Team: Ravikanth G., Priyadarsanan D.R., Robert Chandran, Aravind N.A., Soubadra Devy, T. Ganesh, R. Ganesan, Ankila Hiremath, Harini Nagendra, Nitin Rai, Jagdish K. (programme convenor)
To fill knowledge gaps to enable civil society and government to better manage ecosystems under global change. In objective terms, this would translate to:
There are six working groups under the Ecosystems and Global Change Programme:
Team: Aravind N.A., Ravikanth G., Priyadarsanan D.R. and Ganesan R.

This group teaches and practices research in systematics and conservation of insect species, molluscs, amphibians and plants.
Biosystematics objectives:
Team: Robert Chandran, Aravind N.A., Soubadra Devy, Jagdish K.
The impact of global and regional climate changes on vegetation need to be carefully studied, particularly for biodiversity hotspots and forested landscapes that support the diverse biodiversity as well as livelihoods of human communities. Changes in ecosystems have cascading effects that need to be properly understood and quantified. With climate change already upon us, changes in species distributions, seasonal patterns, and ecosystem processes are already being documented. This working group conducts research in two biodiversity hotspots of India – the Western Ghats and the Eastern Himalayas.
The working group objectives are:
Team: T. Ganesh, Robert Chandran, Jagdish K., R. Ganesan

The demands of human society on natural resources and ecosystems have considerably altered the socio-ecological systems either directly or indirectly. Such changes are often not recorded and monitored systematically over space and time. This working group will address these issues in the following ways:
Team: Ankila Hiremath, Robert Chandran

Invasive species, fire and other disturbances are examples of a whole suite of direct or indirect human and biophysical influences on socio-ecological systems. The objectives of this working group are:
Team: Harini Nagendra, Jagdish K., Soubadra Devy, Aravind N.A., Robert Chandran
Urbanisation, like climate change, has been identified as a major threat to biodiversity (Srinivasulu 2008). By 2030 more than 60% of the world’s population is expected to live in cities (Dietz et al 2007). Cities depend on nature and a wider hinterland from where they draw a variety of inputs and also flush their outputs, thus leaving behind a large ecological footprint. The current paradigm is that cities are net consumers of ecosystem services that are generated elsewhere in rural and natural landscapes. However, cities do have the potential to generate both ecosystem services and sustain biodiversity. Urban biodiversity and the associated ecosystem services have been ignored and undervalued because ecologists have focused only on large wild habitats and rare species. However, with rapid urbanization, the challenge is to build the native biodiversity and generate ecosystem services such as water and carbon sequestration within the urban landscape. This could be done by involving multiple stakeholders like the local municipality, architects and, most importantly, citizens in the neighbourhood. We also need to follow the concept of adaptive co-management.
The Urban ecology programme at ATREE is currently collaborating with the Stockholm Resilience Centre to focus on quantifying and mapping biodiversity and ecosystem services in Bangalore and work with government and citizens towards more sustainable urban socio-ecological systems. It is also working with a corporate to reduce carbon footprint and measure biodiversity on office campuses and working with another corporate in building awareness about carbon sequestration and biodiversity amongst professional staff.
Team: Jagdish K., Nitin Rai
Conservation planning is the design of protected areas and networks of protected areas at all ecological, spatial and governance scales, ranging from sacred groves involving a village panchayat to large landscapes protected and managed by the state. Protected areas have largely been established and maintained by the state. In India, the design, location and management of protected areas have often not been informed adequately by either good ecological science or traditional, social, anthropological, cultural and economic knowledge and insights.
The Conservation planning and society working group at ATREE will incorporate a combination of ecological, forest rights, political ecology and economic perspectives to inform the design and management of protected areas with the involvement of local and regional stakeholders. This may require planning of testing alternate models of protected areas that are based on integration of ecological, socio-cultural and socio-economic perspectives and that are also synergistic with available legal frame-works such as the Forest Rights Act, as well as the provision for community and conservation reserves under the Wildlife Protection Act.