James E. M. Watson’s research while affiliated with The University of Queensland and other places

Global and national commitments on climate imply clean energy and industrial infrastructure deployment at a speed and scale that could have serious implications for natural capital and other important land uses. Prior modelling of a net-zero emissions solution for Australia sites new renewable infrastructure on 111,000 km² of land (approximately 1.7 times the area of mainland Tasmania) by 2060. That solution uses a single, static and certain map of land availability, making it immediately vulnerable to competition with other national goals involving widespread land management. We have incorporated climate goals with consistent handling of Australian Indigenous estate and varying treatments for biodiversity and agriculture to demonstrate an approach to navigate the risks to achieving both the net-zero goal and sustainable use of natural capital in an uncertain land-use planning future. We have identified regions of Australia in which modelled renewable infrastructure is rendered infeasible or more costly when natural capital protection occurs without collaborative consideration of climate action. Our approach and methods are relevant globally and highlight the importance of proactively, collaboratively and regularly reconsidering the risks to the natural capital on which we not only plan our net-zero solutions but also rely on for the critical systems that sustain life and lifestyles.

Almost 200 nations have made bold commitments to halt biodiversity loss as signatories to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). The effective achievement of the GBF relies on domestic targets and actions, reflected in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs). NBSAPS are an integral feature of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) framework and signatory nations were requested to submit revised NBSAPs before the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP-16) incorporating the GBF goals and targets. Here we review NBSAPs of the 36 nations that submitted before COP-16 and assess their commitments to implementing target 2 (the 30% restoration target) and target 3 (the 30 × 30 protection target). By first breaking these targets into their constituent elements and assessing the detailed wording of each NBSAP we discover that no nation has created a plan that meets all the requirements—and overall ambitions—of these two targets. With 5 years remaining until the intended realization of the GBF, countries will need to increase both their ambition and action if the biodiversity crisis of the Earth is to be abated.

Almost 200 nations have made bold commitments to halting biodiversity loss as signatories to the Kunming-Montral Global Biodiversity Framework (‘GBF’). The effective achievement of the GBF relies on domestic targets and actions, reflected in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (‘NBSAPs’). NBSAPS are an integral feature of the CBD framework with signatory nations requested to submit revised NBSAPs prior to COP16 incorporating the GBF goals and targets. Here we review NBSAPs of the 20 countries that have submitted to date and assess their commitments to implementing Target 2 (the 30% restoration target) and Target 3 (the ‘30 x 30 protection target’). By first breaking these targets into their constituent elements, and assessing the detailed wording of each NBSAP, we discover that no nation has created a plan that meets all the requirements – and overall ambitions - of these two targets. With six years remaining until the intended realisation of the GBF, countries will need to increase both their ambition and action if Earth’s biodiversity crisis is to be abated.

Protected areas are the cornerstones of conservation efforts to mitigate the anthropogenic pressures driving biodiversity loss. Nations aim to protect 30% of Earth’s land and water by 2030, yet the effectiveness of protected areas remains unclear. Here we analyze the performance of over 160,000 protected areas in resisting habitat loss at different spatial and temporal scales, using high-resolution data. We find that 1.14 million km² of habitat, equivalent to three times the size of Japan, across 73% of protected areas, had been altered between 2003 and 2019. These protected areas experienced habitat loss due to the expansion of built-up land, cropland, pastureland, or deforestation. Larger and stricter protected areas generally had lower rates of habitat loss. While most protected areas effectively halted the expansion of built-up areas, they were less successful in preventing deforestation and agricultural conversion. Protected areas were 33% more effective in reducing habitat loss compared to unprotected areas, though their ability to mitigate nearby human pressures was limited and varied spatially. Our findings indicate that, beyond establishing new protected areas, there is an urgent need to enhance the effectiveness of existing ones to better prevent habitat loss and achieve the post-2020 global biodiversity goals.

Global and national commitments on climate imply clean energy and industrial infrastructure deployment, and associated land use change, at an unprecedented scale and speed (1). This could have serious implications for natural capital and other important land uses (2). By integrating a macroscale energy system modelling approach (3) with spatially granular downscaling methods (4) for siting of clean energy infrastructure, we first show that 111,000 km2 of the Australian landmass (roughly ×1.7 the area of mainland Tasmania) could be required for renewable infrastructure in a transition of Australia’s domestic and export economy to net-zero emissions. We use three land use cases that incorporate climate goals with consistent handling of Australian Indigenous estate and varying treatments for biodiversity and agriculture to navigate the risks of achieving both a net-zero goal and the sustainable use of natural capital in an uncertain land-use planning future. We find that a given modelled pathway becomes more resilient to uncertainty when alternate land use cases are considered at the outset and included in the identification of clean energy infrastructure projects. We show that it is possible to proactively undertake integrated, inclusive and iterative modelling and planning that embraces uncertainty and diverse stakeholder views on land use change, as nations decarbonize and tackle complex agricultural (5), environmental, social, and cultural challenges (6,7).

We present the results of our 15th horizon scan of novel issues that could influence biological conservation in the future. From an initial list of 96 issues, our international panel of scientists and practitioners identified 15 that we consider important for societies worldwide to track and potentially respond to. Issues are novel within conservation or represent a substantial positive or negative step-change with global or regional extents. For example, new sources of hydrogen fuel and changes in deep-sea currents may have profound impacts on marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Technological advances that may be positive include benchtop DNA printers and the industrialisation of approaches that can create high-protein food from air, potentially reducing the pressure on land for food production. Horizon scanning for conservation Horizon scanning is a well-established method for identifying emerging threats and opportunities that allows sufficient lead time to develop actionable solutions [1]. The inaugural horizon scan of global conservation issues took place in 2009 [2], and every year since we have sought to identify 15 issues before their substantive impacts are widely recorded. Examples include the use of environmental DNA (eDNA) for aquatic and air monitoring, and the promotion of biochar to enhance carbon seques-tration. Inherent to horizon scanning is the understanding that some issues will never fully materialise because the participants misjudged the signal, other factors intervened, or perhaps occasionally because forewarning reduced the likelihood that the issues would be realised. Technologies for reducing human impact on the environment caused by food production and consumption have featured regularly in our horizon scans (e.g., [2,3]). These issues are increasingly seen as a means to tackle both biodiversity loss and climate change. If, for example, global meat and dairy consumption is halved by 2050, greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector could decline by a third, with over 653 million hectares of land being removed from production [4]. Restoration of these lands by 2030 could contribute 13-25% of the estimated area needed globally under Target 2 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Others have suggested that the food system could achieve net negative emissions by 2050 by adopting different technological solutions [5]. The likelihood of such impacts through more environmentally friendly food consumption, similar to other interventions in human behaviour and decision-making, is likely to depend on the success of targeted behavioural change approaches [6] and market dynamics. Highlights Our 15th annual horizon scan identified 15 emerging issues of concern for global biodiversity conservation. A panel of 31 scientists and practitioners submitted a total of 96 topics that were ranked using a Delphi-style technique according to novelty and likelihood of impact on biodiversity conservation. The top 37 issues were discussed in person and online in September 2023 during which the issues were ranked according to the same criteria. Our 15 issues cover impacts from the development of new sources of hydrogen fuel to temperature changes in the mesopelagic ocean zone. Other emerging technologies include benchtop DNA printers and the creation of high-protein food from air.

We present the results of our 15th horizon scan of novel issues that could influence biological conservation in the future. From an initial list of 96 issues, our international panel of scientists and practitioners identified 15 that we consider important for societies worldwide to track and potentially respond to. Issues are novel within conservation or represent a substantial positive or negative step-change with global or regional extents. For example, new sources of hydrogen fuel and changes in deep-sea currents may have profound impacts on marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Technological advances that may be positive include benchtop DNA printers and the industrialisation of approaches that can create high-protein food from air, potentially reducing the pressure on land for food production. Horizon scanning for conservation Horizon scanning is a well-established method for identifying emerging threats and opportunities that allows sufficient lead time to develop actionable solutions [1]. The inaugural horizon scan of global conservation issues took place in 2009 [2], and every year since we have sought to identify 15 issues before their substantive impacts are widely recorded. Examples include the use of environmental DNA (eDNA) for aquatic and air monitoring, and the promotion of biochar to enhance carbon seques-tration. Inherent to horizon scanning is the understanding that some issues will never fully materialise because the participants misjudged the signal, other factors intervened, or perhaps occasionally because forewarning reduced the likelihood that the issues would be realised. Technologies for reducing human impact on the environment caused by food production and consumption have featured regularly in our horizon scans (e.g., [2,3]). These issues are increasingly seen as a means to tackle both biodiversity loss and climate change. If, for example, global meat and dairy consumption is halved by 2050, greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector could decline by a third, with over 653 million hectares of land being removed from production [4]. Restoration of these lands by 2030 could contribute 13-25% of the estimated area needed globally under Target 2 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Others have suggested that the food system could achieve net negative emissions by 2050 by adopting different technological solutions [5]. The likelihood of such impacts through more environmentally friendly food consumption, similar to other interventions in human behaviour and decision-making, is likely to depend on the success of targeted behavioural change approaches [6] and market dynamics. Highlights Our 15th annual horizon scan identified 15 emerging issues of concern for global biodiversity conservation. A panel of 31 scientists and practitioners submitted a total of 96 topics that were ranked using a Delphi-style technique according to novelty and likelihood of impact on biodiversity conservation. The top 37 issues were discussed in person and online in September 2023 during which the issues were ranked according to the same criteria. Our 15 issues cover impacts from the development of new sources of hydrogen fuel to temperature changes in the mesopelagic ocean zone. Other emerging technologies include benchtop DNA printers and the creation of high-protein food from air.

Extensive forest restoration is a key strategy to meet nature-based sustainable development goals and provide multiple social and environmental benefits. Yet achieving forest restoration at scale requires cost-effective methods. Tree planting in degraded landscapes is a popular but costly forest restoration method, which often results in less biodiverse forests when compared to natural regeneration techniques under similar conditions. Here, we assess the current spatial distribution of pantropical natural forest (from 2000-2016) and use this information to present the first model of the potential for natural regeneration across tropical forested countries and biomes at 30-meter spatial resolution. We estimate that 215 million hectares - an area greater than the entire country of Mexico - have potential for natural forest regeneration, representing an above-ground carbon sequestration potential of 23.4 Gt CO2 (range 21.1-25.7 Gt) over 30 years. Five countries (Brazil, Indonesia, China, Mexico, and Colombia) account for 52% of this estimated potential, showcasing the need for targeting restoration initiatives that leverage natural regeneration potential. Our results facilitate broader equitable decision-making processes that capitalise on the widespread opportunity for natural regeneration to help achieve national and global environmental agendas.