Monitoring biodiversity loss in rapidly changing Afrotropical ecosystems: an emerging imperative for governance and research
Abstract
Africa is experiencing extensive biodiversity loss due to rapid changes in the environment, where natural resources constitute the main instrument for socioeconomic development and a mainstay source of livelihoods for an increasing population. Lack of data and information deficiency on biodiversity, but also budget constraints and insufficient financial and technical capacity, impede sound policy design and effective implementation of conservation and management measures. The problem is further exacerbated by the lack of harmonized indicators and databases to assess conservation needs and monitor biodiversity losses. We review challenges with biodiversity data (availability, quality, usability and database access) as a key limiting factor that impacts funding and governance. We also evaluate the drivers of both ecosystems change and biodiversity loss as a central piece of knowledge to develop and implement effective policies. While the continent focuses more on the latter, we argue that the two are complementary in shaping restoration and management solutions. We thus underscore the importance of establishing monitoring programmes focusing on biodiversity–ecosystem linkages in order to inform evidence-based decisions in ecosystem conservation and restoration in Africa.
This article is part of the theme issue ‘Detecting and attributing the causes of biodiversity change: needs, gaps and solutions’.
1. Introduction
Biodiversity loss is the reduction or disappearance of any aspect of community dynamics, or variety of organisms in an ecosystem through the elimination of genes, species or biological traits [1]. Unprecedented biodiversity loss has been experienced across ecosystems globally in the past century [2], yet the drivers of change show no evidence of decline, and even more so, appear to increase in intensity, undermining ecosystem stability and resilience to environmental perturbations [3]. Biodiversity loss poses a significant risk to the global economy as it translates into escalating losses of a wide variety of ecosystem services and catastrophic effects from habitat conversion [4]. It has been rated as one of the top five risks to the global economy, as it is estimated that more than half of the global GDP is dependent upon natural capacity, and can, therefore, be vulnerable to biodiversity loss [5,6]. Consequently, the Convention on Biological Diversity at the 15th Conference of Parties (COP15), held in December 2022 in Montreal Canada, adopted a global biodiversity framework with four overarching goals to protect nature, including (i) halting human-induced extinction of threatened species and reducing by tenfold the rate of extinction of all species by 2050, (ii) sustainable use and management of biodiversity, (iii) fair sharing of the benefits from the utilization of genetic resource and (iv) securing resources for the implementation of the framework so it can be accessible to all parties [7].
The inextricable link between ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss [8] as a result of the human footprint [9–12] and environmental perturbation is invariably signified in scientific studies [11,12], expert judgements [10,13,14] and global reports [15,16]. These anthropogenic disturbances on ecosystem processes (water cycle, energy flow, nutrient cycling and community dynamics) modify the synergies between biotic and abiotic ecosystem components, and consequently disrupt their collective functioning [17]. Biodiversity, being the living web of an ecosystem that forms the basis for life on Earth, plays a fundamental role in regulating the physical and chemical ecosystem components [18], including their provisioning and supportive role [19]. Thus, biodiversity loss often alters the pools and fluxes of materials and energy, thereby impacting a multitude of ecosystem functions [20,21].
Recent advances in research from developed countries (especially in temperate ecosystems) on biodiversity and ecosystems function focus on a range of topics, broadly summarized as: (i) simulations of the influence of biodiversity on multiple ecosystem processes [22]; (ii) mechanisms that catalyse the biodiversity–ecosystem relationships [23]; (iii) links between multitrophic biodiversity and ecosystem functioning [24]; (iv) incorporation of genetic, functional and structural diversity, in addition to species richness [25]; (v) functional linkages among ecosystems in the form of matter, energy and organismal exchange [20]; and (vi) linkages between biodiversity loss and policy [2]. These studies have established relationships between biodiversity and ecological processes, including the implications of changes in environmental conditions for diversity components and exchange of matter/energy at different temporal and spatial scales (reviewed in [2]). Furthermore, emerging knowledge has facilitated our understanding of the spatial and temporal patterns of human pressure on ecosystems. As such, they can provide the basis for policy design and implementation, development of strategies for conservation and management, with emphasis on governance, sustainable use and protection of ecosystems, including mitigation of environmental damage and biodiversity loss. Existing biodiversity models could be adopted and customized in representing biodiversity loss mechanisms in Afrotropical ecosystems to improve our understanding of biodiversity–ecosystem relationships and strengthen policy implementation in the region, if input parameters from biodiversity data become available.
