Showing papers by "International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources published in 2019"
••
Missouri Botanical Garden1, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources2, University of Montana3, University of Western Australia4, Oregon State University5, Center for International Forestry Research6, Southern University of Science and Technology7, University of Cambridge8, Peking University9, University of Concepción10, Parks Canada11, United States Forest Service12, Research Institute for Nature and Forest13, Curtin University14
TL;DR: The second edition of the International Principles and Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration (the Standards) presents a robust framework for restoration projects to achieve intended goals, while addressing challenges including effective design and implementation, accounting for complex ecosystem dynamics (especially in the context of climate change), and navigating trade-offs associated with land management priorities and decisions as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Ecological restoration, when implemented effectively and sustainably, contributes to protecting biodiversity; improving human health and wellbeing; increasing food and water security; delivering goods, services, and economic prosperity; and supporting climate change mitigation, resilience, and adaptation. It is a solutions-based approach that engages communities, scientists, policymakers, and land managers to repair ecological damage and rebuild a healthier relationship between people and the rest of nature. When combined with conservation and sustainable use, ecological restoration is the link needed to move local, regional, and global environmental conditions from a state of continued degradation, to one of net positive improvement. The second edition of the International Principles and Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration (the Standards) presents a robust framework for restoration projects to achieve intended goals, while addressing challenges including effective design and implementation, accounting for complex ecosystem dynamics (especially in the context of climate change), and navigating trade-offs associated with land management priorities and decisions.
567 citations
••
Deakin University1, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology2, University of Western Australia3, University of Technology, Sydney4, James Hutton Institute5, Plymouth Marine Laboratory6, Griffith University7, National University of Singapore8, University of Wollongong9, Bangor University10, Edith Cowan University11, University of Queensland12, Utah State University13, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation14, University of Florida15, McGill University16, Southern Cross University17, Florida International University18, University of Plymouth19, University of Tsukuba20, University of Edinburgh21, Spanish National Research Council22, Aarhus University23, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources24, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science25, Autonomous University of Barcelona26, University of Virginia27, Smithsonian Environmental Research Center28, Bogor Agricultural University29, Center for International Forestry Research30, University of Hong Kong31, University of the Algarve32, Duke University33
TL;DR: The authors identify the top-ten unresolved questions in the field and find that most questions relate to the precise role blue carbon can play in mitigating climate change and the most effective management actions in maximising this.
Abstract: The term Blue Carbon (BC) was first coined a decade ago to describe the disproportionately large contribution of coastal vegetated ecosystems to global carbon sequestration. The role of BC in climate change mitigation and adaptation has now reached international prominence. To help prioritise future research, we assembled leading experts in the field to agree upon the top-ten pending questions in BC science. Understanding how climate change affects carbon accumulation in mature BC ecosystems and during their restoration was a high priority. Controversial questions included the role of carbonate and macroalgae in BC cycling, and the degree to which greenhouse gases are released following disturbance of BC ecosystems. Scientists seek improved precision of the extent of BC ecosystems; techniques to determine BC provenance; understanding of the factors that influence sequestration in BC ecosystems, with the corresponding value of BC; and the management actions that are effective in enhancing this value. Overall this overview provides a comprehensive road map for the coming decades on future research in BC science.
424 citations
••
TL;DR: A critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the NbS principles can inform the review and revision of principles supporting specific types of N bS (such as the approaches reviewed here), as well as serve as the foundation for the development of standards for the successful implementation of NBS.
341 citations
••
National University of Singapore1, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources2, University of Wollongong3, University of Queensland4, United States Geological Survey5, Salisbury University6, The Chinese University of Hong Kong7, Aberystwyth University8, Zoological Society of London9, University of the Western Cape10, Sun Yat-sen University11
TL;DR: Intertidal mangrove forests are a dynamic ecosystem experiencing rapid changes in extent and habitat quality over geological history, today and into the future as mentioned in this paper. Climate and sea level have drastical...
Abstract: Intertidal mangrove forests are a dynamic ecosystem experiencing rapid changes in extent and habitat quality over geological history, today and into the future. Climate and sea level have drastical...
310 citations
••
Zoological Society of London1, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis2, University College London3, BirdLife International4, University of Cambridge5, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources6, Arizona State University7, University of Queensland8, Wildlife Conservation Society9
TL;DR: Four problems with Aichi Target 11 that have contributed to its limited achievement are discussed and a formulation for a target for site-based conservation beyond 2020 aimed at overcoming them are proposed.
Abstract: The ten-year Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, made up of 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets, is coming to an end and it is therefore timely to assess their appropriateness so as to provide scientific support on the development of an improved post-2020 framework. Here we focus on Aichi Target 11, concerned with conserving protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures by 2020. We identify four broad problems with Aichi Target 11 that have led to perverse outcomes and an inability for nations to account for true conservation progress. We propose a formulation for a target for site-based conservation beyond 2020 aimed at overcoming them: ‘The value of all key biodiversity areas and other sites of global significance for biodiversity is documented and retained through protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures’.
245 citations
••
Stellenbosch University1, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources2, NatureServe3, Stony Brook University4, University of Melbourne5, National Wildlife Federation6, University of York7, University of La Verne8, University of Leeds9, Conservation International10, University of British Columbia11, Sapienza University of Rome12, University of Cambridge13, British Trust for Ornithology14, Zoological Society of London15, Wildlife Conservation Society16, University of Queensland17, Durham University18
TL;DR: The authors provide an overview of the rapidly developing field of climate change vulnerability assessment (CCVA) and describe key concepts, terms, steps and considerations, and stress the importance of identifying the full range of pressures, impacts and their associated mechanisms that species face and using this as a basis for selecting the appropriate assessment approaches for quantifying vulnerability.
Abstract: Assessing species' vulnerability to climate change is a prerequisite for developing effective strategies to conserve them. The last three decades have seen exponential growth in the number of studies evaluating how, how much, why, when, and where species will be impacted by climate change. We provide an overview of the rapidly developing field of climate change vulnerability assessment (CCVA) and describe key concepts, terms, steps and considerations. We stress the importance of identifying the full range of pressures, impacts and their associated mechanisms that species face and using this as a basis for selecting the appropriate assessment approaches for quantifying vulnerability. We outline four CCVA assessment approaches, namely trait-based, correlative, mechanistic and combined approaches and discuss their use. Since any assessment can deliver unreliable or even misleading results when incorrect data and parameters are applied, we discuss finding, selecting, and applying input data and provide examples of open-access resources. Because rare, small-range, and declining-range species are often of particular conservation concern while also posing significant challenges for CCVA, we describe alternative ways to assess them. We also describe how CCVAs can be used to inform IUCN Red List assessments of extinction risk. Finally, we suggest future directions in this field and propose areas where research efforts may be particularly valuable.
230 citations
••
Deakin University1, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science2, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration3, Bedford Institute of Oceanography4, Wildlife Conservation Society5, University of South Alabama6, University of Pisa7, Parks Victoria8, University of California, Santa Cruz9, Autonomous University of Carmen10, Mammal Research Institute11, BirdLife International12, International Sleep Products Association13, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology14, Duke University15, Swansea University16, National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research17, University of Exeter18, James Cook University19, University of Miami20, Macquarie University21, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute22, Australian Institute of Marine Science23, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources24, Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom25, University of Cambridge26, University of Washington27, University of Tasmania28, Tethys Research Institute29, Oregon State University30, Natural Environment Research Council31, Suffolk University32, University of East Anglia33, Queen Mary University of London34, University of Southampton35, National Oceanography Centre, Southampton36, National Institute of Polar Research37, Chicago Zoological Society38, Florida State University39, University of Western Australia40
TL;DR: A broad range of case studies from diverse marine taxa are compiled to show how tracking data have helped inform conservation policy and management, including reductions in fisheries bycatch and vessel strikes, and the design and administration of marine protected areas and important habitats.
Abstract: There have been efforts around the globe to track individuals of many marine species and assess their movements and distribution, with the putative goal of supporting their conservation and management. Determining whether, and how, tracking data have been successfully applied to address real-world conservation issues is, however, difficult. Here, we compile a broad range of case studies from diverse marine taxa to show how tracking data have helped inform conservation policy and management, including reductions in fisheries bycatch and vessel strikes, and the design and administration of marine protected areas and important habitats. Using these examples, we highlight pathways through which the past and future investment in collecting animal tracking data might be better used to achieve tangible conservation benefits.
215 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, a review examines theoretical and empirical literature from sustainability science, public administration, and science and technology studies with the intention of advancing the theory and practice of co-production within sustainability science.
Abstract: Co-production has become a cornerstone of research within the sustainability sciences, motivating collaborations of diverse actors to conduct research in the service of societal and policy change. This review examines theoretical and empirical literature from sustainability science, public administration, and science and technology studies (STS) with the intention of advancing the theory and practice of co-production within sustainability science. We argue that co-production must go beyond stakeholder engagement by scientists to the more deliberate design of societal transitions. Co-production can contribute to such transitions by shifting the institutional arrangements that govern relationships between knowledge and power, science and society, and state and citizens. We highlight critical weaknesses in conceptualizations of co-production within sustainability sciences with respect to power, politics, and governance. We offer suggestions for how this can be rectified through deeper engagement with public administration and STS to offer a broad vision for enhancing the use, design, and practice of a more reflexive co-production in sustainability science.
189 citations
••
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources1, University of the Philippines Los Baños2, University of Tasmania3, Duke University4, Stony Brook University5, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds6, BirdLife International7, University of Cambridge8, South African National Parks9, Stellenbosch University10, Zoological Society of London11, Microsoft12, ETH Zurich13, Sapienza University of Rome14
TL;DR: It is recommended that IUCN Red List assessments document AOH wherever practical, because it can guide conservation, for example, through targeting areas for field surveys, assessing proportions of species' habitat within protected areas, and monitoring habitat loss and fragmentation.
Abstract: The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species includes assessment of extinction risk for 98 512 species, plus documentation of their range, habitat, elevation, and other factors. These range, habitat and elevation data can be matched with terrestrial land cover and elevation datasets to map the species' area of habitat (AOH; also known as extent of suitable habitat; ESH). This differs from the two spatial metrics used for assessing extinction risk in the IUCN Red List criteria: extent of occurrence (EOO) and area of occupancy (AOO). AOH can guide conservation, for example, through targeting areas for field surveys, assessing proportions of species' habitat within protected areas, and monitoring habitat loss and fragmentation. We recommend that IUCN Red List assessments document AOH wherever practical.
164 citations
••
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources1, American University2, University of Paris3, Universidade Federal de Lavras4, University of Ljubljana5, University of Vienna6, Claude Bernard University Lyon 17, IRSA8, University of Alabama9, University of Copenhagen10, University College Dublin11, Northern Arizona University12
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors highlight the main threats to underground ecosystems and propose a set of effective actions to protect this globally important natural heritage and highlight the global importance and the conservation challenges associated with subterranean ecosystems.
Abstract:
In light of recent alarming trends in human population growth, climate change, and other environmental modifications, a “Warning to humanity” manifesto was published in BioScience in 2017. This call reiterated most of the ideas originally expressed by the Union of Concerned Scientists in 1992, including the fear that we are “pushing Earth's ecosystems beyond their capacities to support the web of life.” As subterranean biologists, we take this opportunity to emphasize the global importance and the conservation challenges associated with subterranean ecosystems. They likely represent the most widespread nonmarine environments on Earth, but specialized subterranean organisms remain among the least documented and studied. Largely overlooked in conservation policies, subterranean habitats play a critical role in the function of the web of life and provide important ecosystem services. We highlight the main threats to subterranean ecosystems and propose a set of effective actions to protect this globally important natural heritage.
161 citations
••
University of Maryland, College Park1, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute2, Goethe University Frankfurt3, Duke University4, Princeton University5, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul6, State University of New York System7, University of Marburg8, University of Potsdam9, George Mason University10, Michigan Department of Natural Resources11, German Primate Center12, Technische Universität München13, University of British Columbia14, University of Wyoming15, Lamont–Doherty Earth Observatory16, Max Planck Society17, Stony Brook University18, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources19, Hebrew University of Jerusalem20, Wildlife Conservation Society21, Field Museum of Natural History22, National University of Misiones23, Polish Academy of Sciences24, Tel Aviv University25
TL;DR: A comprehensive evaluation of the effects of autocorrelation on home range estimation with a broad array of home range estimators, including Kernel Density Estimation with four bandwidth optimizers and a detailed simulation study to tease apart how sampling frequency, sampling duration, and the focal animal’s movement conspire to affect range estimates.
Abstract: Fil: Noonan, Michael J.. National Zoological Park; Estados Unidos. University of Maryland; Estados Unidos
••
TL;DR: This article examined the association between the development of oil palm plantations and change in objective or material well-being between 2000 and 2014 across villages in Kalimantan, Indonesian Borneo, and found that plantations developed in remote villages with higher forest cover, in which the majority of communities previously relied on subsistence-based livelihoods.
••
University of Fribourg1, University of Vienna2, Environment Agency3, Research Institute for Nature and Forest4, University of Cambridge5, University College London6, Zoological Society of London7, Natural History Museum8, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds9, Scottish Association for Marine Science10, Bournemouth University11, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science12, University of Copenhagen13, Spanish National Research Council14, University of Girona15, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources16, Lincoln University (New Zealand)17, CABI18, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences19, Institute for European Environmental Policy20, University of Bern21, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic22, Ovidius University23, Institut national de la recherche agronomique24, Polish Academy of Sciences25, University of Sussex26, University of Florence27, Naturalis28, Radboud University Nijmegen29
TL;DR: A systematic consensus horizon scanning procedure is presented to derive a ranked list of potential IAS likely to arrive, establish, spread and have an impact on biodiversity in the region over the next decade.
Abstract: The European Union (EU) has recently published its first list of invasive alien species(IAS) of EU concern to which current legislation must apply. The list comprises speciesknown to pose great threats to biodiversity and needs to be maintained and updated.Horizon scanning is seen as critical to identify the most threatening potential IAS thatdo not yet occur in Europe to be subsequently risk assessed for future listing. Accord-ingly, we present a systematic consensus horizon scanning procedure to derive a rankedlist of potential IAS likely to arrive, establish, spread and have an impact on biodiversityin the region over the next decade. The approach is unique in the continental scaleexamined, the breadth of taxonomic groups and environments considered, and themethods and data sources used. International experts were brought together to addressfive broad thematic groups of potential IAS. For each thematic group the experts firstindependently assembled lists of potential IAS not yet established in the EU but poten-tially threatening biodiversity if introduced. Experts were asked to score the specieswithin their thematic group for their separate likelihoods of i) arrival, ii) establishment,iii) spread, and iv) magnitude of the potential negative impact on biodiversity within theEU. Experts then convened for a 2‐day workshop applying consensus methods to com-pile a ranked list of potential IAS. From an initial working list of 329 species, a list of 66species not yet established in the EU that were considered to be very high (8 species),high (40 species) or medium (18 species) risk species was derived. Here, we presentthese species highlighting the potential negative impacts and the most likely biogeo-graphic regions to be affected by these potential IAS.
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors assessed the magnitude of expected changes of biodiversity by performing a meta-analysis of the responses of species distributions to climate change, focusing on the proportion of local remaining species and their habitats.
Abstract: Large changes in biodiversity are expected to occur if climate change continues at its current pace. Adverse effects include changes in species habitats and compositions, and consequently changes in ecosystem functioning. We assessed the magnitude of expected changes of biodiversity by performing a meta-analysis of the responses of species distributions to climate change. We focused on the proportion of local remaining species and their habitats. We summarized 97 studies and calculated two effect-size metrics from their results to quantify changes in biodiversity. These metrics are the fraction of remaining species (FRS) and the fraction of remaining area (FRA) with suitable climate for each species. Both metrics calculate deviations from the original biodiversity state and together they indicate biodiversity intactness. We found an expected gradual decrease in both FRS and FRA with significant reductions of 14% and 35% between 1 and 2 °C increase in global mean temperatures. Strong impacts are projected for both mammals and plants with FRS reductions of 19%. The climate-change response of biodiversity varies strongly among taxonomic groups and biomes. For some taxonomic groups the FRA declines strongly beyond 3 °C of temperature increase. Although these estimates are conservative, as we assume that species are unable to disperse or adapt, we conclude that already at moderate levels (i.e., 1–2 °C) of temperature increase a significant decrease of original biodiversity is projected. Our research supports the pledge to limit climate change to 1.5 °C and preferably lower to protect biodiversity.
••
University of Oxford1, Queen Mary University of London2, University of Mainz3, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut4, University of York5, Texas A&M University6, Natural History Museum7, Trinity College, Dublin8, University of Michigan9, Massachusetts Institute of Technology10, Durham University11, Centre national de la recherche scientifique12, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki13, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill14, Stockholm University15, Russian Academy of Sciences16, University of Edinburgh17, Columbia University18, University of Belgrade19, University of Groningen20, University of Burgos21, Wageningen University and Research Centre22, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences23, University of Lisbon24, University of Huddersfield25, Gazi University26, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University27, University of Naples Federico II28, Graduate University for Advanced Studies29, Hebrew University of Jerusalem30, University of Liverpool31, Queen's University Belfast32, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań33, University of Reading34, Lithuanian Institute of History35, Goethe University Frankfurt36, University of Queensland37, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources38, University of Kent39, City University of New York40, University of Liège41, Free University of Berlin42, University College London43, University of Vienna44, University of Toulouse45, Simon Fraser University46, University of Siena47, Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart48, Bournemouth University49, University of Cambridge50, La Trobe University51, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine52, University of Copenhagen53, Norwegian University of Science and Technology54, University of Basel55, National Museum of Natural History56, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich57, University of Aberdeen58, University of Montpellier59, Liverpool John Moores University60
TL;DR: This paper showed that European domestic pigs dating from 7,100 to 6,000 y BP possessed both Near Eastern and European nuclear ancestry, while later pigs possessed no more than 4% Near Eastern ancestry, indicating that gene flow from European wild boars resulted in a near complete disappearance of Near East ancestry.
Abstract: Archaeological evidence indicates that pig domestication had begun by ∼10,500 y before the present (BP) in the Near East, and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) suggests that pigs arrived in Europe alongside farmers ∼8,500 y BP. A few thousand years after the introduction of Near Eastern pigs into Europe, however, their characteristic mtDNA signature disappeared and was replaced by haplotypes associated with European wild boars. This turnover could be accounted for by substantial gene flow from local European wild boars, although it is also possible that European wild boars were domesticated independently without any genetic contribution from the Near East. To test these hypotheses, we obtained mtDNA sequences from 2,099 modern and ancient pig samples and 63 nuclear ancient genomes from Near Eastern and European pigs. Our analyses revealed that European domestic pigs dating from 7,100 to 6,000 y BP possessed both Near Eastern and European nuclear ancestry, while later pigs possessed no more than 4% Near Eastern ancestry, indicating that gene flow from European wild boars resulted in a near-complete disappearance of Near East ancestry. In addition, we demonstrate that a variant at a locus encoding black coat color likely originated in the Near East and persisted in European pigs. Altogether, our results indicate that while pigs were not independently domesticated in Europe, the vast majority of human-mediated selection over the past 5,000 y focused on the genomic fraction derived from the European wild boars, and not on the fraction that was selected by early Neolithic farmers over the first 2,500 y of the domestication process.
