase in abundance (Arroyo et al., 1992a, 1992), leading to significant changes in the ecosystems. Because habitat alteration can occur in a largely unpredictable fashion, its effect on many species is also unpredictable. The number of life forms that share this planet with humanity is not known, not even to the nearest order of magnitude. Less than 1.5 million species have been identified, although the total number could be closer to 10 million and in some estimates runs as high as 80 million. The majority of species are small animals and micro-organisms living in environments that are not yet well- studied such as the tropical forest canopy or the ocean floor. Even a handful of soil from anywhere in the Americas, however, may contain many unidentified species. While our inventory is incomplete, it is clear that biological diversity is collapsing at an astounding rate. Harvard University biologist Edward O. Wilson has estimated that in tropical rain forests alone, roughly 50,000 species per year are either extinguished or condemned to eventual extinction by destruction of their habitat. Habitat losses in other areas such as dry forests and rangelands, and other mechanisms of destruction such as over-exploitation, pollution, and the introduction of exotic species, probably push the numbers even higher. Nowhere can the losses be taken lightly. Aside from philosophical arguments that a species is a unique and irreplaceable result of millions of years of evolution and not ours to wipe out, there are also arguments of practicality. Like every species, our own is intimately dependent on others for our well- being, and the benefits that we might derive from the others have barely been tapped. Time after time creatures thought useless or harmful are found to perform ecological services to which it is difficult to assign an economic value. Predators driven to extinction no longer keep potential pests in check. Earthworms or termites killed by pesticides no longer aerate soils. Mangroves cut to make way for housing developments no longer protect coastlines from erosion. Other benefits now seen from other species are equally dramatic. A quarter of all prescription drugs used in the United States originated from plants. Include across-the-counter pharmaceuticals and our medical dependency on natural ingredients is startling. Wild relatives of the plant foods we eat sometimes have natural resistances to disease and drought that can be hybridized into the domestic strains. Massive corn blight damage in the United States was averted by incorporating the qualities of a wild strain found in Mexico. Any meaningful strategy of safeguarding the species that remain will require protection of wildlands. Protection can also be provided for species in the areas of human habitation, but the great bulk of species diversity is found in the yet-undisturbed areas. To avoid biological poverty, humanity will have to learn how to save diversity in all places, in the remote corners of the world and in the forests and waters we use and the fields, villages, and cities where we live. As a species, we have been bent on conquering the outdoors and all that lives there. As wildlife biologist Aldo Leopold said more than a half-century ago, "If the biota, in the course of eons, has built something we like but do not understand, then who but a fool would discard seemingly useless parts? To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering." II. THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE Biodiversity is reflected in the number and quality of taxonomic groups on this planet, which refers to the classification of species of plants and animals. A definition by Simonetti et al was considered suitable by participants in the workshop: "Biodiversity is a matter of quantity of life and, fundamentally, of biological quality accumulated over time." Biodiversity must be considered as an important part of a country's genetic wealth. Preserving it might involve creating banks of germplasm (genetic banks), preserving the knowledge of indigenous people as to the value of certain species, identifying key species for biodiversity studies, and other measures, including habitat protection. One of the major threats to biodiversity now appears to be global warming (Raven, 1987). Participants agreed that global warming is probably occurring and at a rate much faster than at any known time in the past. It will probably not be felt equally around the globe. Several authors claim that an overwhelming majority of General Circulation Models show that temperature increases will be greater at higher latitudes. Schlesinger et al. (1990) suggested that higher temperatures would cause greater respiration in vegetation and soils and that vegetation would attempt to shift, or migrate. Human activities would also cause vegetative and biochemical changes. Burning of fossil fuels puts more carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere while destruction of rain forests may deplete a sink for that increased CO2. New roads, farms, and urban areas create impediments to the migration of plant species in the face of climate change. Consideration of climate change should focus on the next 60 years when a doubling of the present CO2 levels has been predicted. This assumes a "business as usual" attitude and a temperature increase of 0.2 to 0.5 degrees Celsius per decade. Scenarios with lower CO2 emissions should also be considered. Areas will respond in different ways, as will species (Bazzaz, 1990). Some species adapt rapidly to environmental change, which may force society to concentrate on those lacking that ability. Species have been moved long distances in the past with no apparent harm to them. Records show that humans took plants to what is now the United Kingdom in the Stone Age. Vikings carried species to Greenland. American Indians spread maize over the New World. The Americas, a Natural Laboratory Available data indicate that the Americas support a disproportionate share of the world's species of organisms for many major taxonomic groups, and an exceptionally rich array of ecosystems. Latin America alone supports more than a third of the world's plant species and a high percentage of the bird and mammal species. The Caribbean is the second richest coastal region in the world for marine biota. For example, Table 1, below, shows the percentage of the world's flowering plant species in five countries in the