BON in a Box: An Open and Collaborative Platform for Biodiversity Monitoring, Indicator Calculation, and Reporting.

Satellite remote sensing (SRS) provides huge potential for tracking progress towards conservation targets and goals, but SRS products need to be tailored towards the requirements of ecological users and policymakers. In this viewpoint article, we propose to advance SRS products with a terrestrial biodiversity focus for tracking the goals and targets of the Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework (GBF). Of 371 GBF biodiversity indicators, we identified 58 unique indicators for tracking the state of terrestrial biodiversity, spanning 2 goals and 8 targets. Thirty-six shared enough information to analyse their underlying workflows and spatial information products. We used the concept of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBV) to connect spatial information products to different dimensions of biodiversity (e.g. species populations, species traits, and ecosystem structure), and then counted EBV usage across GBF goals and targets. Combined with published scores on feasibility, accuracy, and immaturity of SRS products, we identified a priority list of terrestrial SRS products representing opportunities for scientific development in the next decade. From this list, we suggest two key directions for advancing SRS products and workflows in the GBF context using current instruments and technologies. First, existing terrestrial ecosystem distributions and live cover fraction SRS products (of above-ground biomass, ecosystem fragmentation, ecosystem structural variance, fraction of vegetation cover, plant area index profile, and land cover) need to be refined using a co-design approach to achieve harmonized ecosystem taxonomies, reference states and improved thematic detail. Second, new SRS products related to plant physiology and primary productivity (e.g. leaf area index, chlorophyll content & flux, foliar N/P/K content, and carbon cycle) need to be developed to better estimate plant functional traits, especially with deep learning techniques, radiative transfer models and multi-sensor frameworks. Advancements along these two routes could greatly improve the tracking of GBF target 2 (‘improve connectivity of priority terrestrial ecosystems), target 3 (‘ensure management of protected areas’), target 6 (‘control the introduction and impact of invasive alien species’), target 8 (‘minimize impact of climate change on biodiversity’), target 10 (‘increase sustainable productivity of agricultural and forested ecosystems’) and target 12 (‘increase public urban green/blue spaces’). Such improvements can have secondary benefits for other EBVs, e.g. as predictor variables for modelling species distributions and population abundances (i.e. data that are required in several GBF indicators). We hope that our viewpoint stimulates the advancement of biodiversity monitoring from space and a stronger collaboration among ecologists, SRS scientists and policy experts.

<p>Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) are harmonized biodiversity variables and their asssociated measurements needed for developing indicators of global biodiversity change. EBVs can serve the important purpose of aligning biodiversity monitoring efforts, much as Essential Climatic Variables (ECVs) help align allied efforts in climate science. One of six initially proposed EBV classes is devoted to species' traits, since traits form the crucial link between the evolutionary history of organisms, their assembly into communities, and the nature and dynamic functioning of ecosystems. Despite their importance, prevalence, and scientific promise, the biodiversity community is still developing the conceptual, informatics, technical, and legal frameworks required for the large scale implementation and uptake. As part of an international consortium called GLOBIS-B, and in coordination with the The Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON; geobon.org), we report on recent efforts to synthesize current efforts in trait data collection and trait datasets, computational workflows, ways to standardize data and metadata, and assessments of the openness and accessibility of existing species trait datasets. Members of the GLOBIS-B (www.globis-b.eu/) consortium also produced a set of candidate EBVs within the broader trait class ('Phenology', 'Organism morphology', 'Reproduction', 'Physiology' and 'Movement'). In this presentation, we begin by introducing the concept of EBVs, the current working definition of traits in the context of the EBV process, and workflows that have been developed for other EBV classes ('Species Populations') and the importance of standardizing EBV classes and the trait class, in particular. Building on this introduction, we discuss how the EBV concept is operationalized, focusing on workflows for trait integration, and the importance of data and metadata standards,following work from Kissling et al. 2017 (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.12359/full). On the legal front, we suggest that the Creative Commons (CC) framework provides effective tools for designating legally interoperable and open data, especially when trait data are in the public domain (CC0, CC PDM) or assigned with a CC BY license, and metadata citation and other forms of attribution are available in both human and machine-readable form. We also suggest how EBVs can inform policy at national and global scales. Moving forward, renewed efforts of repeated trait data collection as well as standardised protocols for data and metadata collection are needed to improve the empirical basis of species traits EBVs. Moreover, open data as well as computational workflows are required for comprehensively assessing progress towards conservation policy targets and sustainable development goals. We conclude with a call to action for the TDWG community to consider their role in further developing, implementing, and scaling biodiversity monitoring under the EBV framework.</p>

The central aim of this workshop was to bring together and engage scientists and policy makers in a transparent dialogue on transformative change. Taking up respective work of the Convention on Biological Diversity on the process towards the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, participants discussed options on how to translate principles of transformative change into actions, goals, targets and pathways for the new global biodiversity framework. The workshop attracted more than 150 participants from 48 different countries.

Taking stock of nature: Essential biodiversity variables explained

The concept of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) for monitoring changes in biodiversity and tracking policy goals has substantially advanced in the last decade. I synthesize crucial information for developing an integrated European-wide biodiversity monitoring framework using EBVs to better inform environmental policies. This includes an overview of which EBVs have been prioritized for a modern and efficient European biodiversity observation network (Junker et al. 2023) and how these EBVs link to the EU policy framework and to different types of monitoring methods (Kissling et al. 2024). Generating EBVs requires designing and developing workflows for integrating primary observations from multiple data streams into aggregated and harmonized datasets that can then be modelled to derive spatially explicit EBV products with a specific spatial and temporal resolution (Kissling et al. 2018, Fernández et al. 2020). This requires information on data collection and sampling, data integration, and modelling for each EBV (Fig. 1). data collection and sampling, data integration, and modelling for each EBV (Fig. 1). To achieve this at a European scale, an improved data coverage, enhanced transnational coordination, adoption of advanced monitoring technologies, and a digital infrastructure with open data and interoperable standards is needed (Kissling et al. 2024, Moersberger et al. 2024, Morán-Ordóñez et al. 2023, Santana et al. 2023). To develop an effective EU-wide spatial sampling design, existing monitoring sites need to be incorporated, and spatial gaps need to be filled to achieve a broad representation of European biodiversity. This can be accomplished by combining a stratified random selection of sites (e.g. grid cells) across Europe with local sampling designs that consider randomisation, replication and stratification and co-location of monitoring activities using various field survey methods (Kissling et al. 2024). This can ensure a representative sampling across different environments, human impacts and policy or management interventions. Close collaborations between ecologists, data scientists, monitoring practitioners, and national and EU bodies, and the adoption of open science practices and FAIR guiding principles will be crucial to advance EBV implementation at a continental scale. This will support the establishment of a European Biodiversity Observation Coordination Centre (EBOCC) that is proposed for the coordination of monitoring activities and data management across Europe (Liquete et al. 2024).

Tropical forests host at least two-thirds of the world’s flora and fauna diversity and store 25% of the terrestrial above and belowground carbon. However, biodiversity decline due to deforestation and forest degradation of tropical forest is increasing at an alarming rate. Biodiversity dynamics due to natural and anthropogenic disturbances are mainly monitored using established field survey approaches. However, such approaches appear to fall short at addressing complex disturbance factors and responses. We argue that the integration of state-of-the-art monitoring approaches can improve the detection of subtle biodiversity disturbances and responses in changing tropical forests, which are often data-poor. We assess the state-of-the-art technologies used to monitor biodiversity dynamics of changing tropical forests, and how their potential integration can increase the detail and accuracy of biodiversity monitoring. Moreover, the relevance of these biodiversity monitoring techniques in support of the UNCBD Aichi targets was explored using the Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) as a framework. Our review indicates that although established field surveys were generally the dominant monitoring systems employed, the temporal trend of monitoring approaches indicates the increasing application of remote sensing and in -situ sensors in detecting disturbances related to agricultural activities, logging, hunting and infrastructure. The relevance of new technologies (i.e., remote sensing, in situ sensors, and DNA barcoding) in operationalising EBVs (especially towards the ecosystem structure, ecosystem function, and species population classes) and the Aichi targets has been assessed. Remote sensing application is limited for EBV classes such as genetic composition and species traits but was found most suitable for ecosystem structure class. The complementarity of remote sensing and emerging technologies were shown in relation to EBV candidates such as species distribution, net primary productivity, and habitat structure. We also developed a framework based on the primary biodiversity attributes, which indicated the potential of integration between monitoring approaches. In situ sensors are suitable to help measure biodiversity composition, while approaches based on remote sensing are powerful for addressing structural and functional biodiversity attributes. We conclude that, synergy between the recent biodiversity monitoring approaches is important and possible. However, testing the suitability of monitoring methods across scales, integrating heterogeneous monitoring technologies, setting up metadata standards, and making interpolation and/or extrapolation from observation at different scales is still required to design a robust biodiversity monitoring system that can contribute to effective conservation measures.

Pollution derived from hazardous chemicals and waste has emerged as a critical yet comparatively underexamined driver of global biodiversity loss. Increasing evidence demonstrates that exposure to persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals, pesticides, mismanaged waste, etc., adversely affects species survival, ecosystem function, and genetic diversity. However, the scientific and policy responses to these stressors remain fragmented across multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and global governance processes. This assessment studies the role of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm (BRS) Conventions, the Global Framework on Chemicals (GFC), and other international agreements in supporting the implementation of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), with a focus on mechanisms to prevent, monitor and mitigate pollution impacts on biodiversity.The analysis draws upon the 2025 joint BRS-GFC report on their contributions to the GBF targets, a comparative policy mapping against GBF indicators and ongoing collaborative work between biodiversity and chemicals and waste MEAS and International frameworks. In parallel, current work under the GFC’s measurability process is reviewed, examining proposed methodological approaches and indicator frameworks designed to quantify biodiversity benefits arising from improved chemicals and waste management. Particular attention is given to integrative approaches for identifying priority chemicals of concern, assessing exposure pathways and ecosystem-level impacts, and aligning regulatory and technical interventions across multiple actors.Findings indicate that these international frameworks directly support the GBF implementation, particularly interventions related to mitigating pollution impacts, promoting sustainable production and consumption, enhancing knowledge and capacity for informed decision-making, and management and conservation efforts. Moreover, the emerging measurability framework under the GFC provides a basis for developing harmonized global indicators capable of capturing reductions in chemical pressures and associated positive biodiversity outcomes. Furthermore, collaboration with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) demonstrates the potential for cross-regime policy coherence through shared guidance development, integrated technical assistance, and coordinated negotiation inputs.This assessment underscores the importance of integrating chemicals and waste governance into biodiversity policy processes and highlights opportunities for improved scientific collaboration, data harmonization, and implementation coordination. Strengthened alignment across MEAs, reinforced by coherent indicators and shared policy instruments, may significantly enhance the effectiveness of global efforts to halt and reverse biodiversity loss driven by pollution.

The preparation of a new global framework for the post-2020 period occupied a central place in the intergovernmental negotiations on biodiversity from 2018 to 2022. The framework had to be adopted at the fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP 15) to the Convention on Biological Diversity. This article presents a critical analysis of COP 15 based on a recount of past biodiversity governance initiatives at the global scale, a review of the negotiations held from 2018 to 2022, and a comparison of the expectations and results of the conference. The objective is to offer a critical appraisal of COP 15 based on interviews realized during and after the conference with experts and practitioners, as well as a review of the scientific literature and official documentation. The appraisal raises four main critics pertaining to the limits of the targets, governance tools, text clarity, and the approach to the new global framework. The results contribute to the reflection on biodiversity governance, the evaluation of international negotiations, and the discussions on the operationalization and implementation of the new global biodiversity framework.

The concept of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) was conceived to study, report, and manage biodiversity change. The EBV netCDF structure was developed in order to support publication and interoperability of biodiversity data. This standard is based on the Network Common Data Format (netCDF). Additionally, it follows the Climate and Forecast Conventions (CF, version 1.8) and the Attribute Convention for Data Discovery (ACDD, version 1.3). The standard allows several datacubes per netCDF file (see Fig. 1). These cubes have four dimensions: longitude, latitude, time and entity, whereby the last dimension can, for example, encompass different species or groups of species, ecosystem types or other aspects. The usage of hierarchical groups enables the coexistence of multiple EBV cubes (see Fig. 2). The first level (netCDF group) are scenarios, e.g., the modelling for different Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) scenarios. The second level (netCDF group) are metrics, e.g., the percentage of protected area per pixel and its proportional loss over a certain time span per pixel. All metrics are repeated per scenario, if any are present. The result is a rather complex raster dataset (see example dataset in Fig. 3). This is where the ebvcube R package comes into play. This R package enables scientists to create their own netCDFs in the EBV cube standard. Its functionality covers the creation, opening/reading and visualizing the EBV netCDFs. The ebvcube package is part of the overall EBV infrastructure and works together with the EBV Data Portal. Users can work with the downloaded EBV netCDFs or upload their own EBV netCDFs to the portal. Generally, the package aims to condense the output for the users and assist in the understanding of the file structure to overcome the complexity. The output is reduced to the necessary information, e.g., not displaying coordinate variables or any technical attributes. Moreover, functionality for a quick data exploration is implemented.

