Summary Effective biodiversity conservation requires tools that can identify priority areas under growing human pressures. Building on the concept of global biodiversity hotspots, we present a transparent and repeatable approach to mapping conservation priorities using data for 33,604 species of terrestrial vertebrates from the IUCN Red List. This framework expands the taxonomic scope of previous efforts and integrates updated information on key human-driven threats to biodiversity. We identify that around 13% of Earth’s terrestrial surface qualifies as vertebrate conservation hotspots, often shaped by distinct combinations of species groups and threats. These results highlight the need for tailored, context-specific conservation strategies. By providing a robust method to guide spatial prioritization, our work supports more effective implementation of conservation targets in a rapidly changing world.

Based on an extensive model intercomparison, we assessed trends in biodiversity and ecosystem services from historical reconstructions and future scenarios of land-use and climate change. During the 20th century, biodiversity declined globally by 2 to 11%, as estimated by a range of indicators. Provisioning ecosystem services increased several fold, and regulating services decreased moderately. Going forward, policies toward sustainability have the potential to slow biodiversity loss resulting from land-use change and the demand for provisioning services while reducing or reversing declines in regulating services. However, negative impacts on biodiversity due to climate change appear poised to increase, particularly in the higher-emissions scenarios. Our assessment identifies remaining modeling uncertainties but also robustly shows that renewed policy efforts are needed to meet the goals of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

The Convention on Biological Biodiversity (CBD) exists as a major multilateral environmental agreement to safeguard biodiversity and “live in harmony with nature”. To deliver it, strategies and frameworks are set out in regular agreements that are then implemented at the national scale. However, we are not on track to achieve overall goals, and frameworks so far have not been successful. This could be due to unambitious targets, low follow-through on commitments, or desired outcomes for nature not being achieved when action is taken. Here, we focus on national planning and reporting documents from a set of 30% of Parties to the CBD. We found that nearly half of the commitments mentioned in national planning documents did not appear in the Sixth National Reports and that further losses emerged due to measures reported as incomplete or ineffective. There were differences between commitments to each of the Aichi Targets, with more losses in high-profile and “institutionally challenging” Targets. Commitments from Parties in different Human Development Index categories had different outcomes among Targets, and Parties self-identifying as “megadiverse countries” had overall higher rates of reported success. Our results are important for informing the monitoring of commitment implementation in the Kunming-Montreal “global biodiversity package”.

Background Vegetation structure is increasingly recognized as a key variable to explain ecosystems states and dynamics. New Remote Sensing tools are available to complement labor intensive field investigations and consider the global biogeography of this parameter. Objectives We propose to model the processes explaining the interaction between vegetation structure and animal community assembly globally, while requiring minimal computing power, based on the most fundamentals assumptions. Methods We integrate spaceborne (GEDI: Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation) and ground based (TLS: Terrestrial Laser Scanning) Lidar data in the Madingley general ecosystem model. We compare the outcome of this integration to previous version and to the TetraDensity estimate of animal biomass and Elton traits database for arboreality. Results Animal biomass density simulated by Madingley is closer to global estimates when integrating vegetation structure. The strength of this effect increases with higher cohort body mass and varies with local environmental conditions and stochastic processes. Simulated proportion of arboreality across cohorts is consistently higher than observations. This is consistent with the divergence of biases between model and database. Conclusions Our results concur with our hypotheses about the role of vegetation structure on animal community assembly, as it reduces total animal biomass abundance. However, assessing the accuracy of its relative weight is challenging. While we have global products about arboreality and animal biomass density, they represent modern day ecosystem state, including anthropogenic activity, while Madingley simulates potential ecosystem optimum. Therefore, we call for further research in this field and for challenging modelling attempts to compare with.

Vertebrate species worldwide are currently facing significant declines in many populations. Although we have gained substantial knowledge about the direct threats that affect individual species, these threats only represent a fraction of the broader vertebrate threat profile, which is also shaped by species interactions. For example, threats faced by prey species can jeopardize the survival of their predators due to food resource scarcity. Yet, indirect threats arising from species interactions have received limited investigation thus far. In this study, we investigate the indirect consequences of anthropogenic threats on biodiversity in the context of European vertebrate food webs. We integrated data on trophic interactions among over 800 terrestrial vertebrates, along with their associated human-induced threats. We quantified and mapped the vulnerability of various components of the food web, including species, interactions, and trophic groups to six major threats: pollution, agricultural intensification, climate change, direct exploitation, urbanization, and invasive alien species and diseases. Direct exploitation and agricultural intensification were two major threats for terrestrial vertebrate food webs: affecting 34% and 31% of species, respectively, they threaten 85% and 69% of interactions in Europe. By integrating network ecology with threat impact assessments, our study contributes to a better understanding of the magnitude of anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity.

Despite substantial progress in understanding global biodiversity loss, major taxonomic and geographic knowledge gaps remain. Decision makers often rely on expert judgement to fill knowledge gaps, but are rarely able to engage with sufficiently large and diverse groups of specialists. To improve understanding of the perspectives of thousands of biodiversity experts worldwide, we conducted a survey and asked experts to focus on the taxa and freshwater, terrestrial, or marine ecosystem with which they are most familiar. We found several points of overwhelming consensus (for instance, multiple drivers of biodiversity loss interact synergistically) and important demographic and geographic differences in specialists’ perspectives and estimates. Experts from groups that are underrepresented in biodiversity science, including women and those from the Global South, recommended different priorities for conservation solutions, with less emphasis on acquiring new protected areas, and provided higher estimates of biodiversity loss and its impacts. This may in part be because they disproportionately study the most highly threatened taxa and habitats. Front Ecol Environ 2022;

The rate and extent of global biodiversity change is surpassing our ability to measure, monitor and forecast trends. We propose an interconnected worldwide system of observation networks — a global biodiversity observing system (GBiOS) — to coordinate monitoring worldwide and inform action to reach international biodiversity targets.

Aim: Trophic rewilding is proposed as an approach to tackle biodiversity loss by restoring ecosystem dynamics through the reintroduction of keystone species. Currently, evidence on the ecological consequences of reintroduction programmes is sparse and difficult to generalize. To better understand the ecological consequences of trophic rewilding, we simulated the extinction and reintroduction of large-bodied mammals under different environmental conditions.Location: Europe.Methods: We selected four locations varying in productivity and seasonality in Europe and used a general ecosystem model called Madingley to run simulations. We initialized the model using body mass limits of a European Holocene baseline; we then removed large mammals and let the model converge to a new equilibrium. Next, we reintroduced the previously removed groups to assess whether the equilibrium would shift back to the initial condition. We tested three different reintroduction scenarios, in order to disentangle the importance of the different large mammal groups.Results: The removal of large-bodied mammals led to cascading effects, mainly resulting in increases in smaller-bodied herbivores and the release of mesopredators. Post-reintroduction, the system's new equilibrium state was closer to the initial equilibrium for stable and productive locations compared to highly seasonal and low-productive locations. The maximum trait space volume of the initial state and the post-reintroduction state varied by 9.1% on average over all locations, with an average decrease in trait combinations of 6.6%. The body mass distribution differed by 28%, comparing the initial state to the post-reintroduction state.Main Conclusions: Our simulation results suggest that reintroducing locally extinct large-bodied mammals can broadly restore shifts in ecosystem structure, roughly resembling the baseline ecosystem conditions. However, the extent to which the ecosystem's state resembles the original ecosystem is largely dependent on the reintroduction strategy (only herbivores and omnivores vs. also carnivores) and timing, as well as local environmental conditions.

Taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversities are important facets of biodiversity. Studying them together has improved our understanding of community dynamics, ecosystem functioning, and conservation values.1-3 In contrast to species, traits, and phylogenies, the diversity of biotic interactions has so far been largely ignored as a biodiversity facet in large-scale studies. This neglect represents a crucial shortfall because biotic interactions shape community dynamics, drive important aspects of ecosystem functioning,4-7 provide services to humans, and have intrinsic conservation value.8,9 Hence, the diversity of interactions can provide crucial and unique information with respect to other diversity facets. Here, we leveraged large datasets of trophic interactions, functional traits, phylogenies, and spatial distributions of >1,000 terrestrial vertebrate species across Europe at a 10-km resolution. We computed the diversity of interactions (interaction diversity [ID]) in addition to functional diversity (FD) and phylogenetic diversity (PD). After controlling for species richness, surplus and deficits of ID were neither correlated with FD nor with PD, thus representing unique and complementary information to the commonly studied facets of diversity. A three-dimensional mapping allowed for visualizing different combinations of ID-FD-PD simultaneously. Interestingly, the spatial distribution of these diversity combinations closely matched the boundaries between 10 European biogeographic regions and revealed new interaction-rich areas in the European Boreal region and interaction-poor areas in Central Europe. Our study demonstrates that the diversity of interactions adds new and ecologically relevant information to multifacetted, large-scale diversity studies with implications for understanding eco-evolutionary processes and informing conservation planning.

The Anthropocene is characterized by unparalleled human impact on other species, potentially ushering in the sixth mass extinction. Yet mitigation efforts remain hampered by limited information on the spatial patterns and intensity of the threats driving global biodiversity loss. Here we use expert-derived information from the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List on threats to 23,271 species, representing all terrestrial amphibians, birds and mammals, to generate global maps of the six major threats to these groups: agriculture, hunting and trapping, logging, pollution, invasive species, and climate change. Our results show that agriculture and logging are pervasive in the tropics and that hunting and trapping is the most geographically widespread threat to mammals and birds. Additionally, current representations of human pressure underestimate the overall pressure on biodiversity, due to the exclusion of threats such as hunting and climate change. Alarmingly, this is particularly the case in areas of the highest biodiversity importance.

The lack of urgent action to reverse biodiversity loss is partly due to the complex nature of biodiversity as a feature of our planet. Subsequently, policymakers receive an often-confusing variety of narratives on why biodiversity matters, which makes it difficult to link biodiversity loss and risks to the attainment of sustainable development. Making this link clearer calls for a multidimensional perspective on biodiversity to reassess what we value, facilitate mainstreaming and support national decision-making. We propose a co-produced Multidimensional Biodiversity Index to connect biodiversity science to the political agenda that accounts for the diversity of values underpinning nature–human relationships. Biodiversity underpins the health and strength of ecosystems, but the complexity of those systems can be overwhelming for policymakers. This Perspective proposes a new framework for measuring biodiversity with an eye towards greater conservation.

A prominent signal of the Anthropocene is the extinction and population reduction of the megabiota—the largest animals and plants on the planet. However, we lack a predictive framework for the sensitivity of megabiota during times of rapid global change and how they impact the functioning of ecosystems and the biosphere. Here, we extend metabolic scaling theory and use global simulation models to demonstrate that (i) megabiota are more prone to extinction due to human land use, hunting, and climate change; (ii) loss of megabiota has a negative impact on ecosystem metabolism and functioning; and (iii) their reduction has and will continue to significantly decrease biosphere functioning. Global simulations show that continued loss of large animals alone could lead to a 44%, 18% and 92% reduction in terrestrial heterotrophic biomass, metabolism, and fertility respectively. Our findings suggest that policies that emphasize the promotion of large trees and animals will have disproportionate impact on biodiversity, ecosystem processes, and climate mitigation.

