The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES): progress and next steps

Biodiversity and the services ecosystems provide have built the foundation of human civilization and provide for the welfare of people. With the increase of the human population it has become clearer than ever that the human exploitation of our natural resources leads to detrimental interactions between ecological and sociological systems. Only concerted and global actions will be able to reverse ongoing biodiversity loss. In response to these needs, the United Nations agreed the establishment of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) in 2010. Here, we report on the progress IPBES has made since its inception, and suggest how the scientific community can engage with this important science-policy interface.     

A conceptual framework for urban ecological restoration and rehabilitation

Urban greenspace has gained considerable attention during the last decades because of its relevance to wildlife conservation, human welfare, and climate change adaptation. Biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation worldwide require the formation of new concepts of ecological restoration and rehabilitation aimed at improving ecosystem functions, services, and biodiversity conservation in cities. Although relict sites of natural and semi-natural ecosystems can be found in urban areas, environmental conditions and species composition of most urban ecosystems are highly modified, inducing the development of novel and hybrid ecosystems. A consequence of this ecological novelty is the lack of (semi-) natural reference systems available for defining restoration targets and assessing restoration success in urban areas. This hampers the implementation of ecological restoration in cities. In consideration of these challenges, we present a new conceptual framework that provides guidance and support for urban ecological restoration and rehabilitation by formulating restoration targets for different levels of ecological novelty (i.e., historic, hybrid, and novel ecosystems). To facilitate the restoration and rehabilitation of novel urban ecosystems, we recommend using established species-rich and well-functioning urban ecosystems as reference. Such urban reference systems are likely to be present in many cities. Highlighting their value in comparison to degraded ecosystems can stimulate and guide restoration initiatives. As urban restoration approaches must consider local history and site conditions, as well as citizens’ needs, it may also be advisable to focus the restoration of strongly altered urban ecosystems on selected ecosystem functions, services and/or biodiversity values. Ecosystem restoration and rehabilitation in cities can be either relatively inexpensive or costly, but even expensive measures can pay off when they effectively improve ecosystem services such as climate change mitigation or recreation. Successful re‐shaping and re-thinking of urban greenspace by involving citizens and other stakeholders will help to make our cities more sustainable in the future.     

Land use intensification alters ecosystem multifunctionality via loss of biodiversity and changes to functional composition

Global change, especially land‐use intensification, affects human well‐being by impacting the delivery of multiple ecosystem services (multifunctionality). However, whether biodiversity loss is a major component of global change effects on multifunctionality in real‐world ecosystems, as in experimental ones, remains unclear. Therefore, we assessed biodiversity, functional composition and 14 ecosystem services on 150 agricultural grasslands differing in land‐use intensity. We also introduce five multifunctionality measures in which ecosystem services were weighted according to realistic land‐use objectives. We found that indirect land‐use effects, i.e. those mediated by biodiversity loss and by changes to functional composition, were as strong as direct effects on average. Their strength varied with land‐use objectives and regional context. Biodiversity loss explained indirect effects in a region of intermediate productivity and was most damaging when land‐use objectives favoured supporting and cultural services. In contrast, functional composition shifts, towards fast‐growing plant species, strongly increased provisioning services in more inherently unproductive grasslands.     

生物多样性与生态系统服务——关系、权衡与管理

生物多样性和生态系统服务是人类生存和社会经济可持续发展的物质基础,应对生物多样性丧失和生态系统服务退化问题已经成为继气候变化之后的又一个全球性环境热点问题。生物多样性是生态系统生产力、稳定性、抵抗生物入侵以及养分动态的主要决定因素,生物多样性越高,生态系统功能性状的范围越广,生态系统服务质量就越高越稳定。目的是探讨生物多样性和生态系统服务之间的关系:(1)明确了生物多样性与生态系统过程、功能、服务之间的关系;(2)生物多样性在生态系统服务中的角色:生物多样性在不同的空间尺度通过各种形式的运行机制与生态系统服务产生联系,生物多样性是生态系统过程的调节者,是巩固生态系统服务的一个重要因素,生物多样性也是一种终极的生态系统服务,并在遗传和物种水平上直接贡献了其利益和价值;(3)生物多样性与生态系统服务权衡和协同关系的研究可以更好的帮助管理人员做出有利的决策和保护工作,也是制定规划和适应策略以减少生物多样性危机带来的不利影响的基础;(4)生物多样性与生态系统服务的关系在不同的时间和空间尺度上是不恒定的,有必要共同确定生态系统服务和生物多样性的空间格局,以有效和可持续的进行生态系统管理;(5)虽然生物多样性保护和生态系统管理还存在许多不确定性,但相关理论应该在管理、保护和恢复生态系统中发挥重要作用。研究提出了进一步研究的领域,以促进生物多样性保护和生态系统服务提供之间的协同作用。希望对相关领域的研究有所帮助。     