I. Why do we need to consider biodiversity and education?The Earth is currently facing a triple planetary crisis-climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution and waste (UNEP 2024).Addressing these interconnected challenges and accelerating progress toward solutions is essential for a sustainable future.In addition, the United Nations has declared the years 2021 to 2030 as the "UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration" (UNEP & FAO 2021).These trends underscore the urgency of recognizing biodiversity as one of the world's most pressing global issues.Adopted in 2022, the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) presents a new international roadmap to halt biodiversity loss and place nature on a path to recovery by 2030commonly referred to as achieving "nature positive" (CBD 2022).Biodiversity loss is now widely recognized as a global concern, and has been ranked among the top long-term risks by the World Economic Forum (World Economic Forum 2025).Within the GBF, education is given one of the central roles.The framework states: "Implementation of the Framework requires transformative, innovative and transdisciplinary education, formal and informal, at all levels" (CBD 2022).Education is emphasized across multiple sections, including the action targets, implementation considerations, and sections on communication and awareness, underscoring its critical importance.Most recently, at the Convention on Biological Diversity's COP16 held in October 2024, the development of "the Global Plan of Action for Education on Biodiversity" was formally adopted.The plan is currently being developed under the UNESCO and other international partners, underscoring the growing global prioritization of biodiversity education.Transformative education is also seen as a driver of broader societal change.According to the IPBES Transformative Change Assessment, "Transformative change is urgent, necessary and challenging -but possible" (IPBES 2024).Facilitating the sharing of knowledge and practices among educators can help catalyze collaborative action.Considering this international context, it is essential to rethink the relationship between biodiversity and education and to strengthen efforts toward achieving a nature-positive future.Because biodiversity and education are deeply influenced by local ecosystems and cultural contexts, respecting these differences while pursuing shared global objectives is essential.This special issue brings together contributions from educators and researchers working across Asia, exploring the diverse intersections of biodiversity and education in their respective regional contexts.

Using essential biodiversity variables (EBVs) as a framework for coordination between research and monitoring networks: a case study with phenology

Effective decision-making on biodiversity restoration would greatly benefit from baseline data on intraspecific genetic diversity, the ability to integrate it across species for each location, and efficient systems for monitoring changes of genetic diversity in response to management interventions and environmental dynamics. This requires large sets of well-curated information-rich FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) Digital Objects (FDOs; Schultes and Wittenburg 2019), implemented as, for instance, Digital Extended Specimens (DES), which are representing digitized field samples, their derived genomic data and associated information (Hardisty et al. 2022). These use-case-driven sets of structured (meta)data from many providers need to be merged, modified and further extended on demand. Existing workflows and work environments have to be redesigned to accelerate this process and achieve seamless integration to be able to scale to the needs of efficient and effective worldwide monitoring under the United Nations Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Contributing to data and infrastructure development processes in support of global monitoring is also the global effort to generate high-quality reference genomes. The Earth BioGenome communities, including the European Reference Genome Atlas (ERGA) and Biodiversity Genomics Europe (BGE) communities, drive the development of standardization and harmonization for well-designed sampling and comprehensive FAIR and CARE (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics) (meta)data (Buzan et al. 2025). Their goal is reproducible analytical pipelines that can be assembled on the fly for implementing sophisticated statistical approaches and algorithms. Such research-focused pipelines prepare the development and application of globally adopted workflow templates for the calculation of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs). These templates are under development within the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON) (Lumbierres et al. 2025). Their output can be used for globally aligned and interpretable planning, monitoring, reporting and reviewing (see CBD/COP/16/L.33). Achieving global agreement on a (small) set of jointly used interoperable vocabularies and ontologies for (meta)data and machine-actionable operations is a communication, community-capacity development, and negotiation process that requires significant resources, engagement across sociocultural groups and geographies, patience and time. Ongoing processes towards these goals continue to be organized and promoted by, e.g., Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG), the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), GEO BON, and the Ocean Biodiversity Information System (OBIS), as well as large continental networks. We propose to bridge the gap before standardization and harmonization are in place and thereby facilitate and accelerate such efforts. Taking a pragmatic approach, our objective is to contribute a lightweight "pocket" dataspace that provides interoperability and data governance in connection with a digital platform for global genetic monitoring (Fig. 1). The pocket dataspace would allow existing platforms and tools to be connected easily through community-provided mappings between workflow element-specific formats, terms, data and operations stored in an open repository. This approach would enable users to take advantage of the core strengths of existing software products and the expertise of their associated communities, while quickly sharing data and their work between specialized solutions. At the same time, data would be FAIRified and CAREd-for, promoting attribution, transparency and responsibility. The functions of the pocket dataspace can be prerequisites for a transition to machine-actionable operations usable to agentic AI. As a general-purpose interlinking and translation component, the pocket dataspace aims to be the missing link between distributed, federated, non-standard-compliant and undocumented data, governance regimes, provenance logs and software output, and the need for transparent, well-governed and versatile conservation applications. One of these conservation applications will be the proposed platform for monitoring global genetic diversity. The platform will aggregate and visualize externally-linked population-genetic data and summary metrics that are the results of analysis pipelines enabled by, e.g., the pocket dataspace. Its aim is to provide visualization and support dataset and analysis management for local to global conservation efforts. It would store uploaded or linked genetic diversity metrics, perform selected automated analyses for continuously updated genetic diversity measures, as well as provide a starting point for user-designed analyses. The objective of our initial use case is to analyze three basic measures of population-genetic diversity based on genome-wide sequencing data as a first step towards operationalizing genetic monitoring at scale. Together, the pocket dataspace and monitoring platform for genetic diversity data have the goal to support a digital ecosystem that is foremost flexible, requiring low investments by users, and be able to quickly integrate both inter- and transdisciplinary data as well as existing powerful platforms and well-tested analytical pipelines and functionality.

