Climate stabilisation: the need for balanceExamining the global carbon cycle suggests that whilst reducing emissions from human activity must form the basis of our stabilisation strategy it should not be the only part. Indeed there is no guarantee that significant reductions of anthropogenic emissions would on their own result in stabilisation.As a simplified representation, a three way balance describes the global climate stabilisation problem:Climate stability = Global ecosystems' capacity to absorb GHGs - (natural emissions from ecosystems + human induced emissions) [3]The evolution of this will determine to a large extent the speed and magnitude of human induced climate change and the mitigation requirements to stabilise CO2 (and other GHG) concentrations at any given level. [4] Currently the equation is set so as to lead towards climate instability (see Figure 1).The dangerous paradox is that if emissions due to human activity increase as they are doing, emissions from ecosystems are likely to increase as well (due to positive feedback mechanisms), whilst the capacity of ecosystems to absorb emissions decreases.Such an imbalance poses substantial risks of irreversible climate destabilisation.As can be seen from Figure 1, ecosystems function in two of the three components of the stabilisation balance. [5] Again, the danger of not fully recognising and accounting for the role ecosystems play in climate regulation, and looking solely at human based emissions risks addressing only one side of the three way balance. To achieve stabilisation (or climate resilience), there is need to balance the three components in ways that:

Maximise the global ecosystem capacity to absorb GHGs,

Minimise emissions from ecosystems (or at least be able to quantify what they are and understand how the processes work) and crucially,

Reduce emissions due to human activity.

Therefore ecosystems play an unequivocal and increasingly important role in both ecosystem-based mitigation (carbon sequestration and storage) and ecosystem-based adaptation (i.e. foundation to societal adaptation to climate change impacts).Ecosystems: the "˜Win-Win-Win' link between mitigation, adaptation and sustainabilityAn ecosystems approach can fulfil objectives for both mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change as well as being the foundation for long term sustainability. Protecting ecosystems provides multiple benefits, both directly through sustainable management of biological resources and, indirectly through protection of ecosystem services [6]:

Social - Secure livelihoods, particularly for the poor; public health benefits; cultural and aesthetic values; community support.

Economic - Resilient ecosystems secure service provision to support all forms of economic activity.

Climate regulation - ecosystems function as tools for mitigation, through appropriate management to reduce natural sources of emissions or increase absorption capacity.

Environmental - Resilient healthy ecosystems have the capacity to support long-term sustainability.

These together provide countless streams of cost effective benefits and opportunities to human societies (economic, cultural, health and many more). Indeed, a fourth 'win' can be added in that profitable outcomes can be generated by utilising the benefits of healthy ecosystems. It is important to emphasise that the solutions are attainable. Some are relatively straightforward and could be developed immediately and at low cost [7], whilst others will need careful planning, development and larger investments.Ecosystems as a 'safety net'The adoption of an ecosystems management approach at a global scale will serve as a "˜safety net' against possible failures in the efforts to reduce emissions from human activity.However, it must not be seen as an alternative to reducing human emissions, but rather as a complementary mitigation and adaptation approach.Whilst it is vital to achieve agreement on emissions reduction, there is no absolute guarantee that the targets set will be either correct for climate stabilisation or met. It therefore follows, using the precautionary principle, that ecosystems are protected and promoted as the primary mechanism for climate regulation, as well as the foundation for supporting an adapting human society. The risk is that traditional approaches to combined economic and environmental issues (cost benefit analysis and risk assessments), are unable to deal with the inherent uncertainty in ecosystem responses to climate change, and additional pressures from a rapidly growing society. Without being able to define the resilience capabilities of ecosystems, the security of them acting as a safety net is unknown. Thus the argument goes that a considerably greater effort is needed to ensure the health of ecosystems and that we do not exceed the tolerance limits. Hence there is a much greater need for scientific understanding of biodiversity and ecosystem processes so as to identify their vulnerability and risk of exceeding resilience. There is a corresponding need to monitor the health of ecosystems and so better recognise emerging threats.