The year 2030 is rapidly approaching. Building, monitoring, and reporting indicators to evaluate the 2030 targets in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is a major challenge that requires, at minimum, nations to assess their progress at least once within the next five years. To effectively capture this progress, we need indicators that capture fast-paced, on-the-ground biodiversity change, alongside slower, more diffuse biodiversity trends at national scales. We gathered a group of biodiversity scientists and practitioners to evaluate how well common types of indicators cover the space-time continuum of biodiversity changes. We highlight a striking, nearly unanimously agreed upon, gap in the available indicator toolbox in our ability to capture on-the-ground biodiversity changes. To fill this blank space, we call for investment in local-scale and short-term monitoring, research on how to optimize this monitoring for rapid detection, and urgent development of indicators at these more actionable scales.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jousse et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: