Lucy Young’s research while affiliated with WWF United Kingdom and other places

Biogeographic context, such as biome type, has a critical influence on ecological resilience, as climatic and environmental conditions impact how communities respond to anthropogenic threats. For example, land‐use change causes a greater loss of biodiversity in tropical biomes compared to temperate biomes. Furthermore, the nature of threats impacting ecosystems varies geographically. Therefore, monitoring the state of biodiversity at a high spatial resolution is crucial to capture variation in threat–responses caused by biogeographical context. However such fine‐scale ecological data collection could be prohibitively resource intensive. In this study, we aim to find the spatial scale that could best capture variation in community‐level threat responses whilst keeping data collection requirements feasible. Using a database of biodiversity records with extensive global coverage, we modelled species richness and total abundance (the responses) across land‐use types (reflecting threats), considering three different spatial scales: biomes, biogeographical realms, and regional biomes (the interaction between realm and biome). We then modelled data from three highly sampled biomes to ask how responses to threat differ between regional biomes and taxonomic group. We found strong support for regional biomes in explaining variation in species richness and total abundance compared to biomes or realms alone. Our biome case studies demonstrate that there is variation in magnitude and direction of threat responses across both regional biomes and taxonomic group, although the interpretation is limited by sampling bias in the literature. All groups in tropical forest showed a consistently negative response, whilst many taxon‐regional biome groups showed no clear response to threat in temperate forest and tropical grassland. Our results provide the first empirical evidence that the taxon‐regional biome unit has potential as a reasonable spatial unit for monitoring how ecological communities respond to threats and designing effective conservation interventions to bend the curve on biodiversity loss.

Biogeography has a critical influence on how ecological communities respond to threats and how effective conservation interventions are designed. For example, the resilience of ecological communities is linked to environmental and climatic features, and the nature of threats impacting ecosystems also varies geographically. Understanding community-level threat responses may be most accurate at fine spatial scales, however collecting detailed ecological data at such a high resolution would be prohibitively resource intensive. In this study, we aim to find the spatial scale that could best capture variation in community-level threat responses whilst keeping data collection requirements feasible. Using a database of biodiversity records with extensive global coverage, we modelled species richness and total abundance (the responses) across land-use types (reflecting threats), considering three different spatial scales: biomes, biogeographical realms, and regional biomes (the interaction between realm and biome). We then modelled data from three highly sampled biomes separately to ask how responses to threat differ between regional biomes and taxonomic group. We found strong support for regional biomes in explaining variation in species richness and total abundance compared to biomes or realms alone. Our biome case studies demonstrate that there is a high variation in magnitude and direction of threat responses across both regional biomes and taxonomic group, but all groups in tropical forest showed a consistently negative response, whilst many taxon-regional biome groups showed no clear response to threat in temperate forest and tropical grassland. Our results suggest that the taxon-regional biome unit has potential as a reasonable spatial and ecological scale for understanding how ecological communities respond to threats and designing effective conservation interventions to bend the curve on biodiversity loss.

As we enter the next phase of international policy commitments to halt biodiversity loss (e.g., Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework), biodiversity indicators will play an important role in forming the robust basis upon which targeted, and time sensitive conservation actions are developed. Population trend indicators are one of the most powerful tools in biodiversity monitoring due to their responsiveness to changes over short timescales and their ability to aggregate species trends from global down to sub-national or even local scale. We consider how the project behind one of the foremost population level indicators - the Living Planet Index - has evolved over the last 25 years, its value to the field of biodiversity monitoring, and how its components have portrayed a compelling account of the changing status of global biodiversity through its application at policy, research and practice levels. We explore ways the project can develop to enhance our understanding of the state of biodiversity and share lessons learned to inform indicator development and mobilise action.

Biogeography has a critical influence on how ecological communities respond to threats and how effective conservation interventions are designed. For example, the resilience of ecological communities is linked to environmental and climatic features, and the nature of threats impacting ecosystems also varies geographically. Understanding community-level threat responses may be most accurate at fine spatial scales, however collecting detailed ecological data at such a high resolution would be prohibitively resource intensive. In this study, we aim to find the spatial scale that could best capture variation in community-level threat responses whilst keeping data collection requirements feasible. Using a database of biodiversity records with extensive global coverage, we modelled species richness and total abundance (the responses) across land-use types (reflecting threats), considering three different spatial scales: biomes, biogeographical realms, and regional biomes (the interaction between realm and biome). We then modelled data from three highly sampled biomes separately to ask how responses to threat differ between regional biomes and taxonomic group. We found strong support for regional biomes in explaining variation in species richness and total abundance compared to biomes or realms alone. Our biome case studies demonstrate that there is a high variation in magnitude and direction of threat responses across both regional biomes and taxonomic group, but all groups in tropical forest showed a consistently negative response, whilst many taxon-regional biome groups showed no clear response to threat in temperate forest and tropical grassland. Our results suggest that the taxon-regional biome unit has potential as a reasonable spatial and ecological scale for understanding how ecological communities respond to threats and designing effective conservation interventions to bend the curve on biodiversity loss.

