Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water

  • Martin Jung*
  • , Andy Arnell
  • , Xavier de Lamo
  • , Shaenandhoa García-Rangel
  • , Matthew Lewis
  • , Jennifer Mark
  • , Cory Merow
  • , Lera Miles
  • , Ian Ondo
  • , Samuel Pironon
  • , Corinna Ravilious
  • , Malin Rivers
  • , Dmitry Schepaschenko
  • , Oliver Tallowin
  • , Arnout van Soesbergen
  • , Rafaël Govaerts
  • , Bradley L. Boyle
  • , Brian J. Enquist
  • , Xiao Feng
  • , Rachael Gallagher
  • Brian Maitner, Shai Meiri, Mark Mulligan, Gali Ofer, Uri Roll, Jeffrey O. Hanson, Walter Jetz, Moreno Di Marco, Jennifer McGowan, D. Scott Rinnan, Jeffrey D. Sachs, Myroslava Lesiv, Vanessa M. Adams, Samuel C. Andrew, Joseph R. Burger, Lee Hannah, Pablo A. Marquet, James K. McCarthy, Naia Morueta-Holme, Erica A. Newman, Daniel S. Park, Patrick R. Roehrdanz, Jens Christian Svenning, Cyrille Violle, Jan J. Wieringa, Graham Wynne, Steffen Fritz, Bernardo B.N. Strassburg, Michael Obersteiner, Valerie Kapos, Neil Burgess, Guido Schmidt-Traub, Piero Visconti*
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Biodiversity and Natural Resources Program (BNR)
  • International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg
  • United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre
  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
  • Department of Zoology
  • University of Cambridge
  • Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
  • University of Connecticut
  • Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
  • Botanic Gardens Conservation International
  • Siberian Federal University
  • University of Arizona
  • Department of Geography
  • Florida State University
  • Department of Biological Sciences
  • Macquarie University
  • Department of Geography
  • King's College London
  • School of Zoology
  • Tel Aviv University
  • Sede Boqer Campus
  • Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
  • University of Porto
  • Yale University
  • Center for Biodiversity and Global Change
  • Global Mammal Assessment Program
  • University of Rome La Sapienza
  • The Nature Conservancy
  • Columbia University
  • School of Geography
  • University of Tasmania
  • CSIRO
  • Department of Biology
  • University of Kentucky
  • Conservation International
  • Subtidal Ecology Laboratory
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
  • Instituto de Ecología y Biodiversidad
  • Santa Fe Institute
  • Instituto de Sistemas Complejos de Valparaíso (ISCV)
  • Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research
  • Centre for Macroecology
  • University of Copenhagen
  • Purdue University
  • Center for Biodiversity Dynamics in a Changing World (BIOCHANGE)
  • Aarhus University
  • Université de Montpellier
  • Naturalis Biodiversity Center
  • World Resources Institute
  • Rio Conservation and Sustainability Science Centre
  • Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro
  • International Institute for Sustainability
  • Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia
  • Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
  • Botanical Garden Research Institute of Rio de Janeiro
  • University of Oxford
  • UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

351 Scopus citations

Abstract

To meet the ambitious objectives of biodiversity and climate conventions, the international community requires clarity on how these objectives can be operationalized spatially and how multiple targets can be pursued concurrently. To support goal setting and the implementation of international strategies and action plans, spatial guidance is needed to identify which land areas have the potential to generate the greatest synergies between conserving biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people. Here we present results from a joint optimization that minimizes the number of threatened species, maximizes carbon retention and water quality regulation, and ranks terrestrial conservation priorities globally. We found that selecting the top-ranked 30% and 50% of terrestrial land area would conserve respectively 60.7% and 85.3% of the estimated total carbon stock and 66% and 89.8% of all clean water, in addition to meeting conservation targets for 57.9% and 79% of all species considered. Our data and prioritization further suggest that adequately conserving all species considered (vertebrates and plants) would require giving conservation attention to ~70% of the terrestrial land surface. If priority was given to biodiversity only, managing 30% of optimally located land area for conservation may be sufficient to meet conservation targets for 81.3% of the terrestrial plant and vertebrate species considered. Our results provide a global assessment of where land could be optimally managed for conservation. We discuss how such a spatial prioritization framework can support the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1499-1509
Number of pages11
JournalNature Ecology and Evolution
Volume5
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2021

Funding

FundersFunder number
Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
University of Arizona
Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca
Villum Fonden6108-00078B, 16549
Russian Science Foundation19-77-30015
National Science Foundation1913673
H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions746334
Australian Research CouncilDE170100208

    UN SDGs

    This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

    1. SDG 13 - Climate Action
      SDG 13 Climate Action
    2. SDG 15 - Life on Land
      SDG 15 Life on Land

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Areas of global importance for conserving terrestrial biodiversity, carbon and water'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this