The 196 parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) will soon agree to a post-2020 global framework for conserving the three elements of biodiversity (genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity) while ensuring sustainable development and benefit sharing. As the most significant global conservation policy mechanism, the new CBD framework has far-reaching consequences- it will guide conservation actions and reporting for each member country until 2050. In previous CBD strategies, as well as other major conservation policy mechanisms, targets and indicators for genetic diversity (variation at the DNA level within species, which facilitates species adaptation and ecosystem function) were undeveloped and focused on species of agricultural relevance. We assert that, to meet global conservation goals, genetic diversity within all species, not just domesticated species and their wild relatives, must be conserved and monitored using appropriate metrics. Building on suggestions in a recent Letter in Science (Laikre et al., 2020) we expand argumentation for three new, pragmatic genetic indicators and modifications to two current indicators for maintaining genetic diversity and adaptive capacity of all species, and provide guidance on their practical use. The indicators are: 1) the number of populations with effective population size above versus below 500, 2) the proportion of populations maintained within species, 3) the number of species and populations in which genetic diversity is monitored using DNA-based methods. We also present and discuss Goals and Action Targets for post-2020 biodiversity conservation which are connected to these indicators and underlying data. These pragmatic indicators and goals have utility beyond the CBD; they should benefit conservation and monitoring of genetic diversity via national and global policy for decades to come. ; Supplementary material: Tables S1 and S2 and Fig. S1 compile estimates of Ne/Nc from several reviews and new data. ; The EU Framework Horizon 2020 through the ...
Despiteincreasingscientificunderstandingoftheglobalenvironmentalcrisis,westruggletoadoptthepolicies sciencesuggestswouldbeeffective.Oneofthereasonsforthatisthelackofinclusiveengagementanddialogue among a wide range of different actors. Furthermore, there is a lack of consideration of differences between languages, worldviews and cultures. In this paper, we propose that engagement across the science-policy interfacecanbe strengthenedby beingmindfulofthebreadthanddepthofthediversehuman-naturerelations found around the globe. By examining diverse conceptualizations of "nature" in more than 60 languages, we identify three clusters: inclusive conceptualizations where humans are viewed as an integral component of nature; non-inclusiveconceptualizationswhere humansareseparate fromnature; anddeifyingconceptualizationswherenatureisunderstoodandexperiencedwithinaspiritualdimension. Consideringandrespectingthisrichrepertoireofwaysofdescribing,thinkingaboutandrelatingtonature canhelpuscommunicateinwaysthatresonateacrossculturesandworldviews.Thisrepertoirealsoprovidesa resource we can draw on when defining policies and sustainability scenarios for the future, offering opportunitiesforfindingsolutionstoglobalenvironmentalchallenges. ; Peer reviewed