••
Stellenbosch University1, University of Vienna2, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources3, Lincoln University (New Zealand)4, Leibniz Association5, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg6, University of Concepción7, Charles University in Prague8, Environment Agency9, Taizhou University10, University of Konstanz11, Wageningen University and Research Centre12, Spanish National Research Council13, University of Fribourg14
TL;DR: For many species, human-induced environmental changes are important indirect drivers of range expansion into new regions as discussed by the authors, and it is important to distinguish the range dynamics of such species from those that occur without, or with less clear, involvement of human induced environmental changes.
Abstract: For many species, human-induced environmental changes are important indirect drivers of range expansion into new regions. We argue that it is important to distinguish the range dynamics of such species from those that occur without, or with less clear, involvement of human-induced environmental changes. We elucidate the salient features of the rapid increase in the number of species whose range dynamics are human induced, and review the relationships and differences to both natural range expansion and biological invasions. We discuss the consequences for science, policy and management in an era of rapid global change and highlight four key challenges relating to basic gaps in knowledge, and the transfer of scientific understanding to biodiversity management and policy. We conclude that range-expanding species responding to human-induced environmental change will become an essential feature for biodiversity management and science in the Anthropocene. Finally, we propose the term neonative for these taxa.
••
University of California, Santa Cruz1, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds2, American Bird Conservancy3, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources4, BirdLife International5, Natural History Museum6, The Nature Conservancy7, Shedd Aquarium8, National Taiwan University9, University of Auckland10, Aix-Marseille University11, Canterbury of New Zealand12, University of Cambridge13, University of the Balearic Islands14, University of Exeter15, Seychelles Islands Foundation16, Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology17, United States Geological Survey18, Southwest University of Visual Arts19
TL;DR: A conceptual framework to identify globally important islands for invasive mammal eradications to prevent imminent extinctions of highly threatened species using biogeographic and technical factors, plus a novel approach to consider socio-political feasibility is developed.
Abstract: Invasive alien species are a major threat to native insular species. Eradicating invasive mammals from islands is a feasible and proven approach to prevent biodiversity loss. We developed a conceptual framework to identify globally important islands for invasive mammal eradications to prevent imminent extinctions of highly threatened species using biogeographic and technical factors, plus a novel approach to consider socio-political feasibility. We applied this framework using a comprehensive dataset describing the distribution of 1,184 highly threatened native vertebrate species (i.e. those listed as Critically Endangered or Endangered on the IUCN Red List) and 184 non-native mammals on 1,279 islands worldwide. Based on extinction risk, irreplaceability, severity of impact from invasive species, and technical feasibility of eradication, we identified and ranked 292 of the most important islands where eradicating invasive mammals would benefit highly threatened vertebrates. When socio-political feasibility was considered, we identified 169 of these islands where eradication planning or operation could be initiated by 2020 or 2030 and would improve the survival prospects of 9.4% of the Earth's most highly threatened terrestrial insular vertebrates (111 of 1,184 species). Of these, 107 islands were in 34 countries and territories and could have eradication projects initiated by 2020. Concentrating efforts to eradicate invasive mammals on these 107 islands would benefit 151 populations of 80 highly threatened vertebrates and make a major contribution towards achieving global conservation targets adopted by the world's nations.
••
TL;DR: Planned dam locations are classified according to their potential impact on freshwater megafauna species at different spatial scales, attention to potential conflicts between climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation are highlighted, and priorities for freshwater management are recommended.
Abstract: Dam construction comes with severe social, economic and ecological impacts. From an ecological point of view, habitat types are altered and biodiversity is lost. Thus, to identify areas that deserve major attention for conservation, existing and planned locations for (hydropower) dams were overlapped, at global extent, with the contemporary distribution of freshwater megafauna species with consideration of their respective threat status. Hydropower development will disproportionately impact areas of high freshwater megafauna richness in South America, South and East Asia, and the Balkan region. Sub-catchments with a high share of threatened species are considered to be most vulnerable; these are located in Central America, Southeast Asia and in the regions of the Black and Caspian Sea. Based on this approach, planned dam locations are classified according to their potential impact on freshwater megafauna species at different spatial scales, attention to potential conflicts between climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation are highlighted, and priorities for freshwater management are recommended.
••
National Oceanography Centre, Southampton1, Rhodes University2, International Institute for Environment and Development3, World Conservation Monitoring Centre4, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources5, Duke University6, University of Tasmania7, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University8, Plymouth Marine Laboratory9, University of Oxford10, University of British Columbia11
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors identify the ecological connectivity between ABNJ and coastal zones as critically important in the negotiation process and apply several approaches to identify some priority areas for protection from the perspective of coastal populations of Least Developed Countries (LDCs).
••
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources1, University of Maryland, College Park2, University of Northern British Columbia3, Carleton University4, Chinese Academy of Sciences5, World Conservation Monitoring Centre6, International Institute of Minnesota7, University of Queensland8, Wildlife Conservation Society9
TL;DR: Three Global Conditions for Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use (3Cs) is an implementation framework suitable for use in the Post-2020 SP and follows the well-known drivers-state pressure-response approach for addressing biodiversity conservation on land.
