Back

Limiting the loss of terrestrial ecosystems to safeguard nature for biodiversity and humanity

Simmonds, J. S.; Suarez-Castro, A. F.; Reside, A. E.; Watson, J. E. M.; Allan, J. R.; Borrelli, P.; Dudley, N.; Edwards, S.; Fuller, R. A.; Game, E. T.; Linke, S.; Maxwell, S. L.; Panagos, P.; Puydarrieux, P.; Quetier, F.; Runting, R. K.; Santini, T.; Sonter, L. J.; Maron, M.

2021-02-08 ecology
10.1101/2021.02.07.428694 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Humanity is on a pathway of unsustainable loss of the natural systems upon which we, and all life, rely. To date, global efforts to achieve internationally-agreed goals to reduce carbon emissions, halt biodiversity loss, and retain essential ecosystem services, have been poorly integrated. However, these different goals all rely on preserving natural ecosystems. Here, we show how to unify these goals by empirically deriving spatially-explicit, quantitative area-based targets for the retention of natural terrestrial ecosystems. We found that at least 67 million km2 of Earths natural terrestrial ecosystems (~79% of the area remaining) require retention - via a combination of strict protection but more prominently through sustainably managed land use regimes complemented by restoration actions - to contribute to biodiversity, climate, soil and freshwater objectives under four United Nations Resolutions. This equates to retaining natural ecosystems across ~50% of the total terrestrial (excluding Antarctica) surface of Earth. Our results show where retention efforts could be focussed to contribute to multiple goals simultaneously. The retention targets concept that we present explicitly recognises that such management can and should co-occur alongside and be driven by the people who live in and rely on places where natural and semi-natural ecosystems remain on Earth.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.