region compared to other countries which also have high diversity, and the comparative rates of destruction of habitat. Table 1. Share of Share of World's Annual: World's Flowering Rate of Country Land Area Plant Species Forest Loss _________________________________________________________________ _______ (percent) (percent) =09 (square kms) (percent) Brazil 6.3 22 13,820 0.4 Colombia 0.8 18 6,000 1.3 China 7.0 11 n.a. n.a. Mexico 1.4 10 7,000 1.5 Australia 5.7 9 n.a. n.a. Indonesia 1.4 8 10,000 0.9 Peru 1.0 8 2,700 0.4 Malaysia 0.2 6 3,100 =09 1.5 Ecuador 0.2 6 3,400 2.4 India 2.2 6 10,000 2.7 Zaire 1.7 4 4,000 0.4 Madagascar 0.4 4 1,500 1.5 _________________________________________________________ _____ Sources: McNeely et al. (1991) and Reid (1992). All the economies of the Americas are strongly based on the utilization of their biotic resources. The biodiversity stored in the region represents an untapped resource of incalculable socioeconomic and biological value to future generations. Much information about the uses of these biotic resources lies within indigenous cultures of the Americas, a source yet to be explored for the good of society at large. The Americas extend from the sub-Antarctic to Arctic latitudes, offering a huge natural laboratory over which the impacts of global change on biodiversity can be measured and compared. Because climatic warming seems to be proceeding at different rates in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres (Stouffer et al., 1989), comparative studies in North and South America could be useful for assessing the magnitude of global change. Despite the huge variety of biota in the Americas, the information about it is limited, and this varies greatly among taxa and among regions. Taxonomic knowledge is poorest in those areas harboring the highest levels of biodiversity. Few countries possess complete floristic works or even checklists for many taxonomic groups. The use of geographical information systems is limited by the lack of reliable data on species distributions and climatic data. No taxonomic studies have been focused on the relation between global change and biodiversity. The taxonomic knowledge available is largely at the most basic descriptive level. There is little information about the phylogeny of species, on their detailed geographic distributions, and on other biological or ecological attributes. Almost no information is available on the conservation status and needs of all but a few species. Likewise, little attention has been paid to the temperature and precipitation limits and biotic interactions of the major vegetation types. Except for a few overexploited species, very little attention has been paid to the economic and social potential of the region's biotic resources in terms of local, national, and regional development. Local, national, and regional efforts are underway to obtain data on one or another aspect of biodiversity. These include BIN21 in Brazil, INBIO in Costa Rica, CONABIO in Mexico, NBS and the Nature Conservancy's Conservation Data Centers in the U.S. But these are largely uncoordinated with each other at present. The flow of information among researchers in the region on topics related to the biodiversity issue is limited, largely because of technological and financial constraints and lack of a coordinating mechanism to disseminate information. And there is essentially no information available on the relation of biotic diversity to global change. Although hypotheses abound, empirical data are scarce. Furthermore, there is almost no information available on the socioeconomic costs of the loss of biodiversity. Extent of the Losses The losses, however, continue. Tropical rain forest ecosystems, believed to shelter at least half the planet's life forms, have been reduced to nearly half their original area. Annual deforestation claims 17 million hectares of the wet and dry tropics. In many countries, Benin, Ivory Coast, Haiti, and Nigeria, for example, forests have all but disappeared. Brazil has more tropical forest and probably more species than any other nation, as shown in the table above. Massive deforestation continues there, although it has slowed since reaching a peak in 1987 due to government policy, a slowdown in the Brazilian economy, and unusually rainy weather. Although roughly 90 per cent of the Amazonian rain forests still stand, the once vast Atlantic rain forests and the coniferous Araucaria forests of the south have been devastated, more than 95 per cent destroyed by logging or urban expansion. Outside the tropics, many other ecosystems have been all but eliminated, including the tall-grass prairies of North America and the old-growth hardwood forests of the United States and Canada. Temperate rain forests, less widespread than their tropical counterparts, are probably the more endangered ecosystem. Of the 31 million hectares of temperate rain forest once found on Earth, 56 percent have been logged or cleared. Less than 20 per cent of old-growth rain forests survive in the U.S., in scattered fragments. In rain forests of British Columbia in Canada, only one of 25 large coastal watersheds has wholly escaped logging. Damage to wetlands has been severe in both the U.S. and Canada, with losses in California exceeding 90 percent. Many freshwater and marine habitats, including coral reefs, have suffered heavy losses. Elsewhere, mangrove swamps which protect tropical coastlines have been reduced. Ecuador has lost half its mangrove wetlands to commercial shrimp ponds, and half the remainder are slated for development. Lessons From the Past Human societies have been affected by global changes and alterations in biodiversity in the past. During the past 15 millennia, the loss of large herds of grazing herbivores forced hunter-gatherers to become sedentarized in settlements to depend on the gathering and breeding of small animals and on agriculture. Variations in sea level during glacial and interglacial periods also affected the settlement pattern of coastal groups that depended primarily on the consumption of marine mollusks. The severe aridification in the eighth to the sixth millennia that produced the Sahara desert, once rich with herbivores, made even a sedentary existence impossible except where permanent water sources were present, primarily the Nile River (Manzanilla, 1982, 1986a; Butzer, 1994). Migration by former hunter-gatherers to the Nile Valley gave rise to the Egyptian civilization which emerged around 5,000 years ago. Climatic change and overuse of environments have led to collapse of societies, as well as to their emergence. Rosen (1993) noted that agricultural sectors in the Near East collapsed in the Early Bronze Age partly because of state control over surplus production and partly because elite urban managers responded slowly to the misuse of croplands and aridification. Manzanilla (1994) writes that the environmental worsening of the giant urban center of Teotihuacan 1300 years ago, in what is now Mexico City, was attributable to deforestation, drought, urbanization of former farming lands, rural-to-urban migration, over-exploitation of water resources, and the inability of a central authority to deal with these problems-issues easily recognizable today. =09 The drought in the Basin of Mexico that stressed society there and contributed to its collapse coincides with the frequent El Ni=F1o phase mentioned for 1300 BP (Manzanilla, 1994). A study of Galapagos lagoons shows an increased frequency of El Ni=F1o events in recent times, reports Steinitz-Kannan (personal communication). Increased frequencies of El Ni=F1o events can potentially lead to increased rates of species extinctions. The El Ni=F1o-Southern Oscillation or ENSO, is now known to affect climate on a global basis. Discussion of ENSO, subject of a separate workshop, was limited here. III. SCIENTIFIC ISSUES AND PRIORITIES A major question before the workshop was, "What is the potential impact of global change on biodiversity? The goal was the development of a science plan for conservation and biodiversity management in the face of global change. Understanding the possible future must begin with understanding the past. The natural and human-influenced tendencies of global climatic change must be studied historically. When previous changes have occurred, how did they affect extinctions of species, and successions? In the extinctions happening now, and expected to happen in the future, how many changes are due to human activities? Within that category, to what extent are the changes in ecosystems due to (a) changes in land use, bringing loss of habitat and fragmentation, (b) human population growth, and (c) environmental pollution? What are the socio-economic driving forces that are causing changes in land use and human-caused changes in the climate, that bring about loss of biodiversity? Beyond Climate Models Climatic change models only agree that change would involve an increase in temperature. But the models do not specify what impact this increasing temperature would have on precipitation, or on vegetation. This must be determined. Another research problem would be how to evaluate the effect of changed frequencies of "rare" occurrences of natural events such as hurricanes, frosts, etc. on biodiversity. Some research has indicated that increased temperature may cause more frequent occurrences of phenomena such as hurricanes and El Ni=F1o events. So a central issue may be, "To which climate changes would biodiversity be most sensitive?" Which is more important, changes in temperature averages, or temperature extremes? What are the effects of temperature increases on species that structure the system, including keystone species? An inventory is needed of those species that structure the system, the taxonomic groups of greater priority. How does genetic heterogeneity fit into the picture? Are human activities increasing the vulnerability of biodiversity in advance of climate change? Are human activities limiting the possibilities for adaptation? Indigenous peoples, who have considerable expertise in dealing with wild species, have been mostly ignored. Their knowledge should be utilized, and their own social future should be more carefully addressed. Loss of biodiversity, often caused by the activities of technologically advanced humans, drives indigenous people out of the forests, the prairies, and the wetlands, and this will probably be accelerated with the advent of global warming. Their knowledge, their techniques, and their agricultural methods might be preserved if pride can be engendered in their life style, encouraging them to continue with certain valuable traditional practices. Assessing The Magnitude of Extinction What will be the magnitude of extinction in the Americas in the face of the expected global change? Addressing this issue requires developing predictive methods capable of assessing extinction on a large scale. The development of species-area curves and simulations of future vegetation removal is recommended, as is the study of the recent and paleo-ecological history of well-known groups of organisms. These questions must be pursued as present data on extinction are poor and controversial. The development of indicators of pending extinctions is badly needed. The ecological economics of species loss need to be incorporated into such studies. Viable population sizes should be determined for keystone species and the latter should be monitored throughout their distributions for changes in population size. How is biodiversity distributed geographically and at the landscape level? Are the patterns of the geographic distribution of diversity similar at different taxonomic levels and among different taxonomic groups? An answer to this question is vital to assessing which areas of the Americas are areas of high biodiversity and therefore important for conservation for future socio-economic development. The answer is also important in determining whether such areas correspond to those likely to be most strongly impacted by global change. Essential in any research on biodiversity is the definition of the species involved, and interpretations of their interactions. Important tools are (1) species-area curves (models); (2) historical (written) records; and (3) paleo-ecological records (fossils). What Species Might Flourish? What are the relative impacts on biodiversity of the different aspects of global change, such as habitat fragmentation, habitat loss, land and water use changes, alteration of climate, human migrations, overall economic structure, etc.? Are the effects of global change on biodiversity the same on both sides of the equator (i.e., are global changes determined in one area applicable to the other)? Will there be positive as well as negative effects of global change on biodiversity? Or will global change be marked more by great levels of