Global synergies and trade-offs between multiple dimensions of biodiversity and ecosystem services

Abstract

Ensuring the persistence of biodiversity and ecosystem services represents a global challenge that need to be addressed with high urgency. Global priority areas can only be identified by means of an integrated prioritization approach that would not only preserve species numbers and ecosystem services, but also the evolutionary and functional components of diversity. In this study we combine global datasets on the distribution of mammals and birds with species traits and phylogenetic data and we identify conservation priorities for taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversity, as well as for three ecosystem services, including potential for carbon sequestration, pollination potential and groundwater recharge. We show that, when priority areas are identified based only on individual, e.g. functional diversity, or any combination of the three biodiversity components, these areas do not allow a sufficient protection of the three ecosystem services. However, an integrated approach whereby prioritization is based on all biodiversity components and ecosystem services would allow to identify areas that maximize protection of all ecosystem services with a minimal loss in biodiversity coverage. Our results highlight the need for an integrated conservation planning framework in order to optimally allocate resources and achieve the long-term preservation of the multiple dimensions of biodiversity and ecosystems services.

Figure 1

Priority ranking maps showing areas that would be most suitable for the conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. These include separate maps showing priorities for taxonomic diversity, functional diversity and phylogenetic diversity, as well as a map showing priorities for all the three diversity components combined. Priority areas for all selected ecosystem services (i.e. carbon biomass, water recharge, pollination services and livestock production on grassland) are also shown, as well as priority areas based on all three biodiversity components as well as ecosystem services combined.

Figure 2

Synergies and trade-offs for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Proportion of each feature retained in the 17% top fraction of the landscape. For biodiversity the proportion is a mean percentage between birds and mammals.

Figure 3

Distribution of the 17% top fraction of the landscape across biomes (the different colors in the bars) as derived from each of the six prioritization scenarios considered (each bar as named on the Y axis).