生物多样性监测指标体系构建研究进展

生物多样性监测是为确定与预期标准相一致或相背离的程度,而对生物多样性进行定期或不定期的监视,目前已成为生物多样性研究和保护的热点问题。生物多样性监测指标则是一些简化的生物或环境特征参数,说明生物多样性现状和变化趋势,以及人类活动压力对生物多样性的影响,以促进科学界、政府和公众间的沟通,提高生物多样性管理水平。近10年来,国际组织、政府机构和各国学者对生物多样性指标体系的构建进行了大量的探索工作,取得了很多进展,其中有些指标已经应用于实际监测项目。本文综述了生物多样性监测指标筛选的一般标准和指标体系构建的主要理论,梳理目前已提出或应用的主要生物多样性监测指标,以期为我国构建国家或区域尺度生物多样性监测指标体系提供参考。在此基础上分析提出：生物多样性概念的泛化、指标含义模糊以及知识和数据的缺乏是构建生物多样性监测指标的主要困难。我国未来的生物多样性监测指标体系构建需要关注以下两个方面：（1）紧密联系实际,构建适应性的监测指标体系,加强对典型生态系统区域的监测;（2）发展经济社会发展方面的指标,分析生物多样性变化的驱动力,为生物多样性保护和区域可持续发展提供科学依据。     

Forest biodiversity,ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services

Forests are critical habitats for biodiversity and they are also essential for the provision of a wide range of ecosystem services that are important to human well-being. There is increasing evidence that biodiversity contributes to forest ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services. Here we provide a review of forest ecosystem services including biomass production, habitat provisioning services, pollination, seed dispersal, resistance to wind storms, fire regulation and mitigation, pest regulation of native and invading insects, carbon sequestration, and cultural ecosystem services, in relation to forest type, structure and diversity. We also consider relationships between forest biodiversity and multifunctionality, and trade-offs among ecosystem services. We compare the concepts of ecosystem processes, functions and services to clarify their definitions. Our review of published studies indicates a lack of empirical studies that establish quantitative and causal relationships between forest biodiversity and many important ecosystem services. The literature is highly skewed; studies on provisioning of nutrition and energy, and on cultural services, delivered by mixed-species forests are under-represented. Planted forests offer ample opportunity for optimising their composition and diversity because replanting after harvesting is a recurring process. Planting mixed-species forests should be given more consideration as they are likely to provide a wider range of ecosystem services within the forest and for adjacent land uses. This review also serves as the introduction to this special issue of Biodiversity and Conservation on various aspects of forest biodiversity and ecosystem services.     

Plant diversity enhances provision of ecosystem services: A new synthesis

Biodiversity is known to play a fundamental role in ecosystem functioning and thus may positively influence the provision of ecosystem services with benefits to society. There is a need for further understanding of how specific components of biodiversity are affecting service provision. In this context, terrestrial plants are a particularly important component of biodiversity and one for which a wealth of information on biodiversity–ecosystem functioning relationships is available. In this paper, we consider terrestrial plants as providers of ecosystem services and analyze whether manipulating plant diversity has an effect on the magnitude of ecosystem service provision using a meta-analysis of 197 effect sizes and a vote-counting analysis of 361 significance tests. The results of these analyses are compared with those of a previous meta-analysis that included a wide diversity of service providers. We produce a synthesis table to explicitly link plants as service providers to indicators of ecosystem properties and these to ecosystem services. By focusing on only plants, we found a clear positive effect of biodiversity on six out of eight services analyzed (provisioning of plant products, erosion control, invasion resistance, pest regulation, pathogen regulation and soil fertility regulation). When controlling for pseudoreplication (repeated records from single studies), we found that four of the six positive effects remained significant; only pest regulation and soil fertility showed non-significant effects. Further expanding our basis for inference with the vote-counting analysis corroborated these results, demonstrating that quantitative meta-analysis and vote-counting methods are both useful methods to synthesize biodiversity–ecosystem service studies. Notwithstanding the restricted number of identified services, our results point to the importance of maintaining plant diversity to ensure and increased provision of ecosystem services which benefit human well-being.     

Developing a flexible learning activity on biodiversity and spatial scale concepts using open‐access vegetation datasets from the National Ecological Observatory Network

Biodiversity is a complex, yet essential, concept for undergraduate students in ecology and other natural sciences to grasp. As beginner scientists, students must learn to recognize, describe, and interpret patterns of biodiversity across various spatial scales and understand their relationships with ecological processes and human influences. It is also increasingly important for undergraduate programs in ecology and related disciplines to provide students with experiences working with large ecological datasets to develop students’ data science skills and their ability to consider how ecological processes that operate at broader spatial scales (macroscale) affect local ecosystems. To support the goals of improving student understanding of macroscale ecology and biodiversity at multiple spatial scales, we formed an interdisciplinary team that included grant personnel, scientists, and faculty from ecology and spatial sciences to design a flexible learning activity to teach macroscale biodiversity concepts using large datasets from the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON). We piloted this learning activity in six courses enrolling a total of 109 students, ranging from midlevel ecology and GIS/remote sensing courses, to upper‐level conservation biology. Using our classroom experiences and a pre/postassessment framework, we evaluated whether our learning activity resulted in increased student understanding of macroscale ecology and biodiversity concepts and increased familiarity with analysis techniques, software programs, and large spatio‐ecological datasets. Overall, results suggest that our learning activity improved student understanding of biological diversity, biodiversity metrics, and patterns of biodiversity across several spatial scales. Participating faculty reflected on what went well and what would benefit from changes, and we offer suggestions for implementation of the learning activity based on this feedback. This learning activity introduced students to macroscale ecology and built student skills in working with big data (i.e., large datasets) and performing basic quantitative analyses, skills that are essential for the next generation of ecologists.     

How to value biodiversity in environmental management?

Biodiversity is globally recognised as a cornerstone of healthy ecosystems, and biodiversity conservation is increasingly becoming one of the important aims of environmental management. Evaluating the trade-offs of alternative management strategies requires quantitative estimates of the costs and benefits of their outcomes, including the value of biodiversity lost or preserved. This paper takes a decision-analytic standpoint, and reviews and discusses the alternative aspects of biodiversity valuation by dividing them into three categories: socio-cultural, economic, and ecological indicator approaches. We discuss the interplay between these three perspectives and suggest integrating them into an ecosystem-based management (EBM) framework, which permits us to acknowledge ecological systems as a rich mixture of interactive elements along with their social and economic aspects. In this holistic framework, socio-cultural preferences can serve as a tool to identify the ecosystem services most relevant to society, whereas monetary valuation offers more globally comparative and understandable values. Biodiversity indicators provide clear quantitative measures and information about the role of biodiversity in the functioning and health of ecosystems. In the multi-objective EBM approach proposed in the paper, biodiversity indicators serve to define threshold values (i.e., the minimum level required to maintain a healthy environment). An appropriate set of decision-making criteria and the best method for conducting the decision analysis depend on the context and the management problem in question. Therefore, we propose a sequence of steps to follow when quantitatively evaluating environmental management against biodiversity.     

