Search

Spatial prioritization is a critical step in conservation planning, a process designed to ensure that limited resources are applied in ways that deliver the highest possible returns for biodiversity and human wellbeing. In practice, many spatial prioritizations fall short of their potential by focusing on places rather than actions, and by using data of snapshots of assets or threats rather than estimated impacts. We introduce spatial action mapping as an approach that overcomes these shortfalls. This approach produces a spatially explicit view of where and how much a given conservation action is likely to contribute to achieving stated conservation goals. Through seven case examples, we demonstrate simple to complex versions of how this method can be applied across local to global scales to inform decisions about a wide range of conservation actions and benefits. Spatial action mapping can support major improvements in efficient use of conservation resources and will reach its full potential as the quality of environmental, social, and economic datasets converge and conservation impact evaluations improve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Taxonomic knowledge is critical to understanding, cataloguing, and assessing biodiversity, and is central to measuring and achieving conservation goals, including the Post-2020 Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Taxonomy is a centuries-old discipline, but its tools, diversity of users, and applications are constantly expanding and evolving. The lack of trackable and interoperable taxonomic data inhibits data integration and knowledge transfer across communities and disciplines, constraining conservation applications. We propose a globally integrated structure of taxonomy composed of six elements to increase understanding of taxonomic interoperability status across the fields of taxonomy, biodiversity, and conservation. Normalizing taxonomic integration assessments by data aggregators and users will help inform and track progress towards cross-group name integration, biodiversity synthesis science, and applications. All aspects of biodiversity research, from taxonomy to conservation, rely on data associated with species names. Effective integration of names across multiple fields is paramount and depends on the coordination and organization of taxonomic data. We assess current efforts and find that even key applications for well-studied taxa still lack commonality in taxonomic information required for integration. We identify essential taxonomic elements from our interoperability assessment to support improved access and integration of taxonomic data. A stronger focus on these elements has the potential to involve taxonomic communities in biodiversity science and overcome broken linkages currently limiting research capacity. We encourage a community effort to democratize taxonomic expertise and language in order to facilitate maximum interoperability and integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Connectivity underpins the persistence of life; it needs to inform biodiversity conservation decisions. Yet, when prioritising conservation areas and developing actions, connectivity is not being operationalised in spatial planning. The challenge is the translation of flows associated with connectivity into conservation objectives that lead to actions. Connectivity is nebulous, it can be abstract and mean different things to different people, making it difficult to include in conservation problems. Here, we show how connectivity can be included in mathematically defining conservation planning objectives. We provide a path forward for linking connectivity to high-level conservation goals, such as increasing species' persistence. We propose ways to design spatial management areas that gain biodiversity benefit from connectivity. There is a disconnect between global high-level conservation goals and on-the-ground actions such as maintaining ecosystem services or persistence and local planning of protected areas. Dynamic processes such as ecological connectivity underpin species persistence and ecosystem resilience but are difficult to represent in mathematical spatial planning problems for protected areas. Quantitative and SMART (specific – measurable – action-oriented – realistic – time-bound) conservation objectives can provide a link between high-level conservation goals and local or regional design and implementation of functionally connected protected area networks. With current implementation gaps of protected area commitments and increasing climate change threats, there is tremendous opportunity to use quantifiable objectives for ecological connectivity as a vehicle to future-proof protected area networks to help achieve global conservation goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]