Search

Safeguarding Earth’s tree diversity is a conservation priority due to the importance of trees for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services such as carbon sequestration. Here, we improve the foundation for effective conservation of global tree diversity by analyzing a recently developed database of tree species covering 46,752 species. We quantify range protection and anthropogenic pressures for each species and develop conservation priorities across taxonomic, phylogenetic, and functional diversity dimensions. We also assess the effectiveness of several influential proposed conservation prioritization frameworks to protect the top 17% and top 50% of tree priority areas. We find that an average of 50.2% of a tree species’ range occurs in 110-km grid cells without any protected areas (PAs), with 6,377 small-range tree species fully unprotected, and that 83% of tree species experience nonnegligible human pressure across their range on average. Protecting high-priority areas for the top 17% and 50% priority thresholds would increase the average protected proportion of each tree species’ range to 65.5% and 82.6%, respectively, leaving many fewer species (2,151 and 2,010) completely unprotected. The priority areas identified for trees match well to the Global 200 Ecoregions framework, revealing that priority areas for trees would in large part also optimize protection for terrestrial biodiversity overall. Based on range estimates for >46,000 tree species, our findings show that a large proportion of tree species receive limited protection by current PAs and are under substantial human pressure. Improved protection of biodiversity overall would also strongly benefit global tree diversity.

Here we provide the ‘Global Spectrum of Plant Form and Function Dataset’, containing species mean values for six vascular plant traits. Together, these traits –plant height, stem specific density, leaf area, leaf mass per area, leaf nitrogen content per dry mass, and diaspore (seed or spore) mass – define the primary axes of variation in plant form and function. The dataset is based on ca. 1 million trait records received via the TRY database (representing ca. 2,500 original publications) and additional unpublished data. It provides 92,159 species mean values for the six traits, covering 46,047 species. The data are complemented by higher-level taxonomic classification and six categorical traits (woodiness, growth form, succulence, adaptation to terrestrial or aquatic habitats, nutrition type and leaf type). Data quality management is based on a probabilistic approach combined with comprehensive validation against expert knowledge and external information. Intense data acquisition and thorough quality control produced the largest and, to our knowledge, most accurate compilation of empirically observed vascular plant species mean traits to date. Measurement(s) plant trait Technology Type(s) various Factor Type(s) none Sample Characteristic - Organism Tracheophyta Sample Characteristic - Environment natural environment Sample Characteristic - Location global

Comparing the impacts of future scenarios is essential for developing and guiding the political sustainability agenda. This review-based analysis compares six IPBES scenarios for their impacts on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 20 biodiversity targets (Aichi targets) for the Europe and Central Asia regions. The comparison is based on a review of 143 modeled scenarios synthesized in a plural cost–benefit approach which provides the distances to multiple policy goals. We confirm and substantiate the claim that transformative change is vital but also point out which directions for political transformation are to be preferred. The hopeful message is that large societal losses might still be avoided, and multiple benefits can be generated over the coming decades and centuries. Yet, policies will need to strongly steer away from scenarios based on regional competition, inequality, and economic optimism.

Social-ecological interactions have been shown to generate interrelated and reoccurring sets of ecosystem services, also known as ecosystem service bundles. Given the potential utility of the bundles concept, along with the recent surge in interest it is timely to reflect on the concept, its current use and potential for the future. Based on our ecosystem service bundle experience, expertise, and ecosystem service bundle analyses, we have found critical elements for advancing the utility of ecosystem service bundle concept and deepening its impact in the future. In this paper we 1) examine the different conceptualizations of the ecosystem service bundle concept; 2) show the range of benefits of using a bundles approach; 3) explore key issues for improving research on ecosystem service bundles, including indicators, scale, and drivers and relationships between ecosystem services; and 4) outline priorities for the future by facilitating comparisons of ecosystem service bundle research.

A key sustainability challenge in human-dominated landscapes is how to reconcile competing demands such as food production, water quality, climate regulation, and ecological amenities. Prior research has documented how efforts to prioritize desirable ecosystem services such as food and fiber have often led to tradeoffs with other services. However, the growing literature has revealed different and sometimes contradictory patterns in ecosystem service relationships. It thus remains unclear whether there are generalizable patterns across social-ecological systems, and if not, what factors explain the variations. In this study, we synthesize datasets of five ecosystem services from four social-ecological systems. We ask: (1) Are ecosystem service relationships consistent across distinct regional social-ecological systems? (2) How do ecosystem service relationships vary with land-use intensity at the landscape scale? (3) In case of ecosystem service tradeoffs, how does land-use intensity affect intersection points of tradeoffs along the landscape composition gradient? Our results reveal that land-use intensity increases magnitude of ecosystem service tradeoffs (e.g. food production vs. climate regulation and water quality) across landscapes. Land-use intensity also alters where provisioning and regulating services intersect: in high-intensity systems, food production and regulating services can be both sustained only at smaller proportions of agricultural lands, whereas in low-intensity systems, these services could be both supplied with greater proportions of agricultural lands. Our research demonstrates importance of considering multiple aspects of land uses (landscape composition and land-use intensity), and provides a more nuanced understanding and framework to enhance our ability to predict how land use alters ecosystem service relationships.

The Scientific Outcome was produced by participants in the first-ever IPCC-IPBES co-sponsored workshop which took place in December 2020.  This workshop is placed in the context of recent international agreements including the Paris Agreement, the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and ongoing preparation for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development that converge on solving the dual crises of climate change and biodiversity loss as essential to support human well-being.The Scientific Outcome further develops and substantiates the conclusions of the Synopsis, summarizes the emerging state of knowledge involving climate change and biodiversity with the objective to inform decision making and highlight options for action, and to identify knowledge gaps to be filled by scientific research. The Scientific Outcome includes seven sections, the references outlining the evidence reviewed within those sections and the report glossary.

Global sustainability targets demand transformative changes. Nature-based solutions (NbS) are gaining traction in science and policy, but their potential for transformative change remains unexplored. We provide a framework to evaluate how NbS contribute to transformative change and apply it to 93 NbS from mountain social-ecological systems (SES). The framework serves to assess what elements may catalyze transformative change, how transformative change occurs, and what its outcomes are. Our results show that NbS are as much people based as nature based. Most NbS are based on four elements with transformation potential: nature's values, knowledge types, community engagement, and nature management practices. Our results confirm the potential of NbS for transformative change, observed through changes in non-sustainable trajectories of SES. We illustrate the components of our framework through a novel classification of NbS. The framework provides key components for assessing the effectiveness of NbS and allows tracking long-term transformative change processes. © 2021 Elsevier Inc.

Transdisciplinary research is a promising approach to address sustainability challenges arising from global environmental change, as it is characterized by an iterative process that brings together actors from multiple academic fields and diverse sectors of society to engage in mutual learning with the intent to co-produce new knowledge. We present a conceptual model to guide the implementation of environmental transdisciplinary work, which we consider a “science with society” (SWS) approach, providing suggested activities to conduct throughout a seven-step process. We used a survey with 168 respondents involved in environmental transdisciplinary work worldwide to evaluate the relative importance of these activities and the skills and characteristics required to implement them successfully, with attention to how responses differed according to the gender, geographic location, and positionality of the respondents. Flexibility and collaborative spirit were the most frequently valued skills in SWS, though non-researchers tended to prioritize attributes like humility, trust, and patience over flexibility. We also explored the relative significance of barriers to successful SWS, finding insufficient time and unequal power dynamics were the two most significant barriers to successful SWS. Together with case studies of respondents’ most successful SWS projects, we create a toolbox of 20 best practices that can be used to overcome barriers and increase the societal and scientific impacts of SWS projects. Project success was perceived to be significantly higher where there was medium to high policy impact, and projects initiated by practitioners/other stakeholders had a larger proportion of high policy impact compared to projects initiated by researchers only. Communicating project results to academic audiences occurred more frequently than communicating results to practitioners or the public, despite this being ranked less important overall. We discuss how these results poi

Under global change, how biological diversity and ecosystem services are maintained in time is a fundamental question. Ecologists have long argued about multiple mechanisms by which local biodiversity might control the temporal stability of ecosystem properties. Accumulating theories and empirical evidence suggest that, together with different population and community parameters, these mechanisms largely operate through differences in functional traits among organisms. We review potential trait-stability mechanisms together with underlying tests and associated metrics. We identify various trait-based components, each accounting for different stability mechanisms, that contribute to buffering, or propagating, the effect of environmental fluctuations on ecosystem functioning. This comprehensive picture, obtained by combining different puzzle pieces of trait-stability effects, will guide future empirical and modeling investigations.

The end of the first working program of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) provided an opportunity to draw lessons from its work. This perspective paper captures insights from ecosystem services (ES) researchers and practitioners, largely drawing from the Europeancontext (referred to herein as ES community ), on this key science policy interface. We synthesize reflections from a workshop on how (i) IPBES can engage the ES community; (ii) the ES community can engage with IPBES; and (iii) individual scientists can contribute. We note that IPBES constitutes a great advancement towards multidisciplinarity and inclusivity in ES research and practice. Key reflections for IPBES are that funding and visibility at ES research events could be improved, the contribution and selection processes could be more transparent, and communication with experts improved. Key reflections for the ES community include a need to improvepolicy-relevance by integrating more social scientists, researchers from developing countries, early-career scientists and policy-makers. Key reflections directed towards individual scientists include contributing (pro)actively to science policy inter-face initiatives such as IPBES and increasing transdisciplinary research. These reflections intend to contribute to the awareness of challenges and opportunities for institutions, groups and individuals working on ES. © 2020, © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor and Francis Group.

Ecosystems can sustain social adaptation to environmental change by protecting people from climate change effects and providing options for sustaining material and non-material benefits as ecological structure and functions transform. Along adaptation pathways, people navigate the trade-offs between different ecosystem contributions to adaptation, or adaptation services (AS), and can enhance their synergies and co-benefits as environmental change unfolds. Understanding trade-offs and co-benefits of AS is therefore essential to support social adaptation and requires analysing how people co-produce AS. We analysed co-production along the three steps of the ecosystem cascade: (i) ecosystem management; (ii) mobilization; and (iii) appropriation, social access and appreciation. Using five exemplary case studies across socio-ecosystems and continents, we show how five broad mechanisms already active for current ecosystem services can enhance co-benefits and minimize trade-offs between AS: (1) traditional and multi-functional land/sea management targeting ecological resilience; (2) pro-active management for ecosystem transformation; (3) co-production of novel services in landscapes without compromising other services; (4) collective governance of all co-production steps; and (5) feedbacks from appropriation, appreciation of and social access to main AS. We conclude that knowledge and recognition of co-production mechanisms will enable pro-active management and governance for collective adaptation to ecosystem transformation.

Transformation of social-ecological systems due to climate change requires, transformative adaptation responses. We propose the concept of nature s contribution to adaptation (NCA; previously called adaptation services), to reveal properties of ecosystems that provide options for future livelihoods and adaptation to transformative change. Knowledge about the capacity of ecosystems to supply NCA can inform decisions by revealing options for adaptation. We analysed eight historical and contemporary case studies of transformative adaptation and found that the five cases with medium-high degree of adaptation and use of NCA showed evidence of participative learning and co-production of adaptation options, low values contestation, low power imbalances and well-developed governance arrangements. These variables indicated that communities engaged in adaptation had ownership and agency to change how they thought and acted to implement transformative adaptation. We found the use of NCAs enabled transformative adaptation by helping people overcome current decision constraints imposed by societal values, institutional rules, or knowledge deficits to create novel options and re-frame decision contexts. The NCA concept can be applied to (1) help resolve uncertainties about nature s contributions to people under environmental change; (2) reveal ecosystem properties of value for adaptation, but which are marginalised in current, dominant knowledge frameworks and decision-making; (3) act as a boundary object for participative learning and co-production of adaptation options. Thus, the NCA concept represents a pragmatic, optimistic approach for societal adaptation to ecosystem transformation, countering feelings of despair that accompany the acceptance of irreversible, unavoidable loss of current ecosystem states and associated nature s contributions to people. © 2020, © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Mountains play a key role in the provision of nature s contributions to people (NCP) worldwide that support societies quality of life. Simultaneously, mountains are threatened by multiple drivers of change. Due to the complex interlinkages between biodiversity, quality of life and drivers of change, research on NCP in mountains requires interdisciplinary approaches. In this study, we used the conceptual framework of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) and the notion of NCP to determine to what extent previous research on ecosystem services in mountains has explored the different components of the IPBES conceptual framework. We conducted a systematic review of articles on ecosystem services in mountains published up to 2016 using the Web of Science and Scopus databases. Descriptive statistical and network analyses were conducted to explore the level of research on the components of the IPBES framework and their interactions. Our results show that research has gradually become more interdisciplinary by studying higher number of NCP, dimensions of quality of life, and indirect drivers of change. Yet, research focusing on biodiversity, regulating NCP and direct drivers has decreased over time. Furthermore, despite the fact that research on NCP in mountains becoming more policy-oriented over time, mainly in relation to payments for ecosystem services, institutional responses remained underexplored in the reviewed studies. Finally, we discuss the relevant knowledge gaps that should be addressed in future research in order to contribute to IPBES. © 2019 Martín-López et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Access to ecosystem services and influence on their management are structured by social relations among actors, which often occur across spatial scales. Such cross-scale social relations can be analysed through a telecoupling framework as decisions taken at local scales are often shaped by actors at larger scales. Analyzing these cross-scale relations is critical to create effective and equitable strategies to manage ecosystem services. Here, we develop an analytical framework –i.e. the ‘cross-scale influence-dependence framework’- to facilitate the analysis of power asymmetries and the distribution of ecosystem services among the beneficiaries. We illustrate the suitability of this framework through its retrospective application across four case studies, in which we characterize the level of dependence of multiple actors on a particular set of ecosystem services, and their influence on decision-making regarding these services across three spatial scales. The ‘cross-scale influence-dependence framework’ can improve our understanding of distributional and procedural equity and thus support the development of policies for sustainable management of ecosystem services.