Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Georgina M. Mace is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Georgina M. Mace.


Nature | 2012

Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity

Bradley J. Cardinale; J. Emmett Duffy; Andrew Gonzalez; David U. Hooper; Charles Perrings; Patrick Venail; Anita Narwani; Georgina M. Mace; David Tilman; David A. Wardle; Ann P. Kinzig; Gretchen C. Daily; Michel Loreau; James B. Grace; Anne Larigauderie; Diane S. Srivastava; Shahid Naeem

The most unique feature of Earth is the existence of life, and the most extraordinary feature of life is its diversity. Approximately 9 million types of plants, animals, protists and fungi inhabit the Earth. So, too, do 7 billion people. Two decades ago, at the first Earth Summit, the vast majority of the world’s nations declared that human actions were dismantling the Earth’s ecosystems, eliminating genes, species and biological traits at an alarming rate. This observation led to the question of how such loss of biological diversity will alter the functioning of ecosystems and their ability to provide society with the goods and services needed to prosper.


Science | 2015

Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet

Katherine Richardson; Johan Rockström; Ingo Fetzer; Elena M. Bennett; Reinette Biggs; Wim de Vries; Cynthia A. de Wit; Carl Folke; Georgina M. Mace

Crossing the boundaries in global sustainability The planetary boundary (PB) concept, introduced in 2009, aimed to define the environmental limits within which humanity can safely operate. This approach has proved influential in global sustainability policy development. Steffen et al. provide an updated and extended analysis of the PB framework. Of the original nine proposed boundaries, they identify three (including climate change) that might push the Earth system into a new state if crossed and that also have a pervasive influence on the remaining boundaries. They also develop the PB framework so that it can be applied usefully in a regional context. Science, this issue 10.1126/science.1259855 Developments in the planetary boundaries concept provide a framework to support global sustainability. INTRODUCTION There is an urgent need for a new paradigm that integrates the continued development of human societies and the maintenance of the Earth system (ES) in a resilient and accommodating state. The planetary boundary (PB) framework contributes to such a paradigm by providing a science-based analysis of the risk that human perturbations will destabilize the ES at the planetary scale. Here, the scientific underpinnings of the PB framework are updated and strengthened. RATIONALE The relatively stable, 11,700-year-long Holocene epoch is the only state of the ES that we know for certain can support contemporary human societies. There is increasing evidence that human activities are affecting ES functioning to a degree that threatens the resilience of the ES—its ability to persist in a Holocene-like state in the face of increasing human pressures and shocks. The PB framework is based on critical processes that regulate ES functioning. By combining improved scientific understanding of ES functioning with the precautionary principle, the PB framework identifies levels of anthropogenic perturbations below which the risk of destabilization of the ES is likely to remain low—a “safe operating space” for global societal development. A zone of uncertainty for each PB highlights the area of increasing risk. The current level of anthropogenic impact on the ES, and thus the risk to the stability of the ES, is assessed by comparison with the proposed PB (see the figure). RESULTS Three of the PBs (climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, and ocean acidification) remain essentially unchanged from the earlier analysis. Regional-level boundaries as well as globally aggregated PBs have now been developed for biosphere integrity (earlier “biodiversity loss”), biogeochemical flows, land-system change, and freshwater use. At present, only one regional boundary (south Asian monsoon) can be established for atmospheric aerosol loading. Although we cannot identify a single PB for novel entities (here defined as new substances, new forms of existing substances, and modified life forms that have the potential for unwanted geophysical and/or biological effects), they are included in the PB framework, given their potential to change the state of the ES. Two of the PBs—climate change and biosphere integrity—are recognized as “core” PBs based on their fundamental importance for the ES. The climate system is a manifestation of the amount, distribution, and net balance of energy at Earth’s surface; the biosphere regulates material and energy flows in the ES and increases its resilience to abrupt and gradual change. Anthropogenic perturbation levels of four of the ES processes/features (climate change, biosphere integrity, biogeochemical flows, and land-system change) exceed the proposed PB (see the figure). CONCLUSIONS PBs are scientifically based levels of human perturbation of the ES beyond which ES functioning may be substantially altered. Transgression of the PBs thus creates substantial risk of destabilizing the Holocene state of the ES in which modern societies have evolved. The PB framework does not dictate how societies should develop. These are political decisions that must include consideration of the human dimensions, including equity, not incorporated in the PB framework. Nevertheless, by identifying a safe operating space for humanity on Earth, the PB framework can make a valuable contribution to decision-makers in charting desirable courses for societal development. Current status of the control variables for seven of the planetary boundaries. The green zone is the safe operating space, the yellow represents the zone of uncertainty (increasing risk), and the red is a high-risk zone. The planetary boundary itself lies at the intersection of the green and yellow zones. The control variables have been normalized for the zone of uncertainty; the center of the figure therefore does not represent values of 0 for the control variables. The control variable shown for climate change is atmospheric CO2 concentration. Processes for which global-level boundaries cannot yet be quantified are represented by gray wedges; these are atmospheric aerosol loading, novel entities, and the functional role of biosphere integrity. The planetary boundaries framework defines a safe operating space for humanity based on the intrinsic biophysical processes that regulate the stability of the Earth system. Here, we revise and update the planetary boundary framework, with a focus on the underpinning biophysical science, based on targeted input from expert research communities and on more general scientific advances over the past 5 years. Several of the boundaries now have a two-tier approach, reflecting the importance of cross-scale interactions and the regional-level heterogeneity of the processes that underpin the boundaries. Two core boundaries—climate change and biosphere integrity—have been identified, each of which has the potential on its own to drive the Earth system into a new state should they be substantially and persistently transgressed.


Trends in Ecology and Evolution | 2000

Considering evolutionary processes in conservation biology

Keith A. Crandall; Olaf R. P. Bininda-Emonds; Georgina M. Mace; Robert K. Wayne

Conservation biologists assign population distinctiveness by classifying populations as evolutionarily significant units (ESUs). Historically, this classification has included ecological and genetic data. However, recent ESU concepts, coupled with increasing availability of data on neutral genetic variation, have led to criteria based exclusively on molecular phylogenies. We argue that the earlier definitions of ESUs, which incorporated ecological data and genetic variation of adaptive significance, are more relevant for conservation. Furthermore, this dichotomous summary (ESU or not) of a continuum of population differentiation is not adequate for determining appropriate management actions. We argue for a broader categorization of population distinctiveness based on concepts of ecological and genetic exchangeability (sensu Templeton).


Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences | 2000

Predicting extinction risk in declining species

Andy Purvis; John L. Gittleman; Guy Cowlishaw; Georgina M. Mace

What biological attributes predispose species to the risk of extinction? There are many hypotheses but so far there has been no systematic analysis for discriminating between them. Using complete phylogenies of contemporary carnivores and primates, we present, to our knowledge, the first comparative test showing that high trophic level, low population density, slow life history and, in particular, small geographical range size are all significantly and independently associated with a high extinction risk in declining species. These traits together explain nearly 50% of the total between–species variation in extinction risk. Much of the remaining variation can be accounted for by external anthropogenic factors that affect species irrespective of their biology.


Science | 2011

Beyond Predictions: Biodiversity Conservation in a Changing Climate

Terence P. Dawson; Stephen T. Jackson; Joanna Isobel House; I. C. Prentice; Georgina M. Mace

Climate change is predicted to become a major threat to biodiversity in the 21st century, but accurate predictions and effective solutions have proved difficult to formulate. Alarming predictions have come from a rather narrow methodological base, but a new, integrated science of climate-change biodiversity assessment is emerging, based on multiple sources and approaches. Drawing on evidence from paleoecological observations, recent phenological and microevolutionary responses, experiments, and computational models, we review the insights that different approaches bring to anticipating and managing the biodiversity consequences of climate change, including the extent of species’ natural resilience. We introduce a framework that uses information from different sources to identify vulnerability and to support the design of conservation responses. Although much of the information reviewed is on species, our framework and conclusions are also applicable to ecosystems, habitats, ecological communities, and genetic diversity, whether terrestrial, marine, or fresh water.


PLOS Biology | 2010

Adaptation, Plasticity, and Extinction in a Changing Environment: Towards a Predictive Theory

Luis-Miguel Chevin; Russell Lande; Georgina M. Mace

The authors analyze developmental, genetic, and demographic mechanisms by which populations tolerate changing environments and discuss empirical methods for determining the critical rate of sustained environmental change that causes population extinction.


Trends in Ecology and Evolution | 2012

Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship

Georgina M. Mace; Ken Norris; A. H. Fitter

The relationship between biodiversity and the rapidly expanding research and policy field of ecosystem services is confused and is damaging efforts to create coherent policy. Using the widely accepted Convention on Biological Diversity definition of biodiversity and work for the U.K. National Ecosystem Assessment we show that biodiversity has key roles at all levels of the ecosystem service hierarchy: as a regulator of underpinning ecosystem processes, as a final ecosystem service and as a good that is subject to valuation, whether economic or otherwise. Ecosystem science and practice has not yet absorbed the lessons of this complex relationship, which suggests an urgent need to develop the interdisciplinary science of ecosystem management bringing together ecologists, conservation biologists, resource economists and others.