Abstract: ‘Nature and its vital contributions to people, which together embody biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are deteriorating worldwide’ [1]. The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is intended to ensure conservation of biodiversity, its wise use, and sharing of benefits from use of genetic resources. Through it, the Strategic Plan (SP) for Biodiversity 2011–2020 was created to make progress toward a vision of humanity ‘Living inHarmonywithNature’ by 2050 [2]. When that vision is realized, biodiversity will be valued, conserved, restored, andwisely used, so it canmaintain ecosystem services and sustain a healthy planet, delivering benefits essential for all humans (2050 Vision). The SP contains 20 global targets (theAichiTargets) and applies to other nature-oriented UN Conventions. Related to this, in 2015, the UN created the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), an overarching plan for people, planet, and prosperity designed to achieve a multi-faceted vision, which includes living in harmony with nature. The SDGs stressed international cooperation, referenced biodiversity and climate throughout, and reaffirmed Rio Principle 7, which states that countries have common but differentiated responsibilities for the health of the ‘earth ecosystem.’ [3]. Confronted with the global crisis facing nature, the Parties to the CBD will meet in Kunming, China in October 2020. They have called for assistance in developing realistic baselines and frameworks that will support ambitious and measurable targets for aPost-2020SP relevant to theSDGs thatwillmakeprogress toward the 2050 Vision [4].We offer this response. Three Global Conditions for Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use (3Cs) is an implementation framework suitable for use in the Post-2020 SP. It follows the well-known drivers-statepressure-response approach for addressing biodiversity conservation on land [5]. A compatible marine approach is under development. The 3Cs framework evaluates landuse drivers and human pressures to establish a baseline state of three broad terrestrial conditions: Cities and Farms cover 18% of land (C1), shared lands 56% (C2), and large wild areas 26% (C3). It maps all but Antarctica (Fig. 1) and enables development of suites of conservation responses and production practices appropriate for each condition that are clustered on a continuum from those appropriate to themost heavily impacted areas to those best suited to the wildest areas remaining on Earth. These include: C1: Increase conservation efforts to secure endangered species and protect all remaining primary ecosystem fragments. Mainstream sustainable practices such as protecting good farmland, practicing productive regenerative agriculture, and keepingnitrogenoutof freshwater.Maintain pollinators and increase ecological restoration. ‘Green’ cities to reduce carbon emissions, prevent urban sprawl, and provide access to nature for urban dwellers’ health and well-being. C2: Establish ‘ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas (PAs)’ while increasing coverage of key biodiversity areas
••
Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária1, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul2, Panthera Corporation3, Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso4, World Wide Fund for Nature5, Universidade do Estado de Mato Grosso6, Anhanguera-Uniderp University7, Universidade Católica Dom Bosco8, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources9, National Institute for Space Research10, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute11, Federal University of Paraíba12, University of Angers13, National Council for Scientific and Technological Development14, Autonomous University of Madrid15
TL;DR: In this paper, a functional science network can booster the collaborative capability to generate creative ideas and solutions to address the big challenges faced by the Pantanal wetland, one of the largest, most diverse, and continuous inland wetland in the world.
Abstract: Building bridges between environmental and political agendas is essential nowadays in face of the increasing human pressure on natural environments, including wetlands. Wetlands provide critical ecosystem services for humanity and can generate a considerable direct or indirect income to the local communities. To meet many of the sustainable development goals, we need to move our trajectory from the current environmental destructive development to a wiser wetland use. The current article contain a proposed agenda for the Pantanal aiming the improvement of public policy for conservation in the Pantanal, one of the largest, most diverse, and continuous inland wetland in the world. We suggest and discuss a list of 11 essential interfaces between science, policy, and development in region linked to the proposed agenda. We believe that a functional science network can booster the collaborative capability to generate creative ideas and solutions to address the big challenges faced by the Pantanal wetland.
••
TL;DR: The users and uses of the WDPA, its history of quality improvements and challenges for future development are illustrated, which will deliver vital knowledge to support a sustainable future for biodiversity and people globally.
Abstract: The world’s protected area network is constantly changing, and the dynamics of this network are tracked using the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). This database evolved from a list of protected areas first mandated by the United Nations in 1959, and it now informs the key indicators that track progress toward area-based conservation targets. In this capacity, the WDPA illuminates the role of protected areas in advancing a range of international objectives and agreements, including the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Sustainable Development Goals. Despite ongoing challenges in maintaining such a complex global dataset, the WDPA is continuously improving and taking advantage of new technology, making it widely applicable to diverse users, including those in sectors far from its original intended audience. In the future, the WDPA will expand to include areas that contribute to conservation and sustainable use outside of formal protected areas, and will increasingly link to other key global datasets. These innovations in the way the WDPA is managed and used will deliver vital knowledge to support a sustainable future for biodiversity and people globally. The World Database on Protected Areas has evolved since 1959 to become an essential resource for monitoring global progress in terrestrial and marine habitat protection. This Review illustrates the users and uses of the WDPA, its history of quality improvements and challenges for future development.
••
University of New South Wales1, University of Canberra2, University of Tasmania3, Australian National University4, University of Technology, Sydney5, University of Queensland6, Swansea University7, University of British Columbia8, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis9, University of Cambridge10, Dalhousie University11, Bangor University12, University of Montana13, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources14
TL;DR: Moon et al. as mentioned in this paper pointed out that the main purpose of the special feature was to ensure that social science methodologies for decision-making are accessible for all conservation scientists to use, regardless of disciplinary background.
Abstract: 1.In a previous series of papers (Sutherland, Dicks, Everard, & Geneletti, 2018), we summarise the use of a range of social science methods in conservation decision‐making. Moon et al. (2019) claim that the special feature risks narrowing the scope of social science research and suggest that we presented a limited perspective on the field. They thereby criticise the special feature for not doing something that it never intended to do in the first instance. We did not claim that the list of articles covered in the special feature is a comprehensive list (which it obviously is not) and we are unclear why anyone would think it is.
2.While we consider the Moon et al. (2019) paper to be a useful contribution for conservation scientists as a supplementary paper, it serves less as a critique to the special feature. Moon et al.('s (2019) paper makes very few direct and substantive criticisms of points raised in the special feature. We respond to areas of contention referring specifically to research philosophy, bias, and data reporting.
3.Moon et al. (2019) criticise the set of papers for perpetuating an objectivist view of the world. We believe that it would be rather disconcerting for the research community if there were no social truths to discover. Rather, social science research methods conducted in specific places can be good ways of exploring how truths vary in different contexts.
4.We also note that Moon et al. (2019) completely missed the point we were trying to make about psychological biases, which are quite different to the issues associated with researcher bias highlighted by them.
5.We encourage readers to pay close attention to the use of social science methods in conservation science. We reiterate, however, that the main purpose of the special feature was to ensure that social science methodologies for decision‐making are accessible for all conservation scientists to use, regardless of disciplinary background.
••
University of Queensland1, Duke University2, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute3, Lund University4, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science5, National Marine Fisheries Service6, Oregon State University7, Scripps Institution of Oceanography8, Stanford University9, California State University, Monterey Bay10, The Nature Conservancy11, International Sleep Products Association12, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria13, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution14, University of California, Santa Cruz15, BirdLife International16, Virginia Tech College of Natural Resources and Environment17, Wildlife Conservation Society18, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources19, University of Exeter20, University of Barcelona21, University of Lisbon22, Canadian Wildlife Service23, Deakin University24, University of Pisa25, University of Washington26, Tethys Research Institute27, Auckland War Memorial Museum28, University of Western Australia29, Centre national de la recherche scientifique30, Silver Spring Networks31
TL;DR: The concept of migratory connectivity and its use in international policy are reviewed, the Migratory Connectivity in the Ocean system is described, and it is proposed that efforts to effectively conserve these critical species across jurisdictions will have limited effect.
Abstract: The distributions of migratory species in the ocean span local, national and international jurisdictions. Across these ecologically interconnected regions, migratory marine species interact with anthropogenic stressors throughout their lives. Migratory connectivity, the geographical linking of individuals and populations throughout their migratory cycles, influences how spatial and temporal dynamics of stressors affect migratory animals and scale up to influence population abundance, distribution and species persistence. Population declines of many migratory marine species have led to calls for connectivity knowledge, especially insights from animal tracking studies, to be more systematically and synthetically incorporated into decision-making. Inclusion of migratory connectivity in the design of conservation and management measures is critical to ensure they are appropriate for the level of risk associated with various degrees of connectivity. Three mechanisms exist to incorporate migratory connectivity into international marine policy which guides conservation implementation: site-selection criteria, network design criteria and policy recommendations. Here, we review the concept of migratory connectivity and its use in international policy, and describe the Migratory Connectivity in the Ocean system, a migratory connectivity evidence-base for the ocean. We propose that without such collaboration focused on migratory connectivity, efforts to effectively conserve these critical species across jurisdictions will have limited effect.
••
Wildlife Conservation Society1, University of Toronto2, University of Queensland3, Macquarie University4, Nature Conservation Foundation5, Spanish National Research Council6, State University of Zanzibar7, University of Rhode Island8, National Centre for Biological Sciences9, Centre national de la recherche scientifique10, Lancaster University11, University of Copenhagen12, University of Western Australia13, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources14
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors applied common time-series methods to study the temporal patterning of acute thermal stress and evaluated the effectiveness of conventional and new sea surface temperature metrics and mechanisms in predicting bleaching severity.
