Search

The Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework was adopted by parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in December 2022. The aftermath of these negotiations provides an opportunity to draw lessons as to how ecological and evolutionary science can more effectively inform policy. We examined key challenges that limit effective engagement by scientists in the biodiversity policy process, drawing parallels with analogous challenges within global climate negotiations. Biodiversity is multifaceted, yet represents only one framing for nature's contributions to people, complicating the nexus between evidence and values in development of the framework's targets. Processes generating biodiversity and driving its loss are multiscalar, challenging development of an evidence base for globally standardized targets. We illustrated these challenges by contrasting development of 2 key elements of the framework. The genetic diversity element of the framework's target 4 is directly related to the framework's primary goals, but its complexity required development of novel engagement skills. The target for protected areas was easily communicated but more indirectly related to biodiversity outcomes; evidence from ecological and social science was essential to communicating the context and limitations of this relationship. Scientists can strengthen the effectiveness of global agreements and address challenges arising from complexity, scaling, capacity limitations, and the interplay of science and values, if they can prioritize communication, consensus‐building, and networking skills and engage throughout the process, from development of an evidence base to implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comprehensive biodiversity assessments play an essential role in strengthening global and national conservation strategies. The recently announced first U.S. National Nature Assessment (NNA) provides an unparalleled opportunity to comprehensively review status and trends of biodiversity at all levels. This broad context can help in the coordination of actions to conserve individual species and ecosystems. The scientific assessments that informed the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted at the 2022 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) conference of parties provide models for synthesizing information on trends at multiple levels of biodiversity, including decline in abundance and distribution of species, loss of populations and genetic diversity, and degradation and loss of ecosystems and their services. The assessments then relate these trends to data on drivers of biodiversity loss and pathways to their mitigation. The U.S. NNA can augment such global analyses and avoid the pitfalls encountered by previous U.S. efforts by ensuring policy‐relevant design, data accessibility, and inclusivity in process and product and by incorporating spatial data relevant to national and subnational audiences. Although the United States is not formally a CBD party, an effective NNA should take full advantage of the global context by including indicators adopted at the 2022 meeting and incorporating an independent review mechanism that supports periodic stocktaking and ratcheting up of ambition in response to identified shortfalls in stemming biodiversity loss. The challenges to design of an effective U.S. assessment are relevant globally as nations develop assessments and reporting to support the new global biodiversity framework's targets. By considering and incorporating the diverse ways in which society values and benefits from nature, such assessments can help bridge the gap between research and conservation practice and communicate the extent of the biodiversity crisis to the public, fostering broad‐based support for transformative change in humanity's relationship to the natural world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]