BackgroundSaltmarshes are extremely valuable but often overlooked ecosystems, contributing to livelihoods locally and globally through the associated ecosystem services they provide, including fish production, carbon storage and coastal protection. Despite their importance, knowledge of the current spatial distribution (occurrence and extent) of saltmarshes is incomplete. In light of increasing anthropogenic and environmental pressures on coastal ecosystems, global data on the occurrence and extent of saltmarshes are needed to draw attention to these critical ecosystems and to the benefits they generate for people. Such data can support resource management, strengthen decision-making and facilitate tracking of progress towards global conservation targets set by multilateral environmental agreements, such as the Aichi Biodiversity Targets of the United Nations' (UN's) Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Ramsar Convention.New informationHere, we present the most complete dataset on saltmarsh occurrence and extent at the global scale. This dataset collates 350,985 individual occurrences of saltmarshes and presents the first global estimate of their known extent.The dataset captures locational and contextual data for saltmarsh in 99 countries worldwide. A total of 5,495,089 hectares of mapped saltmarsh across 43 countries and territories are represented in a Geographic Information Systems polygon shapefile. This estimate is at the relatively low end of previous estimates (2.2-40 Mha), however, we took the conservative approach in the mapping exercise and there are notable areas in Canada, Northern Russia, South America and Africa where saltmarshes are known to occur that require additional spatial data. Nevertheless, the most extensive saltmarsh worldwide are found outside the tropics, notably including the low-lying, ice-free coasts, bays and estuaries of the North Atlantic which are well represented in our global polygon dataset. Therefore, despite the gaps, we believe that, while incomplete, our global polygon data cover many of the important areas in Europe, the USA and Australia.

Measurements of the status and trends of key indicators for the ocean and marine life are required to inform policy and management in the context of growing human uses of marine resources, coastal development, and climate change. Two synergistic efforts identify specific priority variables for monitoring: Essential Ocean Variables (EOVs) through the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), and Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) from the Group on Earth Observations Muller-Karger et al. EOVs and EBVs Observation Requirements Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON) (see Data Sheet 1 in Supplementary Materials for a glossary of acronyms). Both systems support reporting against internationally agreed conventions and treaties. GOOS, established under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), plays a leading role in coordinating global monitoring of the ocean and in the definition of EOVs. GEO BON is a global biodiversity observation network that coordinates observations to enhance management of the world's biodiversity and promote both the awareness and accounting of ecosystem services. Convergence and agreement between these two efforts are required to streamline existing and new marine observation programs to advance scientific knowledge effectively and to support the sustainable use and management of ocean spaces and resources. In this context, the Marine Biodiversity Observation Network (MBON), a thematic component of GEO BON, is collaborating with GOOS, the Ocean Biogeographic Information System (OBIS), and the Integrated Marine Biosphere Research (IMBeR) project to ensure that EBVs and EOVs are complementary, representing alternative uses of a common set of scientific measurements. This work is informed by the Joint Technical Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology (JCOMM), an intergovernmental body of technical experts that helps international coordination on best practices for observing, data management and services, combined with capacity development expertise. Characterizing biodiversity and understanding its drivers will require incorporation of observations from traditional and molecular taxonomy, animal tagging and tracking efforts, ocean biogeochemistry, and ocean observatory initiatives including the deep ocean and seafloor. The partnership between large-scale ocean observing and product distribution initiatives (MBON, OBIS, JCOMM, and GOOS) is an expedited, effective way to support international policy-level assessments (e.g., the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services or IPBES), along with the implementation of international development goals (e.g., the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals). Keywords: essential ocean variables (EOV), essential biodiversity variables (EBV), marine biodiversity observation network (MBON), global ocean observing system (GOOS), ocean biogeographic information system (OBIS), marine global earth observatory (MarineGEO), integrated marine biosphere research (IMBeR)

communities in order to assess risk, aid coastal development planning, and build decision support systems.

No abstract

Coastal Indigenous peoples rely on ocean resources and are highly vulnerable to ecosystem and economic change. Their challenges have been observed and recognized at local and regional scales, yet there are no global-scale analyses to inform international policies. We compile available data for over 1,900 coastal Indigenous communities around the world representing 27 million people across 87 countries. Based on available data at local and regional levels, we estimate a total global yearly seafood consumption of 2.1 million (1.5 million–2.8 million) metric tonnes by coastal Indigenous peoples, equal to around 2% of global yearly commercial fisheries catch. Results reflect the crucial role of seafood for these communities; on average, consumption per capita is 15 times higher than non-Indigenous country populations. These findings contribute to an urgently needed sense of scale to coastal Indigenous issues, and will hopefully prompt increased recognition and directed research regarding the marine knowledge and resource needs of Indigenous peoples. Marine resources are crucial to the continued existence of coastal Indigenous peoples, and their needs must be explicitly incorporated into management policies.

Summary1. There is a high demand for biodiversity observation data to inform conservation and environmental policy, and citizen scientists generate the vast majority of terrestrial biodiversity observations. As this work is voluntary, many people assume that these data are openly available for use in conservation and scientific research.

Human-driven global change is causing ongoing declines in biodiversity worldwide. In order to address these declines, decision-makers need accurate assessments of the status of and pressures on biodiversity. However, these are heavily constrained by incomplete and uneven spatial, temporal and taxonomic coverage. For instance, data from regions such as Europe and North America are currently used overwhelmingly for large-scale biodiversity assessments due to lesser availability of suitable data from other, more biodiversity-rich, regions. These data-poor regions are often those experiencing the strongest threats to biodiversity, however. There is therefore an urgent need to fill the existing gaps in global biodiversity monitoring. Here, we review current knowledge on best practice in capacity building for biodiversity monitoring and provide an overview of existing means to improve biodiversity data collection considering the different types of biodiversity monitoring data. Our review comprises insights from work in Africa, South America, Polar Regions and Europe; in governmentfunded, volunteer and citizen-based monitoring in terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems. The key steps to effectively building capacity in biodiversity monitoring are: identifying monitoring questions and aims; identifying the key components, functions, and processes to monitor; identifying the most suitable monitoring methods for these elements, carrying out monitoring activities; managing the resultant data; and interpreting monitoring data. Additionally, biodiversity monitoring should use multiple approaches including extensive and intensive monitoring through volunteers and professional scientists but also harnessing new technologies. Finally, we call on the scientific community to share biodiversity monitoring data, knowledge and tools to ensure the accessibility, interoperability, and reporting of biodiversity data at a global scale.4

Key global indicators of biodiversity decline, such as the IUCN Red List Index and the Living Planet Index, have relatively long assessment intervals. This means they, due to their inherent structure, function as late-warning indicators that are retrospective, rather than prospective. These indicators are unquestionably important in providing information for biodiversity conservation, but the detection of early-warning signs of critical biodiversity change is also needed so that proactive management responses can be enacted promptly where required. Generally, biodiversity conservation has dealt poorly with the scattered distribution of necessary detailed information, and needs to find a solution to assemble, harmonize and standardize the data. The prospect of monitoring essential biodiversity variables (EBVs) has been suggested in response to this challenge. The concept has generated much attention, but the EBVs themselves are still in development due to the complexity of the task, the limited resources available, and a lack of long-term commitment to maintain EBV data sets. As a first step, the scientific community and the policy sphere should agree on a set of priority candidate EBVs to be developed within the coming years to advance both large-scale ecological Dirk S. Schmeller and others research as well as global and regional biodiversity conservation. Critical ecological transitions are of high importance from both a scientific as well as from a conservation policy point of view, as they can lead to long-lasting biodiversity change with a high potential for deleterious effects on whole ecosystems and therefore also on human well-being. We evaluated candidate EBVs using six criteria: relevance, sensitivity to change, generalizability, scalability, feasibility, and data availability and provide a literature-based review for eight EBVs with high sensitivity to change. The proposed suite of EBVs comprises abundance, allelic diversity, body mass index, ecosystem heterogeneity, phenology, range dynamics, size at first reproduction, and survival rates. The eight candidate EBVs provide for the early detection of critical and potentially long-lasting biodiversity change and should be operationalized as a priority. Only with such an approach can science predict the future status of global biodiversity with high certainty and set up the appropriate conservation measures early and efficiently. Importantly, the selected EBVs would address a large range of conservation issues and contribute to a total of 15 of the 20 Aichi targets and are, hence, of high biological relevance.