A global biodiversity monitoring initiative could combine national data sources to address gaps in the coverage of ecosystem and species observations, researchers have said.

Uncertainty in assessing biodiversity changes could thwart efforts to meet the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) targets, a study by two professors at Canada’s University of McGill, Andrew Gonzalez and Brian Leung, has warned.

“Information about biodiversity change is geographically patchy, and our estimates of trends in biodiversity and ecosystem metrics are uncertain,” said the study, recently published on Science Advances.

“Most locations with data have been sampled at only a single point in time, precluding calculation of biodiversity change for these points. Even where populations are monitored over time, uncertainty can be high regarding the true underlying trends.”

According to Gonzalez and Leung, flawed monitoring could lead to misguided conservation efforts and hamper the GBF target of protecting 30% of land and sea by 2030.

LOW RESOLUTION

The researchers underscored the limitations of initiatives such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) and the Ocean Biodiversity Information System (OBIS), which are global data repositories for biodiversity covering areas such as invasive species control and conservation investment decisions.

“GBIF and OBIS cover less than 7% of the world’s surface at five kilometres resolution, and less than 1% for most taxa at higher resolutions,” the study said.

They warned against an overreliance on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species, already dubbed incomplete by a separate study published last year.

While 150,000 species have been assessed in the index, this only represents a small fraction of the total number of species worldwide, Gonzalez and Leung said.

“At this time, we do not know how much more monitoring capacity is needed to obtain accurate and robust estimates of change, and to guide future monitoring.”

“Our analyses … suggests that in many countries … we may not be able to tell whether our conservation actions are achieving the reversal of declining trends desired by the goals and targets of the GBF.”

FILL THE GAPS

To address this challenge, the researchers proposed creating a global biodiversity observing system (GBiOS) fostering collaboration between national, subnational, and regional biodiversity observation networks (BONs).

BONs combine data on seas, soils, forests, and species to assess a country’s biodiversity status.

While some regional networks already bring together national BONs – such as the Asia Pacific BON and the EU-funded EuropaBON – a global framework is needed to bridge data gaps on species and ecosystems, researchers argued.

“A global biodiversity observing system collecting data across a network of monitoring sites worldwide could be designed to fill the geographic and taxonomic gaps in our knowledge of biodiversity change, and reduce uncertainties over time.”

“Further, systematic sampling in GBiOS could help ensure that observed trends are representative of overall biodiversity changes.”

The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) called for a global nature-related public data facility last August. In a previous interview with Carbon Pulse, Gonzalez welcomed the TNFD proposal but said it needs to go further by including technology and people.

By Sergio Colombo – sergio@carbon-pulse.com

*** Click here to sign up to our twice-weekly biodiversity newsletter ***