invasion by undesirable species? To anticipate which consequences might occur, what are the key biological features of organisms that determine their response to global change? Individual species and ecosystems are likely to be impacted in a variety of ways. For example, in plants, long-lived, biotically pollinated species with biotic dispersal mechanisms could be more sensitive to global change than short-lived self-compatible species with non-specialized pollinator requirements, e.g. wind pollination (Arroyo et al., 1992). Recruitment could be critical in many vegetation types due to alteration of conditions for germination. However, in some plant species, (e.g., weedy species), recruitment is likely to be favored. Can the historical record of the response of diverse taxa to short-term climatic fluctuations be utilized to predict future responses of populations to rapid global climatic change? The historical record has the potential for providing an analog of future global change. There is a great difference in the amount and quality of historical information on paleoclimates that is available for North and South America, with a particular gap within South America. A full understanding of differences in paleoclimates and population responses requires greater attention to the South American record. These data will constitute an important input for future development planning in the region. The Human Dimension What are the effects of the loss of diversity on patterns of human settlement and on human well-being (e.g., human health, living standards, government stability, etc.)? What are the possible effects of global change on the ability of humans to derive positive socio-economic benefits from utilization of biotic resources? Demographic models suggest that the critical period of growth for the human population will occur in the coming decades (Table 2). During this period many people in the Americas will be increasingly dependent on utilizing biotic resources for their products or on conversion of the land that presently supports natural ecosystems. Table 2. Populations in the Americas (In Thousands) Area 1955 1975 1995 2025 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ Northern America 181,742 238,807 285,843 331,957 Central America 43,093 81,359 131,281 213,183 Temperate S. America 28,076 39,231 51,687 68,970 Tropical S. America 86,123 175,617 273,985 424,762=09 ____________________________________________________________________ Source: United Nations Conservation of biodiversity and research policy in the Americas must be consistent with the socioeconomic realities of the region. Consequently, conservation and development needs must be balanced on a local, national, and regional scale. In many instances, under conditions of global change, emphasis on the sound use of natural resources might be the most appropriate means of conserving biodiversity. Although there are no precise models dealing with the possible large-scale biotic effects of global change, the effects on humans could be enormous. Research efforts should center on assessing the vulnerability of the different areas of the region to biotic changes, including their socio-economic effects. Cooperation with social scientists should be a priority, to facilitate understanding of social changes resulting from biotic change. Given current economic constraints among most of the countries of the Americas, research programs should focus on cooperative efforts among the countries of the region. Given the fact that the scope of the problem is large and will require the expenditure of significant funds, the IAI should explore innovative ways of obtaining funds for its programs from non- governmental sources. Implementation of research programs should be toward the mutual benefit of the countries of the region. IV. PRIORITY RESEARCH QUESTIONS Much discussion has focused on climate change and biodiversity, but the two topics have usually been discussed separately despite the fact that they overlap. Participants at this workshop concluded with a set of priority research questions that attempt to join the two topics as well as address other aspects of global change that might affect the species diversity. =46ollowing are the priority research questions and the measures that might be taken to resolve them: 1. What is the relative importance of biodiversity change due to global change (especially climate change) on a regional scale throughout the Americas? * Assess the relative vulnerability of biodiversity in all biomes of the Americas; * Identify indicators of change in biodiversity. 2. What have been the historical changes in biodiversity in the Americas and how can we predict future changes? * Facilitate the integration and standardization of historical and current data bases and information management systems (e.g. conservation data centers, Internet, etc.); * Synthesize information to define and document the biodiversity "baseline" for the Americas, and identify information gaps; * Foster the development of new methodologies to detect and predict changes in biodiversity; * Document the anthropogenic and natural change of biodiversity over time. 3. How quickly do ecosystems adapt to natural and anthropogenically induced climate/global change? * Assess the relative vulnerability and rate of change of biodiversity in each country (e.g. multi-national transect studies, RAP, etc.) and identify "hot spots" for conservation action; * Develop criteria for evaluating the relative impact of the reduction of the biodiversity in major ecosystems in the Americas; * Facilitate the networking of interdisciplinary scientists to understand the rates of change; * Ensure that special cases such as migratory populations are included in all assessments; * Explore the possibility of slowing or reversing ecosystem degradation. 4. How do we assess the cultural and economic value of biodiversity and transmit it to policy-makers and the public? * Facilitate interactions between economists, social scientists, natural scientists and indigenous cultures to assess the spiritual, cultural, and economic value of our natural resources; * Enhance education and training opportunities in biodiversity assessment and climate change; * Develop and expand operational linkages between science and policy in the public and private sectors to develop integrated action plans to conserve biodiversity (e.g., the Biodiversity and Climate Change Conventions); * Evaluate biodiversity using social-cultural and economic parameters with respect to global change. 