首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Using decision science to evaluate global biodiversity indices
Authors:Kate E Watermeyer  Gurutzeta Guillera-Arroita  Payal Bal  Michael J Burgass  Lucie M Bland  Ben Collen  Chris Hallam  Luke T Kelly  Michael A McCarthy  Tracey J Regan  Simone Stevenson  Brendan A Wintle  Emily Nicholson
Institution:1. Deakin University, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Centre for Integrative Ecology, Burwood, VIC, 3125 Australia;2. School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia;3. Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Silwood Park Campus, Ascot, SL5 7PY U.K.;4. Deakin University, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Centre for Integrative Ecology, Burwood, VIC, 3125 Australia

School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia

Lucie Bland Editing, 1–3 Theobald Street, Thornbury, VIC, 3071 Australia;5. Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, Department of Genetic, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT U.K.;6. School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia;7. School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia

ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072 Australia;8. School of BioSciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3010 Australia

Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Heidelberg, VIC, 3084 Australia;9. Quantitative and Applied Ecology, School of Biosciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010 Australia

Abstract:Global biodiversity indices are used to measure environmental change and progress toward conservation goals, yet few indices have been evaluated comprehensively for their capacity to detect trends of interest, such as declines in threatened species or ecosystem function. Using a structured approach based on decision science, we qualitatively evaluated 9 indices commonly used to track biodiversity at global and regional scales against 5 criteria relating to objectives, design, behavior, incorporation of uncertainty, and constraints (e.g., costs and data availability). Evaluation was based on reference literature for indices available at the time of assessment. We identified 4 key gaps in indices assessed: pathways to achieving goals (means objectives) were not always clear or relevant to desired outcomes (fundamental objectives); index testing and understanding of expected behavior was often lacking; uncertainty was seldom acknowledged or accounted for; and costs of implementation were seldom considered. These gaps may render indices inadequate in certain decision-making contexts and are problematic for indices linked with biodiversity targets and sustainability goals. Ensuring that index objectives are clear and their design is underpinned by a model of relevant processes are crucial in addressing the gaps identified by our assessment. Uptake and productive use of indices will be improved if index performance is tested rigorously and assumptions and uncertainties are clearly communicated to end users. This will increase index accuracy and value in tracking biodiversity change and supporting national and global policy decisions, such as the post-2020 global biodiversity framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Keywords:Aichi targets  assessment  criteria  decision science  indicator  measurement  monitoring  SDG  ciencias de la decisión  criterios  evaluación  indicador  medida  monitoreo  objetivos de Aichi  SDG  评估  决策科学  测量  监测  爱知目标  可持续发展目标  标准  指标
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号