Search

Science plays a crucial role in identifying transformative change trajectories that are positive for biodiversity and human well-being. The concept of transformative change for biodiversity is receiving increased attention both within the political as well as in the scientific arena, but what transformative change entails still remains scientifically unclear. In this paper we report on a research priority exercise undertaken at the 2022 Alternet conference in which conference participants within each session were asked to jointly propose research gaps relevant to transformative change. Thirteen research priorities are identified, emphasising the need to learn from doing through transdisciplinary participatory action research, involving multiple disciplines including social sciences and building on existing research on, for example, nature-based solutions, OneHealth and climate change. The identified research priorities were later analysed under the umbrella of transformative change principles as a proxy for science to act as a lever to realise transformative change for biodiversity. Mobilising scientific research, interdisciplinarity and co-construction with stakeholders and decision-makers is a necessary step forward to make transformative progress in developing the biodiversity research agenda. In this respect, transformative action by the scientific community to develop the research agenda in an all-inclusive participatory process can be seen as a lever of transformative change for biodiversity. Such an all-inclusive participatory process for the development of a long-term biodiversity research agenda is in accordance with building on an integrated and whole-of-society approach as included in the EU Biodiversity Strategy’s aims and priorities around enabling transformative change.

Mercury (Hg) methylation genes (hgcAB) mediate the formation of the toxic methylmercury and have been identified from diverse environments, including freshwater and marine ecosystems, Arctic permafrost, forest and paddy soils, coal-ash amended sediments, chlor-alkali plants discharges and geothermal springs. Here we present the first attempt at a standardized protocol for the detection, identification and quantification of hgc genes from metagenomes. Our Hg-cycling microorganisms in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (Hg-MATE) database, a catalogue of hgc genes, provides the most accurate information to date on the taxonomic identity and functional/metabolic attributes of microorganisms responsible for Hg methylation in the environment. Furthermore, we introduce “marky-coco”, a ready-to-use bioinformatic pipeline based on de novo single-metagenome assembly, for easy and accurate characterization of hgc genes from environmental samples. We compared the recovery of hgc genes from environmental metagenomes using the marky-coco pipeline with an approach based on coassembly of multiple metagenomes. Our data show similar efficiency in both approaches for most environments except those with high diversity (i.e., paddy soils) for which a coassembly approach was preferred. Finally, we discuss the definition of true hgc genes and methods to normalize hgc gene counts from metagenomes

The BioAgora project aims to set up a transformative Science Service for biodiversity (SSBD) within the EU, to link knowledge more effectively to policy making and implementation, so to contribute to enable the transformative changes necessary for reaching the goals of the BDS 2030. In this report we present a framework for assessing the potential of networks to contribute to transformative changes for biodiversity. Because of the setting up of the SSBD, the framework pays special attention to networks at the Science-Policy-Society Interfaces (SPSIs). The framework assumes that networks can only convincingly contribute to transformative change if they themselves work in transformative ways.

Climate change, biodiversity loss and degradation of ecosystems are interdependent and pose significant societal challenges, threatening economic and social stability, public health and well-being. The World Economic Forum considers extreme weather- and climate-related events and biodiversity loss to be among the five most imminent global risks (WEF, 2020). Fighting climate change and preventing ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss are highly interdependent, requiring increased coherency between their respective policy agendas and actions.

An approach that has been suggested as potentially addressing the challenges of science-policy-interfaces (SPIs) is the mobilization of existing networks through a ‘network-of-networks’ (NoN) approach. This paper shares empirical findings from a mixed-method study, combining qualitative and quantitative data, that critically evaluates the ‘network-of-networks’ approach for SPIs. To establish whether and how a NoN can help existing networks act more effectively at the boundary of science and policy, we use the Eklipse Mechanism as a key example. We analyse the major characteristics of networks active in biodiversity-focused science-policy interactions, the potential roles and types of engagement of participants, and the major challenges faced by networks and individuals when acting at the boundaries of science and policy. Results suggest that the more diverse the actors involved, the more effective the SPI. While a formalized EU-level SPI for biodiversity is welcomed by most respondents, willingness and actual potential to contribute to such an entity differed amongst networks, highlighting that contributions to SPIs are highly dependent on individual and organizational capacities. The challenges faced by individuals and networks range from limited resources to effective communication and achieving meaningful impact even if the institutional context is unrewarding. To make a ‘network-of-networks’ model fully operational requires meeting the capacity building needs of networks, providing institutional support, and creating room for wider engagement.

National and local governments need to step up efforts to effectively implement the post-2020 global biodiversity framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity to halt and reverse worsening biodiversity trends. Drawing on recent advances in interdisciplinary biodiversity science, we propose a framework for improved implementation by national and subnational governments. First, the identification of actions and the promotion of ownership across stakeholders need to recognize the multiple values of biodiversity and account for remote responsibility. Second, cross-sectorial implementation and mainstreaming should adopt scalable and multifunctional ecosystem restoration approaches and target positive futures for nature and people. Third, assessment of progress and adaptive management can be informed by novel biodiversity monitoring and modeling approaches handling the multidimensionality of biodiversity change.

The European Union (EU) 2020 Biodiversity strategy will soon come to an end and may not have been as successful as envisioned. In the current context of the global biodiversity crisis, the European Commission, the research community, and broader society cannot risk another, likely ineffective, attempt by the EU to halt biodiversity loss after 2020. Through the development of the EU post 2020 Biodiversity Strategy, the scientific community of the ALTER-Net and EKLIPSE networks saw a unique opportunity to make a difference for biodiversity in Europe by better involving scientists, policy makers, and society. We developed an innovative, transparent, and collaborative process—called the multiphased, iterative, and consultative elicitation of scientific expertise (MICESE) method. This process allowed us to produce a set of 12 key messages developed by scientists for the EU to prioritize in the development of the new post 2020 biodiversity strategy. These key messages were structured according to their systemic value, scale, and nature. We provide insights and analyses of the new MICESE method before reflecting on how to improve the future involvement of scientists in science–policy interfaces.

The European Union (EU) 2020 Biodiversity strategy will soon come to an end and may not have been as successful as envisioned. In the current context of the global biodiversity crisis, the European Commission, the research community, and broader society cannot risk another, likely ineffective, attempt by the EU to halt biodiversity loss after 2020. Through the development of the EU post 2020 Biodiversity Strategy, the scientific community of the ALTER-Net and EKLIPSE networks saw a unique opportunity to make a difference for biodiversity in Europe by better involving scientists, policy makers, and society. We developed an innovative, transparent, and collaborative process—called the multiphased, iterative, and consultative elicitation of scientific expertise (MICESE) method. This process allowed us to produce a set of 12 key messages developed by scientists for the EU to prioritize in the development of the new post 2020 biodiversity strategy. These key messages were structured according to their systemic value, scale, and nature. We provide insights and analyses of the new MICESE method before reflecting on how to improve the future involvement of scientists in science–policy interfaces

The central aim of this workshop was to bring together and engage scientists and policy makers in a transparent dialogue on transformative change. Taking up respective work of the Convention on Biological Diversity on the process towards the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, participants discussed options on how to translate principles of transformative change into actions, goals, targets and pathways for the new global biodiversity framework. The workshop attracted more than 150 participants from 48 different countries.

The aim of EKLIPSE is to develop a mechanism to inform European-scale policy on biodiversity and related environmental challenges. This paper considers two fundamental aspects of the decision-support mechanism being developed by EKLIPSE: 1) the engagement of relevant actors from science, policy and society to jointly identify evidence for decision making; and 2) the networking of scientists and other holders of knowledge on biodiversity and other relevant evidence. The mechanism being developed has the potential not only to build communities of knowledge holders but to build informal networks among those with similar interests in evidence, be they those that seek to use evidence or those who are building evidence, or both. EKLIPSE has been successful in linking these people and in contributing to building informal networks of requesters of evidence, and experts of evidence and its synthesis. We have yet to see, however, significant engagement of formal networks of knowledge holders. Future success, however, relies on the continued involvement with and engagement of networks, a high degree of transparency within the processes and a high flexibility of structures to adapt to different requirements that arise with the broad range of requests to and activities of EKLIPSE.

How the patterns of niche occupancy vary from species‐poor to species‐rich communities is a fundamental question in ecology that has a central bearing on the processes that drive patterns of biodiversity. As species richness increases, habitat filtering should constrain the expansion of total niche volume, while limiting similarity should restrict the degree of niche overlap between species. Here, by explicitly incorporating intraspecific trait variability, we investigate the relationship between functional niche occupancy and species richness at the global scale. We assembled 21 datasets worldwide, spanning tropical to temperate biomes and consisting of 313 plant communities representing different growth forms. We quantified three key niche occupancy components (the total functional volume, the functional overlap between species and the average functional volume per species) for each community, related each component to species richness, and compared each component to the null expectations. As species richness increased, communities were more functionally diverse (an increase in total functional volume), and species overlapped more within the community (an increase in functional overlap) but did not more finely divide the functional space (no decline in average functional volume). Null model analyses provided evidence for habitat filtering (smaller total functional volume than expectation), but not for limiting similarity (larger functional overlap and larger average functional volume than expectation) as a process driving the pattern of functional niche occupancy. Synthesis. Habitat filtering is a widespread process driving the pattern of functional niche occupancy across plant communities and coexisting species tend to be more functionally similar rather than more functionally specialized. Our results indicate that including intraspecific trait variability will contribute to a better understanding of the processes driving patterns of functional niche occupancy.

Knowledge brokerage on biodiversity and ecosystem services can apply communication tools such as policy briefs to facilitate the dialogue between scientists and policymakers. There is currently considerable debate on how to go beyond the linear communication model, outdated in theoretical debate but still often implicitly leading interaction with policy. In this paper, we provide recommendations to scientists in the field of biodiversity and ecosystem services for developing policy briefs with increased impact and that are adapted to the needs of the audience. We also highlight the challenges of addressing the key criteria of credibility, relevance, legitimacy and iterativity that often lead to trade-offs.

Knowledge brokerage on biodiversity and ecosystem services can apply communication tools such as policy briefs to facilitate the dialogue between scientists and policymakers. There is currently considerable debate on how to go beyond the linear communication model, outdated in theoretical debate but still often implicitly leading interaction with policy. In this paper, we provide recommendations to scientists in the field of biodiversity and ecosystem services for developing policy briefs with increased impact and that are adapted to the needs of the audience. We also highlight the challenges of addressing the key criteria of credibility, relevance, legitimacy and iterativity that often lead to trade-offs.

To respond to the need for a strengthened biodiversity science-policy-society interface at the European level, this paper presents the relevant actors and steps of a knowledge synthesis process relying on a Network of Knowledge. This process aims to maximize active involvement and contribution (including holders of traditional and local knowledge), transparency, credibility, relevance and legitimacy (among other values defined during several workshops held). The presented process allows for the implementation of several synthesis methodologies, depending on the availability of resources, quantity and quality of knowledge and decided according to the expectations of the requesters and users. We put this approach in parallel with other knowledge-based recommendations and negotiation processes such as CBD and IPBES and highlight the need to encompass the diversity of approaches, values, and challenges at the European scale, while the process simultaneously has to be highly flexible, yet simple and robust. Although the presented process still holds several challenges, it offers a step forward in the development and reflections on science-policy–society interfaces, based on consultations with a significant number of the actors from the European policy–science community.

ience–policy-interfaces (SPIs) are expected to go beyond the linear model of scientific policy advice through creating spaces for exchange and dialogue between ‘policy’ and ‘knowledge’. Given that most environmental issues require inter- and transdisciplinary approaches, SPIs must take into account a variety of knowledge types, views and interests of scientists, policymakers and other decision makers. Moreover, acceptance and durability of SPIs depend largely on their perceived legitimacy and the credibility of their knowledge-gathering processes, providing additional challenges for their internal organisation. As the interplay between different knowledge types and decision making is far from neutral, a reflexive approach is required in the design of an SPI so that it is capable of learning from past experiences. The aim of this article is to discuss which governance arrangements could best support the development of an effective and legitimate SPI for European biodiversity politics. We analyse different options for facilitating the implementation of a ‘Network of Knowledge’ approach. This approach has been developed to improve the interface between diverse knowledge-holder communities and decision making processes for biodiversity and ecosystem services—a field where multi-scalar and multi-dimensional problems arise. In this article, we develop and discuss two stylized extreme governance models as our starting point: an `informal network model´, which almost entirely depends on the dedication of individuals, versus a more formalized `platform model´, predominantly based on the needs and interests of the organisations involved. We discuss the pros and cons of each of these models in reaching their objectives and in developing sound governing processes for a ‘Network of Knowledge’. From this discussion, we derive a recommended design for the reflexive governance of such a network in the context of the European Union and finish by discussing some more general lessons

Responding to different questions generated by biodiversity and ecosystem services policy or management requires different forms of knowledge (e.g. scientific, experiential) and knowledge synthesis. Additionally, synthesis methods need to be appropriate to policy context (e.g. question types, budget, timeframe, output type, required scientific rigour). In this paper we present a range of different methods that could potentially be used to conduct a knowledge synthesis in response to questions arising from knowledge needs of decision makers on biodiversity and ecosystem services policy and management. Through a series of workshops attended by natural and social scientists and decision makers we compiled a range of question types, different policy contexts and potential methodological approaches to knowledge synthesis. Methods are derived from both natural and social sciences fields and reflect the range of question and study types that may be relevant for syntheses. Knowledge can be available either in qualitative or quantitative form and in some cases also mixed. All methods have their strengths and weaknesses and we discuss a sample of these to illustrate the need for diversity and importance of appropriate selection. To summarize this collection, we present a table that identifies potential methods matched to different combinations of question types and policy contexts, aimed at assisting teams undertaking knowledge syntheses to select appropriate methods.

Developing an interface between knowledge holders, stakeholders and decision makers on biodiversity issues, just as any science-policy interface, will face many challenges. In the crucial endeavour to tackle all those challenges, determining an ethical course of actions will be essential to the prestige and credibility of such an interface. The paper identifies and assesses potential ethical risks that may arise in interactions between science, society and policy and uses the Network of Knowledge (NoK) process as an example to show how an ethical infrastructure could be developed for minimizing the ethical risks and their potential consequences. Indeed, when various actors from different spheres (politics, academia, lobbyism, media, etc.) are called upon to interact within one process as complex as the NoK, the integrity and credibility of the latter are at high risk of being compromised if the ethical risks are not adequately addressed. In order to limit those risks, which science-policy interfaces such as IPCC and IPBES have already encountered, we propose to set up an ethical governance infrastructure that will guide (and regulate) interactions among internal actors of the NoK (knowledge coordination body, secretariat, expert working groups, etc.) as well as with external actors (requesters, stakeholders, etc.). A thorough evaluation of the interaction between the actors for every step of the process is carried out and potential ethical risks are identified. Suggestions as to how the risks can be handled and prevented are presented and integrated as part of an ethical infrastructure. The main objective of the paper is to address how a science-policy interface and the scientific community as a whole would benefit from implementing ethical measures and instruments to help prevent sensitive issues and undesired consequences undermining credibility and legitimacy.

Recent studies have shown that accounting for intraspecific trait variation (ITV) may better address major questions in community ecology. However, a general picture of the relative extent of ITV compared to interspecific trait variation in plant communities is still missing. Here, we conducted a meta-analysis of the relative extent of ITV within and among plant communities worldwide, using a data set encompassing 629 communities (plots) and 36 functional traits. Overall, ITV accounted for 25% of the total trait variation within communities and 32% of the total trait variation among communities on average. The relative extent of ITV tended to be greater for whole-plant (e.g. plant height) vs. organ-level traits and for leaf chemical (e.g. leaf N and P concentration) vs. leaf morphological (e.g. leaf area and thickness) traits. The relative amount of ITV decreased with increasing species richness and spatial extent, but did not vary with plant growth form or climate. These results highlight global patterns in the relative importance of ITV in plant communities, providing practical guidelines for when researchers should include ITV in trait-based community and ecosystem studies.