5. What are the interactions between global change and biodiversity? * Evaluate the quality and rate of change in biodiversity due to global change throughout the Americas; * Study the effects of changes in biodiversity throughout the Americas on the rate and extent of global change; * Encourage studies that address the integrated effects of global change and their relative impact on biodiversity (e.g. UV-B, climate variability, pollutants, land-use changes, etc.); * Encourage studies on land-use changes and greenhouse gas emissions; * Encourage studies on the combined effects of climate change and UV-B on biodiversity; * Develop an appropriate methodology to measure reductions in biodiversity using ecological, cultural, climatological, and economic indices. 6. How can we formulate and develop cost-effective actions that will conserve biodiversity in the face of global change? * Promote increased in-situ conservation action throughout the region, such as nature reserves, multi-use areas; * Promote increased ex-situ conservation action throughout the region, such as germplasm banks, zoos; * Facilitate monitoring programs for key conservation areas throughout the region. V. UNDERLYING NEEDS Unraveling the complexities of biodiversity and transmitting that information to decision-makers and the general public requires cooperation among the scientific disciplines. To identify the best models of global warming, for example, physical scientists need to get together with atmospheric scientists to improve terrestrial input and to find out what is missing, without duplicating work. Wildlife specialists need to communicate with soil scientists and soil scientists with hydrologists to see the complete picture of possible impact on habitat. A network of social scientists should be established to determine the strategies that people might use under conditions of environmental stress, and to advise policymakers. The importance of biota in terms of medicines, food supply, and ecosystem balance must be better understood and communicated. Linkages between the IAI and the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) are to be encouraged so that IUCN can assist in expanding the work of environmental groups throughout the region. This would help raise public awareness of biodiversity problems. As one participant in the workshop said, "There is a need to understand each other's science. The atmospheric people are saying there is a rapid warming coming on, the biology people have to determine how organisms react to it, and the social people have to mediate and between the scientific world and the public. So there is a need for communication, and encouraging it may be a role that the IAI can play." The interactions among species must be better understood. An assessment should be done, it was agreed, not only of the biodiversity in a given area, but of the linkages to biodiversity in other areas as well, as in the case of songbirds of the North wintering in the tropics. Modeling Although climatic models are much discussed, models should be developed in the field of biodiversity as a vehicle of socioeconomic analysis and for evaluating potential biodiversity and rates of species loss. There are also needs for linkages, between biodiversity and climate models, and biodiversity and ecosystem function models. Start-up of biodiversity models is difficult because of the scarcity of resources and data. Those that have been developed are region-specific. IAI should develop a center for modeling to start education and training. Standardization of information about biodiversity would be essential in collecting data for models, so the results from there can be compared. The region could be divided into areas for study transects, information can be obtained from these study areas through a variety of disciplines, and examined using a number of variables, such as CO2 content, UV-B levels, acid precipitation, etc. The Data Drought The need for more data is apparent, with many species not yet identified and the function of ecosystems often poorly understood. IAI hopes to help develop research centers throughout the Americas, rather than concentrating research data in a single center. Information data bases already exist, but access to them must be facilitated. Access to information should be borderless, free and easy. Language should be considered. One study done in Mexico was published only in English. A policy might be established that any study undertaken should be available in the host country's language. More scientists and more institutions should be encouraged to get involved in IAI activities. To this point the work being done is the result of a strong commitment of the IAI Implementation Committee Representatives from the 16 countries, who are the ones who publicize IAI information in the IAI newsletter. With more people involved, more systems could become integrated, such as libraries, universities, and non-university laboratories. Scientists and institutions throughout the Americas need to be connected through Internet. An IAI workshop is contemplated, bringing together scientists with managers of network systems. The United Nations Development Program may have funds for setting up network connections. Training is necessary in a number of areas, especially in the areas of taxonomy, use of geographic information systems, palynology, population biology, regional planning, and economics and sociology. Training should be at the post-doctoral, doctoral, or masters level. Intermediate-level courses on specific topics should be encouraged. The participation and support of sub-regional and national institutions will be essential to all efforts. Countries and institutions should develop agreements at the regional and sub- regional levels to facilitate the interchange of information on biological inventories, climatic data, geographic information systems, and socio-demographic aspects. Regional workshops, among other means, can promote the standardization of research methods. Infrastructure development can assure the success of research and training programs at each center and the exchange of information at a minimal cost. Joint research protocols and fund-raising mechanisms, both regional and sub- regional, should be developed and matching fund strategies explored. Scientists should identify