Convention on Biological Diversity
About: Convention on Biological Diversity is a(n) research topic. Over the lifetime, 2232 publication(s) have been published within this topic receiving 65599 citation(s). The topic is also known as: CBD & United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.
Papers published on a yearly basis
United Nations Environment Programme1, BirdLife International2, Zoological Society of London3, Statistics Netherlands4, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill5, Old Dominion University6, Conservation International7, Food and Agriculture Organization8, University of Virginia9, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds10, University of Queensland11, University of Cambridge12, National Center for Atmospheric Research13, World Wide Fund for Nature14, South African National Parks15, UNESCO16, University of British Columbia17, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research18, The Nature Conservancy19, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center20, American Bird Conservancy21, Stellenbosch University22, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources23
TL;DR: Most indicators of the state of biodiversity showed declines, with no significant recent reductions in rate, whereas indicators of pressures on biodiversity showed increases, indicating that the Convention on Biological Diversity’s 2010 targets have not been met.
Abstract: In 2002, world leaders committed, through the Convention on Biological Diversity, to achieve a significant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. We compiled 31 indicators to report on progress toward this target. Most indicators of the state of biodiversity (covering species' population trends, extinction risk, habitat extent and condition, and community composition) showed declines, with no significant recent reductions in rate, whereas indicators of pressures on biodiversity (including resource consumption, invasive alien species, nitrogen pollution, overexploitation, and climate change impacts) showed increases. Despite some local successes and increasing responses (including extent and biodiversity coverage of protected areas, sustainable forest management, policy responses to invasive alien species, and biodiversity-related aid), the rate of biodiversity loss does not appear to be slowing.
TL;DR: With the explicit recognition of the genetic component of biodiversity in conservation legislation of many countries and in the Convention on Biological Diversity, the ESU concept is set to become increasingly significant for conservation of natural as well as captive populations.
Abstract: writing in the first issue of TREE, Ryder’ brought the term ‘Evolutionarily Significant Unit’ (ESU) to the attention of a broad audience of ecologists and evolutionary biologists. The ESU concept was developed to provide a rational basis for prioritizing taxa for conservation effort (e.g. captive breeding), given that resources are limited and that existing taxonomy may not adequately reflect underlying genetic diversity*. With the explicit recognition of the genetic component of biodiversity in conservation legislation of many countries and in the Convention on Biological Diversity, the ESU concept is set to become increasingly significant for conservation of natural as well as captive populations.
01 Dec 1993-Environmental Conservation
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose case studies on various topics to identify management practices, technologies and policies that promote the positive and mitigate the negative impacts of agriculture on biodiversity, and enhance productivity and the capacity to sustain livelihoods.
Abstract: Background The programme of work on agricultural biodiversity, adopted by the Conference of Parties in decision V/5, makes provision for case studies on various topics to identify management practices, technologies and policies that promote the positive and mitigate the negative impacts of agriculture on biodiversity, and enhance productivity and the capacity to sustain livelihoods. More specifically, activity 2.1 of the Programme of Work calls for a series of case studies, in a range of environments and production systems, and in each region: (a) To identify key goods and services provided by agricultural biodiversity, needs for the conservation and sustainable use of components of this biological diversity in agricultural ecosystems, and threats to such diversity;
TL;DR: The biodiversity of eukaryote species and their extinction rates, distributions, and protection is reviewed, and what the future rates of species extinction will be, how well protected areas will slow extinction Rates, and how the remaining gaps in knowledge might be filled are reviewed.
Abstract: Background A principal function of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is to “perform regular and timely assessments of knowledge on biodiversity.” In December 2013, its second plenary session approved a program to begin a global assessment in 2015. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and five other biodiversity-related conventions have adopted IPBES as their science-policy interface, so these assessments will be important in evaluating progress toward the CBD’s Aichi Targets of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020. As a contribution toward such assessment, we review the biodiversity of eukaryote species and their extinction rates, distributions, and protection. We document what we know, how it likely differs from what we do not, and how these differences affect biodiversity statistics. Interestingly, several targets explicitly mention “known species”—a strong, if implicit, statement of incomplete knowledge. We start by asking how many species are known and how many remain undescribed. We then consider by how much human actions inflate extinction rates. Much depends on where species are, because different biomes contain different numbers of species of different susceptibilities. Biomes also suffer different levels of damage and have unequal levels of protection. How extinction rates will change depends on how and where threats expand and whether greater protection counters them. Different visualizations of species biodiversity. ( A ) The distributions of 9927 bird species. ( B ) The 4964 species with smaller than the median geographical range size. ( C ) The 1308 species assessed as threatened with a high risk of extinction by BirdLife International for the Red List of Threatened Species of the International Union for Conservation of Nature. ( D ) The 1080 threatened species with less than the median range size. (D) provides a strong geographical focus on where local conservation actions can have the greatest global impact. Additional biodiversity maps are available at www.biodiversitymapping.org. Advances Recent studies have clarified where the most vulnerable species live, where and how humanity changes the planet, and how this drives extinctions. These data are increasingly accessible, bringing greater transparency to science and governance. Taxonomic catalogs of plants, terrestrial vertebrates, freshwater fish, and some marine taxa are sufficient to assess their status and the limitations of our knowledge. Most species are undescribed, however. The species we know best have large geographical ranges and are often common within them. Most known species have small ranges, however, and such species are typically newer discoveries. The numbers of known species with very small ranges are increasing quickly, even in well-known taxa. They are geographically concentrated and are disproportionately likely to be threatened or already extinct. We expect unknown species to share these characteristics. Current rates of extinction are about 1000 times the background rate of extinction. These are higher than previously estimated and likely still underestimated. Future rates will depend on many factors and are poised to increase. Finally, although there has been rapid progress in developing protected areas, such efforts are not ecologically representative, nor do they optimally protect biodiversity. Outlook Progress on assessing biodiversity will emerge from continued expansion of the many recently created online databases, combining them with new global data sources on changing land and ocean use and with increasingly crowdsourced data on species’ distributions. Examples of practical conservation that follow from using combined data in Colombia and Brazil can be found at www.savingspecies.org and www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3zjeJW2NVk.
TL;DR: 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.
Abstract: 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 UK 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.
Trending Questions (8)
Related Topics (5)
44.8K papers, 1.9M citations
28K papers, 997.1K citations
99.2K papers, 3.5M citations
25.4K papers, 1.2M citations
57K papers, 1.1M citations