Setting robust biodiversity goals

Retaining natural vegetation to safeguard biodiversity and humanity

Global efforts to deliver internationally agreed goals to reduce carbon emissions, halt biodiversity loss, and retain essential ecosystem services have been poorly integrated. These goals rely in part on preserving natural (e.g., native, largely unmodified) and seminatural (e.g., low intensity or sustainable human use) forests, woodlands, and grasslands. To show how to unify these goals, we empirically derived spatially explicit, quantitative, area-based targets for the retention of natural and seminatural (e.g., native) terrestrial vegetation worldwide. We used a 250-m-resolution map of natural and seminatural vegetation cover and, from this, selected areas identified under different international agreements as being important for achieving global biodiversity, carbon, soil, and water targets. At least 67 million km² of Earth's terrestrial vegetation (∼79% of the area of vegetation remaining) required retention to contribute to biodiversity, climate, soil, and freshwater conservation objectives under 4 United Nations' resolutions. This equates to retaining natural and seminatural vegetation across at least 50% of the total terrestrial (excluding Antarctica) surface of Earth. Retention efforts could contribute to multiple goals simultaneously, especially where natural and seminatural vegetation can be managed to achieve cobenefits for biodiversity, carbon storage, and ecosystem service provision. Such management can and should co-occur and be driven by people who live in and rely on places where natural and sustainably managed vegetation remains in situ and must be complemented by restoration and appropriate management of more human-modified environments if global goals are to be realized.

Nature-positive goals for an organization's food consumption

Organizations are increasingly committing to biodiversity protection targets with focus on 'nature-positive' outcomes, yet examples of how to feasibly achieve these targets are needed. Here we propose an approach to achieve nature-positive targets with respect to the embodied biodiversity impacts of an organization's food consumption. We quantify these impacts using a comprehensive database of life-cycle environmental impacts from food, and map exploratory strategies to meet defined targets structured according to a mitigation and conservation hierarchy. By considering the varying needs and values across the organization's internal community, we identify a range of targeted approaches towards mitigating impacts, which balance top-down and bottom-up actions to different degrees. Delivering ambitious nature-positive targets within current constraints will be challenging, particularly given the need to mitigate cumulative impacts. Our results evidence that however committed an organization is to being nature positive in its food provision, this is unachievable in the absence of systems change.

A Critical Assessment of the Congruency between Environmental DNA and Palaeoecology for the Biodiversity Monitoring and Palaeoenvironmental Reconstruction

The present study suggests that standardized methodology, careful site selection, and stratigraphy are essential for investigating ancient ecosystems in order to evaluate biodiversity and DNA-based time series. Based on specific keywords, this investigation reviewed 146 publications using the SCOPUS, Web of Science (WoS), PUBMED, and Google Scholar databases. Results indicate that environmental deoxyribose nucleic acid (eDNA) can be pivotal for assessing and conserving ecosystems. Our review revealed that in the last 12 years (January 2008–July 2021), 63% of the studies based on eDNA have been reported from aquatic ecosystems, 25% from marine habitats, and 12% from terrestrial environments. Out of studies conducted in aquatic systems using the environmental DNA (eDNA) technique, 63% of the investigations have been reported from freshwater ecosystems, with an utmost focus on fish diversity (40%). Further analysis of the literature reveals that during the same period, 24% of the investigations using the environmental DNA technique were carried out on invertebrates, 8% on mammals, 7% on plants, 6% on reptiles, and 5% on birds. The results obtained clearly indicate that the environmental DNA technique has a clear-cut edge over other biodiversity monitoring methods. Furthermore, we also found that eDNA, in conjunction with different dating techniques, can provide better insight into deciphering eco-evolutionary feedback. Therefore, an attempt has been made to offer extensive information on the application of dating methods for different taxa present in diverse ecosystems. Last, we provide suggestions and elucidations on how to overcome the caveats and delineate some of the research avenues that will likely shape this field in the near future. This paper aims to identify the gaps in environmental DNA (eDNA) investigations to help researchers, ecologists, and decision-makers to develop a holistic understanding of environmental DNA (eDNA) and its utility as a palaeoenvironmental contrivance.

How percentage-protected targets can support positive biodiversity outcomes

Global targets for the percentage area of land protected, such as 30% by 2030, have gained increasing prominence, but both their scientific basis and likely effectiveness have been questioned. As with emissions-reduction targets based on desired climate outcomes, percentage-protected targets combine values and science by estimating the area over which conservation actions are required to help achieve desired biodiversity outcomes. Protected areas are essential for achieving many biodiversity targets, in part because many species are highly sensitive to human-associated disturbance. However, because the contribution of protected areas to biodiversity outcomes is contingent on their location, management, governance, threats, and what occurs across the broader landscape matrix, global percentage-protected targets are unavoidably empirical generalizations of ecological patterns and processes across diverse geographies. Percentage-protected targets are insufficient in isolation but can complement other actions and contribute to biodiversity outcomes within a framework that balances accuracy and pragmatism in a global context characterized by imperfect biodiversity data. Ideally, percentage-protected targets serve as anchors that strengthen comprehensive national biodiversity strategies by communicating the level of ambition necessary to reverse current trends of biodiversity loss. If such targets are to fulfill this role within the complex societal process by which both values and science impel conservation actions, conservation scientists must clearly communicate the nature of the evidence base supporting percentage-protected targets and how protected areas can function within a broader landscape managed for sustainable coexistence between people and nature. A new paradigm for protected and conserved areas recognizes that national coordination, incentives, and monitoring should support rather than undermine diverse locally led conservation initiatives. However, the definition of a conserved area must retain a strong focus on biodiversity to remain consistent with the evidence base from which percentage-protected targets were originally derived.

Evaluation of proposed genetic goals and targets for the Convention on Biological Diversity

In the current negotiations regarding revision of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) proposals have been made to strengthen the genetic goals, indicators, and targets for wild species in natural habitats by specifying “tolerable” losses of genetic diversity. However, they have not been subjected to evaluations of their continued use over 100 years, a common conservation time frame. I evaluated six scenarios (3, 5 or 10% loss of genetic diversity [heterozygosity] over 8 or 32 years) proposed as targets for revision of genetic indicators in CBD by predicting their consequences on genetic diversity, inbreeding, fitness, and evolutionary potential when applied at the same rate for 100 years. All proposals lead to substantial genetic harm to species when continued for 100 years that will compromise species persistence, especially in the context of environmental change. Consequently, none of the proposals are suitable for inclusion in the CBD. However, alternative indicators are proposed that would reflect improvements in the genetic status of populations and species, namely (1) the number of species and their populations being maintained at sizes sufficient to retain evolutionary potential in perpetuity, and (2) the number of species for which population genetic connectivity has been improved.

Integrating Ecology into Land Planning and Development: Between Disillusionment and Hope, Questioning the Relevance and Implementation of the Mitigation Hierarchy

Scientific research on the mitigation hierarchy has steadily increased over the past few years at the international level. While some seek to improve the application of this public action instrument, others point out its shortcomings and risks. This opinion paper—which focuses on the French context—does not provide an exhaustive overview of existing research but instead targets specific issues considered to be a “priority”. We mainly investigate the relevance and implementation of the mitigation hierarchy, especially from an ecological point of view. Part of this paper thus questions the very principle of biodiversity offsetting (BO)—the last resort of the mitigation hierarchy that brings together numerous controversies—and the adequacy of the mitigation hierarchy with the objective of no net loss (NNL) of biodiversity. The general idea underlying this paper is to show how the mitigation hierarchy has been built and based on what values (mainly economic and legal, which leads us to conclude about the lack of ecology in the policy itself). In doing so, we provide a few perspectives as to what should be done to (better) integrate ecology into land use planning and development.