Ecology | 2009

PanTHERIA: a species-level database of life history, ecology, and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals

Kate E. Jones; Jon Bielby; Marcel Cardillo; Susanne A. Fritz; Justin O'Dell; C. David L. Orme; Kamran Safi; Wes Sechrest; Elizabeth H. Boakes; Chris Carbone; Christina Connolly; Michael J. Cutts; Janine K. Foster; Richard Grenyer; Michael B. Habib; Christopher A. Plaster; Samantha A. Price; Elizabeth A. Rigby; Janna Rist; Amber G. F. Teacher; Olaf R. P. Bininda-Emonds; John L. Gittleman; Georgina M. Mace; Andy Purvis

Analyses of life-history, ecological, and geographic trait differences among species, their causes, correlates, and likely consequences are increasingly important for understanding and conserving biodiversity in the face of rapid global change. Assembling multispecies trait data from diverse literature sources into a single comprehensive data set requires detailed consideration of methods to reliably compile data for particular species, and to derive single estimates from multiple sources based on different techniques and definitions. Here we describe PanTHERIA, a species-level data set compiled for analysis of life history, ecology, and geography of all known extant and recently extinct mammals. PanTHERIA is derived from a database capable of holding multiple geo-referenced values for variables within a species containing 100 740 lines of biological data for extant and recently extinct mammalian species, collected over a period of three years by 20 individuals. PanTHERIA also includes spatial databases o...


Conservation Biology | 2008

Quantification of Extinction Risk: IUCN's System for Classifying Threatened Species

Georgina M. Mace; Nigel J. Collar; Kevin J. Gaston; Craig Hilton-Taylor; H. Resit Akçakaya; Nigel Leader-Williams; E. J. Milner-Gulland; Simon N. Stuart

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species was increasingly used during the 1980s to assess the conservation status of species for policy and planning purposes. This use stimulated the development of a new set of quantitative criteria for listing species in the categories of threat: critically endangered, endangered, and vulnerable. These criteria, which were intended to be applicable to all species except microorganisms, were part of a broader system for classifying threatened species and were fully implemented by IUCN in 2000. The system and the criteria have been widely used by conservation practitioners and scientists and now underpin one indicator being used to assess the Convention on Biological Diversity 2010 biodiversity target. We describe the process and the technical background to the IUCN Red List system. The criteria refer to fundamental biological processes underlying population decline and extinction. But given major differences between species, the threatening processes affecting them, and the paucity of knowledge relating to most species, the IUCN system had to be both broad and flexible to be applicable to the majority of described species. The system was designed to measure the symptoms of extinction risk, and uses 5 independent criteria relating to aspects of population loss and decline of range size. A species is assigned to a threat category if it meets the quantitative threshold for at least one criterion. The criteria and the accompanying rules and guidelines used by IUCN are intended to increase the consistency, transparency, and validity of its categorization system, but it necessitates some compromises that affect the applicability of the system and the species lists that result. In particular, choices were made over the assessment of uncertainty, poorly known species, depleted species, population decline, restricted ranges, and rarity; all of these affect the way red lists should be viewed and used. Processes related to priority setting and the development of national red lists need to take account of some assumptions in the formulation of the criteria.


Science | 2013

Bringing Ecosystem Services into Economic Decision-Making: Land Use in the United Kingdom

Ian J. Bateman; Amii R. Harwood; Georgina M. Mace; Robert T. Watson; David James Abson; Barnaby Andrews; Amy Binner; Andrew Crowe; Brett Day; Steve Dugdale; Carlo Fezzi; Jo Foden; David Hadley; Roy Haines-Young; M Hulme; Andreas Kontoleon; Andrew Lovett; Paul Munday; Unai Pascual; James Paterson; Grischa Perino; Antara Sen; G. Siriwardena; D.P. van Soest; Mette Termansen

Monitoring Land Use Land-use decisions are based largely on agricultural market values. However, such decisions can lead to losses of ecosystem services, such as the provision of wildlife habitat or recreational space, the magnitude of which may overwhelm any market agricultural benefits. In a research project forming part of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment, Bateman et al. (p. 45) estimate the value of these net losses. Policies that recognize the diversity and complexity of the natural environment can target changes to different areas so as to radically improve land use in terms of agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions, recreation, and wild species habitat and diversity. The value of using land for recreation and wildlife, not just for agriculture, can usefully factor into planning decisions. Landscapes generate a wide range of valuable ecosystem services, yet land-use decisions often ignore the value of these services. Using the example of the United Kingdom, we show the significance of land-use change not only for agricultural production but also for emissions and sequestration of greenhouse gases, open-access recreational visits, urban green space, and wild-species diversity. We use spatially explicit models in conjunction with valuation methods to estimate comparable economic values for these services, taking account of climate change impacts. We show that, although decisions that focus solely on agriculture reduce overall ecosystem service values, highly significant value increases can be obtained from targeted planning by incorporating all potential services and their values and that this approach also conserves wild-species diversity.

Collaboration


Dive into the Georgina M. Mace's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Andy Purvis

Imperial College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ben Collen

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Simon N. Stuart

Conservation International

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ian J. Bateman

University College London

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robert J. Scholes

University of the Witwatersrand

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge