Applied Filters
- Science and Policy
- Ban, Natalie CRemove filter
Journal Title
Publication Date
Author
Access Type
1 - 4of4
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
Search Name | Searched On |
---|---|
[Subject Areas: Science and Policy] AND [Author: Dick, Melissa] (2) | 26 Mar 2025 |
[Subject Areas: Science and Policy] AND [Author: Ban, Natalie C] (4) | 26 Mar 2025 |
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESSPlanning for adaptation to climate change requires regionally relevant information on rising air and ocean temperatures, sea levels, increasingly frequent and intense storms, and other climate-related impacts. However, in many regions there are limited focused syntheses of the climate impacts, risks, and potential adaptation strategies for coastal marine areas and sectors. We report on a regional assessment of climate change impacts and recommendations for adaptation strategies in the NE Pacific Coast (British Columbia, Canada), conducted in collaboration with a regional planning and plan implementation partnership (Marine Plan Partnership for the North Pacific Coast), aimed at bridging the gaps between climate science and regional adaptation planning. We incorporated both social and ecological aspects of climate change impacts and adaptations, and the feedback mechanisms which may result in both increased risks and opportunities for the following areas of interest: “Ecosystems”, “Fisheries and Aquaculture”, “Communities”, and “Marine Infrastructure”. As next steps within the region, we propose proactive planning measures including communication of the key impacts and projections and cross-sectoral assessments of climate vulnerability and risk to direct decision-making.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Lauren E. Eckert,
- Nick XEMŦOLTW_ Claxton,
- Cameron Owens,
- Anna Johnston,
- Natalie C. Ban,
- Faisal Moola, and
- Chris T. Darimont
Policy-makers ideally pursue well-informed, socially just means to make environmental decisions. Indigenous peoples have used Indigenous knowledge (IK) to inform decisions about environmental management for millennia. In the last 50 years, many western societies have used environmental assessment (EA) processes to deliberate on industrial proposals, informed by scientific information. Recently EA processes have attempted to incorporate IK in some countries and regions, but practitioners and scholars have criticized the ability of EA to meaningfully engage IK. Here we consider these tensions in Canada, a country with economic focus on resource extraction and unresolved government-to-government relationships with Indigenous Nations. In 2019, the Canadian government passed the Impact Assessment Act, reinvigorating dialogue on the relationship between IK and EA. Addressing this opportunity, we examined obstacles between IK and EA via a systematic literature review, and qualitative analyses of publications and the Act itself. Our results and synthesis identify obstacles preventing the Act from meaningfully engaging IK, some of which are surmountable (e.g., failures to engage best practices, financial limitations), whereas others are substantial (e.g., knowledge incompatibilities, effects of colonization). Finally, we offer recommendations for practitioners and scholars towards ameliorating relationships between IK and EA towards improved decision-making and recognition of Indigenous rights. - OPEN ACCESS
- Tanya C. Tran,
- Douglas Neasloss,
- Kitasoo/Xai’xais Stewardship Authority,
- Jonaki Bhattacharyya, and
- Natalie C. Ban
Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas (IPCAs) have gained global attention because of renewed interest in protecting biodiversity during a time of Indigenous resurgence. However, few examples in academic literature illustrate Indigenous Peoples’ rationale and processes for developing IPCAs. This paper fills that gap, describing a participatory action research collaboration with the Kitasoo/Xai’xais Nation. We used document analysis, interviews, and community engagement to summarize the Nation’s perspectives while assisting Kitasoo/Xai’xais efforts to develop a land-and-sea IPCA. IPCAs are a tool for the Nation to address ongoing limitations of state protected area governance and management, to better reflect the Nation’s Indigenous rights and responsibilities, and to preserve cultural heritage and biological diversity while fostering sustainable economic opportunities. The Kitasoo/Xai’xais process benefits from research on other IPCAs, includes intergenerational community engagement, and is rooted in long-term territory planning and stewardship capacity building. The Kitasoo/Xai’xais IPCA faces challenges similar to other protected areas but is influenced by ongoing impacts of settler-colonialism. The Kitasoo/Xai’xais Nation applies Indigenous and western approaches along with responsibility-based partnerships to address many anticipated challenges. Our case study demonstrates that more efforts are needed by state and other actors to reduce burdening Indigenous Nations’ protected area governance and management and to create meaningful external support for Indigenous-led conservation. - OPEN ACCESSClimate change is affecting the ocean, altering the biogeography of marine species. Yet marine protected area (MPA) planning still rarely incorporates projected species range shifts. We used the outputs of species distribution models fitted with biological and climate data as inputs to identify trends in occurrence for marine species in British Columbia (BC), Canada. We assessed and compared two ways of incorporating climate change projections into MPA planning. First, we overlaid 98 species with modelled distributions now and by the mid-21st century under two contrasting (“no mitigation” and “strong mitigation”) climate change scenarios with existing Provincial marine parks in BC, to ask which species could overlap with protected areas in the future. Second, we completed a spatial prioritization analysis using Marxan with the projected future species ranges as inputs, to ask where priority regions exist for the 98 marine species. We found that many BC marine parks will lose species in both climate scenarios that we analyzed, and that protecting 30% of important marine species will be challenging under the “no mitigation” climate change scenario. Challenges included the coarse resolution of the data and uncertainty in projecting species range shifts.