Integrative freshwater ecology and biodiversity conservation

Freshwater ecosystems provide goods and services of critical importance to human societies, yet they are among the most heavily altered ecosystems with an overproportional loss of biodiversity. Major threats to freshwater biodiversity include overexploitation, water pollution, fragmentation, destruction or degradation of habitat, and invasions by non-native species. Alterations of natural flow regimes by man-made dams, land-use changes, river impoundments, and water abstraction often have profound impacts on lotic communities. An understanding of the functional interactions and processes in freshwater ecosystems presents a major challenge for scientists, but is crucial for effective and sustainable restoration. Most conservation approaches to date have considered single species or single level strategies. In contrast, the concept of ‘Integrative Freshwater Ecology and Biodiversity Conservation’ (IFEBC) proposed herein addresses the interactions between abiotic and biotic factors on different levels of organization qualitatively and quantitatively. It consequently results in a more holistic understanding of biodiversity functioning and management. Core questions include modeling of the processes in aquatic key habitats and their functionality based on the identification and quantification of factors which control the spatial and temporal distribution of biodiversity and productivity in aquatic ecosystems. The context and importance of research into IFEBC is illustrated using case studies from three major areas of research: (i) aquatic habitat quality and restoration ecology, (ii) the genetic and evolutionary potential of aquatic species, and (iii) the detection of stress and toxic effects in aquatic ecosystems using biomarkers. In conclusion, our understanding of the functioning of aquatic ecosystems and conservation management can greatly benefit from the methodological combination of molecular and ecological tools.     

IPBES框架下的生物多样性和生态系统服务区域评估及政策经验

生物多样性和生态系统服务为人类的生计和良好的生活质量奠定了重要基础。然而, 越来越多的研究表明, 生物多样性和生态系统服务在全球范围内的持续下降使自然对人类的贡献大幅降低。多尺度评估能够说明不同尺度下生物多样性的现状, 有利于制定适合区域特点、符合国情的决策建议。2013年12月, 生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学政策平台(Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, IPBES)通过第一轮工作方案, 决定开展“区域/次区域生物多样性和生态系统服务评估”(简称“区域评估”), 即评估亚洲-太平洋(简称亚太)、美洲、非洲以及欧洲-中亚四大地理区域的生物多样性和生态系统服务。区域评估报告及其决策者摘要已在IPBES第六次全体会议上(2018年3月, 哥伦比亚麦德林)审议通过。本文概述了四大地理区域的生物多样性的重要性、生物多样性保护领域取得的进展、面临的主要危机和机遇, 探讨了评估对其他国际进程的影响, 综合分析了各区域生物多样性和生态系统服务的特点以及各区域评估结果的差别, 总结了评估的政策经验, 以期为中国的生物多样性保护提供科学参考。     

The MAES process in Italy: Contribution of vegetation science to implementation of European Biodiversity Strategy to 2020

Abstract

Target 2 of the European Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, whose aim was to maintain and restore ecosystems and their services, deals in practical terms with the mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services, with the development of green infrastructure and with halting the loss of biodiversity at the EU, national, and subnational levels. The aim of this short communication was to show the activities currently being carried out in Italy that are related to this target, focusing on the contribution of vegetation science skills to the national implementation process. In particular, we outline noteworthy inputs in ecosystem mapping, in the assessment of ecosystem conservation status, in the individuation of priorities for the restoration of ecosystems, and in the settingup of an ecological framework to promote green infrastructure. An overview of the process outcomes and their relevance within the national and international contexts is also provided.     

Examining the Links between Biodiversity and Human Health: An Interdisciplinary Research Initiative at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment, the agency seeks to conduct research on the structure and function of ecosystems and to improve our understanding of the processes that contribute to the sustained health of the nation’s ecosystems and the well-being of human populations. Changes in biodiversity can profoundly impact the ability of ecosystems to provide clean water, energy, food, recreation, and other services that contribute to human well-being. In addition, changes in biodiversity can affect the transmission of infectious disease to humans, particularly vectorborne diseases such as malaria and Lyme disease. The Environmental Protection Agency’s new initiative supports interdisciplinary research to characterize the mechanisms that link biodiversity and human health and to use this knowledge to develop integrative tools and approaches for quantifying and predicting these relationships. Research on these links can have an important impact on our view of biodiversity and how we manage resources to protect human and ecosystem health. Disclaimer: This work was funded in part under Grant #CX3-832328 with the American Association for the Advance of Science (AAAS). The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the Environmental Protection Agency.     

Biodiversity mitigates trade-offs among species functional traits underpinning multiple ecosystem services

Biodiversity loss and its effects on humanity is of major global concern. While a growing body of literature confirms positive relationships between biodiversity and multiple ecological functions, the links between biodiversity, ecological functions and multiple ecosystem services is yet unclear. Studies of biodiversity–functionality relationships are mainly based on computer simulations or controlled field experiments using only few species. Here, we use a trait-based approach to integrate plant functions into an ecosystem service assessment to address impacts of restoration on species-rich grasslands over time. We found trade-offs among functions and services when analysing contributions from individual species. At the community level, these trade-offs disappeared for almost all services with time since restoration as an effect of increased species diversity and more evenly distributed species. Restoration to enhance biodiversity also in species-rich communities is therefore essential to secure higher functional redundancy towards disturbances and sustainable provision of multiple ecosystem services over time.     

Human transformation of ecosystems: Comparing protected and unprotected areas with natural baselines

Protected areas serve as reserves of biological diversity and conserve the naturalness of characteristic regional ecosystems. Numerous approaches have been applied to estimate the level of transformation of ecosystems and to compare trends inside and outside of protected areas. In this study, we apply aggregate indicators of anthropogenic pressures on ecosystems and biodiversity in a fine-scale spatial analysis to compare the level of human influence within protected and unprotected areas. The actual state of ecosystems is compared to a natural baseline that is intact or potential natural state. The results show that in a non-protected Central-European landscape, humans appropriate a considerable share of natural ecosystem productivity and carbon stocks, and significantly reduce natural biodiversity and ecosystem services. Human appropriation of net primary production reached more than 60% in total, humans reduced original biodiversity levels by 69%, and net carbon storage was considerably decreased by intensive types of land use. All three indicators significantly differed between protected areas and unprotected areas, suggesting that protected areas maintain higher biodiversity levels, store more carbon and are in total less influenced by human exploitation than average non-protected landscape. Furthermore, we bring evidence that human appropriation of net primary production is negatively related both to biodiversity and ecosystem services indicated by mean species abundance and net carbon storage at the national level. Our results contribute to the quantitative evidence of the impacts of anthropogenic transformation of natural ecosystems on the ecosystem condition, supporting the hypothesis that protected areas significantly reduce anthropogenic pressures and contribute to maintaining critical ecosystem services and biodiversity.     

系统保护规划的理论、方法及关键问题

为了减缓生物多样性丧失的趋势、将有限的保护资源用于关键区域,Margules等提出了系统保护规划(Systematic Conservation Planning)概念和方法,目前该方法已成为国际主流保护规划方法。与传统基于专家决策的保护体系规划方法不同,系统保护规划拥有量化的保护目标、保护成本,并综合考虑保护体系连通性、人为干扰因素,使用优化算法计算,从而获得空间明晰的生物多样性保护体系。在阐述规划理念、规划流程与方法的基础上,重点评述了生物多样性替代指标的选择、保护规划成本的计算、保护目标的设置、规划结果的可靠性评估等关键问题,并结合我国的具体情况,探讨了该方法在我国的应用前景,以期为推进我国生物多样性与生态服务功能的保护做出贡献。     

生物多样性与生态系统服务情景模拟研究进展

生物多样性和生态系统服务情景模拟是指对未来生物多样性和生态系统服务变化轨迹的定量估计,二者相互关联并为长期、稳定的保护和恢复生态系统提供了重要科学依据。梳理生物多样性以及生态系统服务预测情景的核心观点,讨论基于生物多样性和生态系统服务情景模拟的保护决策支持途径,以期服务于我国生物多样性与生态系统服务预测研究的发展和深化。研究凝练结果如下：物种分布模型需要进行更规范的评价以明晰其对具体对象的适用性,生态系统预测模型亟待在关系结构的基础上嵌入更多的生态系统过程和社会经济过程,生态系统服务评估模型有必要强化对生物多样性、生态系统服务、人类福祉级联特征的刻画;全球气候变化驱动了未来区域生物多样性的大幅改变;土地利用则是陆地生态系统服务预测中的核心驱动变量。生态区划与区域尺度情景模拟、景观尺度下的生态安全格局构建、基于社会生态网络的社区适应三点重要展望方向将对基于情景模拟的我国生态系统保护决策提供重要的理论和实践支持。     

不同生态恢复方式下生态系统服务与生物多样性恢复效果的整合分析

全球范围内关键生态系统服务的减少使人类社会面临巨大的威胁,生物多样性是生态系统提供各种产品和服务的基础。生态恢复工程对退化的生态系统服务和生物多样性进行修复,对于缓解人类环境压力具有非常重要的意义。长期的理论和实践工作形成了多种生态恢复措施:(1)单纯基于生态系统自我设计的自然恢复方式,(2)人为设计对环境条件进行干预,反馈影响生态系统的自我设计,(3)人为设计对目标种群和生态系统进行直接干预和重建。这3类恢复方式可以在不同程度上定向的影响生态系统的恢复进程,反映了人类对生态系统的低度、中度和高度介入。哪种恢复方式和介入程度能够实现更好的恢复效果,是生态恢复学中的一个关键问题,但到目前为止,虽广有争议,却无定量的分析和结论。针对这个空白,通过对ISI Web of Knowledge数据库中生态恢复相关文献的整合分析,基于数学统计的方法定量比较在不同条件下低度介入(自然恢复)、中度介入(环境干预)和高度介入(直接干预)3种恢复方式对生态系统服务与生物多样性的恢复效果。论文从4个方面展开研究:(1)低度、中度、高度介入生态恢复方式的划分,(2)比较3大类介入方式对生态系统服务和生物多样性恢复效果的差异,(3)不同气候条件、生态系统类型和恢复时间等背景因素的影响,(4)生物多样性恢复和生态系统服务恢复之间的关系。研究结果揭示了不同生态恢复方式的适用条件,以及对生物多样性和生态系统恢复相互关系的作用,对生态恢复实践中恢复方式的选择有指导作用。对未来的研究也有启示意义,如针对特定生态系统服务或具体研究问题进一步探索低度、中度和高度介入生态恢复方式的作用规律和机制;将地区的社会经济水平、生态系统的受损程度等因素纳入生态恢复方式的考察,以最优化生态恢复成本-效率等。     

The urgency of building global capacity for biodiversity science

The biodiversity sciences represent the disciplines of whole-organism biology, including systematics, ecology, population biology, behaviour and the fields of comparative biology. The biodiversity sciences are critically important to society because it is knowledge of whole-organisms that is essential for managing and conserving the world's species. Because of an acceleration in environmental degradation and global biodiversity loss in recent decades, the need for the biodiversity sciences has never been more urgent. Yet, biodiversity science is not well supported relative to other fields of science, and thus the need for knowledge about organisms and their environment is far outstripping biologists' ability to provide it. National and international capacity for biodiversity science must therefore be increased substantially. Each nation should establish a national biodiversity research programme coordinated across all government agencies. An international biodiversity research programme should also be established, perhaps with an organizational structure that parallels the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme. Biodiversity scientists must assume a leadership role in educating the public and bringing about policy changes that will enhance our understanding of the world's species and their ecosystems.     

Towards a global terrestrial species monitoring program

The Convention on Biological Diversity's strategic plan lays out five goals: “(A) address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society; (B) reduce the direct pressures on biodiversity and promote sustainable use; (C) improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity; (D) enhance the benefits to all from biodiversity and ecosystem services; (E) enhance implementation through participatory planning, knowledge management and capacity building.” To meet and inform on the progress towards these goals, a globally coordinated approach is needed for biodiversity monitoring that is linked to environmental data and covers all biogeographic regions. During a series of workshops and expert discussions, we identified nine requirements that we believe are necessary for developing and implementing such a global terrestrial species monitoring program. The program needs to design and implement an integrated information chain from monitoring to policy reporting, to create and implement minimal data standards and common monitoring protocols to be able to inform Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs), and to develop and optimize semantics and ontologies for data interoperability and modelling. In order to achieve this, the program needs to coordinate diverse but complementary local nodes and partnerships. In addition, capacities need to be built for technical tasks, and new monitoring technologies need to be integrated. Finally, a global monitoring program needs to facilitate and secure funding for the collection of long-term data and to detect and fill gaps in under-observed regions and taxa. The accomplishment of these nine requirements is essential in order to ensure data is comprehensive, to develop robust models, and to monitor biodiversity trends over large scales. A global terrestrial species monitoring program will enable researchers and policymakers to better understand the status and trends of biodiversity.