priority areas and taxonomic groups of interest for completing biological inventories. They should encourage the development of geographic information systems for detecting areas of high biodiversity, developing species-area curves for predicting extinction patterns and aiding the definition of policies for conservation and economic development. North American-South American comparisons of the impact of global change on biodiversity would be useful. Empirical rules to relate climatic variables and biological diversity should be developed. Studies should utilize replicated series of carefully chosen study sites in each major biome. These sites should be areas for long-term research and monitoring of biodiversity changes over the decadal time scale. Detailed climatic data are required at each site. The key life history traits of organisms should be studied to determine the response capacity to global change and the performance of organisms under different aspects of global change. Conservation strategies to preserve as many species as possible in the face of expected global change must be devised. Studies should evaluate the importance of the development of reserves versus ex situ conservation and the socio-economic feasibility of reserves for areas impacted differently by global change. VI. THE APPROACH Loss of species, which changes biodiversity, is not reversible. Some environmental problems, such as increasing concentrations of chlorofluorocarbons or carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, can be reversed, but once an element in biodiversity is lost, it is lost forever. Therefore the need for human intervention is essential. The mechanisms for action in Latin America, however, are different than they are in the U.S. and Canada, and that should be taken into account. The Latin American countries are at a different stage of development, so it is critical that before local action can be taken, local people must be convinced that they can make up lost income. Steps should be taken to demonstrate that conservation and development can be compatible. The state of biodiversity in the Americas must be examined at a number of different levels. A proposal for a multi-level approach follows: I. At the Species Level The structure of populations of endemic species and of indictor species and their genetic heterogeneity should be determined. These population parameters should be studied when and while climatic parameters are being monitored. Centers of high biodiversity should be identified and more attention given to monitoring species, which involves extensive inventories. The effect of human activities must be studied, based on the hypothesis that human activities increase the vulnerability of biodiversity in advance of climatic change. Consideration should be give to the relative importance of: (a) changes in average temperatures (mean values), or (b) changes in temperature extremes. II. At the Community Level Biodiversity should be monitored at sites where and while climatic change is being monitored. Functions of species should be studied, as well as their relative abundance or evenness (proportion of species in the system). Other considerations should include: (1) better characterization of components of biodiversity more than the indices; (2) structure of the community (vertical and spatial); (3) productivity; (4) functional types; (5) indirect effects of temperature changes on predators, competitors, and other and other interspecific linkages (including symbiosis, parasitism, succession, etc.); and (6) structure and energy flows in trophic networks. III. At the Level of Ecosystems Consideration should be given to the diversity of communities, the surface occupied, and the new communities developed when change occurs. Which ecosystems particularly vulnerable to climatic change? Which ecosystems are more important for humans, those with high biodiversity or those with high socio- economic value? We should know how biodiversity is valued. IV. At the Level of Landscapes and "Seascapes" Patterns of land and sea use, or management, should be determined. A valuation system for biodiversity must be devised to determine the cost of the loss of biodiversity due to global change. Feedback processes of biodiversity loss and climatic change need to be documented. For example, deforestation of the Amazon region will surely modify precipitation and temperature regimes, and over-fishing in the oceans will cause substitution of species, or displacement of species. The degree and direction of the impact of human activities must be determined. Other possible approaches: -- Ecological theories of complex ecosystems should be developed, perhaps by dissecting the interactions of agroecosystems in three different locations. --A search should be made for biotic resources that are underutilized. --The adaptation limits of productive systems should be determined and recognized. --Formulas should be developed as to the cost of a narrow iew of our resources and the potential benefits of a broader vision. With rates of extinction believed to be higher than at any time since the disappearance of the dinosaurs, a sense of urgency prevails in the scientific community on the subject of biodiversity. Rapid assessment of species and ecosystems in selected areas may be necessary throughout the Americas, in advance of the more inclusive assessment of all areas. There is a need to generate possible scenarios of change at the regional (Americas), sub-regional, and local levels for those parameters relevant to biodiversity, such as temperature, precipitation, relative humidity, land use, UV-B, ozone, international political accords, etc. As a method of defining IAI programs, a system of transects for comparative study over seven areas of the region is suggested. The information gathered in those transects could be applied to a matrix to take inventory, identify gaps in information, and show the availability of information. A separate matrix could be generated for each system. Systems include: mountains, tropical forests, temperate forests, coastal ecosystems, oceans, wetlands, arid and semi-arid regions, agricultural systems, etc. VII. THE ROLE OF THE IAI As the sponsoring organization, the Inter-American Institute should take an active role in creating a management plan for global change research. The question to be resolved is: What is the potential impact of global change on biodiversity? The