Search

Community monitoring can track environmental phenomena, resource use, and natural resource management processes of concern to community members. It can also contribute to planning and decision-making and empower community members in resource management. While community monitoring that addresses the environmental crisis is growing, it also gathers data on other global challenges: climate change, social welfare, and health. Some environmental community monitoring programs are challenged by limited collective action and community participation, insufficient state responsiveness to data and proposals, and lack of sustainability over time. Additionally, community members monitoring the environment are increasingly harassed and sometimes killed. Community monitoring is more effective with improved data collection, improved data management and sharing, andstronger efforts to meet community information needs, enable conflict resolution, and strengthen self-determination. Other promising areas for development are further incorporating governance issues, embracing integrated approaches at the community level, and establishing stronger links to national and global frameworks.

Since 1997 Tanzania has undertaken a process to identify and declare a network of Nature Forest Reserves (NFRs) with high biodiversity values, mainly from within its existing portfolio of national Forest Reserves, but with some new extensions. In recent years this expansion has accelerated, with ten NFRs declared since 2015. The current network of 19 existing NFRs covered 918,212 hectares by the end of 2020 (with an additional three reserves covering 34,862 hectares in the process of being declared). The coverage by NFRs of Tanzanian habitat types has increased to include the main forest types, wet, seasonal, and dry, and includes wetlands and grasslands. This has led to more than a doubling of the coverage of species ranges of vertebrates by the NFR network. Declared and proposed reserves now contain at least 178 of Tanzania’s 242 endemic vertebrate species, of which over 50% are threatened with extinction, and 553 Tanzanian endemic plant taxa (species, subspecies, and varieties), of which 61.3% are threatened. NFRs also support 41 single site endemic vertebrate species and 76 single site endemic plant taxa. Time series data show that NFR management effectiveness is increasing, especially where donor funds are available. Tourism, diversified revenue generation and investment schemes are required to create a network of economically self-sustaining NFRs able to conserve critical biodiversity values. Improved management and investment have reduced some threats in recent years, but ongoing challenges include illegal logging, charcoal production, firewood, pole cutting, hunting, fire, wildlife trade, and the unpredictable impacts of climate change.

Biodiversity is not evenly distributed across the globe and some areas have greater potential to contribute to biodiversity conservation than others. Whilst there are multiple ways to determine priority areas for conservation, for a global institution like the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the funding mechanism for the Convention on Biological Diversity and the largest multilateral source of funding for developing countries focused on enhancing biodiversity outcomes and promoting sustainable use, it is important to fund the top-ranked countries whilst also ensuring that all eligible countries are able to undertake some biodiversity conservation actions in accordance with the Convention. To this end, the GEF uses the System for Transparent Allocation of Resources (STAR) to allocate funding in separate funding rounds to eligible countries. This country focus means that all prioritization analyses need to be undertaken within that political framework, while also considering the intrinsic patterns in biodiversity that don’t respect national borders. We present the 2018 update of the biodiversity component of GEF-STAR, investigate how the weighting system affects the ranking of countries. We show that top ranked and bottom ranked countries are robust to changes in the weighting of analytical elements, but the weighting can significantly alter the importance of middle ranking countries, affecting their funding allocation. This analysis has been used by the GEF, along with other data, to allocate over $1 billion in biodiversity funding (GEF-7 = $1.2 billion) to improve country and global prospects for conservation. However, this large funding allocation for conservation needs to be set against the vastly larger funding flows that decrease natural values around the world, and the need for systems level change remains evident across the entire planet.

The Anthropocene is characterized by unparalleled human impact on other species, potentially ushering in the sixth mass extinction. Yet mitigation efforts remain hampered by limited information on the spatial patterns and intensity of the threats driving global biodiversity loss. Here we use expert-derived information from the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List on threats to 23,271 species, representing all terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals, to generate global maps of the six major threats to these groups: agriculture, hunting and trapping, logging, pollution, invasive species, and climate change. Our results show that agriculture and logging are pervasive in the tropics and that hunting and trapping is the most geographically widespread threat to mammals and birds. Additionally, current representations of human pressure underestimate the overall pressure on biodiversity, due to the exclusion of threats such as hunting and climate change. Alarmingly, this is particularly the case in areas of the highest biodiversity importance., Red List information is used to generate global maps of the likelihood of impacts on terrestrial vertebrates exerted by agriculture, hunting and trapping, logging, pollution, invasive species and climate change.

The lack of urgent action to reverse biodiversity loss is partly due to the complex nature of biodiversity as a feature of our planet. Subsequently, policymakers receive an often-confusing variety of narratives on why biodiversity matters, which makes it difficult to link biodiversity loss and risks to the attainment of sustainable development. Making this link clearer calls for a multidimensional perspective on biodiversity to reassess what we value, facilitate mainstreaming and support national decision-making. We propose a co-produced Multidimensional Biodiversity Index to connect biodiversity science to the political agenda that accounts for the diversity of values underpinning nature–human relationships. Biodiversity underpins the health and strength of ecosystems, but the complexity of those systems can be overwhelming for policymakers. This Perspective proposes a new framework for measuring biodiversity with an eye towards greater conservation.

Despite substantial conservation efforts, the loss of ecosystems continues globally, along with related declines in species and nature's contributions to people. An effective ecosystem goal, supported by clear milestones, targets and indicators, is urgently needed for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework and beyond to support biodiversity conservation, the UN Sustainable Development Goals and efforts to abate climate change. Here, we describe the scientific foundations for an ecosystem goal and milestones, founded on a theory of change, and review available indicators to measure progress. An ecosystem goal should include three core components: area, integrity and risk of collapse. Targets-the actions that are necessary for the goals to be met-should address the pathways to ecosystem loss and recovery, including safeguarding remnants of threatened ecosystems, restoring their area and integrity to reduce risk of collapse and retaining intact areas. Multiple indicators are needed to capture the different dimensions of ecosystem area, integrity and risk of collapse across all ecosystem types, and should be selected for their fitness for purpose and relevance to goal components. Science-based goals, supported by well-formulated action targets and fit-for-purpose indicators, will provide the best foundation for reversing biodiversity loss and sustaining human well-being.

We present a novel index that represents, in one combined metric, the integrity of terrestrial ecosystems globally at 1km2 resolution: the Ecosystem Integrity Index (EII). The index provides a simple, yet scientifically robust, way of measuring, monitoring and reporting on ecosystem integrity at any geographical scale. It is formed of three components, structure, composition, and function, and measured against a natural (current potential) baseline on a scale of 0 to 1. The index has been developed to help national governments measure and report on various of the goals and targets being developed within the draft post-2020 global biodiversity framework being negotiated under the Convention on Biological Diversity, and for non-state actor contributions to also be recognized. In doing so, it will enable these actors to make informed decisions on the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of ecosystems for which they are wholly or partly responsible. We find that ecosystem integrity is rapidly declining in terrestrial areas globally, with countries, on average, retaining less than half of their natural ecosystem integrity with a mean EII across all countries of 0.45 (SD: 0.20). This poses a challenge for nations and businesses seeking to halt and reverse decades of loss of nature around the world, but one that is not insurmountable. With sufficient effort, values of EII can increase at national and other scales, representing progress towards the vision of living in harmony with nature.

Funder: Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100013724, Funder: Global Environment Facility; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100011150, Funder: Danish International Development Agency; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100011054, Funder: Scottish Government’s Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division, Funder: Finnish International Development Agency, Funder: Leverhulme Trust; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000275, Societal Impact Statement: Large areas of tropical forest are degraded. While global tree cover is being mapped with increasing accuracy from space, much less is known about the quality of that tree cover. Here we present a field protocol for rapid assessments of forest condition. Using extensive field data from Tanzania, we show that a focus on remotely‐sensed deforestation would not detect significant reductions in forest quality. Radar‐based remote sensing of degradation had good agreement with the ground data, but the ground surveys provided more insights into the nature and drivers of degradation. We recommend the combined use of rapid field assessments and remote sensing to provide an early warning, and to allow timely and appropriately targeted conservation and policy responses. Summary: Tropical forest degradation is widely recognised as a driver of biodiversity loss and a major source of carbon emissions. However, in contrast to deforestation, more gradual changes from degradation are challenging to detect, quantify and monitor. Here, we present a field protocol for rapid, area‐standardised quantifications of forest condition, which can also be implemented by non‐specialists. Using the example of threatened high‐biodiversity forests in Tanzania, we analyse and predict degradation based on this method. We also compare the field data to optical and radar remote‐sensing datasets, thereby conducting a large‐scale, independent test of the ability of these products to map degradation in East Africa from space. Our field data consist of 551 ‘degradation’ transects collected between 1996 and 2010, covering >600 ha across 86 forests in the Eastern Arc Mountains and coastal forests. Degradation was widespread, with over one‐third of the study forests—mostly protected areas—having more than 10% of their trees cut. Commonly used optical remote‐sensing maps of complete tree cover loss only detected severe impacts (≥25% of trees cut), that is, a focus on remotely‐sensed deforestation would have significantly underestimated carbon emissions and declines in forest quality. Radar‐based maps detected even low impacts (

Land conversion is causing habitat loss and fragmentation worldwide, particularly in Africa, where the proliferation of agricultural development corridors may threaten vital areas for ecological connectivity and wildlife survival. To conserve connectivity, careful landscape planning is necessary, which strongly relies on remotely sensed land cover maps. Here, we present a remote sensing‐based framework that efficiently identifies priority locations for connectivity conservation. We applied the framework in the Kilombero catchment and development cluster of the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor (SAGCOT) in Tanzania, where new agricultural development projects could act as barriers for connectivity. Using satellite imagery from Sentinel‐1 and 2, we mapped the mixture of mountain and lowland land covers and habitats with an overall accuracy of 75%. Then, we assessed ecological connectivity to predict African elephant corridors and prioritize them in two ways. First, we identified elephant corridors that contribute the most to current landscape connectivity, and second, we identified those whose restoration would significantly enhance landscape functionality and improve the current connectivity level. We mapped 214 potential elephant corridors, identified 43 of them as priority for conservation, and 43 as target for restoration. Our model predicted four already known corridor areas in and around the Kilombero valley floodplain, and other important corridors not yet identified by previous studies in the south of the basin. Priority elephant corridors inside the floodplain showed narrow widths and low permeability, indicating low functionality in the connectivity network. Nevertheless, the abundance of priority corridors for restoration suggests that connectivity could be recovered if the recommended measures are applied during SAGCOT planning and implementation process. Our findings demonstrate the possibilities of combining multispectral and radar data for guiding biodiversity management in development corridors and for assessing ecological connectivity worldwide.

Indigenous Peoples’ lands cover over one‐quarter of Earth's surface, a significant proportion of which is still free from industrial‐level human impacts. As a result, Indigenous Peoples and their lands are crucial for the long‐term persistence of Earth's biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, information on species composition on these lands globally remains largely unknown. We conducted the first comprehensive analysis of terrestrial mammal composition across mapped Indigenous lands based on data on area of habitat (AOH) for 4460 mammal species assessed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. We overlaid each species’ AOH on a current map of Indigenous lands and found that 2695 species (60% of assessed mammals) had ≥10% of their ranges on Indigenous Peoples’ lands and 1009 species (23%) had >50% of their ranges on these lands. For threatened species, 473 (47%) occurred on Indigenous lands with 26% having >50% of their habitat on these lands. We also found that 935 mammal species (131 categorized as threatened) had ≥ 10% of their range on Indigenous Peoples’ lands that had low human pressure. Our results show how important Indigenous Peoples’ lands are to the successful implementation of conservation and sustainable development agendas worldwide., Article impact statement: Indigenous Peoples’ lands are important for the successful implementation of international conservation and sustainable development agendas.

During 2021, Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are expected to meet in Kunming, China, to agree on a new global biodiversity framework aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss, encouraging the sustainable use of biodiversity, and ensuring the equitable sharing of its benefits. As the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework evolves, parties to the convention are being exposed to a range of perspectives on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, relating to the future framework as a whole or to aspects of it. Area‐based conservation measures are one such aspect, and there are diverse perspectives on how new targets might be framed in relation to these measures. These perspectives represent different outlooks on the relationship between human and nonhuman life on Earth. However, in most cases there is a lack of clarity on how they would be implemented in practice, the implications this would have for biodiversity and human well‐being, and how they would contribute to achieving the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity of “living in harmony with nature.” We sought to clarify these issues by summarizing some of these perspectives in relation to the future of area‐based biodiversity conservation. We identified these perspectives through a review of the literature and expert consultation workshops and compiled them into 4 main groups: Aichi+, ambitious area‐based conservation perspectives, new conservation, and whole‐earth conservation. We found that although the perspectives Aichi+ and whole earth are in some cases at odds with one another, they also have commonalities, and all perspectives have elements that can contribute to developing and implementing the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework and achieving the longer term CBD 2050 Vision., Article impact statement: Scaling up area‐based conservation is essential to post‐2020 framework to address the CBD mission to improve the status of biodiversity.

Despite substantial biodiversity conservation efforts over the past two decades, Earth's biodiversity is rapidly declining. We identify global priorities for the expansion of marine conservation efforts, aiming to conserve at least 10% of the range of all 22,885 mapped marine species. We found that a minimum of 8.5 million km2 (2.5% of the ocean) of new conservation areas are required, and show that, in total, at least 26% of the ocean needs effective conservation to preserve marine biodiversity. For each priority area, we recommend broad conservation responses—ranging from marine protected areas to large-scale policy approaches (e.g., fisheries regulations)—best suited to mitigate threats to biodiversity in that area. With a post-2020 global biodiversity agreement currently under development, our analysis provides insights into the scale of conservation action required across the marine realm and identifies new areas that clearly warrant conservation attention.

Sustainable use of wildlife is a core aspiration of biodiversity conservation but is the subject of intense debate in the scientific literature, including the extent to which use is impacting species and whether management can mitigate any impact. Although positive and negative outcomes of sustainable use are known for specific taxa or local communities, a global and regional picture of trends in wildlife populations in use is lacking. We use a global dataset of more than 11,000 time series to derive indices of “utilized” and “not utilized” wildlife populations. Our results show that population trends globally are negative on average but that utilized populations tend to decline more rapidly, especially in Africa and the Americas. Crucially, where populations are managed, they are more likely to be increasing. This evidence can inform global biodiversity assessments and provide an operational indicator to track progress toward the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.

Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species-level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data-sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28-29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752-2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597-1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one-third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use-related red-list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.Predominio del Uso Sustentable y No Sustentable de Especies Silvestres Inferido a partir de la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN Resumen La explotación insostenible de especies silvestres representa una verdadera amenaza para la biodiversidad y el sustento de las comunidades locales y los pueblos indígenas. Sin embargo, el uso sostenible gestionado tiene el potencial para prevenir extinciones, auxiliar en la recuperación y satisfacer las necesidades humanas. Analizamos los datos a nivel de especie correspondientes a 30,923 especies de 13 grupos taxonómicos localizados en la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) para investigar los patrones del uso intencional de recursos biológicos. Usamos el 40% de las especies analizadas (10,098 de 25,009 especies pertenecientes a diez grupos taxonómicos con suficiente información). Los principales motivos para el uso de vida silvestre fueron como mascotas, animales de exhibición, horticultura y consumo humano. El uso intencional está actualmente contribuyendo a un riesgo elevado de extinción para 28 - 29% de las especies amenazadas o casi amenazadas (NT) (2,752 - 2,848 de 9,753 especies). El uso intencional también afectó al 16% de todas las especies utilizadas (1,597 - 1,631 de 10,098). Sin embargo, el 72% de las especies utilizadas (7,291 de 10, 098) pertenecen a la categoría de preocupación menor, de las cuales casi la mitad (3,469) también contaban con tendencias poblacionales estables o de mejoría. Las especies restantes no estaban documentadas como amenazadas por el uso de recursos biológicos, incluyendo al menos 172 especies amenazadas o NT con poblaciones estables o en aumento. Casi un tercio de las especies que tienen documentado el uso como una amenaza no cuentan con acciones de manejo para abordar directamente esta amenaza. Para mejorar la información de la lista roja relacionada con el uso, sugerimos pequeñas modificaciones a los esquemas relevantes de clasificación y la documentación de apoyo requerida. Nuestros descubrimientos sobre el predominio del uso sustentable y no sustentable, y la variación entre taxones, puede orientar la formulación de políticas internacionales, incluyendo a la Plataforma Intergubernamental de Políticas Científicas sobre Biodiversidad y Servicios Ecosistémicos, el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica y la Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas.

Assemblages of large mammal species play a disproportionate role in the structure and composition of natural habitats. Loss of these assemblages destabilizes natural systems, while their recovery can restore ecological integrity. Here we take an ecoregion-based approach to identify landscapes that retain their historically present large mammal assemblages, and map ecoregions where reintroduction of 1–3 species could restore intact assemblages. Intact mammal assemblages occur across more than one-third of the 730 terrestrial ecoregions where large mammals were historically present, and 22% of these ecoregions retain complete assemblages across > 20% of the ecoregion area. Twenty species, if reintroduced or allowed to recolonize through improved connectivity, can increase the area of the world containing intact large mammal assemblages by 54% (11 116 000 km 2). Each of these species have at least two large, intact habitat areas (> 10 000 km 2) in a given ecoregion. Timely integration of recovery efforts for large mammals strengthens area-based targets being considered under the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Development corridors are extensive, often transnational and linear, geographical areas targeted for investment to help achieve sustainable development. They often comprise the creation of hard infrastructure (i.e., physical structures) and soft infrastructure (i.e., policies, plans, and programmes) involving a variety of actors. They are globally widespread, and likely to be a significant driver of habitat loss. Here, we describe the development corridors phenomenon from a biodiversity perspective and identify the elements of best practice in biodiversity impact mitigation. We use these to carry out a review of the peer reviewed literature on corridors to respond to three questions: (i) how impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services are assessed; (ii) what mitigation measures are discussed to manage these impacts; and (iii) to what extent do these measures approximate to best practice. We found that of 271 publications on development corridors across all continents (except for Antarctica) mentioning biodiversity or ecosystem services, only 100 (37%) assessed impacts on biodiversity and 7 (3%) on ecosystem services. Importantly, only half of these (52, 19% of the total 271 articles) discussed mitigation measures to manage these impacts. These measures focused on avoidance and minimisation and there was scant mention of restoration or ecological compensation illustrating a deficient application of the mitigation hierarchy. We conclude that the academic literature on corridors does not give sufficient consideration to comprehensive mitigation of biodiversity impacts. To change this, impact assessment research needs to acknowledge the complexity of such multi-project and multi-stakeholder initiatives, quantify biodiversity losses due to the full suite of their potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts, and follow all the steps of the mitigation hierarchy impact framework. We suggest a series of research avenues and policy recommendations to improve impact assessments of corridors towards achieving better biodiversity outcomes.

As of 10 July 2021, there have been over 186 million cases of COVID-19 and more than four million died as a result of this disease. The COVID-19 outbreak has also contributed to tremendous global decline in trade flows. The rapid spread of COVID-19 and the measures implemented by governments to contain the pandemic have had serious consequences for the world’s economies. While the pandemic has affected the international movement of people, goods and services, there is still limited systematic research regarding the possible associations between the COVID-19 measures on countries’ international trade flows. To fill this gap, we conducted regression analysis based on country level time series data from the United Nations and World Bank datasets. The results of the random effects panel regression models show that, the country import and export values are positively affected by health-related policies, while there is a negative association between stringency measures and import and export values. More specifically, school closing, stay-at-home requirements, and testing policy measures were found to have significant negative effects on countries’ trade values. In contrast, facial covering policies were found to have significant positive effects on countries’ import, export and total trade values.

Funder: MAVA Foundation; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100013324, The crisis generated by the emergence and pandemic spread of COVID‐19 has thrown into the global spotlight the dangers associated with novel diseases, as well as the key role of animals, especially wild animals, as potential sources of pathogens to humans. There is a widespread demand for a new relationship with wild and domestic animals, including suggested bans on hunting, wildlife trade, wet markets or consumption of wild animals. However, such policies risk ignoring essential elements of the problem as well as alienating and increasing hardship for local communities across the world, and might be unachievable at scale. There is thus a need for a more complex package of policy and practical responses. We undertook a solution scan to identify and collate 161 possible options for reducing the risks of further epidemic disease transmission from animals to humans, including potential further SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission (original or variants). We include all categories of animals in our responses (i.e. wildlife, captive, unmanaged/feral and domestic livestock and pets) and focus on pathogens (especially viruses) that, once transmitted from animals to humans, could acquire epidemic potential through high rates of human‐to‐human transmission. This excludes measures to prevent well‐known zoonotic diseases, such as rabies, that cannot readily transmit between humans. We focused solutions on societal measures, excluding the development of vaccines and other preventive therapeutic medicine and veterinary medicine options that are discussed elsewhere. We derived our solutions through reading the scientific literature, NGO position papers, and industry guidelines, collating our own experiences, and consulting experts in different fields. Herein, we review the major zoonotic transmission pathways and present an extensive list of options. The potential solutions are organised according to the key stages of the trade chain and encompass solutions that can be applied at the local, regional and international scales. This is a set of options targeted at practitioners and policy makers to encourage careful examination of possible courses of action, validating their impact and documenting outcomes.

One-sixth of the global terrestrial surface now falls within protected areas (PAs), making it essential to understand how far they mitigate the increasing pressures on nature which characterize the Anthropocene. In by far the largest analysis of this question to date and not restricted to forested PAs, we compiled data from 12,315 PAs across 152 countries to investigate their ability to reduce human pressure and how this varies with socioeconomic and management circumstances. While many PAs show positive outcomes, strikingly we find that compared with matched unprotected areas, PAs have on average not reduced a compound index of pressure change over the past 15 y. Moreover, in tropical regions average pressure change from cropland conversion has increased inside PAs even more than in matched unprotected areas. However, our results also confirm previous studies restricted to forest PAs, where pressures are increasing, but less than in counterfactual areas. Our results also show that countries with high national-level development scores have experienced lower rates of pressure increase over the past 15 y within their PAs compared with a matched outside area. Our results caution against the rapid establishment of new PAs without simultaneously addressing the conditions needed to enable their success.

The USA is the largest consumer of legally, internationally-traded wildlife. A proportion of this trade consists of species listed in the Appendices of CITES, and recorded in the CITES Trade Database. Using this resource, we quantified wildlife entering the USA for 82 of the most frequently recorded wildlife products and a range of taxonomic groups during 1979–2014. We examined trends in legal trade and seizures of illegally traded items over time, and relationships between trade and four national measures of biodiversity. We found that: (1) there is an overall positive relationship between legal imports and seizures; (2) Asia was the main region exporting CITES-listed wildlife products to the USA; (3) bears, crocodilians and other mammals (i.e. other than Ursidae, Felidae, Cetacea, Proboscidea, Primates or Rhinocerotidae) increased in both reported legal trade and seizures over time; (4) legal trade in live specimens was reported to be primarily from captive-produced, artificially-propagated or ranched sources, whereas traded meat was primarily wild sourced; (5) both seizures and legally traded items of felids and elephants decreased over time; and (6) volumes of both legally traded and seized species were correlated with four attributes of exporting countries: species endemism, species richness, number of IUCN threatened species, and country size. The goal of our analysis was to inform CITES decision-making and species conservation efforts.

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.

Despite substantial conservation efforts, the loss of ecosystems continues globally, along with related declines in species and nature's contributions to people. An effective ecosystem goal, supported by clear milestones, targets and indicators, is urgently needed for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework and beyond to support biodiversity conservation, the UN Sustainable Development Goals and efforts to abate climate change. Here, we describe the scientific foundations for an ecosystem goal and milestones, founded on a theory of change, and review available indicators to measure progress. An ecosystem goal should include three core components: area, integrity and risk of collapse. Targets-the actions that are necessary for the goals to be met-should address the pathways to ecosystem loss and recovery, including safeguarding remnants of threatened ecosystems, restoring their area and integrity to reduce risk of collapse and retaining intact areas. Multiple indicators are needed to capture the different dimensions of ecosystem area, integrity and risk of collapse across all ecosystem types, and should be selected for their fitness for purpose and relevance to goal components. Science-based goals, supported by well-formulated action targets and fit-for-purpose indicators, will provide the best foundation for reversing biodiversity loss and sustaining human well-being.

Work on the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework is now well advanced and will outline a vision, goals, and targets for the next decade of biodiversity conservation and beyond. For the effectiveness of Protected areas and Other Effective area‐based Conservation Measures, an indicator has been proposed for “areas meeting their documented ecological objectives.” However, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has not identified or agreed on what data should inform this indicator. Here we draw on experiences from the assessment of protected area effectiveness in the CBD's previous strategic plan to provide recommendations on the essential elements related to biodiversity outcomes and management that need to be captured in this updated indicator as well as how this could be done. Our proposed protected area effectiveness indicators include a combination of remotely derived products for all protected areas, combined with data from monitoring of both protected area management and trends in species and ecosystems based on field observations. Additionally, we highlight the need for creating a digital infrastructure to operationalize national‐level data‐capture. We believe these steps are critical and urge the adoption of suitable protected area effectiveness indicators before the post‐2020 framework is agreed in 2021.

To meet the ambitious objectives of biodiversity and climate conventions, the international community requires clarity on how these objectives can be operationalized spatially and how multiple targets can be pursued concurrently. To support goal setting and the implementation of international strategies and action plans, spatial guidance is needed to identify which land areas have the potential to generate the greatest synergies between conserving biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people. Here we present results from a joint optimization that minimizes the number of threatened species, maximizes carbon retention and water quality regulation, and ranks terrestrial conservation priorities globally. We found that selecting the top-ranked 30% and 50% of terrestrial land area would conserve respectively 60.7% and 85.3% of the estimated total carbon stock and 66% and 89.8% of all clean water, in addition to meeting conservation targets for 57.9% and 79% of all species considered. Our data and prioritization further suggest that adequately conserving all species considered (vertebrates and plants) would require giving conservation attention to ~70% of the terrestrial land surface. If priority was given to biodiversity only, managing 30% of optimally located land area for conservation may be sufficient to meet conservation targets for 81.3% of the terrestrial plant and vertebrate species considered. Our results provide a global assessment of where land could be optimally managed for conservation. We discuss how such a spatial prioritization framework can support the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions.

Locally based monitoring is typically undertaken in areas in which communities have a close attachment to their natural resource base. We present a summary of work to develop a theoretical and practical understanding of locally based monitoring and we outline tests of this approach in research and practice over the past 20 years. Our tests show that locally based monitoring delivers credible data at local scale independent of external experts and can be used to inform local and national decision making within a short timeframe. We believe that monitoring conducted by and anchored in communities will gain in importance where scientist-led monitoring is sparse or too expensive to sustain and for ecosystem attributes in cases in which remote sensing cannot provide credible data. The spread of smartphone technology and online portals will further enhance the importance and usefulness of this discipline.

Background Mangrove forests have gained recognition for their potential role in climate change mitigation due to carbon sequestration in live trees, and carbon storage in the sediments trapped by mangrove tree roots and pneumatophores. Africa hosts about 19% of the world’s mangroves, yet relatively few studies have examined the carbon stocks of African mangroves. The available studies report considerable differences among sites and amongst the different pools of carbon stocks. None considered the effects of seaward distance. We present details of AGC and SOC carbon stocks for Lindi in Tanzania, and focus on how these values differ with increasing seaward distance and, how our results compare to those reported elsewhere across Africa. Results AGC ranged between 11 and 55 Mg C ha−1, but was not significantly affected by seaward distance. SOC for 0–1 m depth ranged from 154 to 484, with a mean of 302 Mg C ha−1. SOC was significantly negatively correlated with seaward distance. Mangrove type (estuarine/oceanic), soil erosion, soil depth may explain these differences We note important methodological differences in previous studies on carbon stocks in mangroves in Africa. Conclusion This study indicates that seaward distance has an important effect on SOC stocks in the Lindi region of Tanzania. SOC should be fully incorporated into national climate change mitigation policies. Studies should report seaward distance and to describe the type of mangrove stand to make results easily comparable across sites and to assess the true value of Blue Carbon in Africa. We recommend focusing on trees > 10 cm diameter for AGC, and sampling soils to at least 1 m depth for SOC, which would provide a more complete assessment of the potentially considerable mangrove carbon store.

Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. Research to date has focused on unsustainable biological resource use with little consideration of sustainable use; we infer the current prevalence of both. We analyzed species-level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the IUCN Red List. Our results demonstrate the broad taxonomic prevalence of use, with 40% of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data-sufficient taxonomic groups) documented as being used. The main purposes of use are pets, display animals and horticulture, and human consumption. Use often has an adverse impact on species extinction risk (we define this as biologically unsustainable): intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for over a quarter of all threatened or Near Threatened (NT) species (2,752 – 2,848 of 9,753 species). Intentional use also threatens 16% of all species used (1,597 – 1,631 of 10,098). However, 72% of species that are used (7,291 of 10,098) are Least Concern (LC), of which nearly half (3,469) also have stable or improving population trends. The remainder of used species are not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. Around a third of species that have use documented as a threat do not currently receive targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. We offer suggestions for improving use-related Red List data. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policymaking, including the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.

The sustainable use of wildlife is a core aspiration of biodiversity conservation but is the subject of intense debate in the scientific literature as to how, and whether, species are best used and managed. While both positive and negative outcomes of sustainable use are known for specific taxa or local case studies, a global and regional picture of trends in wildlife populations in use is lacking. We use a global data set of over 11,000 time-series to derive indices of ‘utilised’ and ‘not utilised’ wildlife populations and assess global and regional changes, principally for mammals, birds and fishes. We also assess whether ‘management’ makes a measurable difference to wildlife population trends, especially for the utilised species populations. Our results show that wildlife population trends globally are negative, but with utilised populations tending to decline more rapidly, especially in Africa and the Americas. Crucially, where utilised populations are managed, using a variety of mechanisms, there is a positive impact on the trend. It is therefore true that use of species can both be a driver of negative population trends, or a driver of species recovery, with numerous species and population specific case examples making up these broader trends. This work is relevant to the evidence base for the IPBES Sustainable Use Assessment, and to the development of indicators of sustainable use of species under the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework being developed under the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Only 10 years remain to achieve all Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) globally, so there is a growing need to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of action by targeting multiple SDGs. The SDGs were conceived as an ‘indivisible whole’, but interactions between SDGs need to be better understood. Several previous assessments have begun to explore interactions including synergies and possible conflicts between the SDGs, and differ widely in their conclusions. Although some highlight the role of the more environmentally-focused SDGs in underpinning sustainable development, none specifically focuses on environment–human linkages. Assessing interactions between SDGs, and the influence of environment on them can make an important contribution to informing decisions in 2020 and beyond. Here, we review previous assessments of interactions among SDGs, apply an influence matrix to assess pairwise interactions between all SDGs, and show how viewing these from the perspective of environment–human linkages can influence the outcome. Environment, and environment–human linkages, influence most interactions between SDGs. Our action-focused assessment enables decision makers to focus environmental management to have the greatest impacts and to identify opportunities to build on synergies and reduce trade-offs between particular SDGs. It may enable sectoral decision makers to seek support from environment managers for achieving their goals. We explore cross-cutting issues and the relevance and potential application of our approach in supporting decision making for progress to achieve the SDGs.

International audience; The Convention on Biological Diversity’s post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework will probably include a goal to stabilize and restore the status of species. Its delivery would be facilitated by making the actions required to halt and reverse species loss spatially explicit. Here, we develop a species threat abatement and restoration (STAR) metric that is scalable across species, threats and geographies. STAR quantifies the contributions that abating threats and restoring habitats in specific places offer towards reducing extinction risk. While every nation can contribute towards halting biodiversity loss, Indonesia, Colombia, Mexico, Madagascar and Brazil combined have stewardship over 31% of total STAR values for terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals. Among actions, sustainable crop production and forestry dominate, contributing 41% of total STAR values for these taxonomic groups. Key Biodiversity Areas cover 9% of the terrestrial surface but capture 47% of STAR values. STAR could support governmental and non-state actors in quantifying their contributions to meeting science-based species targets within the framework.

Background: Mangrove forests have gained recognition for their potential role in climate change mitigation due to the carbon sequestration of the productive ecosystems and storage in the sediments that are trapped by the mangrove tree roots and pneumatophores. Africa hosts about 19% of the world’s mangroves, yet there are relatively few studies that have examined the carbon stocks of African mangroves, and the studies available report great differences among sites and amongst the different pools of carbon stocks, particularly between the above ground carbon stored in trees (AGC) and organic carbon stored within the sediment - ‘soil organic carbon (SOC)’. We investigate if AGC and SOC carbon stocks differ with increasing seaward distance for estuarine mangroves in Tanzania and, how our results compare to those reported elsewhere across Africa.Results: AGC ranged between 10.9-54.9 Mg C ha-1. Stem density, basal area, mean diameter and mean height increased with increasing seaward distance, but percentage of small stems (5.0-9.9 cm diameter) decreased. SOC for 0-1m depth ranged from 153.7-483.6, with a mean of 301.7 Mg C ha-1. SOC was significantly negatively correlated with seaward distance. Overall, our estimates of AGC are similar to those reported elsewhere in Tanzania but our estimates of SOC are higher as we sampled at a greater depth. There are important methodological differences in previous studies in Africa. Conclusion:This study indicates that seaward distance has an important effect on both AGC and SOC stocks in the Lindi region of Tanzania and there is the need to standardise methodological approaches to make results easily comparable across sites. The high SOC value is likely to be much greater if the full extent of the sediment system is assessed and so if Tanzania and other African nations are to fully benefit from carbon offsetting schemes, it is essential that the contribution of mangrove sediment carbon is considered.

Intact Forest Landscapes (IFLs) are critical strongholds for the environmental services that they provide, not least for their role in climate protection. On the basis of information about the distributions of IFLs and Indigenous Peoples’ lands, we examined the importance of these areas for conserving the world's remaining intact forests. We determined that at least 36% of IFLs are within Indigenous Peoples’ lands, making these areas crucial to the mitigation action needed to avoid catastrophic climate change. We also provide evidence that IFL loss rates have been considerably lower on Indigenous Peoples’ lands than on other lands, although these forests are still vulnerable to clearing and other threats. World governments must recognize Indigenous Peoples’ rights, including land tenure rights, to ensure that Indigenous Peoples play active roles in decision‐making processes that affect IFLs on their lands. Such recognition is critical given the urgent need to reduce deforestation rates in the face of escalating climate change and global biodiversity loss. Intact Forest Landscapes (IFLs) are critical strongholds for the environmental services that they provide, not least for their role in climate protection. On the basis of information about the distributions of IFLs and Indigenous Peoples' lands, we examined the importance of these areas for conserving the world's remaining intact forests. We determined that at least 36% of IFLs are within Indigenous Peoples' lands, making these areas crucial to the mitigation action needed to avoid catastrophic climate change. We also provide evidence that IFL loss rates have been considerably lower on Indigenous Peoples' lands than on other lands, although these forests are still vulnerable to clearing and other threats. World governments must recognize Indigenous Peoples' rights, including land tenure rights, to ensure that Indigenous Peoples play active roles in decision-making processes that affect IFLs on their lands. Such recognition is critical given the urgent need to reduce deforestation rates in the face of escalating climate change and global biodiversity loss.

1. Further progress in reducing biodiversity loss relies on the improved quantification of the connections between drivers of habitat loss and subsequent biodiversity impacts. To this end, biodiversity impact metrics should be able to report linked trends in specific human activities and changes in biodiversity state, accounting for both the ecology of different species, and the cumulative effects of historical habitat losses. These characteristics are not currently captured within a single metric. 2. Here we develop a globally applicable methodological framework that uses freely and publicly available datasets to quantify the relative impacts of anthropogenic activities on biodiversity. We use speciesspecific habitat suitability models to link specific land uses to ensuing changes in the likelihood that local populations of those species will persist. To illustrate our approach we assess the impacts of soy expansion and other land uses within the Brazilian Cerrado on over 2,000 species of amphibians, birds, mammals and plants for three periods between 2000 and 2014. 3. Our results showed that mammals and plants suffered the greatest overall reduction of suitable habitat. However, among endemic and nearendemic species – which face greatest risk of global extinction from habitat conversion in the Cerrado – birds and mammals were the most affected groups. While conversion of natural vegetation to grassland and planted pastures were together responsible for most of the biodiversity impact of recent changes, soy expansion (via direct conversion of natural vegetation) had the greatest impact per unit area. The total biodiversity impact of recent land-use change was concentrated in the southern states of the Cerrado -Minas Geráis, Goiás and Mato Grosso - but the Methods in Ecology and Evolution For Review Only impact on biodiversity of production of soy was greatest within the agricultural frontiers of Bahía and Piauí. 4. The flexibility of our approach to examine linkages between biodiversity loss and specific human activities has clear potential to better characterise the pathways by which habitat loss drivers operate. Its capacity to incorporate species-specific ecological needs, through a globally applicable methodology, can improve the tangibility of biodiversity loss assessments.