► Human well-being depends on multiple ecosystem services, many of them being underpinned by biodiversity. ► Biodiversity continues to be lost at an unprecedented rate. ► Decision-makers and ...policy-makers require sound scientific foundation to secure the planet's biodiversity and ecosystem services, while contributing to human well-being and poverty eradication. ► The new DIVERSITAS vision is built around four main research challenges to help guide the global research community towards this foundation.
DIVERSITAS, the international programme on biodiversity science, is releasing a strategic vision presenting scientific challenges for the next decade of research on biodiversity and ecosystem services: “Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Science for a Sustainable Planet”. This new vision is a response of the biodiversity and ecosystem services scientific community to the accelerating loss of the components of biodiversity, as well as to changes in the biodiversity science-policy landscape (establishment of a Biodiversity Observing Network—GEO BON, of an Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services—IPBES, of the new Future Earth initiative; and release of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020). This article presents the vision and its core scientific challenges.
The issues surrounding 'Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation' (REDD) have become a major component of continuing negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on ...Climate Change (UNFCCC). This paper aims to address two key requirements of any potential REDD mechanism: first, the generation of measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV) REDD credits; and secondly, the sustainable and efficient provision of emission reductions under a robust financing regime.
To ensure the supply of MRV credits, we advocate the establishment of an 'International Emission Reference Scenario Coordination Centre' (IERSCC). The IERSCC would act as a global clearing house for harmonized data to be used in implementing reference level methodologies. It would be tasked with the collection, reporting and subsequent processing of earth observation, deforestation- and degradation driver information in a globally consistent manner. The IERSCC would also assist, coordinate and supervise the computation of national reference scenarios according to rules negotiated under the UNFCCC. To overcome the threats of "market flooding" on the one hand and insufficient economic incentives for REDD on the other hand, we suggest an 'International Investment Reserve' (IIR) as REDD financing framework. In order to distribute the resources of the IIR we propose adopting an auctioning mechanism.
Auctioning not only reveals the true emission reduction costs, but might also allow for incentivizing the protection of biodiversity and socio-economic values. The introduced concepts will be vital to ensure robustness, environmental integrity and economic efficiency of the future REDD mechanism.
•Defining Essential Variables for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offers a more coordinated, effective and efficient SDG monitoring system.•Criteria of system essence, transformations, ...coordination priorities, and indispensability guide the identification of Essential Variables.•A conceptual model of global sustainable development should draw together diverse disciplines, models and monitoring efforts.•Interdisciplinary system models, sustainable development transformations, and policy interactions and gaps, emerge as research priorities.
The imperative to measure progress towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has resulted in a proliferation of targets and indicators fed by an ever-expanding set of observations. This proliferation undermines one principal purpose of the SDGs: to provide a framework for coordinated action across policy domains. Systems approaches to defining Essential Variables have focused monitoring of climate, biodiversity and oceans and offer opportunities to coordinate SDG monitoring. We propose four criteria and a process to identify Essential SDG Variables (ESDGVs), which will highlight interactions and gaps in current monitoring. The ESDGV criteria suggest a research agenda to: develop and test interdisciplinary system models; test transformations theory for sustainable development; analyse policy interactions; and formulate models to support further refinements of ESDGVs and SDG monitoring.
► Ecosystem service assessments benefit from being done at several scales, especially if cross-scale links are made explicit. ► 2–4 scales are usually sufficient to realise the benefits of ...multi-scale and cross-scale assessments. ► Careful choice of the scale and resolution of the assessment in time and space makes them easier to do and communicate. ► Methods are available to guide scale choice, move information between scales and investigate scale-related issues.
It is often either undesirable or unfeasible to conduct an assessment of ecological or social systems, independently or jointly, at a single scale and resolution in time and space. This paper outlines the alternatives, which include ‘multi-scale assessments’ (conducting the assessment at two or more discrete scales) and ‘cross-scale assessments’ (multi-scale assessments which deliberately look for cross-scale interactions), and points to some methods which may be useful in conducting them. The additional work and complexity that result from taking a multi-scale or cross-scale approach, while necessary and realistic, needs to be managed. This can be achieved by the informed choice of scales, a priori consideration of the scale-related properties of the phenomena being assessed, and paying attention to the ways in which information and control pass between scales. The conceptual issues associated with choosing the scales and resolutions at which to work are discussed, as are strategies for aggregation and disaggregation and for linking studies at different scales.
The United Nations’ Agenda 2030 marks significant progress towards sustainable development by making explicit the intention to integrate previously separate social, economic and environmental ...agendas. Despite this intention, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which were adopted to implement the agenda, are fragmented in their formulation and largely sectoral. We contend that while the design of the SDG monitoring is based on a systems approach, it still misses most of the dynamics and complexity relevant to sustainability outcomes. We propose that insights from the study of social-ecological systems offer a more integrated approach to the implementation of Agenda 2030, particularly the monitoring of progress towards sustainable development outcomes. Using five key features highlighted by the study of social-ecological systems (SESs) relevant to sustainable development: (1) social-ecological feedbacks, (2) resilience, (3) heterogeneity, (4) nonlinearity, and (5) cross-scale dynamics. We analyze the current set of SDG indicators based on these features to explore current progress in making them operational. Our analysis finds that 59% of the indicators account for heterogeneity, 33% for cross-scale dynamics, 23% for nonlinearities, and 18% and 17%, respectively, for social-ecological feedbacks and resilience. Our findings suggest limited use of complex SES science in the current design of SDG monitoring, but combining our findings with recent studies of methods to operationalize SES features suggests future directions for sustainable development monitoring for the current as well as post 2030 set of indicators.
•Nine planetary boundaries have been defined that delimit the safe operating space for humanity.•The biodiversity boundary was transgressed more than any other.•We revisit the scientific basis for ...the biodiversity boundary and the extinction rate metric.•Instead we propose measures of the genetic library, functional diversity, and biome condition.•We highlight the particular significance of interactions between the boundaries.
The idea that there is an identifiable set of boundaries, beyond which anthropogenic change will put the Earth system outside a safe operating space for humanity, is attracting interest in the scientific community and gaining support in the environmental policy world. Rockstrom et al. (2009) identify nine such boundaries and highlight biodiversity loss as being the single boundary where current rates of extinction put the Earth system furthest outside the safe operating space. Here we review the evidence to support a boundary based on extinction rates and identify weaknesses with this metric and its bearing on humanity's needs. While changes to biodiversity are of undisputed importance, we show that both extinction rate and species richness are weak metrics for this purpose, and they do not scale well from local to regional or global levels. We develop alternative approaches to determine biodiversity loss boundaries and extend our analysis to consider large-scale responses in the Earth system that could affect its suitability for complex human societies which in turn are mediated by the biosphere. We suggest three facets of biodiversity on which a boundary could be based: the genetic library of life; functional type diversity; and biome condition and extent. For each of these we explore the science needed to indicate how it might be measured and how changes would affect human societies. In addition to these three facets, we show how biodiversity's role in supporting a safe operating space for humanity may lie primarily in its interactions with other boundaries, suggesting an immediate area of focus for scientists and policymakers.
Grasslands provide many ecosystem services required to support human well-being and are home to a diverse fauna and flora. Degradation of grasslands due to agriculture and other forms of land use ...threaten biodiversity and ecosystem services. Various efforts are underway around the world to stem these declines. The Grassland Programme in South Africa is one such initiative and is aimed at safeguarding both biodiversity and ecosystem services. As part of this developing programme, we identified spatial priority areas for ecosystem services, tested the effect of different target levels of ecosystem services used to identify priority areas, and evaluated whether biodiversity priority areas can be aligned with those for ecosystem services. We mapped five ecosystem services (below ground carbon storage, surface water supply, water flow regulation, soil accumulation and soil retention) and identified priority areas for individual ecosystem services and for all five services at the scale of quaternary catchments. Planning for individual ecosystem services showed that, depending on the ecosystem service of interest, between 4% and 13% of the grassland biome was required to conserve at least 40% of the soil and water services. Thirty-four percent of the biome was needed to conserve 40% of the carbon service in the grassland. Priority areas identified for five ecosystem services under three target levels (20%, 40%, 60% of the total amount) showed that between 17% and 56% of the grassland biome was needed to conserve these ecosystem services. There was moderate to high overlap between priority areas selected for ecosystem services and already-identified terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity priority areas. This level of overlap coupled with low irreplaceability values obtained when planning for individual ecosystem services makes it possible to combine biodiversity and ecosystem services in one plan using systematic conservation planning.
Ecosystems services sustain humans all over the world. The unsustainable use of ecosystem services around the world has led to widespread degradation which now threatens human health and livelihoods. ...Although the maintenance of ecosystem services is often used to justify biodiversity conservation actions, it is still unclear how ecosystem services relate to different aspects of biodiversity and to what extent the conservation of biodiversity will ensure the provision of services. The aim of this study was to find out whether biodiversity priorities, biomes, species richness and vegetation diversity hotspots co-occur in space with ecosystem services. The distribution of the ranges and hotspots of five ecosystem services (surface water supply, water flow regulation, carbon storage, soil accumulation, and soil retention) was assessed in South African biomes. Coincidence, overlap, and correlation analyses were used to assess spatial congruence between ecosystem services and species richness (plants and animals) and vegetation diversity hotspots. The grassland and savanna biomes contained significant amounts of all five ecosystem services. There was moderate overlap and a generally positive but low correlation between ecosystem services hotspots and species richness and vegetation diversity hotspots. Species richness was mostly higher in the hotspots of water flow regulation and soil accumulation than would be expected by chance. The water services showed varying levels of congruence with species richness hotspots and vegetation diversity hotspot. These results indicate that actions taken to conserve biodiversity in South Africa will also protect certain ecosystem services and ecosystem services can be used to strengthen biodiversity conservation in some instances.
PDF