In order to develop and implement effective policies for mitigating biodiversity loss, it is important to address the drivers, along with their associated causes, of ecosystem degradation. Some of the common drivers include: population growth, resource-use demand, socioeconomic development [26] and heavy reliance on natural resources for livelihood, especially in developing countries, including the continuing heavy international/foreign resource extraction. Conservationists broadly summarize them as direct (habitat change, climate change, invasive species, overexploitation and pollution) and indirect (demographic and sociocultural, economic and technological, institutional and governance, conflicts and epidemics) drivers of ecosystem change [27,28]. These direct and indirect drivers have a chronic impact in African ecosystems, while an additional uncertainty factor is the data deficiency on the status of biodiversity, owing to: (i) political instability in some countries that leads to inconsistent (or lack of) policies, resource overexploitation and habitat destruction; (ii) absence of effective intergovernmental agencies responsible for prioritizing continental policy-driven biodiversity actions; (iii) little support from governments on environmental management and biodiversity monitoring programmes; and (iv) lack of standardization of biodiversity datasets and monitoring programmes over time and space [29–31].
In this regard, Africa lags behind in many aspects of biodiversity studies due to data deficiency, including the ubiquitous knowledge gaps about all the major facets of taxonomic, ecological and physiographical diversity, in addition to the lack of established thresholds of environmental change that lead to biodiversity loss [13]. Furthermore, insufficient financial and technical capacity when studying biodiversity loss impedes sound policy formulation and effective implementation of conservation and management practices. Very few studies and reviews focus on the interplay between biodiversity and ecosystem change in the continent, except for reports from international organizations, which tend to be generic, often with gaps in scientific evidence. Since natural resources are one of the pillars for socioeconomic development and a primary source of livelihood in the continent [32], the aim of this paper is to ignite the conversation on monitoring biodiversity loss in rapidly changing ecosystems in Africa. Our goal is to emphasize the need for data-driven biodiversity policy interventions and management implementation. Our thesis is that challenges in funding and lack of highly qualified personnel present fundamental hindrances to data acquisition and design for the execution of quality scientific studies in the region, whereby we can evaluate the drivers of ecosystem change and biodiversity loss, effectively inform the policy-making process and design appropriate restoration solutions.
2. Conceptual framework
Drivers of ecosystem change and biodiversity loss are intricately connected with funding, research and governance (figure 1). Major direct and indirect drivers of ecosystem degradation have an impact on biodiversity (gene, species, functional groups and community dynamics) and ecosystems (processes, structure and function). Biodiversity and its components (which are profoundly understudied in Africa) are interlinked with ecosystem processes, structure and functions through mechanisms that facilitate and complement those processes. Consequently, ecosystem degradation leads to biodiversity loss, and biodiversity loss iteratively leads to ecosystem change (figure 1). From our perspective, the limited understanding of the mechanisms that shape the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystems are the primary concern in Africa. This knowledge gap is further exacerbated by the lack of institutional, infrastructural and human capacity, which in turn leads to poorly informed management interventions. The lack of political will and underfunding to monitor ecosystem change and biodiversity loss are critical for effective conservation and management, including the implementation of mitigation measures of ecosystem impairment and restoration of biodiversity in the region.
3. Ecosystems in Africa
Africa harbours an enormous wealth of biodiversity, distributed across numerous environmental gradients. The continent straddles the equator, extending 37° N and 35° S; it has a great latitudinal range and an enormous variety of climate types that shape its uniquely rich ecosystem diversity [33]. The diverse range of terrestrial, aquatic inland and coastal ecosystems are also largely transboundary resources. From the north, the continent borders the Mediterranean Sea and extends to the expansive Sahara Desert before transitioning to tropical ecosystems with dense forests, intermixed by shrubland, woodland, grassland, montane and Afroalpine, bushland and thickets, arid and semi-arid land, followed by the Kalahari and Namib deserts to the south, and finally, the Cape region with Mediterranean climate (electronic supplementary material, table S1; [31]). Major land use and land cover classifications with granular satellite images of 10 m resolution are conspicuously dominated by forested areas, shrubland and grassland within Sub-Saharan Africa and deserts at the north and south, while agriculture dominates human activities throughout the continent (figure 2a).
Africa's Great Rift Valley, with extraordinary geographical features of numerous deep and spectacular gorges cutting into the margins of a plateau, is a source of many rivers and streams [34], flowing either into the inland lentic ecosystems or into the sea. The region also harbours the African Great Lakes that hold over 25% of the world's unfrozen freshwater [35,36] and more than 90% of Africa's total freshwater [37]. Terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems in Africa also support numerous habitats with exclusive reservoirs of the world's biodiversity, including eight of the world's 36 recognized biodiversity hot spots [38]; they host approximately one-quarter of the world's mammals and birds [39] and have the second largest tropical rainforest with unmatched endemic species globally [40], in addition to aquatic inland and marine amphibians, reptiles and fish [41]. Moreover, Key Biodiversity Areas are continuously being identified and mapped in the region for monitoring and conservation [42,43]. The continent is rich in taxonomic and physiographic diversity, and displays great connectivity from terrestrial to aquatic ecosystems that contributes to high functional diversity [44]. Plant endemism peaks within Mediterranean habitats at the north and south of the continent [45], while vertebrate endemism peaks within the tropics, especially in the aquatic ecosystems within the African Great Lakes [46]. Furthermore, it has numerous phytochorions within watersheds or wetlands (electronic supplementary material, table S1; figure 2b) with terrestrial and aquatic food web links from the highly diverse and rich biotic communities. Evidence of connectivity in ecosystems and biodiversity is clear in protected areas [47,48], but human activities leading to ecosystem degradation impair this connectivity.
4. Biodiversity studies in Africa
Despite the numerous ecosystems in Africa, studies have shown that there is a paucity of quantitative information on biodiversity in many countries, including species, populations, distributions, offtake and threat status (table 1; [30]). In some countries, these datasets are unevenly available [50]. For instance, a review of responses from 44 African countries on the status of Ramsar sites during the 12th Meeting of the Conference of Parties (COP12) in Uruguay in 2015, and COP13 in Dubai in 2018, revealed key challenges with biodiversity data that includes availability, accessibility and usability, in addition to the technical and financial capacity for data collection and management [30]. A similar observation was made in other ecosystems in Africa, in addition to the widespread absence of credible science–policy interface to shape environmental management decisions [31,49]. Some of the available data could not be accessed due to lack of agreeable data-sharing policies and lack of consensus on what to monitor, with different organizations and projects adopting diverse measurements [31], while data presentation and use are often influenced by donor conditions on sharing [30]. Africa has, therefore, been ranked as last in terms of long-term ecological research among other continents that own regional and continental-scale monitoring networks [51]. To make matters worse, many African countries are lacking even the rudimentary elements of conservation science, reflecting the fact that biodiversity conservation is still perceived as a trivial theme in the national research agendas [52].
biodiversity research needs | African countries | data source | reference |
---|---|---|---|
Key challenges that include data availability, accessibility, usability, quality and financial and technical capacity for data collection, management and use. |
Continent-wide | Review on status of Ramsar sites from 44 African countries during COP12 and COP13 in the years 2015 and 2018, respectively. | Stephenson et al. [30] |
Uneven availability of biodiversity data. | South-Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique | Survey to local conservation experts in eleven [11] countries working in high conservation values on monitoring and capacity needs. | Han et al. [50] |
Data gaps include species, populations, distributions, offtake, trade and threat status; habitat cover or distribution; protected area coverage and management effectiveness. |
Angola, Botswana, |
COP12 with more than 40 stakeholders from government, Civil society organization, United Nations agencies and delegates from 20 African states. | Stephenson et al. [31] |
Africa ranked last in terms of long-term ecological research amongst other continents that own regional and continental-scale monitoring networks. | Continent-wide | Review of 1442 scientific publications on ecosystem monitoring and related research from 1987 to 2014, mostly published in English. | Yevide et al. [51] |
Several countries lack research attention in conservation science, reflecting the fact that research is poorly aligned with biodiversity distribution and conservation priorities. | Angola, Malawi, Rwanda, Burundi, Eswatini, Somali, Djibouti, Eritrea, Sudan, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Chad, Niger, Benin, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Mauritania, Senegal, Guinea and Western Sahara | Analysed 2553 articles published between 2011 and 2015. | Di Marco et al. [52] |
5. Case study of African Great Lakes region
Our studies confirmed the aforementioned assertions within the African Great Lakes region, where there is a dearth of basic information on the diversity, distribution and population characteristics of riverine fish species in the Lake Victoria basin [53,54]. The inconsistent data collection, storage and use impedes quality research on biodiversity and hampers effective management of environmental changes, including evaluation of the riverine environment as refuge for the declining fish species populations within the Lake Victoria basin. In these studies, we collected data with field surveys and corroborated the detected trends with historical information from peer-reviewed and grey literature; this process took several years during compilation and cleaning to acquire reliable data. We have used data for preliminary studies on the ecological concept of size-spectrum with fish species among the rivers to monitor the potential effects of the changing environment on communities and ecosystem functions [55]. We have also assessed the ecological health of these rivers using fish assemblages and the concept of niche breadth from the compiled data [56]. These studies are among the first published works using the ecological concept of size-spectrum and niche breadth for riverine fish species in Africa.