As we enter the next phase of international policy commitments to halt biodiversity loss (e.g. Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework), biodiversity indicators will play an important role forming the robust basis upon which targeted, and time sensitive conservation actions are developed. Population trend indicators are perhaps the most powerful tool in biodiversity monitoring due to their responsiveness to changes over short timescales and their ability to aggregate species trends from global down to at a sub-national or even local scale. We consider how the project behind the foremost population level indicator - the Living Planet Index - has evolved over the last 25 years, its value to the field of biodiversity monitoring, and how its components have portrayed a compelling account of the changing status of global biodiversity through its application at policy, research and practice levels. We explore ways the project can develop to enhance our understanding of the state of biodiversity and share lessons learned to inform indicator development and mobilise action.

Increased efforts are required to prevent further losses to terrestrial biodiversity and the ecosystem services that it provides1,2. Ambitious targets have been proposed, such as reversing the declining trends in biodiversity³; however, just feeding the growing human population will make this a challenge⁴. Here we use an ensemble of land-use and biodiversity models to assess whether—and how—humanity can reverse the declines in terrestrial biodiversity caused by habitat conversion, which is a major threat to biodiversity⁵. We show that immediate efforts, consistent with the broader sustainability agenda but of unprecedented ambition and coordination, could enable the provision of food for the growing human population while reversing the global terrestrial biodiversity trends caused by habitat conversion. If we decide to increase the extent of land under conservation management, restore degraded land and generalize landscape-level conservation planning, biodiversity trends from habitat conversion could become positive by the mid-twenty-first century on average across models (confidence interval, 2042–2061), but this was not the case for all models. Food prices could increase and, on average across models, almost half (confidence interval, 34–50%) of the future biodiversity losses could not be avoided. However, additionally tackling the drivers of land-use change could avoid conflict with affordable food provision and reduces the environmental effects of the food-provision system. Through further sustainable intensification and trade, reduced food waste and more plant-based human diets, more than two thirds of future biodiversity losses are avoided and the biodiversity trends from habitat conversion are reversed by 2050 for almost all of the models. Although limiting further loss will remain challenging in several biodiversity-rich regions, and other threats—such as climate change—must be addressed to truly reverse the declines in biodiversity, our results show that ambitious conservation efforts and food system transformation are central to an effective post-2020 biodiversity strategy.

Despite their limited spatial extent, freshwater ecosystems host remarkable biodiversity, including one third of all vertebrate species. This biodiversity is declining dramatically: globally, wetlands are vanishing three times faster than forests, and freshwater vertebrate populations have fallen more than twice as steeply as terrestrial or marine populations. Threats to freshwater biodiversity are well documented but co-ordinated action to reverse the decline is lacking. We present an Emergency Recovery Plan to “bend the curve” of freshwater biodiversity loss. Priority actions include: 1) accelerating implementation of environmental flows; 2) improving water quality; 3) protecting and restoring critical habitats; 4) managing exploitation of freshwater ecosystem resources, especially species and riverine aggregates; 5) preventing and controlling non-native species invasions; and 6) safeguarding and restoring river connectivity. We recommend adjustments to targets and indicators for the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Sustainable Development Goals, and roles for national and international state and non-state actors. *** This paper has been accepted for publication in BioScience. A link to the BioScience version will follow in due course ***

Consumption of globally traded agricultural commodities like soy and palm oil is one of the primary causes of deforestation and biodiversity loss in some of the world’s most species-rich ecosystems. However, the complexity of global supply chains has confounded efforts to reduce impacts. Companies and governments with sustainability commitments struggle to understand their own sourcing patterns, while the activities of more unscrupulous actors are conveniently masked by the opacity of global trade. We combine state-of-the-art material flow, economic trade, and biodiversity impact models to produce an innovative approach for understanding the impacts of trade on biodiversity loss and the roles of remote markets and actors. We do this for the production of soy in the Brazilian Cerrado, home to more than 5% of the world´s species. Distinct sourcing patterns of consumer countries and trading companies result in substantially different impacts on endemic species. Connections between individual buyers and specific hot spots explain the disproportionate impacts of some actors on endemic species and individual threatened species, such as the particular impact of European Union consumers on the recent habitat losses for the iconic giant anteater ( Myrmecophaga tridactyla ). In making these linkages explicit, our approach enables commodity buyers and investors to target their efforts much more closely to improve the sustainability of their supply chains in their sourcing regions while also transforming our ability to monitor the impact of such commitments over time.

Unless actions are taken to reduce multiple anthropogenic pressures, biodiversity is expected to continue declining at an alarming rate. Models and scenarios can be used to help design the pathways that sustain a thriving nature and its ability to contribute to people. This approach has so far been hampered by the complexity associated with combining projections of pressures on, and subsequent responses from, biodiversity. Most previous assessments have projected continuous biodiversity declines and very few have identified pathways for reversing the loss of biodiversity without jeopardizing other objectives such as development or climate mitigation. The Bending The Curve initiative set out to advance quantitative modelling techniques towards ambitious scenarios for biodiversity. In this proof-of-concept analysis, we developed a modelling approach that demonstrates how global land use and biodiversity models can be combined to can shed light on pathways able to bend the curve of biodiversity trends as affected by land-use change, the biggest current threat to biodiversity. In order to address the uncertainties associated with such pathways we used a multi-model framework and relied on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway/Representative Concentration Pathway scenario framework. This report describes the details of this modelling approach.