Academic publishing requires linguistically inclusive policies.

Scientific knowledge is produced in multiple languages but is predominantly published in English. This practice creates a language barrier to generate and transfer scientific knowledge between communities with diverse linguistic backgrounds, hindering the ability of scholars and communities to address global challenges and achieve diversity and equity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). To overcome those barriers, publishers and journals should provide a fair system that supports non-native English speakers and disseminates knowledge across the globe. We surveyed policies of 736 journals in biological sciences to assess their linguistic inclusivity, identify predictors of inclusivity, and propose actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing. Our assessment revealed a grim landscape where most journals were making minimal efforts to overcome language barriers. The impact factor of journals was negatively associated with adopting a number of inclusive policies whereas ownership by a scientific society tended to have a positive association. Contrary to our expectations, the proportion of both open access articles and editors based in non-English speaking countries did not have a major positive association with the adoption of linguistically inclusive policies. We proposed a set of actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing, including the renegotiation of power dynamics between publishers and editorial boards.

Beyond ecology: ecosystem restoration as a process for social-ecological transformation.

Ecosystem restoration conventionally focuses on ecological targets. However, while ecological targets are crucial to mobilizing political, social, and financial capital, they do not encapsulate the need to: integrate social, economic, and ecological dimensions and systems approaches; reconcile global targets and local objectives; and measure the rate of progress toward multiple and synergistic goals. Restoration is better conceived as an inclusive social-ecological process that integrates diverse values, practices, knowledge, and restoration objectives across temporal and spatial scales and stakeholder groups. Taking a more process-based approach will ultimately enable greater social-ecological transformation, greater restoration effectiveness, and more long-lasting benefits to people and nature across time and place.

The role of incentive mechanisms in promoting forest restoration.

Forest restoration has been proposed as a scalable nature-based solution to achieve global environmental and socio-economic outcomes and is central to many policy initiatives, such as the Bonn Challenge. Restored forests contain appreciable biodiversity, improve habitat connectivity and sequester carbon. Incentive mechanisms (e.g. payments for ecosystem services and allocation of management rights) have been a focus of forest restoration efforts for decades. Yet, there is still little understanding of their role in promoting restoration success. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate how incentive mechanisms are used to promote forest restoration, outcomes, and the biophysical and socio-economic factors that influence implementation and program success. We found that socio-economic factors, such as governance, monitoring systems and the experience and beliefs of participants, dominate whether or not an incentive mechanism is successful. We found that approximately half of the studies report both positive ecological and socio-economic outcomes. However, reported adverse outcomes were more commonly socio-economic than ecological. Our results reveal that achieving forest restoration at a sufficient scale to meet international commitments will require stronger assessment and management of socio-economic factors that enable or constrain the success of incentive mechanisms. This article is part of the theme issue 'Understanding forest landscape restoration: reinforcing scientific foundations for the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration'.

Accelerated shifts in terrestrial life zones under rapid climate change.

Rapid climate change is impacting biodiversity, ecosystem function, and human well-being. Though the magnitude and trajectory of climate change are becoming clearer, our understanding of how these changes reshape terrestrial life zones-distinct biogeographic units characterized by biotemperature, precipitation, and aridity representing broad-scale ecosystem types-is limited. To address this gap, we used high-resolution historical climatologies and climate projections to determine the global distribution of historical (1901-1920), contemporary (1979-2013), and future (2061-2080) life zones. Comparing the historical and contemporary distributions shows that changes from one life zone to another during the 20th century impacted 27 million km2 (18.3% of land), with consequences for social and ecological systems. Such changes took place in all biomes, most notably in Boreal Forests, Temperate Coniferous Forests, and Tropical Coniferous Forests. Comparing the contemporary and future life zone distributions shows the pace of life zone changes accelerating rapidly in the 21st century. By 2070, such changes would impact an additional 62 million km2 (42.6% of land) under "business-as-usual" (RCP8.5) emissions scenarios. Accelerated rates of change are observed in hundreds of ecoregions across all biomes except Tropical Coniferous Forests. While only 30 ecoregions (3.5%) had over half of their areas change to a different life zone during the 20th century, by 2070 this number is projected to climb to 111 ecoregions (13.1%) under RCP4.5 and 281 ecoregions (33.2%) under RCP8.5. We identified weak correlations between life zone change and threatened vertebrate richness, levels of vertebrate endemism, cropland extent, and human population densities within ecoregions, illustrating the ubiquitous risks of life zone changes to diverse social-ecological systems. The accelerated pace of life zone changes will increasingly challenge adaptive conservation and sustainable development strategies that incorrectly assume current ecological patterns and livelihood provisioning systems will persist.

Wilderness forms and their implications for global environmental policy and conservation.

With the intention of securing industry-free land and seascapes, protecting wilderness entered international policy as a formal target for the first time in the zero draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Given this increased prominence in international policy, it is timely to consider the extent to which the construct of wilderness supports global conservation objectives. We evaluated the construct by overlaying recently updated cumulative human pressure maps that offer a global-scale delineation of industry-free land as wilderness with maps of carbon stock, species richness, and ground travel time from urban centers. Wilderness areas took variable forms in relation to carbon stock, species richness, and proximity to urban centers, where 10% of wilderness areas represented high carbon and species richness, 20% low carbon and species richness, and 3% high levels of remoteness (>48 h), carbon, and species richness. Approximately 35% of all remaining wilderness in 2013 was accessible in <24 h of travel time from urban centers. Although the construct of wilderness can be used to secure benefits in specific contexts, its application in conservation must account for contextual and social implications. The diverse characterization of wilderness under a global environmental conservation lens shows that a nuanced framing and application of the construct is needed to improve understanding, communication, and retention of its variable forms as industry-free places.

Formas de las Áreas Silvestres y sus Implicaciones para las Políticas y la Conservación Mundial Resumen Con la intención de asegurar paisajes terrestres y marinos libres de la industria, la protección de las áreas silvestres entró a la política internacional por primera vez como un objetivo formal en el primer borrador del Marco de Trabajo para la Biodiversidad Mundial Post-2020 bajo el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica. Con este incremento en la presencia dentro de la política internacional, es oportuno considerar el grado al que el concepto de área silvestre ayuda a los objetivos de conservación mundial. Evaluamos este concepto mediante la superposición de mapas de la presión humana acumulada recientemente actualizados que brindan una definición a escala mundial de las tierras libres de industria con mapas del stock de carbono, riqueza de especies y el tiempo de traslado terrestre desde los centros urbanos. Las áreas silvestres mostraron formas variables con respecto al stock de carbono, la riqueza de especies y la cercanía a los centros urbanos, de las cuales el 10% representó una elevada riqueza de especies y presencia de carbono, el 20% una baja riqueza de especies y presencia de carbono y el 3% una elevada lejanía (>48 horas), presencia de carbono y riqueza de especies. Aproximadamente el 35% de todas las áreas silvestres en 2013 era accesible en <24 horas de traslado desde los centros urbanos. Aunque el concepto de áreas silvestres puede usarse para garantizar beneficios en contextos específicos, su aplicación en la conservación debe considerar las implicaciones contextuales y sociales. La caracterización diversa de las áreas silvestres bajo el lente de la conservación ambiental mundial muestra que un encuadre matizado y la aplicación de este concepto son necesarios para aumentar el conocimiento, la comunicación y la retención de sus formas variables como lugares libres de industria.