Following the failure to fully achieve any of the 20 Aichi biodiversity targets, the future of biodiversity rests in the balance. The Convention on Biological Diversity's Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) presents the opportunity to preserve nature's contributions to people (NCPs) for current and future generations by conserving biodiversity and averting extinctions. There is a need to safeguard the tree of life-the unique and shared evolutionary history of life on Earth-to maintain the benefits it bestows into the future. Two indicators have been adopted within the GBF to monitor progress toward safeguarding the tree of life: the phylogenetic diversity (PD) indicator and the evolutionarily distinct and globally endangered (EDGE) index. We applied both to the world's mammals, birds, and cycads to show their utility at the global and national scale. The PD indicator can be used to monitor the overall conservation status of large parts of the evolutionary tree of life, a measure of biodiversity's capacity to maintain NCPs for future generations. The EDGE index is used to monitor the performance of efforts to conserve the most distinctive species. The risk to PD of birds, cycads, and mammals increased, and mammals exhibited the greatest relative increase in threatened PD over time. These trends appeared robust to the choice of extinction risk weighting. EDGE species had predominantly worsening extinction risk. A greater proportion of EDGE mammals (12%) had increased extinction risk compared with threatened mammals in general (7%). By strengthening commitments to safeguarding the tree of life, biodiversity loss can be reduced and thus nature's capacity to provide benefits to humanity now and in the future can be preserved.

Global sustainability policy demands coordination among domain‐specific policies, yet a major challenge persists in policy monitoring and reporting, where various, often uncoordinated indicator initiatives exist. To address this challenge, we apply a network approach to investigate linkages between the indicators of the Sustainable Development Goal 15 (SDG 15, Life on Land), the indicators of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and those used in assessments of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), and the Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs). Network analysis is a well‐known tool but to the best of our knowledge remains largely unexplored to analyse indicator linkages. Our findings indicate limited interconnectivity (number and type of cross‐set linkages) among the selected indicator sets. Nevertheless, we identify direct network linkages showing that most SDG 15 indicators could draw upon data or other information (e.g., methodological) from Aichi indicators, IPBES indicators, or EBVs. Findings show the potential of EBVs to deliver policy‐relevant information, but this warrants further research. We identify indicators and EBVs with a key role in the network and discuss advantages and limitations of our network approach. We show the utility of the approach to linking multiple policy agendas, and argue that—if applied more widely—it can promote a more coordinated sustainability policy monitoring and reporting.

Selecting biodiversity indicators to report national and subnational progress towards the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is a major challenge, one made even more urgent by the fast approaching 2030 targets. To efficiently identify appropriate indicators, the selection process must be streamlined, while remaining transparent, effective, and with the active engagement of stakeholders from the academic, public, and private sectors. We present guidelines for the selection of biodiversity indicators to track progress towards 2030 targets in the context of the GBF, with a case study of the province-level indicator recommendation process for Quebec’s 2030 Nature Plan. We outline six steps to develop a shortlist of indicators that are relevant to targets, fulfill minimum criteria of scientific quality given the province’s available biodiversity data, and practical to inform decisions and on-the-ground conservation actions. We present the rationale and outcomes of this selection process, culminating in the 15 biodiversity indicators that we recommended for Quebec’s 2030 Nature Plan. Going forward, we recommend continuing to build trust across sectors, developing communication guidelines to standardize indicator reporting, and testing indicator performance at national and subnational scales. Overall, this case study demonstrates that with active engagement and cooperation, we can rapidly rise to the challenge of identifying the indicators we need to track and report biodiversity change.