Explore the vast range of titles available.

Wildlife trade is a key driver of the biodiversity crisis. Unregulated, or under-regulated wildlife trade can lead to unsustainable exploitation of wild populations. International efforts to regulate wildlife mostly miss ‘lower-value’ species, such as those imported as pets, resulting in limited knowledge of trade in groups like reptiles. Here we generate a dataset on web-based private commercial trade of reptiles to highlight the scope of the global reptile trade. We find that over 35% of reptile species are traded online. Three quarters of this trade is in species that are not covered by international trade regulation. These species include numerous endangered or range-restricted species, especially hotspots within Asia. Approximately 90% of traded reptile species and half of traded individuals are captured from the wild. Exploitation can occur immediately after scientific description, leaving new endemic species especially vulnerable. Pronounced gaps in regulation imply trade is having unknown impacts on numerous threatened species. Gaps in monitoring demand a reconsideration of international reptile trade regulations. We suggest reversing the status-quo, requiring proof of sustainability before trade is permitted. There are gaps in international efforts to monitor the wildlife trade, with many species potentially being undetected by the established monitoring groups. Here the authors use an automated web search to document the sale of reptiles online, revealing over 36% of all known reptile species are in trade, including many missing from official databases.

Ecosystems services (ES) assessment is a significant scientific topic recognized for its potential to address sustainability issues. However, there is an absence of science–policy frameworks in land use planning that lead to the ES science being used in policy. China’s Ecological Redline Policy (ERP) is one of the first national policies utilizing multiple ES, but there is no standardized approach for working across the science–policy interface. We propose a transdisciplinary framework to determine ecological redline areas (ERAs) in Shanghai using: ES, biodiversity and ecologically fragile hotspots, landscape structure, and stakeholder opinions. We determine the five criteria to identify ERAs for Shanghai using multi-temporal, high resolution images (0.5 m) and biophysical models. We examine ERP effectiveness by comparing land use scenarios for 2040. Compared to alternative land uses, ES increase significantly under the ERP. The inclusion of ES in spatial planning led stakeholders to increase terrestrial habitat protection by 174% in Shanghai. Our analysis suggests that strategic planning for ES could reduce tradeoffs between environmental quality and development. Ecosystem services, though a prominent ecological concept, have yet to be considered in major land use policy changes. Here, the authors demonstrate how the Ecological Redline Policy implemented in Shanghai utilized ecosystem services science and stakeholder engagement.

December 2022 finally saw the historic agreement of the Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KM‐GBF), a landmark framework that sets to halt and reverse global biodiversity loss by remedying the multifaceted drivers behind biodiversity declines around the planet. The KM‐GBF follows on from the Aichi targets, which aimed to prevent further biodiversity loss through a concerted effort between 2010 and 2020, but which were not successfully achieved. The KM‐GBF builds on the drivers of biodiversity losses rather than their outcomes and sets a suite of targeted and measurable actions to reconcile losses. Developing the framework faced considerable challenges, especially in the face of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and issues were often resolved at the very last moment. Consequently, compromises had to be made, useful elements were left out, or removed from the KM‐GBF to achieve consensus, and some will need to be reflected in other ways, or incorporated into indicators. The final agreed KM‐GBF includes 4 goals and 23 targets in addition to a package of annexes including a monitoring framework to set targets and benchmark progress. Particularly challenging issues included the flagship target of ‘30 × 30’ of protecting 30% of land, freshwater, coastal, and high‐sea in a representative way by 2030, which will require both new mechanisms and funding streams to enact effectively. Digital sequence information and funding mechanisms also presented major hurdles in the agreement of the KM‐GBF. Ultimately, the success of the new GBF depends on implementation and mainstreaming. New targets can only be achieved through the inclusion of all sectors, clear communication, and effective funding mechanisms to guide change and provide the means to implement it. Furthermore, while common but differentiated responsibility is crucial to implementation, impacts of inaction are disproportionate in developing economies, and more resources and support are needed to enable them to develop sustainably and meet targets. This highlights the urgent need for action if we are to achieve the new targets and secure a future for all life on earth. 2022年12月，昆明‐蒙特利尔全球生物多样性框架（简称“昆蒙框架”）终于达成历史性协议。这是一个具有里程碑意义的框架，旨在通过调控全球生物多样性下降背后的多方驱动因素，遏制和扭转全球生物多样性的丧失。“昆蒙框架” 是“爱知目标”的延续。“爱知目标”旨在 2010 至 2020 年间，通过共同努力防止生物多样性进一步丧失，但并未成功实现。“昆蒙框架”建立在生物多样性丧失的驱动因素而不是其结果的基础之上，并制定了一套有针对性、可量化的行动方案，来缓解生物多样性丧失。“昆蒙框架”的制定经历了相当大的挑战，尤其在Covid‐19疫情的影响下，问题往往到最后一刻才得以解决。因此，各方必须做出妥协。为达成共识，一些条款被删除，一些则通过其他方式来实现，或被纳入监测指标之中。最终商定的“昆蒙框架”包括4项长期目标和23项行动目标，以及相关一揽子文件，包括用于规划和报告的监测框架。特别具有挑战性的议题包括“30×30”旗舰目标，即到2030年，有效保护至少30%的陆地、内陆水域、海岸带和海洋区域，这将需要新的机制和资金流才能有效实现。数字序列信息和资助机制也是阻碍“昆蒙框架”达成一致的主要障碍。“昆蒙框架” 的成功与否将取决于其执行及主流化。只有通过所有部门的参与、清晰的沟通和有效的资金机制，以及推行实施变革的手段，才能实现新的目标。此外，虽然共同但有区别的责任对于实施“昆蒙框架”也至关重要，但发展中国家如未能履约将会带来很大的影响，需提供更多的资源和支持，帮助其可持续发展并实现目标。这表明我们需要采取紧迫行动，以实现“昆蒙框架”制定的新目标，共建地球生命共同体。 Practitioner points The Post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework provides a critical legacy for the future of conservation. Understanding the process, strengths and weaknesses will be crucial to its success. Based on this we can navigate how to move forward to help best fulfill these targets and pave the way for future initiatives. Understanding the structure of the Post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.

Spatial patterns of biodiversity are inextricably linked to their collection methods, yet no synthesis of bias patterns or their consequences exists. As such, views of organismal distribution and the ecosystems they make up may be incorrect, undermining countless ecological and evolutionary studies. Using 742 million records of 374 900 species, we explore the global patterns and impacts of biases related to taxonomy, accessibility, ecotype and data type across terrestrial and marine systems. Pervasive sampling and observation biases exist across animals, with only 6.74% of the globe sampled, and disproportionately poor tropical sampling. High elevations and deep seas are particularly unknown. Over 50% of records in most groups account for under 2% of species and citizen‐science only exacerbates biases. Additional data will be needed to overcome many of these biases, but we must increasingly value data publication to bridge this gap and better represent species' distributions from more distant and inaccessible areas, and provide the necessary basis for conservation and management.

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) marks one of the most ambitious environmental agreements of the 21st century. Yet despite the ambition, and the considerable change in approach since negotiating its predecessor (the 2025 Vision and Aichi targets), the many pressures, including working through a global pandemic mean that the final agreement, despite several years of delay, is weaker than might have been hoped for. The GBF provides a set of four goals, composed of 23 targets (and a series of supporting annexes) which explore the options for conservation, restoration and sustainable use of biodiversity, and the mobilisation of necessary resources to maintain life on Earth. In this perspective we systematically examine the composition of the GBF, exploring what the targets lack and what weaknesses exist in text. We also detail the link between the targets and the key indicators which can be used to track success toward fulfilling the targets. We offer key recommendations which could help strengthen the application of various targets, and show where the indicators could be improved to provide more detailed information to monitor progress. Furthermore, we discuss the association between targets and their indicators, and detail where indicators may lack the necessary temporal resolution or other elements. Finally, we discuss how various actors might better prepare for the successor to the GBF in 2030 and what has been learnt about the negotiating process, including lessons to help ensure that future agreements can circumnavigate issues which may have weakened the agreement.

As the biodiversity crisis continues, we must redouble efforts to understand and curb pressures pushing species closer to extinction. One major driver is the unsustainable trade of wildlife. Trade in internationally regulated species gains the most research attention, but this only accounts for a minority of traded species and we risk failing to appreciate the scale and impacts of unregulated legal trade. Despite being legal, trade puts pressure on wild species via direct collection, introduced pathogens, and invasive species. Smaller species-rich vertebrates, such as reptiles, fish, and amphibians, may be particularly vulnerable to trading because of gaps in regulations, small distributions, and demand of novel species. Here, we combine data from five sources: online web searches in six languages, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) trade database, Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) trade inventory, IUCN assessments, and a recent literature review, to characterise the global trade in amphibians, and also map use by purpose including meat, pets, medicinal, and for research. We show that 1215 species are being traded (17% of amphibian species), almost three times previous recorded numbers, 345 are threatened, and 100 Data Deficient or unassessed. Traded species origin hotspots include South America, China, and Central Africa; sources indicate 42% of amphibians are taken from the wild. Newly described species can be rapidly traded (mean time lag of 6.5 years), including threatened and unassessed species. The scale and limited regulation of the amphibian trade, paired with the triptych of connected pressures (collection, pathogens, invasive species), warrants a re-examination of the wildlife trade status quo, application of the precautionary principle in regard to wildlife trade, and a renewed push to achieve global biodiversity goals. In the last few decades, exotic pets have become much more common. In the UK in 2008, reptiles and amphibians were more popular than dogs, with over eight million in captivity. But while almost all pet cats and dogs are born and bred in captivity, exotic pets are often taken from the wild, putting species and their habitats at risk. An international trade agreement called the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) strives to prevent unsustainable animal trade. But to get CITES protection, species depend on data showing that wildlife trade threatens their survival. In addition, their range countries need to first propose them to be listed. For most wild animal species, there are no data on population size or population decline. In the case of amphibians, CITES regulates the trade of just 2.5% of species. This leaves the rest with no protection from overarching international trade regulations. To protect these animals, researchers need to find out which species are in trade, where they are coming from, and how many are already threatened. To address this, Hughes, Marshall and Strine combined data from five sources, including official CITES trade records, recent research and an online search for amphibian sales in six languages. The data showed evidence of trade in at least 1,215 amphibian species, representing 17% of all amphibians. The figure is three times higher than previous estimates. Of the species in trade, more than one in five is vulnerable to extinction, endangered, or critically endangered. For a further 100 of the traded species, data on population were unavailable. Moreover, analysis of the origins of traded individuals showed that around 42% came from the wild. Tropical parts of the world had the highest number of species in trade, but the data showed exchanges happening across the globe. Unsustainable wildlife trade can have devastating consequences for wild animals. It has already driven at least 21 reptile species to extinction, and data of amphibian species are unknown. To prevent further species going extinct, legal wildlife trade should follow the precautionary principle when it comes to wildlife trade. Rather than allowing people to trade a species until CITES regulates it, a blanket ban should come into force for species that have not been assessed or are threatened. Trade would be able to resume for a species only when assessments show that it would not cause major population decline, or secure, captive breeding facilities can be guaranteed.