Global gap analysis of cactus species and priority sites for their conservation.

Knowing how much biodiversity is captured by protected areas (PAs) is important to meeting country commitments to international conservation agreements, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, and analyzing gaps in species coverage by PAs contributes greatly to improved locating of new PAs and conservation of species. Regardless of their importance, global gap analyses have been conducted only for a few taxonomic groups (e.g., mangroves, corals, amphibians, birds, mammals). We conducted the first global gap analysis for a complete specious plant group, the highly threatened Cactaceae. Using geographic distribution data of 1438 cactus species, we assessed how well the current PA network represents them. We also systematically identified priority areas for conservation of cactus species that met and failed to meet conservation targets accounting for their conservation status. There were 261 species with no coverage by PAs (gap species). A greater percentage of cacti species (18%) lacked protection than mammals (9.7%) and birds (5.6%), and also a greater percentage of threatened cacti species (32%) were outside protected areas than amphibians (26.5%), birds (19.9%), or mammals (16%). The top 17% of the landscape that best captured covered species represented on average 52.9% of species ranges. The priority areas for gap species and the unprotected portion of the ranges of species that only partially met their conservation target (i.e., partial gap) captured on average 75.2% of their ranges, of which 100 were threatened gap species. These findings and knowledge of the threats affecting species provide information that can be used to improve planning for cacti conservation and highlight the importance of assessing the representation of major groups, such as plants, in PAs to determining the performance of the current PA network.

Análisis del Vacío Mundial de Especies de Cactáceas y Sitios Prioritarios para su Conservación Resumen El conocimiento sobre cuánta biodiversidad es captada por las áreas protegidas (AP) es importante para cumplir los compromisos de cada país con los acuerdos internacionales sobre conservación, como la Convención sobre la Diversidad Biológica, y el análisis de los vacíos en la cobertura de especies por las AP contribuye enormemente a una ubicación mejorada de AP nuevas y a la conservación de especies. Sin considerar su importancia, los análisis de vacío global se han realizado solamente para unos cuantos grupos taxonómicos (p. ej.: mangles, corales, anfibios, aves, mamíferos). Realizamos el primer análisis de vacío global para un grupo completo de especies de plantas, las Cactaceae, que se encuentran bajo seria amenaza. Evaluamos que tan bien representa la red actual de AP a las cactáceas con datos de distribución geográfica de 1438 especies de cactus. También identificamos sistemáticamente las áreas prioritarias de conservación para especies de cactus que cumplieron o fallaron los objetivos de conservación considerando el estado de conservación de las cactáceas. Hubo 261 especies sin cobertura en las AP (especies vacío). Un mayor porcentaje de especies de cactus (18%) careció de protección comparado con los mamíferos (9.7%) y las aves (5.6%), y también encontramos un mayor porcentaje de especies amenazadas de cactus (32%) fuera de las áreas protegidas comparado con los anfibios (26.5%), aves (19.9%) o mamíferos (16%). El 17% máximo del paisaje que mejor capturó a las especies cubiertas representó el 52.9% de la extensión de las especies. Las áreas prioritarias para las especies vacío y la porción desprotegida de la extensión de las especies que sólo cumplieron parcialmente con sus objetivos de conservación (es decir, el vacío parcial) capturaron en promedio el 75.2% de la extensión de las cactáceas, de las cuales 100 eran especies vacío amenazadas. Estos hallazgos y conocimiento sobre las amenazas que afectan a las especies proporcionan información que puede usarse para mejorar la planeación de la conservación de cactáceas y también resalta la importancia de la evaluación de la representación de grupos importantes, como las plantas, en AP para determinar el desempeño de la red contemporánea de AP.

Bringing the Nature Futures Framework to life: creating a set of illustrative narratives of nature futures.

To halt further destruction of the biosphere, most people and societies around the globe need to transform their relationships with nature. The internationally agreed vision under the Convention of Biological Diversity-Living in harmony with nature-is that "By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people". In this context, there are a variety of debates between alternative perspectives on how to achieve this vision. Yet, scenarios and models that are able to explore these debates in the context of "living in harmony with nature" have not been widely developed. To address this gap, the Nature Futures Framework has been developed to catalyse the development of new scenarios and models that embrace a plurality of perspectives on desirable futures for nature and people. In this paper, members of the IPBES task force on scenarios and models provide an example of how the Nature Futures Framework can be implemented for the development of illustrative narratives representing a diversity of desirable nature futures: information that can be used to assess and develop scenarios and models whilst acknowledging the underpinning value perspectives on nature. Here, the term illustrative reflects the multiple ways in which desired nature futures can be captured by these narratives. In addition, to explore the interdependence between narratives, and therefore their potential to be translated into scenarios and models, the six narratives developed here were assessed around three areas of the transformative change debate, specifically, (1) land sparing vs. land sharing, (2) Half Earth vs. Whole Earth conservation, and (3) green growth vs. post-growth economic development. The paper concludes with an assessment of how the Nature Futures Framework could be used to assist in developing and articulating transformative pathways towards desirable nature futures. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-023-01316-1.

Research priorities for maintaining biodiversity's contributions to people in Latin America.

Maintaining biodiversity is crucial for ensuring human well-being. The authors participated in a workshop held in Palenque, Mexico, in August 2018, that brought together 30 mostly early-career scientists working in different disciplines (natural, social and economic sciences) with the aim of identifying research priorities for studying the contributions of biodiversity to people and how these contributions might be impacted by environmental change. Five main groups of questions emerged: (1) Enhancing the quantity, quality, and availability of biodiversity data; (2) Integrating different knowledge systems; (3) Improved methods for integrating diverse data; (4) Fundamental questions in ecology and evolution; and (5) Multi-level governance across boundaries. We discuss the need for increased capacity building and investment in research programmes to address these challenges.

The major barriers to evidence-informed conservation policy and possible solutions.

Conservation policy decisions can suffer from a lack of evidence, hindering effective decision-making. In nature conservation, studies investigating why policy is often not evidence-informed have tended to focus on Western democracies, with relatively small samples. To understand global variation and challenges better, we established a global survey aimed at identifying top barriers and solutions to the use of conservation science in policy. This obtained the views of 758 people in policy, practice, and research positions from 68 countries across six languages. Here we show that, contrary to popular belief, there is agreement between groups about how to incorporate conservation science into policy, and there is thus room for optimism. Barriers related to the low priority of conservation were considered to be important, while mainstreaming conservation was proposed as a key solution. Therefore, priorities should focus on convincing the public of the importance of conservation as an issue, which will then influence policy-makers to adopt pro-environmental long-term policies.