An operational definition of essential biodiversity variables

  • Dirk S. Schmeller
  • Jean-Baptiste Mihoub
  • Anne Bowser
  • Christos Arvanitidis
  • Mark J. Costello
  • Miguel Fernandez
  • Gary N. Geller
  • Donald Hobern
  • W. Daniel Kissling
  • Eugenie Regan
  • Hannu Saarenmaa
  • Eren Turak
  • Nick J. B. Isaac
Commentary

DOI: 10.1007/s10531-017-1386-9

Cite this article as:
Schmeller, D.S., Mihoub, JB., Bowser, A. et al. Biodivers Conserv (2017). doi:10.1007/s10531-017-1386-9

Abstract

The concept of essential biodiversity variables (EBVs) was proposed in 2013 to improve harmonization of biodiversity data into meaningful metrics. EBVs were conceived as a small set of variables which collectively capture biodiversity change at multiple spatial scales and within time intervals that are of scientific and management interest. Despite the apparent simplicity of the concept, a plethora of variables that describes not only biodiversity but also any environmental features have been proposed as potential EBV (i.e. candidate EBV). The proliferation of candidates reflects a lack of clarity on what may constitute a variable that is essential to track biodiversity change, which hampers the operationalization of EBVs and therefore needs to be urgently addressed. Here, we propose that an EBV should be defined as a biological state variable in three key dimensions (time, space, and biological organization) that is critical to accurately document biodiversity change.

Keywords

Biodiversity monitoring Conservation policy Biodiversity change Essential biodiversity variables Biological state variables 

Funding information

Funder NameGrant NumberFunding Note
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
  • 308454
  • 654003

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dirk S. Schmeller
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jean-Baptiste Mihoub
    • 1
    • 3
  • Anne Bowser
    • 4
  • Christos Arvanitidis
    • 5
  • Mark J. Costello
    • 6
  • Miguel Fernandez
    • 7
    • 8
  • Gary N. Geller
    • 9
  • Donald Hobern
    • 10
  • W. Daniel Kissling
    • 11
  • Eugenie Regan
    • 12
  • Hannu Saarenmaa
    • 13
  • Eren Turak
    • 14
    • 15
  • Nick J. B. Isaac
    • 16
  1. 1.Department of Conservation BiologyHelmholtz Center for Environmental Research – UFZLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Université de Toulouse; UPS, INPT; EcoLab (Laboratoire Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Environnement)ToulouseFrance
  3. 3.Université Pierre et Marie Curie, CESCO, UMR 7204 MNHN-CNRS-UPMCParisFrance
  4. 4.Woodrow Wilson International Center for ScholarsWashingtonUSA
  5. 5.Institute of Marine Biology, Biotechnology and AquacultureHellenic Centre for Marine ResearchHerakleionGreece
  6. 6.Institute of Marine ScienceUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  7. 7.German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  8. 8.Instituto de EcologíaUniversidad Mayor de San Andrés Cota-CotaLa PazBolivia
  9. 9.Group on Earth Observations (GEO)GenevaSwitzerland
  10. 10.Global Biodiversity Information Facility SecretariatCopenhagenDenmark
  11. 11.Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED)University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  12. 12.The Biodiversity ConsultancyCambridgeUK
  13. 13.University of Eastern FinlandJoensuuFinland
  14. 14.Australian MuseumSydneyAustralia
  15. 15.NSW Office on Environment and HeritageParramattaAustralia
  16. 16.Centre for Ecology & HydrologyWallingfordUK

Personalised recommendations