The concept of ‘biodiversity conservation’ includes diverse notions of what part of ‘nature’ one is trying to conserve. Moreover, the conservation discourse is part of a wider discussion on what kind of world we want for both humans and nature. Over the past few decades, debates have erupted on both fronts: what nature is worth saving and how to link concerns for nature with concerns for larger societal well-being. But proposals such as the Global Deal for Nature (www.globaldealfornature.org) articulated by Dinerstein and others suggest that mainstream conservation thinking has not changed much. I argue that acknowledging multiple values about conservation and about society, rejecting the biocentric high horse, pragmatic pluralism and simplistic ‘win–win’ arguments, and embracing a broader set of societal concerns is a more tenable approach towards achieving a balanced society–nature relationship.

Indicators are necessary to monitor national progress toward commitments made to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), but countries often struggle to mobilize quantitative indicators for many biodiversity targets. Assessing the extent to which countries are using measurable indicators from global and national sources by surveying 5th National Reports to the CBD, we found that nationally generated indicators were used 11 times more frequently than global indicators and only one-fifth of indicators matched those recommended by the CBD, suggesting that countries and indicator experts should work more closely to agree upon measurable, scalable, fit-for-purpose indicators for the next generation of CBD targets.

Systems thinking provides a comprehensive range of theories and methods that are useful for understanding and managing sustainability challenges. Biodiversity conservation is riddled with complex interactions between science, society and myriad interacting systems through temporal and spatial scales. This article presents a synthetic analysis of the history of systems thinking from a genealogical perspective, drawing from hard and soft systems thinking, and resilience and social-ecological systems. Using the anchor point of system leverage points and system characteristics (parameters, feedbacks, design and intent), we employ a diversity of examples to illustrate their relevance to multiple biodiversity related problems. We conclude by illustrating the opportunities for systems thinking to bridge epistemic divides with multiple biodiversity actors working towards conservation outcomes. Systems thinking can support more integrative biodiversity interventions, as they provide a pluralistic set of tools for bridging knowledges and disciplines, which can be useful to create new shared understandings of how to conserve biodiversity.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), designed to build critical infrastructure and coordinate economic growth, is the most significant development initiative in modern history. The BRI has a documented vision for sustainability, including environmental impact assessments and responsibility tenets. Despite this, a growing body of literature has found adverse effects of BRI projects on protected land and species. To understand corporate responsibility and regulations for companies participating in the BRI, we gathered information on 260 BRI companies using the Refinitiv Eikon BRI Connect database and the China Global Investment Tracker. The results revealed a significant gap in corporate responsibility reporting for biodiversity impacts, environmental restoration, environmental project financing and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 14 ‘Life below Water’ and 15 ‘Life on Land’. The modest fraction of companies that we found to report biodiversity accountability highlights the need to restructure and incentivize the reporting of environmental and biodiversity risks. The current evidence of limited adherence to responsibility measures highlights a clear opportunity to align BRI development with the BRI’s vision for sustainability, and to strengthen links for policy engagement within Chinese regulatory frameworks and international obligations at the United Nations within its SDG framework.

The scope and scale of wildlife crimes around the world have risen in intensity and complexity, yet current enforcement strategies have often not delivered desired effects on illegal activities, even within protected areas. Tackling the array of illegal activities by emphasizing law enforcement above other options is challenging and potentially unsustainable. We explored the potential for social norms, community regulations and socioeconomic factors to promote compliance with wildlife laws by interviewing 334 respondents in 28 villages that share boundaries with protected areas in Nigeria. Using an anonymous direct questioning approach, we recorded a high prevalence of non-compliance behaviours in all studied communities. Injunctive norms (i.e., perceptions of acceptable behaviour within a social group) significantly predicted compliance, as respondents with no complicit friends or family members were more likely to comply with wildlife regulations. Perceived likelihood of community-level sanctions played a more salient role than the fear of arrest by rangers in influencing compliance. In addition, non-compliance increased with number of dependents, but reduced with average monthly household income. Our study demonstrates that clear knowledge of the social norms that drive local behaviour as well as the authorities that enforce them is integral to understanding the forces that drive community involvement and participation in conservation. Incorporating local communities in planning enforcement interventions may help protect threatened species and landscapes.

Science, as both a body of knowledge and a process of acquiring new knowledge, is widely regarded as playing a central role in biodiversity conservation. Science undoubtedly enhances our understanding of the drivers of biodiversity loss and assists in the formulation of practical and policy responses, but it has not yet proved sufficiently influential to reverse global trends of biodiversity decline. This review seeks to critically examine the science of biodiversity conservation and to identify any hidden assumptions that, once interrogated and explored, may assist in improving conservation science, policy and practice. By drawing on existing reviews of the literature, this review describes the major themes of the literature and examines the historical shifts in the framing of conservation. It highlights the dominance of research philosophies that view conservation through a primarily ecological lens, changes in the goal(s) of conservation and a lack of clarity over the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation. Finally, this review offers a simple framework to more clearly and consistently conceptualize the role(s) of science in biodiversity conservation in the future. Greater critical reflection on how conservation science might better accommodate multiple knowledges, goals and values could assist in ‘opening up’ new, legitimate pathways for biodiversity conservation.

Major advances in biology and ecology have sharpened our understanding of what the goals of biodiversity conservation might be, but less progress has been made on how to achieve conservation in the complex, multi-sectoral world of human affairs. The failure to deliver conservation outcomes is especially severe in the rapidly changing landscapes of tropical low-income countries. We describe five techniques we have used to complement and strengthen long-term attempts to achieve conservation outcomes in the landscapes and seascapes of such regions; these are complex social-ecological systems shaped by interactions between biological, ecological and physical features mediated by the actions of people. Conservation outcomes occur as a result of human decisions and the governance arrangements that guide change. However, much conservation science in these countries is not rooted in a deep understanding of how these social-ecological systems work and what really determines the behaviour of the people whose decisions shape the future of landscapes. We describe five scientific practices that we have found to be effective in building relationships with actors in landscapes and influencing their behaviour in ways that reconcile conservation and development. We have used open-ended inductive enquiry, theories of change, simulation models, network analysis and multi-criteria analysis. These techniques are all widely known and well tested, but seldom figure in externally funded conservation projects. We have used these techniques to complement and strengthen existing interventions of international conservation agencies. These five techniques have proven effective in achieving deeper understanding of context, engagement with all stakeholders, negotiation of shared goals and continuous learning and adaptation.

The ability of national governments to set and implement policies that protect biodiversity is currently facing widespread scepticism within the conservation movement. Here, we review the literature from several disciplines to outline a positive agenda for how the global conservation movement can address this. We combine the strengths of the people-centred and science-led conservation approaches to develop a framework that emphasizes the importance of ecological infrastructure for the long-term prosperity of human societies in an ever-changing world. We show that one of the major goals of the conservation movement (enhancing global ecological infrastructure to end species and ecosystem loss) remains central and irreplaceable within the broad sustainable development agenda. Then, we argue that the conservation community is now more prepared than ever to face the challenge of supporting societies in designing the ecological infrastructure they need to move towards more sustainable states. Because it is where global and local priorities meet, the national level is where impactful changes can be made. Furthermore, we point out two priorities for the conservation movement for the next decade: (1) substantially increase the amount of financial resources dedicated to conservation; and (2) advance the next generation of policies for ecological infrastructure.

Because knowledge of fungal diversity is very incomplete, it is possible that anthropogenic impacts are driving species to extinction before they have been discovered. Fungal inventories are still incomplete and do not reflect the complete diversity of this large taxon. Whilst molecular advancements are leading to an increased rate of species discovery, there is still much to be done to understand the diversity of fungi, identify rare species and establish conservation goals. Citizen science via social media could play an increasingly important role in mycological research, and its continued development should be supported and encouraged. The involvement of non-professionals in data collection helps increase public awareness, as well as extending the scope and efficiency of fungal surveys. Future academic mycological research could benefit from social media interaction and engagement with the amateur mycological community, which may accelerate the achievement of more effective conservation goals.

Narratives shape human understanding and underscore policy, practice and action. From individuals to multilateral institutions, humans act based on collective stories. As such, narratives have important implications for revisiting biodiversity. There have been growing calls for a ‘new narrative’ to underpin efforts to address biodiversity decline that, for example, foreground optimism, a more people-centred narrative or technological advances. This review presents some of the main contemporary narratives from within the biodiversity space to reflect on their underpinning categories, myths and causal assumptions. It begins by reviewing various interpretations of narrative, which range from critical views where narrative is a heuristic for understanding structures of domination, to advocacy approaches where it is a tool for reimagining ontologies and transitioning to sustainable futures. The work reveals how the conservation space is flush with narratives. As such, efforts to search for a ‘new narrative’ for conservation can be usefully informed by social science scholarship on narratives and related constructs and should reflect critically on the power of narrative to entrench old ways of thought and practice and, alternatively, make space for new ones. Importantly, the transformative potential of narrative may not lie in superficial changes in messaging, but in using narrative to bring multiple ways of knowing into productive dialogue to revisit biodiversity and foster critical reflection.

The global loss of biodiversity is one of the most important challenges facing humanity, and a multi-faceted strategy is needed to address the size and complexity of this problem. This paper draws on scholarship from the philosophy of science and environmental ethics to help address one aspect of this challenge: namely, the question of how to frame biodiversity loss in a compelling manner. The paper shows that the concept of biodiversity, like many scientific concepts, is value-laden in the sense that it tends to support some ethical or social values over others. Specifically, in comparison with other potential concepts, the biodiversity concept is tied more closely to the notion that nature has intrinsic value than to the idea that nature is valuable instrumentally or relationally. Thus, alternative concepts could prove helpful for communicating about biodiversity loss with those who emphasize different value systems. The paper briefly discusses five concepts that illustrate the potential for using different concepts in different contexts. Going forward, conservationists would do well to recognize the values embedded in their language choices and work with social scientists to develop a suite of concepts that can motivate the broadest swath of people to promote conservation.