Search

Research infrastructures (RIs) are tools intended to be a fundamental pillar in producing knowledge regarding the functioning of Earth’s vital systems. However, it is unclear to what extent these instruments can help to deal with global biodiversity challenges. This paper presents the first assessment of the alignment between the services provided by environmental RIs, and the knowledge requested to address three specific Global Challenges concerning biodiversity loss at a global level: threatened species, alien species and ecosystem conservation. We characterized the specific needs and Subchallenges behind each Global Challenge. We also collected the services provided by 44 relevant environmental RIs in a standardized form. Then, we assessed to what extent those services are useful to address the challenges’ needs. Our results show that RIs, as a whole, are better suited to respond to species-related challenges than to challenges involving whole ecosystems. Nevertheless, the overlap among challenges’ needs is quite significant. Nearly half of the identified needs are shared between the ‘threatened species’ and the ‘ecosystem conservation’ challenges. Most of the assessed RIs work with multiple Earth System’s compartments at the same time (e.g. terrestrial + marine, terrestrial + freshwater, etc). Regarding the spatial extent of the studied RIs, most of the ecosystem-based RIs focus on the country scale, while most of the RIs specialized in species-related challenges work at a global scale. Considering the needs required to address the studied challenges, we have found that the RIs assessed in this study do not cover several of them. These gaps comprise complex data combinations that the studied RIs do not provide. Most of these gaps can be attributed to the ‘ecosystem conservation’ challenge. We consider that RIs were generally built to support pure basic research, which hampers their contribution to combat biodiversity loss. Because of the urgency to address global biodiversity challenges, we suggest adding new functionalities to make RIs work as problem-oriented facilities.

Anthropogenic pressures are causing a global decline in biodiversity. Successful attempts at biodiversity conservation requires an understanding of biodiversity patterns as well as the drivers and processes that determine those patterns. To deepen this knowledge, neoecologists have focused on studying present-day or recent historical data, while paleoecologists usually study long-term data through the composition of various biological proxies and environmental indicators. By establishing standard protocols or gathering databases, research infrastructures (RIs) have been instrumental to foster exchange and collaboration among scientists within neoecology (e.g. Global Information Biodiversity Facility or National Ecological Observatory Network) and paleoecology (e.g. Paleobiology Database, Neotoma Paleoecology Database or European Pollen Database). However, these two subdisciplines (and their RIs) have traditionally remained segregated although both provide valuable information that combined can improve our understanding of biodiversity drivers and underlying processes, as well as our predictions of biodiversity responses in the future. For instance, integrative studies between paleo- and neoecology have addressed the global challenge of biodiversity loss by validating climate and ecological models, estimating species fundamental niches, understanding ecological changes and trajectories, or establishing baseline conditions for restoration. Supporting and contributing to research infrastructures from both paleo- and neoecology, as well as their further integration, could boost the amount and improve the quality of such integrative studies. We argue this will enable improved capabilities to anticipate the impacts of global change and biodiversity losses. To boost such integration and illustrate our arguments, we (1) review studies integrating paleo- and neoecology to advance in the light of global changes challenge, (2) describe RIs developed in paleoecology, and (3) discuss opportunities for further integration of RIs from both disciplines (i.e. paleo- and neoecology).

Many Mediterranean coastal areas encounter similar problems and gaps between science, governance, and implementation of sustainable management at local-regional scales. There is often a lack of coordination between management of inland and coastal areas, and a lack of integrated land-sea data and knowledge exchange to support transitions towards sustainable development and synergies between rural and coastal areas. In this paper, we illustrate the main challenges to reach a sustainable development of coastal-rural areas related to data availability, knowledge exchange and governance, which could be tackled by coupling regional and international research infrastructures (RIs) with scientific and stakeholder collaboration networks to facilitate knowledge exchange and co-creation of solutions. We first identified the main challenges in sustainable development of coastal-rural areas followed by a review of major existing RIs, scientific knowledge and collaboration networks that can help support integrated management of Mediterranean coastal zones. Based on this, we developed recommendations for a better integration of RIs and collaboration networks in the management of coastal-rural areas, including (1) the creation of local networks to facilitate periodical meetings between all sectors involved and to connect science and policy actors and (2) setting up local RIs that support the data processing and the use of regional and international RIs by scientists and policy stakeholders.

There is currently a lack of representative, systematic and harmonised greenhouse gas (GHG) observations covering the variety of natural and human-altered biomes that occur in Africa. This impedes the long-term assessment of the drivers of climate change, in addition to their impacts and feedback loops at the continental scale, but also limits our understanding of the contribution of the African continent to the global carbon (C) cycle. Given the current and projected transformation of socio-economic conditions in Africa (i.e. the increasing trend of urbanisation and population growth) and the adverse impacts of climate change, the development of a GHG research infrastructure (RI) is needed to support the design of suitable mitigation and adaptation strategies required to assure food, fuel, nutrition and economic security for the African population. This paper presents the initial results of the EU-African SEACRIFOG project, which aims to design a GHG observation RI for Africa. The first stages of this project included the identification and engagement of key stakeholders, the definition of the conceptual monitoring framework and an assessment of existing infrastructural capacity. Feedback from stakeholder sectors was obtained through three Stakeholder Consultation Workshops held in Kenya, Ghana and Zambia. Main concerns identified were data quality and accessibility, the need for capacity building and networking among the scientific community, and adaptation to climate change, which was confirmed to be a priority for Africa. This feedback in addition to input from experts in the atmospheric, terrestrial and oceanic thematic areas, facilitated the selection of a set of ‘essential variables’ that need to be measured in the future environmental RI. An inventory of 47 existing and planned networks across the continent allowed for an assessment of the current RIs needs and gaps in Africa. Overall, the development of a harmonised and standardised pan-African RI will serve to address the continent’s primary societal and scientific challenges through a potential cross-domain synergy among existing and planned networks at regional, continental and global scales.