Developing a Regional Network of Biodiversity Observation in the Asia-Pacific Region: Achievements and Challenges of AP BON

Yahara, Tetsukazu; Ma, Keping; Darnaedi, Dedy; Miyashita, Tadashi; Takénaka, Akio; Tachida, Hidenori; Nakashizuka, Tohru; Kim, Eun-Shik; Takamura, Noriko; Nakano, Shinichi; Shirayama, Yoshihisa; Yamamoto, Hiroyuki; Vergara, Sheila

doi:10.1007/978-4-431-54783-9_1

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since APBON launched in 2009, we have held 11 APBON meetings and 12 Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS, Table S1) AP symposiums with contributors from more than 18 countries/areas by the end of 2019. According to our visions and missions (Yahara et al, 2014), we have also promoted collaborative projects, shared information gathered from various methods across the region and implemented collaborative work through five working groups (WGs) (cf. Reports of the past meetings, Biodiversity Center of Japan, 2020a).…”

Section: Achievement Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, APBON has successfully developed a network of biodiversity scientists from many institutes in the AP region (Yahara et al, 2014). APBON has also contributed to networking biodiversity‐related bodies and programs including the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, Table S1), Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF, Table S1), International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN, Table S1), International Long‐Term Ecological Research–East Asia‐Pacific Regional Network (ILTER‐EAP, Table S1) (Kim et al, 2018) and Asia Oceania Group on Earth Observations (AOGEO, Table S1).…”

Section: Achievement Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here, we summarize our activities and achievements under the last work plan (Yahara et al, 2014). We review how APBON has been initiated and grown as a network; we have facilitated the communication and interaction opportunities inter‐/intra‐researchers and stakeholders through workshops and publications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Asia‐Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network: 10‐year achievements and new strategies to 2030

Takeuchi

Muraoka

Yamakita

et al. 2021

Ecological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Asia‐Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network (APBON) was launched in 2009, in response to the establishment of the Biodiversity Observation Network under the Group on Earth Observations in 2008. APBON's mission is to increase exchange of knowledge and know‐how between institutions and researchers concerning biodiversity science research in the Asia‐Pacific (AP) region and thereby contribute to evidence‐based decision‐making and policy‐making. Here we summarize APBON activities and achievements in its first 10 years. We review how APBON has developed networks, facilitated communication for sharing knowledge, and built capacity of researchers and stakeholders through workshops and publications as well as discuss the network plan. Key findings by APBON members include descriptions of species new to science, mapping tropical forest cover change, evaluating impacts of hydropower dams and climate change on fish species diversity in the Mekong, and mapping “Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas” in the oceans. APBON has also contributed to data collection, sharing, analysis, and synthesis for regional and global biodiversity assessment. A highlight was contributing to the “Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services” regional report. New strategic plans target the development of national‐level BONs and interdisciplinary research to address the data and knowledge gaps and increase data accessibility for users and for meeting societal demands. Strengthening networks in AP region and capacity building through APBON meetings will continue. By promoting monitoring and scientific research and facilitating the dialogue with scientists and policymakers, APBON will contribute to the implementation of conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in the entire AP region.

show abstract

Section: Achievement Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Achievement Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Asia‐Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network: 10‐year achievements and new strategies to 2030

Takeuchi

Muraoka

Yamakita

et al. 2021

Ecological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Permanent sample plots are a standard method but can be supplemented by biodiversity observation networks such as the transect approach of the Asia-Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network (Yahara et al 2012(Yahara et al , 2014. Larger PSPs (~50 ha), such as those established by the Centre for Tropical Forest Science (CTFS, now ForestGEO), play an important role in furthering our understanding of community ecological patterns as they monitor a larger number of smaller (≥ 1 cm dbh) trees over bigger areas.…”

Section: Handling Editor: Erwin Dreyermentioning

confidence: 99%

Opportunities and challenges for an Indonesian forest monitoring network

Brearley

Adinugroho²,

Cámara‐Leret

et al. 2019

Annals of Forest Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

& Key message Permanent sampling plots (PSPs) are a powerful and reliable methodology to help our understanding of the diversity and dynamics of tropical forests. Based on the current inventory of PSPs in Indonesia, there is high potential to establish a long-term collaborative forest monitoring network. Whilst there are challenges to initiating such a network, there are also innumerable benefits to help us understand and better conserve these exceptionally diverse ecosystems.

show abstract

“…Biodiversity Observation Networks (BONs) can be key players in driving forward all of these steps by identifying knowledge gaps and removing regional biases, identifying synergies across habitats, linking sampling approaches across spatial scales; ensuring data connectivity and coordination, and verifying policy relevance and application (Figure 1). Most new terrestrial monitoring programs established across the world and especially in developing regions in Asia, South America and Africa (Cui et al 2014;Jürgens et al 2012;Magnusson 2014;Yahara et al 2014), monitor progress towards the objectives of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity of the CBD (http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/). Only with policy-relevant data, which are current, reliable, comparable among sites, and understandable , may international conventions and processes like the CBD and the Intergovernmental Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) succeed in producing a reliable trend analysis of global biodiversity (Schmeller and Bridgewater 2016;Vohland and Nadim 2015).…”

Section: A Capacity Building Framework In Biodiversity Monitoringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building capacity in biodiversity monitoring at the global scale

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

show abstract

Developing a Regional Network of Biodiversity Observation in the Asia-Pacific Region: Achievements and Challenges of AP BON

Cited by 6 publications

References 46 publications

The Asia‐Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network: 10‐year achievements and new strategies to 2030

The Asia‐Pacific Biodiversity Observation Network: 10‐year achievements and new strategies to 2030

Opportunities and challenges for an Indonesian forest monitoring network

Building capacity in biodiversity monitoring at the global scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About