David W. Gibbons’s research while affiliated with The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and other places

Although some sectors have made significant progress in learning from failure, there is currently limited consensus on how a similar transition could best be achieved in conservation and what is required to facilitate this. One of the key enabling conditions for other sectors is a widely accepted and standardized classification system for identifying and analyzing root causes of failure. We devised a comprehensive taxonomy of root causes of failure affecting conservation projects. To develop this, we solicited examples of real‐life conservation efforts that were deemed to have failed in some way, identified their underlying root causes of failure, and used these to develop a generic, 3‐tier taxonomy of the ways in which projects fail, at the top of which are 6 overarching cause categories that are further divided into midlevel cause categories and specific root causes. We tested the taxonomy by asking conservation practitioners to use it to classify the causes of failure for conservation efforts they had been involved in. No significant gaps or redundancies were identified during this testing phase. We then analyzed the frequency that particular root causes were encountered by projects within this test sample, which suggested that some root causes were more likely to be encountered than others and that a small number of root causes were more likely to be encountered by projects implementing particular types of conservation action. Our taxonomy could be used to improve identification, analysis, and subsequent learning from failed conservation efforts, address some of the barriers that currently limit the ability of conservation practitioners to learn from failure, and contribute to establishing an effective culture of learning from failure within conservation.

The COVID‐19 pandemic has had an enormous impact on almost all aspects of human society and endeavor; the natural world and its conservation have not been spared. Through a process of expert consultation, we identified and categorized, into 19 themes and 70 subthemes, the ways in which biodiversity and its conservation have been or could be affected by the pandemic globally. Nearly 60% of the effects have been broadly negative. Subsequently, we created a compendium of all themes and subthemes, each with explanatory text, and in August 2020 a diverse group of experienced conservationists with expertise from across sectors and geographies assessed each subtheme for its likely impact on biodiversity conservation globally. The 9 subthemes ranked highest all have a negative impact. These were, in rank order, governments sidelining the environment during their economic recovery, reduced wildlife‐based tourism income, increased habitat destruction, reduced government funding, increased plastic and other solid waste pollution, weakening of nature‐friendly regulations and their enforcement, increased illegal harvest of wild animals, reduced philanthropy, and threats to survival of conservation organizations. In combination, these impacts present a worrying future of increased threats to biodiversity conservation but reduced capacity to counter them. The highest ranking positive impact, at 10, was the beneficial impact of wildlife‐trade restrictions. More optimistically, among impacts ranked 11‐20, 6 were positive and 4 were negative. We hope our assessment will draw attention to the impacts of the pandemic and, thus, improve the conservation community's ability to respond to such threats in the future.

In this horizon scan, we highlight 15 emerging issues of potential relevance to global conservation in 2020. Seven relate to potentially extensive changes in vegetation or ecological systems. These changes are either relatively new, for example, conversion of kelp forests to simpler macroalgal systems, or may occur in the future, for example, as a result of the derivation of nanocelluose from wood or the rapid expansion of small hydropower schemes. Other topics highlight potential changes in national legislation that may have global effect on international agreements. Our panel of 23 scientists and practitioners selected these issues using a modified version of the Delphi technique from a long-list of 89 potential topics.

Motivation We undertook large citizen science surveys of bird distributions (atlases) in Britain and Ireland, aimed at quantifying breeding bird distributions on a 20‐year cycle and wintering bird distributions on a c. 30‐year cycle. We use these to generate spatially referenced information on apparent changes in bird distributions over c. 40 years. Main type of variable contained Detection of breeding and wintering bird species in grid squares during five periods, and changes in detection between periods. The combined distribution dataset contains 1,410,938 records detailing detections of 465 bird species in 3,880 grid cells in different periods. The combined distribution change dataset contains 1,297,791 records describing stability, apparent colonization or apparent extinction of individual species in grid squares between pairs of atlases spanning up to c. 40 years. Spatial location and grain Grid squares (10 km × 10 km) containing land throughout Britain, Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. The majority of data are at 10‐km resolution, but data for rare species are summarized at 20‐ or 50‐km resolution to protect sensitive locations. Time period The data represent summarized detection information derived from fieldwork during five periods: the breeding seasons 1968–1972, 1988–1991 and 2008–2011, and the winters 1981/1982–1983/1984 and 2007/2008–2010/2011. Major taxa studied and level of measurement Birds; their distribution derived from citizen science surveys. Software format Data are supplied as comma‐separated text files.

Our first horizon scan, conducted in 2009, aimed to identify novel but poorly known issues with potentially significant effects on global conservation of biological diversity. Following completion of the tenth annual scan, we reviewed the 15 topics identified a decade ago and assessed their development in the scientific literature and news media. Five topics, including microplastic pollution, synthetic meat, and environmental applications of mobile-sensing technology, appeared to have had widespread salience and effects. The effects of six topics were moderate, three have not emerged, and the effects of one topic were low. The awareness of, and involvement in, these issues by 12 conservation organisations has increased for most issues since 2009.

We present the results of our tenth annual horizon scan. We identified 15 emerging priority topics that may have major positive or negative effects on the future conservation of global biodiversity, but currently have low awareness within the conservation community. We hope to increase research and policy attention on these areas, improving the capacity of the community to mitigate impacts of potentially negative issues, and maximise the benefits of issues that provide opportunities. Topics include advances in crop breeding, which may affect insects and land use; manipulations of natural water flows and weather systems on the Tibetan Plateau; release of carbon and mercury from melting polar ice and thawing permafrost; new funding schemes and regulations; and land-use changes across Indo-Malaysia.

The impact of increasing vertebrate predator numbers on bird populations is widely debated among the general public, game managers and conservationists across Europe. However, there are few systematic reviews of whether predation limits the population sizes of European bird species. Views on the impacts of predation are particularly polarised in the UK, probably because the UK has a globally exceptional culture of intensive, high‐yield gamebird management where predator removal is the norm. In addition, most apex predators have been exterminated or much depleted in numbers, contributing to a widely held perception that the UK has high numbers of mesopredators. This has resulted in many high‐quality studies of mesopredator impacts over several decades. Here we present results from a systematic review of predator trends and abundance, and assess whether predation limits the population sizes of 90 bird species in the UK. Our results confirm that the generalist predators Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes) and Crows (Corvus corone and C. cornix) occur at high densities in the UK compared with other European countries. In addition, some avian and mammalian predators have increased numerically in the UK during recent decades. Despite these high and increasing densities of predators, we found little evidence that predation limits populations of pigeons, woodpeckers and passerines, whereas evidence suggests that ground‐nesting seabirds, waders and gamebirds can be limited by predation. Using life‐history characteristics of prey species, we found that mainly long‐lived species with high adult survival and late onset of breeding were limited by predation. Single‐brooded species were also more likely to be limited by predation than multi‐brooded species. Predators that depredate prey species during all life stages (i.e. from nest to adult stages) limited prey numbers more than predators that depredated only specific life stages (e.g. solely during the nest phase). The Red Fox and non‐native mammals (e.g. the American Mink Neovison vison) were frequently identified as numerically limiting their prey species. Our review has identified predator–prey interactions that are particularly likely to result in population declines of prey species. In the short term, traditional predator‐management techniques (e.g. lethal control or fencing to reduce predation by a small number of predator species) could be used to protect these vulnerable species. However, as these techniques are costly and time‐consuming, we advocate that future research should identify land‐use practices and landscape configurations that would reduce predator numbers and predation rates.

We present the results of a process to attempt to identify 100 questions that, if answered, would make a substantial difference to terrestrial and marine landscape restoration in Europe. Representatives from a wide range of European governmental and non-governmental conservation organisations, universities, independent ecolo-gists and land managers compiled 677 questions relating to all aspects of European landscape restoration for nature and people. The questions were shortlisted by an email vote, followed by a two-day workshop, to produce the final list of 100 questions. Many of the final questions evolved through a process of modification and combination as the workshop progressed. The questions are divided into eight sections: conservation of biodiversity ; connectivity, migration and translocations; delivering and evaluating restoration; natural processes; ecosystem services; social and cultural aspects of restoration; policy and governance; and economics. We anticipate that these questions will help identify new directions for researchers and policy-makers and assist funders and programme managers in allocating funds and planning projects, resulting in improved understanding and implementation of landscape-scale ecological restoration in Europe.