Search

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Biodiversity on 2023-01-09, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/14888386.2022.2150313. Deposited by shareyourpaper.org and openaccessbutton.org. We've taken reasonable steps to ensure this content doesn't violate copyright. However, if you think it does you can request a takedown by emailing help@openaccessbutton.org.

The new global biodiversity framework (GBF) being developed under the Convention on Biological Diversity must drive action to reverse the ongoing decline of the Earth's biodiversity. Explicit, measurable goals that specify the outcomes we want to achieve are needed to set the course for this action. However, the current draft goals and targets fail to set out these clear outcomes. We argue that distinct outcome goals for species, ecosystems, and genetic diversity are essential and should specify net outcomes required for each. Net outcome goals such as “no net loss” do, however, have a controversial history, and loose specification can lead to perverse outcomes. We outline seven general principles to underpin net outcome goal setting that minimize risk of such perverse outcomes. Finally, we recommend inclusion of statements of impact in action targets that support biodiversity goals, and we illustrate the importance of this with an example from the draft GBF action targets. These modifications would help reveal the specific contribution each action would make to achieving the outcome goals and provide clarity on whether the successful achievement of action targets would be adequate to achieve the outcome goals and, in turn, the 2050 vision: living in harmony with nature.

Although recent biodiversity loss has been compared with cataclysmic mass extinctions, we still possess few indicators that can assess the extent or location of biodiversity loss on a global scale. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has mandated development of indicators that can meet the needs of monitoring biodiversity by 2010. To date, many indicators rely on unwarranted assumptions, secondary data, expert opinion and retrospective time series. We present a new biodiversity indicator, the Wildlife Picture Index (WPI) that targets medium and large-sized terrestrial birds and mammals in forested and savannah ecosystems that. The WPI is a composite indicator based on the geometric mean of relative occupancy estimates derived from camera trap sampling at a landscape scale. It has been designed to meet the needs of a CBD indicator while avoiding many of the pitfalls that characterize some CBD indicators. We present an example using 8 years of camera trap data from Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park, Indonesia to show that the WPI is capable of detecting changes in the rate of loss of biodiversity, a key requirement of a CBD indicator. We conclude that the WPI should be effective at monitoring top trophic levels in forest and savannah ecosystems using primary data and can fill the gap in knowledge about trends in tropical biodiversity.

"Despite a growing and increasingly sophisticated set of international policy guidance and norms governing issues of equity and the rights of indigenous and local people, conservationists continue to face moral and practical dilemmas in the application of these guidelines in the field, especially in cases where conservationists seek to restrict access to natural resources. One source of the dilemma is that successful implementation of international covenants may require a stronger enabling environment (in the form of fairness, legitimacy of political actors, transparency and accountability) than typically exists on the ground. Conservationists also need to be better informed about existing best practice on community participation. However, both policy and practice can be ultimately strengthened by an iterative process in which practitioners provide regular input to policy development in order to improve the normative basis for successful conservation."