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) sets to create connections and build infrastructure across Eurasia, Asia, and parts of the African continent in its initial phase and is the largest infrastructure project of all time. Any infrastructure project on this scale will necessarily pass through ecofragile regions and key biodiversity areas (KBAs). This creates an imperative to identify possible areas of impact and probable effects on conservation values to facilitate adaptive planning and to mitigate, minimize, or avoid impacts. Using the highest resolution route maps of the BRI available, I overlaid the proposed road and rail routes on KBAs, protected areas, and predicted biodiversity hotspots for over 4138 animal and 7371 plant species. I also assessed the relationship between the proposed route with the distribution of mines across BRI countries and the proportion of deforestation and forest near routes. Infrastructure, especially mining, was clustered near the proposed route; thus, construction and development along the route may increase the size and number of mines. Up to 15% of KBAs were within 1 km of proposed railways. Thus, planned and probable development along the routes may pose a significant risk to biodiversity, especially because the majority of KBAs are unprotected. Many biodiversity hotspots for different taxa were near the route. These hotspots varied between taxa, making systematic management and environmental impact assessments an effective strategy for at least some taxa. A combination of planning and mitigation strategies will likely be necessary to protect the most important areas for biodiversity proximal to development, especially in currently unprotected KBAs and other regions that need protection. A fuller assessment of trade-offs between conservation and other values will be necessary to make good decisions for each project and site being developed, including potentially modifying parts of the route to minimize impacts. Modification or foregoing of infrastructure may be needed if stakeholders consider the conservation costs too high. La Iniciativa del Cinturón y Ruta (BRI, en inglés) de China busca crear conexiones y construir infraestructura a lo largo de Eurasia, Asia y partes del continente africano en su fase inicial y es el proyecto infraestructural más grande de todos los tiempos. Cualquier proyecto infraestructural a esta escala pasará obligatoriamente a través de regiones con fragilidad ecológica y áreas importantes para la biodiversidad (KBA, en inglés). Esto genera una necesidad por identificar las áreas de posible impacto y los efectos probables sobre los valores de conservación para facilitar la planeación adaptativa y mitigar, reducir o evitar los impactos. Usé los mapas de ruta de la BRI con la mayor resolución disponible para sobreponer las rutas propuestas de ferrocarriles y carreteras sobre las KBA, las áreas protegidas y los puntos calientes de biodiversidad pronosticados para más de 4138 especies de animales y 7371 especies de plantas. También evalué la relación entre la ruta propuesta con la distribución de minas a lo largo de los países en la BRI y la proporción de deforestación y bosques cerca de las rutas. La infraestructura, en especial la de minas, estuvo agrupada cerca de la ruta propuesta; por lo tanto, la construcción y el desarrollo a lo largo de la ruta podrían incrementar el tamaño y el número de minas. Hasta el 15% de las KBA estarían dentro de 1 km de distancia de las vías ferrocarrileras propuestas. Así, el desarrollo planeado y probable a lo largo de las rutas puede presentar un riesgo significativo para la biodiversidad, especialmente porque la mayoría de las KBA no está protegida. Muchos puntos calientes para la biodiversidad están cerca de la ruta. Estos puntos calientes variaron entre taxones, lo que hace que el manejo sistémico y las evaluaciones de impacto ambiental sean una estrategia efectiva para por lo menos algunos taxones. Una combinación de estrategias de planeación y mitigación probablemente será necesaria para proteger las áreas más importantes para la biodiversidad próximas al desarrollo, especialmente en las KBA que actualmente se encuentran sin protección y en otras regiones que requieren protección. Una evaluación más completa de compensaciones entre la conservación y otros valores será necesaria para tomar buenas decisiones para cada proyecto y sitio en desarrollo, incluyendo la potencial modificación de partes de la ruta para reducir los impactos. La modificación o renuncia a la infraestructura puede ser necesaria si los accionistas consideran que los costos de conservación son demasiado elevados. 中国的し带一路” 倡议(BRI)是有史以来规模最大的基础设施项目，其目标是在欧亚大，亚洲和非洲大 陆部分地区建立互联互通和基础设施建设。如此大规模的基础设施项目必定会经过生态脆弱区和生物多样性 重要区域，这就迫切需要确定可能对生物多祥性保护价值产生影响的区域和可能产生的影响，以便进行适应性 规划，尽量减轻、減少或者避免工程施工对生物多样性带来的不良影响。本文利用覆盖生物多祥性重要区域 (KBAs)和保护区拟建公路和铁路的\"一带一路, ,高分辨率路线图，预测沿线的生物多样性热点地区有超过4138 神动物和i y n 植物种类。本文还评估了 “ー带一路”沿线各国拟建路线上矿山的分布和路线附近毁林和森林 比例之间的关系。基础设施，特别是采矿业，成群分布在在拟建路线附近。因此，沿线的建设和开发可能会増加 矿山的规模和数量，而多达15%的KBAs就位于拟建铁路1 公里以内，从而，沿线规划和未来发展，也许会给当 地生物多祥性造成严重的影响。拥有许多不同类群的生物多样性热点地区都在这条路线附近，而其中还有许多 KBAs都还未受到保护，这些生物多样性热点在不同的类群之间存在差异，因此系统的管理和对环境影响进行 评估，至少对某些类群来说是ー种有效的策略o 为了保护近期开发最重要的生物多祥性地区，尤其是目前未受 到保护以及其他需要保护的地区，对其采取统筹规划和缓解措施将会是必要的策略。为了对每ー个正在开发的 项目和地点做出正确的决策，有必要对生物多祥性保护和其他各种价值之间的权衡进行更全面的评估，这包括需 要修改部分路线以尽量减少对生物与环境的影响。如果计划中的基础设施建设会造成严重的生物多样性丧失， 郵么就必须要重新考虑。

The study is conducted to facilitate conservation of migratory wader species along the East Asian-Australasian Flyway, particularly to 1) Identify hotspots of wader species richness along the flyway and effectively map how these might change between breeding, non-breeding and migratory phases; 2) Determine if the existing network of protected areas (PA) is sufficient to effectively conserve wader biodiversity hotspots along the EAAF; 3) Assess how species distribution models can provide complementary distribution estimates to existing BirdLife range maps. We use a species distribution modelling (SDM) approach (MaxEnt) to develop temporally explicit individual range maps of 57 migratory wader species across their annual cycle, including breeding, non-breeding and migratory phases, which in turn provide the first biodiversity hotspot map of migratory waders along the EAAF for each of these phases. We assess the protected area coverage during each migration period, and analyse the dominant environmental drivers of distributions for each period. Additionally, we compare model hotspots to those existing range maps of the same species obtained from the BirdLife Internationals' database. Our model results indicate an overall higher and a spatially different species richness pattern compared to that derived from a wader biodiversity hotspot map based on BirdLife range maps. Field observation records from the eBird database for our 57 study species confirm many of the hotspots revealed by model outputs (especially within the Yellow Sea coastal region), suggesting that current richness of the EAAF may have been underestimated and certain hotspots overlooked. Less than 10% of the terrestrial zones area (inland and coastal) which support waders are protected and, only 5% of areas with the highest 10% species richness is protected. The study results suggest the need for new areas for migratory wader research and conservation priorities including Yellow Sea region and Russian far-East. It also suggests a need to increase the coverage and percentage of current PA network to achieve Aichi Target 11 for Flyway countries, including giving stronger consideration to the temporal dynamics of wader migration.

International agreements aim to conserve 17% of Earth's land area by 2020 but include no area‐based conservation targets within the working landscapes that support human needs through farming, ranching, and forestry. Through a review of country‐level legislation, we found that just 38% of countries have minimum area requirements for conserving native habitats within working landscapes. We argue for increasing native habitats to at least 20% of working landscape area where it is below this minimum. Such target has benefits for food security, nature's contributions to people, and the connectivity and effectiveness of protected area networks in biomes in which protected areas are underrepresented. We also argue for maintaining native habitat at higher levels where it currently exceeds the 20% minimum, and performed a literature review that shows that even more than 50% native habitat restoration is needed in particular landscapes. The post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework is an opportune moment to include a minimum habitat restoration target for working landscapes that contributes to, but does not compete with, initiatives for expanding protected areas, the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (2021–2030) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Although 23% of Thailand’s land is in protected areas, these are vulnerable to climate change. We used spatial distribution modelling for 866 vertebrate and 591 plant species to understand potential climate change impacts on species in protected areas. Most mammals, birds, and plants were projected to decline by 2070, but most amphibians and reptiles were projected to increase. By 2070 under RCP8.5, 54% of modeled species will be threatened and 11 nationally extinct. However, SDMs are sensitive to truncation of the climate space currently occupied by habitat loss and hunting, and apparent truncation by data limitations. In Thailand, lowland forest clearance has biased records for forest-dependent species to cooler uplands (> 250 m a.s.l.) and hunting has confined larger vertebrates to well-protected areas. In contrast, available data is biased towards lowland non-forest taxa for amphibians and reptiles. Niche truncation may therefore have resulted in overestimation of vulnerability for some mammal and plant species, while data limitations have likely led to underestimation of the threat to forest-dependent amphibians and reptiles. In view of the certainty of climate change but the many uncertainties regarding biological responses, we recommend regular, long-term monitoring of species and communities to detect early signals of climate change impacts.