goal is the study of conservation and the use of biodiversity in the face of global change, with the expectation of providing recommendations based on scientific knowledge in the face of global change. In the first steps toward achieving a management plan, the IAI should undertake the following activities: (1) Promote multidisciplinary research relevant to the sustainable development of the Americas; (2) Integrate regional scale analysis with local case studies through comparative studies; (3) For these studies, systematic data sets are needed and IAI should take inventory of existing data, facilitate access to data and identify further need for data gathering; (4) Sponsor a series of specific workshops and support short-term and doctoral/post-doctoral studies involving multinational and multidisciplinary research. The following issues should also underlie all activities undertaken by the IAI: --Defining units of biodiversity to allow comparisons between data generated by different working groups. --Selecting systems to be studied based on the following criteria, to determine which systems should have priority: (a) sensitivity of the system to global change; (b) intra-regional comparability of the system; (c) sustainability of the system; (d) availability of information; and (e) existence of an effective research center in the system --Discriminating between those factors that are not due to global change, yet are affecting biodiversity. --Looking for connections between strategies for conservation and the sustainable use of resources at the regional level in the face of global change. =46ostering Scientific Cooperation The global change issue is interdisciplinary and the IAI should foster the cooperation and work of scientists in the different countries. Many institutions within the Americas are carrying out work on biodiversity and its socio-economic implications. These institutions should be given the opportunity to collaborate with IAI through networking. A selected list of institutions should be compiled by IAI once the final research priorities have been defined. By undertaking the following activities, the IAI could go far toward improving cooperation among scientists, and encouraging the free flow of information about global change: (1) Assessment of models, and selection of the best ones. (2) Providing linkage between science and government. (3) Encouraging data centers linked by phone systems and high capacity data lines for Internet. (4) Getting science to interact with the international biodiversity conventions, thus affecting the political level. (5) Designating environmental observers to assure that the dictates of the convention are observed. (6) Distributing information on biodiversity and climate change, which would help integrate systems such as libraries. (7) Lead the way in standardizing data so it is applicable to all models, allowing the models to be comparative. Since the communication of information to the general public and the policy makers is especially important, the recruitment of social scientists as a liaison between scientists and non- scientists becomes paramount. The IAI could be instrumental in establishing a network of social scientists for this purpose. VIII. REFERENCES Arroyo, M. T. Kalin, Armesto, J., Squeo, F., and Guti=E9rrez J. 1992: Global change: the flora and vegetation of Chile. In: Mooney H., =46uentes, E., Kronberg, B., and Fuenzalida, F., (eds.) Northern and Southern Hemisphere Responses to Global Change. New York, Academic Press. Arroyo, M. T. Kalin, Raven, P. and Sarukhan, J. 1992a: Biodiversity. In An Agenda for Environment and Science into the 21st Century. In: Doode, J. C. I. et al., (eds.). Cambridge University Press. Bazzaz, F. A., 1990: The response of natural ecosystems to the rising CO2 level. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 21: 167-196. Butzer, K. W.1994: Environmental change, climatic history, and human modification. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. In: Sasson, J. M., (ed.): in press. Manzanilla, L., 1982: Hypoth=E8ses et indices du processus de formation de la civilisation =E9gyptienne (cinqui=E8me et quatri=E8me mill=E9naires avant J=E9sus-Christi), PhD Dissertation, Universite de Paris IV (Sorbonne), Paris. Manzanilla, L. 1994: Past Global Change and Human Dimensions of Biodiversity. (In preparation). McNeely, J. A. et al, 1991: Table 1. Percentage of the world's flowering plant species. IUCN: World Resources Institute, Ricardo Bonalume, Nature. Raven, P. H. 1987: Biological resources and global stability. In: Kawano, S., Connell, J. H., and Hideaka, T., (eds.) Evolution and Coadaptation in Biotic Communities, pop 3-27. University of Tokyo Press. Reid, W. V., 1992: How Many Species Will There Be? In: Whitmore T. and Sayer J., eds., Tropical Deforestation and Species Extinction. Chapman and Hall. Rosen, Arlene M. 1993: Environmental Stress as a Factor in the Collapse of Early Bronze Age Society in Palestine, Paper presented at the 57th Annual Meeting of the Society of American Archaelogy, St. Louis, April 17, 1993. Schlesinger, W. H., Reynolds, J. F., Cunningham, G. L., Huenneke, L. =46., Jarrell, W. M., Virginia, R. A., and Whitford, W. G., 1990: Biological feedbacks in global desertification. Science 297: 1043-1048. Stouffer, R. J., Manabe, S., and Bryan. K. 1989: Interhemispheric asymmetry in climate response to a gradual increase in CO2 . Nature 342: 660-662. APPENDIX 1 IAI SCIENTIFIC THEMES * The Comparative Studies of Temperate Terrestrial Ecosystems; * High Latitude Processes; * Ocean/Land/Atmosphere Interactions in the Inter-tropical Americas; * Tropical Ecosystems and Biogeochemical Cycles; * ENSO and Interannual Climate Variability; * The Comparative Studies of Temperate Terrestrial Ecosystems; * The Study of the Impacts of Climate Change on Biodiversity. APPENDIX 2 ACRONYMS IAI Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research IAI/IC IAI/Implementation Committee ICSU International Union for Conservation of Nature CONABIO Comisi=F3n Nacional de Biodiversidad NBS National Biological Survey ENSO El Ni=F1o-Southern Oscillation UV-B Ultraviolet-Biological NSF National Science Foundation NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOAA/OGP NOAA/Office of Global Programs APPENDIX 3 WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS Mario N. N=FA=F1ez Secretar=EDa de Ciencia y Tecnolog=EDa Depart. de Meteorolog=EDa, Universidad de