Abstract: Under extreme heat stress, corals expel their symbiotic algae and colour (that is, ‘bleaching’), which often leads to widespread mortality. Predicting the large-scale environmental conditions that reinforce or mitigate coral bleaching remains unresolved and limits strategic conservation actions1,2. Here we assessed coral bleaching at 226 sites and 26 environmental variables that represent different mechanisms of stress responses from East Africa to Fiji through a coordinated effort to evaluate the coral response to the 2014–2016 El Nino/Southern Oscillation thermal anomaly. We applied common time-series methods to study the temporal patterning of acute thermal stress and evaluated the effectiveness of conventional and new sea surface temperature metrics and mechanisms in predicting bleaching severity. The best models indicated the importance of peak hot temperatures, the duration of cool temperatures and temperature bimodality, which explained ~50% of the variance, compared to the common degree-heating week temperature index that explained only 9%. Our findings suggest that the threshold concept as a mechanism to explain bleaching alone was not as powerful as the multidimensional interactions of stresses, which include the duration and temporal patterning of hot and cold temperature extremes relative to average local conditions. Improved predictions of coral bleaching are critical. In a coordinated global survey effort during the 2016 El Nino, time-series patterns of peak hot temperatures, cool period durations and temperature bimodality were found to be better predictors of coral bleaching than common threshold metrics.
••
University of Wisconsin-Madison1, University of British Columbia2, Radboud University Nijmegen3, University of the Philippines Los Baños4, University of Tasmania5, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources6, Auburn University at Montgomery7, University of California, Merced8, NatureServe9
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors derived, for the first time, the Dynamic Habitat Indices (DHIs) globally, and used these to evaluate three hypotheses (available energy, environmental stress, and environmental stability) that attempt to explain global variation in species richness of amphibians, birds, and mammals.
••
University of Vienna1, Durham University2, University of Göttingen3, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic4, Stellenbosch University5, Charles University in Prague6, Taizhou University7, University of Konstanz8, University of Potsdam9, University of Delhi10, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources11, University of Auckland12, Sun Yat-sen University13
TL;DR: The first global analysis of the effects of biogeographic factors, the physical environment and socio-economy on the richness of naturalized and invasive alien plants found that socio-economic pressures are more relevant for invasive than for naturalized species richness.
Abstract: Biological invasions are a defining feature of the Anthropocene, but the factors that determine the spatially uneven distribution of alien plant species are still poorly understood. Here, we present the first global analysis of the effects of biogeographic factors, the physical environment and socio-economy on the richness of naturalized and invasive alien plants. We used generalized linear mixed-effects models and variation partitioning to disentangle the relative importance of individual factors, and, more broadly, of biogeography, physical environment and socio-economy. As measures of the magnitude of permanent anthropogenic additions to the regional species pool and of species with negative environmental impacts, we calculated the relative richness of naturalized (= RRN) and invasive (= RRI) alien plant species numbers adjusted for the number of native species in 838 terrestrial regions. Socio-economic factors (per-capita gross domestic product (GDP), population density, proportion of agricultural land) were more important in explaining RRI (~50 % of the explained variation) than RRN (~40 %). Warm-temperate and (sub)tropical regions have higher RRN than tropical or cooler regions. We found that socio-economic pressures are more relevant for invasive than for naturalized species richness. The expectation that the southern hemisphere is more invaded than the northern hemisphere was confirmed only for RRN on islands, but not for mainland regions nor for RRI. On average, islands have ~6-fold RRN, and >3-fold RRI compared to mainland regions. Eighty-two islands (=26 % of all islands) harbour more naturalized alien than native plants. Our findings challenge the widely held expectation that socio-economic pressures are more relevant for plant naturalization than for invasive plants. To meet international biodiversity targets and halt the detrimental consequences of plant invasions, it is essential to disrupt the connection between socio-economic development and plant invasions by improving pathway management, early detection and rapid response.
••
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used the Kelani river basin in Sri Lanka as the study area to assess erosion severity using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) model supported by a GIS system.
••
Deakin University1, University of Tasmania2, Hobart Corporation3, University of the Philippines Los Baños4, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources5, Stellenbosch University6, Université Paris-Saclay7, University of São Paulo8, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation9, Australian Research Council10, University of Hawaii at Manoa11, University of Queensland12, Wildlife Conservation Society13
TL;DR: How scenarios and models can and should inform the Aichi Targets of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and their reformulation are reviewed.
Abstract: Global biodiversity targets have far-reaching implications for nature conservation worldwide. Scenarios and models hold unfulfilled promise for ensuring such targets are well founded and implemented; here, we review how they can and should inform the Aichi Targets of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity and their reformulation. They offer two clear benefits: providing a scientific basis for the wording and quantitative elements of targets; and identifying synergies and trade-offs by accounting for interactions between targets and the actions needed to achieve them. The capacity of scenarios and models to address complexity makes them invaluable for developing meaningful targets and policy, and improving conservation outcomes.
••
TL;DR: Field studies in the Gulf of Bothnia (Baltic Sea) showed sea ice concentration of microplastics from 8 to 41 particles per liter of melted ice, wich were much lower than those found to impact sea ice properties in the microcosm experiments, however, should microplastic concentrations increase, microPlastic incorporation in sea ice may impactSea ice albedo.