Integrated high-resolution maps of carbon stocks and biodiversity that identify areas of potential co-benefits for climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation can help facilitate the implementation of global climate and biodiversity commitments at local levels. However, the multi-dimensional nature of biodiversity presents a major challenge for understanding, mapping and communicating where and how biodiversity benefits coincide with climate benefits. A new integrated approach to biodiversity is therefore needed. Here, we (a) present a new high-resolution map of global above- and below-ground carbon stored in biomass and soil, (b) quantify biodiversity values using two complementary indices (BIp and BIr) representing proactive and reactive approaches to conservation, and (c) examine patterns of carbon–biodiversity overlap by identifying 'hotspots' (20% highest values for both aspects). Our indices integrate local diversity and ecosystem intactness, as well as regional ecosystem intactness across the broader area supporting a similar natural assemblage of species to the location of interest. The western Amazon Basin, Central Africa and Southeast Asia capture the last strongholds of highest local biodiversity and ecosystem intactness worldwide, while the last refuges for unique biological communities whose habitats have been greatly reduced are mostly found in the tropical Andes and central Sundaland. There is 38 and 5% overlap in carbon and biodiversity hotspots, for proactive and reactive conservation, respectively. Alarmingly, only around 12 and 21% of these proactive and reactive hotspot areas, respectively, are formally protected. This highlights that a coupled approach is urgently needed to help achieve both climate and biodiversity global targets. This would involve (1) restoring and conserving unprotected, degraded ecosystems, particularly in the Neotropics and Indomalaya, and (2) retaining the remaining strongholds of intactness. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions’.

Perturbed ecosystems may undergo rapid and non-linear changes, resulting in 'regime shifts' to an entirely different ecological state. The need to understand the extent, nature, magnitude and reversibility of these changes is urgent given the profound effects that humans are having on the natural world. General ecosystem models, which simulate the dynamics of ecosystems based on a mechanistic representation of ecological processes, provide one novel way to project ecosystem changes across all scales and trophic levels, and to forecast impact thresholds beyond which irreversible changes may occur. We model ecosystem changes in four terrestrial biomes subjected to human removal of plant biomass, such as occurs through agricultural land-use change. We find that irreversible, non-linear responses commonly occur where removal of vegetation exceeds 80% (a level that occurs across nearly 10% of the Earth's land surface), especially for organisms at higher trophic levels and in less productive ecosystems. Very large, irreversible changes to ecosystem structure are expected at levels of vegetation removal akin to those in the most intensively used real-world ecosystems. Our results suggest that the projected twenty-first century rapid increases in agricultural land conversion may lead to widespread trophic cascades and in some cases irreversible changes to ecosystem structure.

Despite the scientific consensus on the extinction crisis and its anthropogenic origin, the quantification of historical trends and of future scenarios of biodiversity and ecosystem services has been limited, due to the lack of inter-model comparisons and harmonized scenarios. Here, we present a multi-model analysis to assess the impacts of land-use and climate change from 1900 to 2050. During the 20th century provisioning services increased, but biodiversity and regulating services decreased. Similar trade-offs are projected for the coming decades, but they may be attenuated in a sustainability scenario. Future biodiversity loss from land-use change is projected to keep up with historical rates or reduce slightly, whereas losses due to climate change are projected to increase greatly. Renewed efforts are needed by governments to meet the 2050 vision of the Convention on Biological Diversity. One Sentence Summary Development pathways exist that allow for a reduction of the rates of biodiversity loss from land-use change and improvement in regulating services but climate change poses an increasing challenge.

Large carnivores can exert top–down effects in ecosystems, but the size of these effects are largely unknown. Empirical investigation on the importance of large carnivores for ecosystem structure and functioning presents a number of challenges due to the large spatio‐temporal scale and the complexity of such dynamics. Here, we applied a mechanistic global ecosystem model to investigate the influence of large‐carnivore removal from undisturbed ecosystems. First, we simulated large‐carnivore removal on the global scale to inspect the geographic pattern of top–down control and to disentangle the functional role of large carnivores in top–down control in different environmental contexts. Second, we conducted four small‐scale ecosystem simulation experiments to understand direct and indirect changes in food‐web structure under different environmental conditions. We found that the removal of top–down control exerted by large carnivores (> 21 kg) can trigger large trophic cascades, leading to an overall decrease in autotroph biomass globally. Furthermore, the loss of large carnivores resulted in an increase of mesopredators. The magnitude of these changes was positively related to primary productivity (NPP), in line with the ‘exploitation ecosystem hypothesis’. In addition, we found that seasonality in NPP dampened the magnitude of change following the removal of large carnivores. Our results reinforce the idea that large carnivores play a fundamental role in shaping ecosystems, and further declines and extinctions can trigger substantial ecosystem responses. Our findings also support previous studies suggesting that natural ecosystem dynamics have been severely modified and are still changing as a result of the widespread decline and extinction of large carnivores.

Increased efforts are required to prevent further losses to terrestrial biodiversity and the ecosystem services that it provides1,2. Ambitious targets have been proposed, such as reversing the declining trends in biodiversity3; however, just feeding the growing human population will make this a challenge4. Here we use an ensemble of land-use and biodiversity models to assess whether—and how—humanity can reverse the declines in terrestrial biodiversity caused by habitat conversion, which is a major threat to biodiversity5. We show that immediate efforts, consistent with the broader sustainability agenda but of unprecedented ambition and coordination, could enable the provision of food for the growing human population while reversing the global terrestrial biodiversity trends caused by habitat conversion. If we decide to increase the extent of land under conservation management, restore degraded land and generalize landscape-level conservation planning, biodiversity trends from habitat conversion could become positive by the mid-twenty-first century on average across models (confidence interval, 2042–2061), but this was not the case for all models. Food prices could increase and, on average across models, almost half (confidence interval, 34–50%) of the future biodiversity losses could not be avoided. However, additionally tackling the drivers of land-use change could avoid conflict with affordable food provision and reduces the environmental effects of the food-provision system. Through further sustainable intensification and trade, reduced food waste and more plant-based human diets, more than two thirds of future biodiversity losses are avoided and the biodiversity trends from habitat conversion are reversed by 2050 for almost all of the models. Although limiting further loss will remain challenging in several biodiversity-rich regions, and other threats—such as climate change—must be addressed to truly reverse the declines in biodiversity, our results show that ambitious conservation efforts and food system transformation are central to an effective post-2020 biodiversity strategy. To promote the recovery of the currently declining global trends in terrestrial biodiversity, increases in both the extent of land under conservation management and the sustainability of the global food system from farm to fork are required.

A prominent signal of the Anthropocene is the extinction and population reduction of the megabiota – the largest animals and plants on the planet. However, we lack a predictive framework for the sensitivity of megabiota during times of rapid global change and how they impact the functioning of ecosystems and the biosphere. Here, we extend metabolic scaling theory and use global simulation models to demonstrate that the megabiota (i) are more prone to extinction due to human land use, hunting, and climate change; (ii) their loss has a negative impact on ecosystem metabolism and functioning; and (iii) their continued reduction will significantly decrease biosphere functioning. Analyses of several forest and animal datasets and large-scale simulation models largely support these predictions. Global simulations show that continued loss of large animals could lead to a 44%, 18% and 92% reduction in terrestrial heterotrophic biomass, metabolism, and fertility respectively. Landscapes with megabiota buffer ecosystem functioning, diversity, and likely human health. As a result, policies that emphasize the promotion of large trees and animals will have disproportionate impact on biodiversity, ecosystem processes, and climate mitigation.

The archive provides supporting material for the article entitled “Bending the curve of terrestrial biodiversity needs an integrated strategy”, published in the Nature journal (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2705-y). It contains: i) the final version of the methodological report (updating the initial version [DOI:10.22022/ESM/04-2018.15241] for this article), ii) geospatial land-use projections generated by land-use models for the various scenarios described in the article, iii) aggregated land-use model projections for other variables used in the article, iv) the code, input data and output data of the various biodiversity models applied to the land use projections, v) the code and side data to produce numbers and figures presented in the article.”