Buenos Aires Pabell=F3n II, Piso 2, Ciudad Universitar=EDa Buenos Aires 1428 ARGENTINA Tel. (54 1) 788 3572=09 =46ax (54 1) 788 3572=09 mnunez@cima.edu.ar Carlos Norverto Secretar=EDa de Ciencia y Tecnolog=EDa Comisi=F3n Nacional del Cambio Global Ave. C=F3rdoba 831 (1054) Of. Cambio Global 1=B0 Piso Buenos Aires ARGENTINA =09 Eduardo Rapoport=09 Universidad Nacional del Comahue Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche Casilla de Correo 1336 8400 San Carlos de Bariloche Pcia. de R=EDo Negro ARGENTINA Tel. (549) 442 6368 =46ax (549) 442 2111 ecotono@arib51atina!cab!ecotono ecotono@cab.edu.ar Br=E1ulio Ferreira Dias Minist=E9rio do Meio Ambiente Coordena=E7=E3o de Biodiversidade Esplanada dos Minist=E9rios, B1. B, 5=B0 andar 70068-900 Bras=EDlia/DF BRAZIL Tel. (55 61) 322 5640 ext. 260 =46ax (55 61) 223 6800 Hilton Silveira Pinto Campinas State University - UNICAMP/CEPAGRI PO Box 1150 CEP 13081, Campinas, SP BRAZIL hilton@ccvax.unicamp.br Donald MacIver Atmospheric Environment Service Environment Canada 4905 Dufferin St. Downsview, Ontario M3H 5T4 CANADA Tel. (416) 739 4391 =46ax (416) 739 4297 Joaqu=EDn Roberto Qui=F1onez COLCIENCIAS Transversal 9-A 133-28 Bogot=E1 COLOMBIA Tel. (57 1) 216 9800 =46ax (57 1) 625 1788 jrquin@colciencias.gov.co Jaime Echeverr=EDa Centro Cient=EDfico Tropical Apartado 8-3870-1000 San Jos=E9 COSTA RICA Tel. (506) 225 2649 =46ax (506) 253 4963 Jos=E9 Manuel Mora Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad Universidad Costa Rica Escuela de Biolog=EDa San Jos=E9 COSTA RICA Tel.(506) 253 5323 ext. 5544 =46ax (506) 224 9374 =46rancisco Squeo University of La Serena Departamento de Biolog=EDa =46aculdad de Ciencias, Casilla 599 La Serena CHILE Luis C=E1ceres Ministerio de Energ=EDa y Minas Instituto Nacional de Meteorolog=EDa e Hidrolog=EDa I=F1aquito 923 y Corea, Quito ECUADOR Tel. (59 32) 468 326 =46ax (59 32) 433 934 Linda Manzanilla Instituto de Investigaciones Antropol=F3gicas Ciudad Universitaria- UNAM Circuito Exterior 04515 M=E9xico D.F. MEXICO Tel. (52 5) 548 7828 =46ax (52 5) 548 3667 lmanza@redvax1.dgsca.unam.mx Martha Ileana Espejel Universidad Aut=F3noma de Baja California AP 1880, Carretera Tijuana-Ensenada Km 106 Ensenada, B.C. MEXICO =46rancisco Correa Universidad Auton=F3ma de Baja California Instituto de Investigaciones Oceanol=F3gicas Carr. Tijuana-Ensenada Km. 103, Ensenada, B.C. MEXICO Mar=EDa Elena D=EDaz Universidad de Guadalajara AP 4-160, Guadalajara, Jalisco MEXICO melena@redudg.udg.mx =46rancisco Javier Flores Universidad de Guadalajara Km. 15 Carretera Guadajalara-Nogales Zapopan, Jalisco MEXICO fflores@udgserv.cencar.udg.mx Bruce Benz Instituto Manantl=E1n de Ecolog=EDa/Universidad de Guadalajara 253 Valent=EDn Velasco, El Grullo, Jalisco MEXICO Tel. (52 338) 728 55 =46ax (52 338) 727 49 bbenz@udgserd.cencar.udg.mx Eduardo L=F3pez Alcocer Universidad de Guadalajara Departamento de Ciencias Ambientales Emerson 73 S.J Guadalajara, Jalisco MEXICO alcocer@redudg.udg.mx Eleazar Loa Loza Instituto Nacional de Ecolog=EDa (SEDESOL) Rio Elba 208vo Piso Col. Cuauht=E9moc M=E9xico DF CP 06500 MEXICO Aurea Estrada Esquivel Instituto Nacional de Ecolog=EDa (SEDESOL) R=EDo Elba 20 - 8vo Piso, Col. Cuauht=E9moc M=E9xico DF CP 06500 MEXICO Raul G=EDo-Argaez Sociedad Mexicana de Historia Natural Dr. Vertiz 724, Col. Vertiz Narvarte M=E9xico, DF CP 03020 MEXICO V=EDctor S=E1nchez Cordero Insituto De Biolog=EDa - UNAM AP 70-153 M=E9xico DF, CP MEXICO scordero@redvax1.dgsa.unam Miguel Angel Campa Molina Universidad de Guadalajara Divisi=F3n de Ciencias Biol=F3gicas Castellanos y Tapia 697, Col. Blanco y Cuellar S.L. Guadalajara, Jalisco MEXICO Javier Ochoa Covarrubias CIAFASE Ave. de las Rosas 359-B Col. Chapalita, CP 45042 Guadalajara, Jalisco MEXICO Indra Candanedo Instituto Nacional de Recursos Naturales Renovables INRENARE Direcci=F3n Nacional de Areas Protegidas y Vida Silvestre, Parque Nacional Dari=E9n Apartado 2016 Para=EDso Corregimiento de Anc=F3n PANAMA Tel.(507) 324 325 =46ax (507) 324 083 Noris Salazar Universidad Nacional de Panam=E1 and Inst. Smithsonian Inv. Trop. Apartado 2072, Balboa PANAMA Tel.(507) 276 022 =46ax (507) 325 978 stremo85@si.edu Anthony Coates Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI - PANAMA) Unit 0948APO AA 34002-09948 PANAMA Tel. (507) 276 017 =46ax (507) 326 197 strem2@si.edu C=E9sar Mor=E1n Val Sociedad Pachamama Growers Consultant & Research Paseo de la Rep=FAblica 4053 Lima 34 PERU Tel. (51 14) 428 951 =46ax (51 14) 428 951 In=E9s Redolfi de Huiza Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina Instituto de Biodiversidad Ave. La Universidad s/n La Molina, Lima AP 456 PERU Tel. (51 14) 352 035 =46ax (51 14) 363 113 Ana Aber Direcci=F3n Nacional de Medio Ambiente del Ministerio de Vivienda, Ordenaci=F3n Territ. y Medio Ambiente Zabala 1427 Montevideo, CP 11000 URUGUAY Tel. (59 82) 963 950 =46ax (59 82) 922 416 Gustavo Sacco Chero Direcci=F3n General de Recursos Naturales Renovables Cerrito 318 Montevideo CP 11000 URUGUAY Tel.(59 82) 963 950 =46ax (59 82) 922 416 Lisa Farrow NOAA/OGP 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1225 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA Tel.(301) 427 2089 =46ax (301) 427 2073 farrow@ogp.noaa.gov Rub=E9n Lara IAI Office of the Executive Scientist 1100 Wayne Ave., Suite 1201 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA Tel.(301) 589 5747 =46ax (301) 589 5711 lara@ogp.noaa.gov Marcella Ohira IAI Office of the Executive Scientist 1100 Wayne Ave., Suite 1201 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA Tel. (301) 589 5747 =46ax (301) 589 5711 ohira@ogp.noaa.gov Noel Grove IAI Editor 2114 St. Louis Rd. Middleburg, VA 22117 USA Tel. (703) 687 5052 =46ax (703) 687 5052 Gene Rosenberg National Museum of Natural History Division of Botany NHB 166 10th & Constitution Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20560 USA Tel. (202) 483 7485 =46ax (202) 786 2563 Pat Foster Turley USAID 2007 Key Boulevard #589 Arlington, VA 22201 USA Tel. (202) 736 4875 =46ax (202) 647 7368 pfoster-tur@aid.gov Miriam Steinitz-Kannan Northern Kentucky University Dept. of Biological Sciences Highland Heights, KY41099-0400 USA Tel. (606) 572 5522 =46ax (606) 576 5566 Peter Fields Scripps Institute of Oceanography University of California, Mail Code 0204, San Diego La Jolla, CA USA Tel. (619) 453 0167 =46ax (619) 534 2836 pfields@ucsd.edu ---------------------------------------------------------------- ----