Premium
Using decision science to evaluate global biodiversity indices
Author(s) -
Watermeyer Kate E.,
GuilleraArroita Gurutzeta,
Bal Payal,
Burgass Michael J.,
Bland Lucie M.,
Collen Ben,
Hallam Chris,
Kelly Luke T.,
McCarthy Michael A.,
Regan Tracey J.,
Stevenson Simone,
Wintle Brendan A.,
Nicholson Emily
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
conservation biology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.2
H-Index - 222
eISSN - 1523-1739
pISSN - 0888-8892
DOI - 10.1111/cobi.13574
Subject(s) - convention on biological diversity , biodiversity , index (typography) , environmental resource management , sustainability , measurement of biodiversity , computer science , biodiversity conservation , environmental economics , environmental science , ecology , economics , world wide web , biology
Abstract Global biodiversity indices are used to measure environmental change and progress toward conservation goals, yet few indices have been evaluated comprehensively for their capacity to detect trends of interest, such as declines in threatened species or ecosystem function. Using a structured approach based on decision science, we qualitatively evaluated 9 indices commonly used to track biodiversity at global and regional scales against 5 criteria relating to objectives, design, behavior, incorporation of uncertainty, and constraints (e.g., costs and data availability). Evaluation was based on reference literature for indices available at the time of assessment. We identified 4 key gaps in indices assessed: pathways to achieving goals (means objectives) were not always clear or relevant to desired outcomes (fundamental objectives); index testing and understanding of expected behavior was often lacking; uncertainty was seldom acknowledged or accounted for; and costs of implementation were seldom considered. These gaps may render indices inadequate in certain decision‐making contexts and are problematic for indices linked with biodiversity targets and sustainability goals. Ensuring that index objectives are clear and their design is underpinned by a model of relevant processes are crucial in addressing the gaps identified by our assessment. Uptake and productive use of indices will be improved if index performance is tested rigorously and assumptions and uncertainties are clearly communicated to end users. This will increase index accuracy and value in tracking biodiversity change and supporting national and global policy decisions, such as the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity.