Related Articles

Achieving at-scale seascape restoration by optimising cross-habitat facilitative processes

Cross-habitat facilitative processes can enhance seascape restoration outcomes but there is uncertainty around the spatial dependencies of these processes across habitats. We synthesised the influence of environmental parameters on six processes underpinning cross-habitat facilitation and identified the linear distances over which they operate between habitats. All six process types occur at distances commonly used in seascape restoration demonstrating how harnessing facilitation can scale-up restoration to meet national and international goals.

Coastal wetland resilience through local, regional and global conservation

Coastal wetlands, including tidal marshes, mangrove forests and tidal flats, support the livelihoods of millions of people. Understanding the resilience of coastal wetlands to the increasing number and intensity of anthropogenic threats (such as habitat conversion, pollution, fishing and climate change) can inform what conservation actions will be effective. In this Review, we synthesize anthropogenic threats to coastal wetlands and their resilience through the lens of scale. Over decades and centuries, anthropogenic threats have unfolded across local, regional and global scales, reducing both the extent and quality of coastal wetlands. The resilience of existing coastal wetlands is driven by their quality, which is modulated by both physical conditions (such as sediment supply) and ecological conditions (such as species interactions operating from local through to global scales). Protection and restoration efforts, however, are often localized and focus on the extent of coastal wetlands. The future of coastal wetlands will depend on an improved understanding of their resilience, and on society’s actions to enhance both their extent and quality across different scales.

Successes and failures of conservation actions to halt global river biodiversity loss

To address the losses of river biodiversity worldwide, various conservation actions have been implemented to promote recovery of species and ecosystems. In this Review, we assess the effectiveness of these actions globally and regionally, and identify causes of success and failure. Overall, actions elicit little improvement in river biodiversity, in contrast with reports from terrestrial and marine ecosystems. This lack of improvement does not necessarily indicate a failure of any individual action. Rather, it can be attributed in part to remaining unaddressed stressors driving biodiversity loss; a poor match between the spatial scale of action and the scale of the affected area; and absence of adequate monitoring, including insufficient timescales, missing reference and control sites or insufficient selection of targeted taxa. Furthermore, outcomes are often not reported and are unevenly distributed among actions, regions and organism groups. Expanding from local-scale actions to coordinated, transformative, catchment-scale management approaches shows promise for improving outcomes. Such approaches involve identifying major stressors, appropriate conservation actions and source populations for recolonization, as well as comprehensive monitoring, relevant legislation and engaging all stakeholders to promote the recovery of river biodiversity.

Biodiversity offsets, their effectiveness and their role in a nature positive future

Biodiversity offsetting is a mechanism for addressing the impacts of development projects on biodiversity, but the practice remains controversial and its effectiveness generally poor. In the context of the Global Biodiversity Framework and the emergence of new approaches for mitigating damage, we need to learn from the past. In this Review, we explore biodiversity offsetting, its effectiveness and its future prospects, especially in relation to ‘nature positive’ goals. Offsets often fall short of their stated goal: to achieve at least no net loss of affected biodiversity. However, such failures are prominent because offsets have more explicit quantitative objectives than most other conservation approaches, whose effectiveness is also variable. These clear objectives provide the potential for the transparency that alternative approaches to addressing negative human impacts on biodiversity lack. Unfortunately, promising alternatives are scarce, so offsetting and offset-like mechanisms remain a necessary component of strategies to halt and reverse nature loss. However, improving their performance is essential. No quick and easy solution exists; instead, upholding best practice principles and rigorous implementation — including in the face of challenges from opposing narratives and interest groups — remains key.

Tracing inclusivity at UNFCCC conferences through side events and interest group dynamics

Inclusivity and transparency are the foundations of procedural justice in climate governance. However, concerns persist around the influence of business interest groups at United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conferences of Parties (COPs). COPs have increased in size and complexity, obscuring agendas and organizational relationships. Here we analyse the discourse and networks of actors at COP side events from 2003 to 2023 using machine learning-based topic modelling and social network analysis. We trace how discussions on energy, food and forests have evolved. Focusing on energy topics, we show that fossil fuel lobbyists gain COP access through developed-country business non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and developing-country governments. Their nominators focus on renewable energy and system approaches but are peripheral in the anti-fossil fuel discourse which grew from a collaborative network of environmental NGOs. Despite data availability challenges, systematically tracing the inclusivity of COP processes can uncover power dynamics at the highest levels of climate governance.

Responses

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *