![https://zenodo.org/badge/217191201.svg]

Preliminary global assessment of pressures and protection of Ecosystem Functional Groups

Citation:

This source code is work in progress

David A. Keith, Jose R. Ferrer-Paris, Emily Nicholson, ..., Nicholas J. Murray

‘The challenge of assessing change in Earth’s ecosystems’

(to do)

The IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology

The IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology (version 2.1) has been published and has a dedicated webpage. The new typology comprises six hierarchical levels to support applications across global to local scales. The three upper levels classify ecosystems based on their functional characteristics, irrespective of species composition. The three lower levels of classification distinguish functionally similar ecosystems from one another based on compositional resemblance and enable integration of established classifications already in use and incorporated into policy infrastructure at national levels. This is crucial, as important conservation action occurs at local levels, where most expertise resides.

The typology is based on an explicit theoretical framework with contributions from an extensive global network of ecosystem experts. It differs from the IUCN Habitats Classification Scheme, designed to characterize habitats of individual species rather than ecosystem processes. Version 2.1 includes a set of systematic profiles describing the key ecological traits, functional processes and global distribution of biomes and ecosystem functional groups throughout the biosphere. You can browse the typology at the official site. The typology applies the same classificatory framework and underlying model to ecosystems across marine, freshwater, terrestrial and subterranean environments.

Policy context

The conservation and management of ecosystems has never been more central to the future of biodiversity and human well-being on Earth. The CBD Aichi targets and UN Sustainable Development Goals mandate global action that depends directly or indirectly on ecosystem assessment. The CBD post-2020 agenda also focusses heavily on ecosystem conservation.

Information infrastructure to support these global policy initiatives is developing rapidly, including the UN System of Environmental-Economic Accounting – Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA), and listing criteria for both the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems (RLE) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA), among several other tools. All initiatives, their overarching policy framework, and several other activities require a standardized, globally consistent, spatially explicit typology and terminology for managing the world’s ecosystems and their services.

We selected examples across different realms to show how the knowledge on ecosystem function can be used to assess decline in extent and degradation of environmental and ecological conditions, and the effect of protective action on mitigating these trends.

Methods

We undertook preliminary spatial analysis to examine the degradation and protection of selected Ecosystem Functional Groups (EFGs, Level 3 of the global ecosystem typology) across terrestrial, freshwater and marine realms of the biosphere. For each example, we focused on available spatio-temporal indicators related to key ecosystem properties and ecological drivers and highlight the relationship to other elements and processes that can not be accounted for with existing data. This analysis only addresses a subset of pressures causing decline and degradation.

Here we focus on following examples:

Terrestrial realm
- T1 biome
  - T1.3
- T2 biome
  - T2.1
- T4 biome
  - T4.1
- T5 biome
  - T5.5
- T6 biome
  - T6.5
Marine realm
- M1 biome ?
  - Seagrass? Kelp?
- M2 biome
  - M2.5 Sea ice
Marine Terrestrial transitional
- MT2 biome
  - MT2.2
Freshwater realm
- ???

We considered three criteria for assessing trends: declines in ecosystem extent, degradation of environmental conditions and disruption of biotic processes. For each example with focused on one criterion:

T1.3 : extent T2.1 : extent / abiotic degradation a T4.1 : biotic disruption T5.5 : abiotic degradation T6.5 : abiotic degradation M2.5 : extent MT2.2 : biotic disruption MFT1.2 : extent?

We adapted each analysis to the particular defining ecosystem features and suggest the use of tailored approach for future in depth assessments.

References

Keith, David A., José R. Ferrer-Paris, Emily Nicholson, Melanie J. Bishop, Beth A. Polidoro, Eva Ramirez-Llodra, Mark G. Tozer, Jeanne L. Nel, Ralph Mac Nally, Edward J. Gregr, Kate E. Watermeyer, Franz Essl, Don Faber-Langendoen, Paul S. Giller, Belinda Robson, Janet Franklin, Caroline E. R. Lehmann, Andres Etter, Dirk J. Roux, Jonathan S. Stark, Jessica A. Rowland, Neil A. Brummitt, Ulla C. Fernandez-Arcaya, Iain M. Suthers, Thomas M. Iliffe, Vasilis Gerovasileiou, Troy S. Sakihara, Susan K. Wiser, Ian Donohue, Leland J. Jackson, R. Toby Pennington, Christy Linardich, Nathalie Pettorelli, Angela Andrade, Tytti Kontula, Arild Lindgaard, Teemu Tahvanainan, Aleks Terauds, Oscar Venter, James E. M. Watson, Michael A Chadwick, Nicholas J. Murray, Justin Moat, Patricio Pliscoff, Richard T. Corlett, Kenneth R. Young, Matthew S. McGlone, Richard T. Williams, Javier Loidi, Jeremy Russell-Smith, David Gibson, David J. Eldridge, Alexandre M. B. Anesio, Christian H. Körner, Richard Harper, Patrick W. Bogaart, P. Bhanumati, Monica Sharma, Grant C. Hose, Brett C. Gonzalez, David Brankovits, Alejandro Martínez García, Megan Lamson, Barbara Seidel, Dena M. Sedar, Scott Santos, Justin Havird, Jane A. Catford, Mark C. Rains, Kenneth Irvine, Angela H. Arthington, Mary Kelly-Quinn, Stefan Bertilsson, J. Tim Hollibaugh, Alan Channing, Martin J Siegert, Catherine Reidy Liermann, Malcom Beveridge, Thomas S. Bianchi, Ryan J. Woodland, Katherine A. Dafforn, Sarah L. McSweeney, Nick A. Cutler, Robert J. Orth, Andrew H. Altieri, Sergio Rossi, Charles R. C. Sheppard, Stephen E. Swearer, Ryan R. Rykaczewski , Lynne J. Shannon, Imants G. Priede, Tracey T. Sutton, Jeremy T. Claisse, Alicia T.R. Acosta, Paul E. Carnell, Tasman P. Crowe, Louise B. Firth, Neil D. Burgess, Sylvia E. Hay, Lila García, Irene Zager, Lucie M. Bland, Richard T. Kingsford (2020) The IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology v2.0: Descriptive profiles for Biomes and Ecosystem Functional Groups. International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Gland.

Keith, David A., Ferrer-Paris, Jose R., Nicholson, Emily, Bishop, Melanie J., Polidoro, Beth A., Ramirez-Llodra, Eva, … Kingsford, Richard T. (2020). Indicative distribution maps for Ecological Functional Groups - Level 3 of IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology (Version 2.0.0) [Data set]. Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3546513