An understanding of risks to biodiversity is needed for planning action to slow current rates of decline and secure ecosystem services for future human use. Although the IUCN Red List criteria provide an effective assessment protocol for species, a standard global assessment of risks to higher levels of biodiversity is currently limited. In 2008, IUCN initiated development of risk assessment criteria to support a global Red List of ecosystems. We present a new conceptual model for ecosystem risk assessment founded on a synthesis of relevant ecological theories. To support the model, we review key elements of ecosystem definition and introduce the concept of ecosystem collapse, an analogue of species extinction. The model identifies four distributional and functional symptoms of ecosystem risk as a basis for assessment criteria: A) rates of decline in ecosystem distribution; B) restricted distributions with continuing declines or threats; C) rates of environmental (abiotic) degradation; and D) rates of disruption to biotic processes. A fifth criterion, E) quantitative estimates of the risk of ecosystem collapse, enables integrated assessment of multiple processes and provides a conceptual anchor for the other criteria. We present the theoretical rationale for the construction and interpretation of each criterion. The assessment protocol and threat categories mirror those of the IUCN Red List of species. A trial of the protocol on terrestrial, subterranean, freshwater and marine ecosystems from around the world shows that its concepts are workable and its outcomes are robust, that required data are available, and that results are consistent with assessments carried out by local experts and authorities. The new protocol provides a consistent, practical and theoretically grounded framework for establishing a systematic Red List of the world’s ecosystems. This will complement the Red List of species and strengthen global capacity to report on and monitor the status of biodiversity

No abstract

Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) allow observation and reporting of global biodiversity change, but a detailed framework for the empirical derivation of specific EBVs has yet to be developed. Here, we re-examine and refine the previous candidate set of species traits EBVs and show how traits related to phenology, morphology, reproduction, physiology and movement can contribute to EBV operationalization. The selected EBVs express intra-specific trait variation and allow monitoring of how organisms respond to global change. We evaluate the societal relevance of species traits EBVs for policy targets and demonstrate how open, interoperable and machine-readable trait data enable the building of EBV data products. We outline collection methods, meta(data) standardization, reproducible workflows, semantic tools and licence requirements for producing species traits EBVs. An operationalization is critical for assessing progress towards biodiversity conservation and sustainable development goals and has wide implications for data-intensive science in ecology, biogeography, conservation and Earth observation.

1. About 5-10% of the world's land surface is currently wetland but possibly >70% is already destroyed or impaired. Conservation of these unique ecosystems lags progress in other realms, reflected in high rates of biodiversity loss. Wetlands provide a range of critically important ecosystem services including fresh water, nutrient cycling, food and fibre production, carbon fixation and storage, flood mitigation and water storage; water treatment and purification and habitats for biodiversity. There is increasing recognition that these services provide real economic values.2. Wetlands are affected by numerous threats including habitat loss and degradation, climate change, pollution, invasive species, overharvesting and disease. The most serious impact is from habitat loss and degradation caused by upstream water resource developments and conversion to agriculture, industry and transport, and urban development.3. The status of the distribution and extent of the world's wetlands remains poorly known, varying among countries. Wetland loss has varied internationally, with generally higher impacts in the Northern Hemisphere, with its long history of conversion to urban centres, ports and agriculture and yet there are increasing losses occurring in developing continents in the south.4. Wetland conservation needs to focus primarily on identification of priority areas for biodiversity conservation and legal protection, including Ramsar-listing. Identification of wetland biodiversity hotspots for conservation should be an imperative, with associated Ramsar-listing. There also needs to be effective protection of flow regimes. Mitigation of other deleterious processes, pollution, overharvesting, invasive species and disease, also remains particularly important.5. Conservation of wetlands remains especially challenging, given the importance of fresh water for human communities, industry and agriculture. Without effective conservation actions, mitigation of threats, rigorous risk assessment and acknowledgement of the value of wetland ecosystem services, wetland conservation will continue to lag behind conservation in other realms in protecting the Earth's biodiversity.

ABSTRACT1. Transitional waters, described as critical transition zones because of their position at terrestrial, freshwater and marine interfaces, provide essential goods and services to the biosphere including human populations. These ecotones face increasing human influence mainly due to population density increase in coastal areas.2. Transitional water bodies have, to date, received little attention in the development of ecological status indicators; this is a critical deficiency when trying to meet the Water Framework Directive objective of all significant water bodies achieving good ecological status by the year 2015.3. In order to assess changes in transitional water communities many taxonomic-based indicators have already been proposed but there are a number of concerns for their use such as taxonomic classification difficulties, their unsuitability for multi-site comparisons and their inconsistent relationships with disturbance or stress.4. Alternative methods based on body size, abundance distribution among functional groups, functional diversity and productivity descriptors are proposed. These methods offer the opportunity to compare sites with different taxonomic compositions and allow derivation of indicators related to ecological status of communities under scrutiny.5. Finally, the suitability of these taxonomic-free descriptors to provide relevant information for each of the four main biotic compartments in coastal lagoons is discussed. The use of biomass distribution among functional groups for fish, benthos and macrophyte and to use body-size distribution for benthos and plankton is proposed.