Many global environmental agendas, including halting biodiversity loss, reversing land degradation, and limiting climate change, depend upon retaining forests with high ecological integrity, yet the scale and degree of forest modification remain poorly quantified and mapped. By integrating data on observed and inferred human pressures and an index of lost connectivity, we generate a globally consistent, continuous index of forest condition as determined by the degree of anthropogenic modification. Globally, only 17.4 million km2 of forest (40.5%) has high landscape-level integrity (mostly found in Canada, Russia, the Amazon, Central Africa, and New Guinea) and only 27% of this area is found in nationally designated protected areas. Of the forest inside protected areas, only 56% has high landscape-level integrity. Ambitious policies that prioritize the retention of forest integrity, especially in the most intact areas, are now urgently needed alongside current efforts aimed at halting deforestation and restoring the integrity of forests globally.

Signatory countries to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are formulating goals and indicators through 2050 under the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). Among the goals is increasing the integrity of ecosystems. The CBD is now seeking input toward a quantifiable definition of integrity and methods to track it globally. Here, we offer a schema for using Earth observations (EO) to monitor and evaluate global forest ecosystem integrity (EI). Our approach builds on three topics: the concept of EI, the use of satellite-based EO, and the use of "essential biodiversity variables" to monitor and report on it. Within this schema, EI is a measure of the structure, function, and composition of an ecosystem relative to the range of variation determined by climaticgeophysical environment. We use evaluation criteria to recommend eight potential indicators of EI that can be monitored around the globe using Earth Observations to support the efforts of nations to monitor and report progress to implement the post-2020 GBF. If operationalized, this schema should help Parties to the CBD take action and report progress on achieving ecosystem commitments during this decade.

Signatory countries to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are formulating indicators through 2030 under the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). These goals include increasing the integrity of natural ecosystems. However, the definition of integrity and methods for measuring it remain unspecified. Moreover, nations did not achieve their 2011-2020 CBD targets, partly due to inability to monitor and report progress on these targets. Here, we define ecological integrity (EI) and suggest a framework to measure and evaluate trends in terrestrial EI. Our approach builds on three topics: the concept of ecological integrity, satellite-based Earth observation, and Essential Biodiversity Variables. Within this framework, EI is a measure of the structure, function and composition of an ecosystem relative to the pre-industrial range of variation of these characteristics. We recommend 13 indicators of EI to facilitate the efforts of nations to monitor, evaluate, and report during implementation of the post-2020 GBF. These indicators can help assess the condition of ecosystems relative to benchmark states, and track the degradation or improvement of ecosystem condition due to human impacts or restoration strategies. If operationalized, this framework can help Parties to the CBD systematically evaluate and report progress on achieving ecosystem commitments in the post-2020 GBF

Executive SummaryForests are important determinants of the carbon cycle, and they provide countless ecosystem services to support billions of people worldwide. Global-scale forest restoration is one of our most effective weapons in the fight against biodiversity loss, rural poverty and climate change. In this report, we generate a spatial map of tree density within the potential forest restoration areas delineated by the IUCN/WRI's 'Atlas of Forest Landscape Restoration Opportunities' to estimate the potential number of trees that could be restored at a global scale. We also estimate the number of trees that might be saved by avoiding deforestation in currently forested areas.We show that the restoration areas have the capacity to support a total of 1.33 trillion trees. However, given that a considerable proportion of these areas already contain forests, we estimate that 589 billion new trees (larger than 10 cm diameter) could be restored within these areas, which would have the potential to store 65-91 Gigatonnes of carbon after reaching forest maturation. These values will increase marginally over time, as deforestation is responsible for the removal of living trees within the restoration areas. However, if only 50% or 25% of the mosaic areas (the largest of the designated restoration types) are available for reforestation, this total number will fall to approximately 360, or 246 billion trees, respectively, with corresponding decreases in potential carbon storage. Given that anthropogenic carbon emissions are currently in the order of 9-12 Gigatonnes per year, effective global-scale restoration might potentially have a valuable impact on global-scale climate mitigation over the rest of this century.This report was produced with funding from WWF-UK as part of the Trillion Trees programme with the Wildlife Conservation Society and BirdLife International

No abstract

Coastal soft‐sediment environments provide numerous benefits to all aspects of life and are disproportionally impacted by anthropogenic influence. There is an acknowledgment that ecosystem restoration is required across the globe to combat environmental degradation over the past century. Initiatives like The United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration have an aim of protecting 30% of the world's oceans by 2030. While we need to set goals to prompt action, we also need to ensure that these goals are backed with decision‐making that is underpinned by scientific principles to ensure that we do not end up with residual reserves. This paper suggests practical methods for determining the most appropriate areas for protection in coastal soft‐sediment environments to increase the chances of the ecosystem restoration that is so desperately needed.

No abstract

No abstract