Bold nature retention targets are essential for the global environment agenda

Maron, Martine; Simmonds, Jeremy S.; Watson, James

doi:10.1038/s41559-018-0595-2

Cited by 89 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We therefore suggest that developing area‐based retention targets (Maron et al. ) for both carbon and biodiversity metrics, along with the consideration of land ownership (Krankina et al. ), would allow the development of a portfolio of preserves to meet these criteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, we also find high biodiversity in some areas with low future carbon sequestration potential due to slow growth or high vulnerability to fire. We therefore suggest that developing area-based retention targets (Maron et al 2018) for both carbon and biodiversity metrics, along with the consideration of land ownership (Krankina et al 2014), would allow the development of a portfolio of preserves to meet these criteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Carbon sequestration and biodiversity co‐benefits of preserving forests in the western United States

Buotte

Law

Ripple

et al. 2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest carbon sequestration via forest preservation can be a viable climate change mitigation strategy. Here, we identify forests in the western conterminous United States with high potential carbon sequestration and low vulnerability to future drought and fire, as simulated using the Community Land Model and two high carbon emission scenario (RCP 8.5) climate models. High‐productivity, low‐vulnerability forests have the potential to sequester up to 5,450 Tg CO2 equivalent (1,485 Tg C) by 2099, which is up to 20% of the global mitigation potential previously identified for all temperate and boreal forests, or up to ~6 yr of current regional fossil fuel emissions. Additionally, these forests currently have high above‐ and belowground carbon density, high tree species richness, and a high proportion of critical habitat for endangered vertebrate species, indicating a strong potential to support biodiversity into the future and promote ecosystem resilience to climate change. We stress that some forest lands have low carbon sequestration potential but high biodiversity, underscoring the need to consider multiple criteria when designing a land preservation portfolio. Our work demonstrates how process models and ecological criteria can be used to prioritize landscape preservation for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and preserving biodiversity in a rapidly changing climate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carbon sequestration and biodiversity co‐benefits of preserving forests in the western United States

Buotte

Law

Ripple

et al. 2019

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…( Table 1) (Bland et al, 2019). In particular, indicators based on change in ecosystem area and health are strongly aligned with targets under the CBD and SDGs and associated indicators based on the retention of intact ecosystems (Maron, Simmonds, & Watson, 2018) and goals surrounding restoration.…”

Section: Nongovernmental Organizations (Ngos)mentioning

confidence: 91%

Ecosystem indices to support global biodiversity conservation

Rowland

Bland

Keith

et al. 2019

CONSERVATION LETTERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governments have committed to global targets to slow biodiversity loss and sustain ecosystem services. Biodiversity state indicators that measure progress toward these targets mostly focus on species, while indicators synthesizing ecosystem change are largely lacking. We fill this gap with three indices quantifying past and projected changes in ecosystems using data from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Ecosystems. Our indices quantify changes in risk of ecosystem collapse, ecosystem area and ecological processes, and capture variation in underlying patterns among ecosystems. We apply the indices to three case studies of regional and national assessments (American/Caribbean forests, terrestrial ecosystems of Colombia, and terrestrial ecosystems of South Africa) to illustrate the indices’ complementarity and versatility in revealing patterns of interest for users across sectors. Our indices have the potential to fill the recognized need for ecosystem indicators to inform conservation targets, guide policy, and prioritize management actions.

show abstract

“…Human activities associated with agriculture, urbanisation, and natural resource extraction have led to large-scale habitat destruction and degradation, causing not only species declines and extinctions ( 2 , 3 ), but also the rapid erosion of intact ecosystems on land and in the sea ( 4 , 5 ). The disparity between increasing conservation efforts, including a doubling of the protected area estate in just two decades ( 6 ), and persistent biodiversity decline has led to a number of calls for more ambitious, science-based plans to halt biodiversity loss ( 7 – 10 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a clear scientific basis for substantially increasing area-based conservation efforts ( 11 – 13 ), and discussions around the generation of a new international framework for biodiversity conservation are now well underway ( 14 ). This framework will require not only the growth of strict, well-funded and well-managed protected areas, but also actions to manage the entire land/seascape to ensure conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of its benefits ( 7 , 15 ). As a new, post 2020 biodiversity framework is currently being debated, it is crucial that baseline analyses provide the necessary detail on where and how conservation action is needed to safeguard biodiversity now.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Area requirements to safeguard Earth’s marine species

Jones

Klein

Grantham

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite global policy commitments to preserve Earth's marine biodiversity, many species are 1 in a state of decline. Using data on 22,885 marine species, we identify 8.5 million km 2 of 2 priority areas that complement existing areas of conservation and biodiversity importance. 3New conservation priorities are found in over half (56%) of all coastal nations, with key 4 priority regions in the northwest Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean. We identify where 5 different conservation actions, ranging from marine protected areas to broader policy 6 approaches, may best overcome anthropogenic threats to these areas. This analysis shows 26-7 41% of the ocean (depending on targets used for species representation) needs to be 8 effectively conserved through a combination of site-based actions and wider policy responses 9 to achieve global conservation and sustainable development agendas. 10 11 One Sentence Summary: 12At least 26% of the ocean needs a combination of site-based conservation and wider policy 13 responses to achieve global conservation goals. 14 15 16

show abstract

Bold nature retention targets are essential for the global environment agenda

Cited by 89 publications

References 23 publications

Carbon sequestration and biodiversity co‐benefits of preserving forests in the western United States

Carbon sequestration and biodiversity co‐benefits of preserving forests in the western United States

Ecosystem indices to support global biodiversity conservation

Area requirements to safeguard Earth’s marine species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About