Our additional review on data availability from eleven countries within the African Great Lakes region revealed the need for harmonized long-term multi-lake monitoring of the seven African Great Lakes and their catchments. We observed some regular, but also irregular or rare monitoring in some catchments, mainly when sporadic funds or short-term projects became available [36]. Our second review on training aquatic and environmental scientists in ten countries in this region observed only a handful of academic institutions with postgraduate programmes in the disciplines, in addition to limited specialized human resources grappling with a multitude of socioeconomic challenges [35]. These case studies reinforce the problem with biodiversity data deficiency, the need for long-term monitoring and generally the dearth of reliable studies to inform decision making, as well as the need for empowerment of the institutional capacity to train experts able to conduct reliable research on biodiversity–ecosystem linkages and make recommendations to guide the implementation of biodiversity–conservation policies.
6. Challenges with funding and research
Monitoring biodiversity–ecosystem relationships within the diverse Afrotropical ecosystems is challenged by fundamental shortfalls in funding, which is the major impediment for the development of effective biodiversity conservation policies globally [57]. A global ranking of 124 countries according to funding for biodiversity conservation recorded 45 of the 54 African countries as underfunded [57]. The limitations of funding and research in many African countries are further exacerbated by the low number of institutions and professionals in the continent. This hinders the dissemination of relevant knowledge [58–60] on its diverse ecosystems, including the processes and mechanisms that maintain the biotic–abiotic interactions, sustain ecosystem functions and regulate degradation. The limited capacity of professionals from Africa to participate in designing research and submitting proposals that can win highly competitive funding as principal investigators, except through collaboration with researchers from developed countries (as co-investigators), impacts the flow of funding in biodiversity research and the capacity of that research to closely target the regional needs [61]. Thus, funding agencies must commit to long-term investment in African scientists to break this cycle. Funding and research play central roles in knowledge co-creation [62,63]. Hiring skilled human resources, building technological and infrastructural capacity, conducting well-designed experiments using state-of-the-art methodologies, acquiring reliable data and producing quality publications are requisite credentials for researchers to establish their reputation and obtain competitive funds [64]. This creates a vexing cycle that hinders access to highly sought-after grants and biases the understanding of biodiversity loss and conservation priorities in Africa. Studies have shown that decades of severe underfunding have prevented institutions from achieving their potential on biodiversity studies and conservation [65,66].
In-depth studies on ecosystem processes are, therefore, scarce. This includes empirical knowledge and simulations of nutrient biogeochemical cycles [67,68] to solidify our understanding on how additional nutrient loads would impact these ecosystems and species diversity. Topics of particular interest are the high endemism, energy flows within and among trophic levels, trophic transfer efficiency and tracing food pathways (using stable isotopes) to understand feeding habits and how ecosystem degradation impacts the exchange of matter and energy among organisms. We lack many fundamental pieces of knowledge to effectively parameterize simulation models of hydrological and biogeochemical processes that shape the exchanges of mass from watersheds to inland waters and/or marine ecosystems. Considering the connectivity among African ecosystems, the latter uncertainty constitutes an emerging imperative in biodiversity research, as the degradation and broader impact on community dynamics stretch far and wide [28].
However, there are successfully funded projects through collaborations with academic and research institutions from abroad to strengthen the local research capacity. Our recent review on environmental science programmes in 10 African countries reinforces the importance of these collaborations [35] that also create a global network of experts to provide mentorship in biodiversity studies. Nonetheless, collaborators from abroad merely play a supportive role [35,58], and the research is often driven by donor objectives rather than the real priorities identified in scientific fora. Furthermore, international research and funding agencies are not within the governance of the host countries. Their agendas and priorities are sometimes set at international levels, leading to their being disconnected from national scientific systems [58] and insufficient for detailed long-term monitoring ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss. Funding for in-depth studies and long-term monitoring of ecosystem degradation and biodiversity loss remains a challenge, which cripples the capacity of academic and research institutions. As a result, mentoring professional scientists to formulate and conduct studies that link the heterogeneous ecosystems and biodiversity loss in Africa, including the processes, mechanisms and linkages of biodiversity and ecosystem function, is still an arduous task. This has led to incoherent research activities and inconsistent biodiversity databases, while the existing biodiversity monitoring initiatives are often based on short-term, poorly designed surveys, largely dependent on volunteer researchers or international partners, biased towards large animal species and published in difficult-to-access outlets [29].
7. Drivers of ecosystem change and biodiversity loss
As a consequence of the aforementioned issues, there is a worrisome increase in the level of ecosystem degradation due to the surging need for natural resources triggered by global and regional demands for commodities and human population growth [69,70], which is currently more than 1 billion, with a growth rate of 2.3% per annum [71]. The demand for forest products through logging, fuelwood, clearance for settlement [72], land use and cover changes stemming from agricultural intensification [73] and urban development, overexploitation of biodiversity for consumption and illegal poaching of wildlife [74], and pollution (especially from nutrients, heavy metals and other toxic elements) of rivers, wetlands, lakes and marine ecosystems leading to eutrophication and toxicity have resulted in rapid ecosystem impairment and biodiversity loss. These demands on resource use have formed the basis for research into the drivers of ecosystem change and biodiversity loss in Africa, including climate change [17,75,76], land use and habitat change [77,78], invasive species [79,80], overexploitation of resources [81,82] and pollution [83,84]. Further proposed mineral extractions potentially pose serious threats for some of the most biodiverse areas in Africa [85]. Given the time-lag between ecological degradation and its impact on biodiversity and human systems, there are increasing concerns over the lack of awareness of the negative implications of these accelerating trends, and the high likelihood for a late response when the ecosystem degradation will have already reached an irreversible state.
We therefore emphasize the need for data-driven studies that are designed to link biodiversity with ecosystem degradation in Africa, and complement studies that focus either on drivers of ecosystem change or on biodiversity loss patterns. From our perspective, this is a critical research direction if we strive to effectively support the science–policy interface in the context of ecosystem restoration and conservation. The exploitation of these ecosystems has led to significant increases in provisioning services for socioeconomic development and livelihood, but at the expense of a range of other supporting (e.g. nutrient cycling), regulating (e.g. clean air and water) and cultural services [8,19], and further loss in biodiversity components, such as genetic diversity, functional diversity and abundance and activity of organisms [86].
8. Efforts to establish a biodiversity database and access
There is an appreciable effort in some countries, and also globally, to solve the problem of biodiversity data deficiency in Africa, including creating databases and making the data available and accessible [30]. Some of these database and data sources are: (i) Albertine Rift Conservation Society Biodiversity Management Information System (ARBIMS: http://arbims.arcosnetwork.org/out.biodiversitydata.php) with biodiversity data on African Mountains, Great Lakes and Albertine Rift, with occurrence (presence–absence) data on species being compiled by individuals; (ii) FishBase for Africa (http://www.fishbase.us/tools/region/FB4Africa/FB4Africa.html) with some of the fish species found in Africa and their ecological and biological interactions; (iii) Global Biodiversity Information Facility (http://www.gbif.org/) also with species occurrence data for some countries in Africa; (iv) IUCN Red List on Threatened Species (http://www.iucnredlist.org/) and (v); WWF/ZSL Living Plant Index (https://www.livingplanetindex.org/). Some countries have also established national biodiversity data compilation centres, such as (i) South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI: https://www.sanbi.org/); (ii) Uganda's National Biodiversity Data Bank (NDBD: http://nbdb.mak.ac.ug/) hosted by Makerere University website and (iii) Egyptian Environmental Affair Agency National Biodiversity Unit (https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/eg/eg-nr-01-en.pdf; but we could not trace the link to this website). These are great initiatives that recognize the challenges with biodiversity data in the region and make strides in championing solutions to the problem in Africa.
9. Conclusion
While there are many subjects of interest in biodiversity and an array of possibilities in the science–policy interface, the existing scientific knowledge is not adequate to inform the development of robust policies or even to articulate targets of biodiversity research in many African countries. The limited data reliability, accessibility and (ultimately) usability represent an impediment to draw inference that informs decisions on ecosystem conservation and management. Mitigating biodiversity loss also requires understanding on how the drivers of ecosystem change impact community dynamics and demography, and thus fundamental knowledge of the community–ecosystem linkages. The problem of biodiversity loss is further exacerbated by a multitude of other factors including the surging demand for natural resources, population growth and associated conflicts between resource use and conservation. Since many countries in Africa (about three-quarters of the continent) are classified as least developed, research funding automatically emerges as a major imperative. Given that the international community has committed funding for biodiversity conservation in developing countries, we argue that it is critical to design scientifically sound and logistically sustainable monitoring programmes to establish biodiversity benchmarks in Africa. In the same vein, our study underscores the importance of factoring in the biodiversity–ecosystem linkages if we strive to improve our predictive capacity of future conditions in an ever-changing world.
Data accessibility
The data are provided in the electronic supplementary material [87].
Authors' contributions
A.O.A.: conceptualization, methodology, resources, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; G.B.A.: supervision, writing—review and editing; N.M.: supervision, writing—review and editing; C.F.: supervision, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; B.O.: conceptualization, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; T.J.C.: supervision, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; F.O.M.: writing—review and editing; K.I.: supervision, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; Z.M.A.: writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; K.O.: writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; J.E.B.: writing—review and editing; B.K.-A: supervision, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing.
All authors gave final approval for publication and agreed to be held accountable for the work performed therein.
Conflict of interest declaration
We declare we have no competing interests.
Funding
We received no funding for this study.
References
- 1.
Cardinale BJ 2012 Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59-67. (doi:10.1038/nature11148) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 2.
Mazor T, Doropoulos C, Schwarzmueller F, Gladish DW, Kumaran N, Merkel K, Di Marco M, Gagic V . 2018 Global mismatch of policy and research on drivers of biodiversity loss. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1071-1074. (doi:10.1038/s41559-018-0563-x) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 3.
Dong Y, Wu N, Li F, Huang L, Lu H, Stenseth NChr . 2021 Paleorecords reveal the increased temporal instability of species diversity under biodiversity loss. Quat. Sci. Rev. 269, 107147. (doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107147) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 4.
Carvalho SHCD, Cojoianu T, Ascui F . 2022 From impacts to dependencies: a first global assessment of corporate biodiversity risk exposure and responses. Bus. Strategy Environ. 31, 1-15. (doi:10.1002/bse.3142) Google Scholar - 5. World Economic Forum. 2020. The global risks report 2020. World Economic Forum. See https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2020/. Google Scholar
- 6. World Economic Forum, & PwC. 2020. Nature risk rising: why the crisis engulfing nature matters for business and the economy. World Economic Forum. See https://www.weforum.org/reports/nature-risk-rising-why-the-crisis-engulfing-nature-matters-for-business-and-the-economy/. Google Scholar
- 7. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2022. Decision adoption by the conference of the parties to the convention on biological diversity. CBD/COP/DEC/15/4. See https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-15/cop-15-dec-04-en.pdf. Google Scholar
- 8.
Norris K . 2012 Biodiversity in the context of ecosystem services: the applied need for systems approaches. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 191-199. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0176) Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 9.
Venter O 2016 Sixteen years of change in the global terrestrial human footprint and implications for biodiversity conservation. Nat. Commun. 7, 1-11. (doi:10.1038/ncomms12558) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 10.
Thomas CD . 2020 The development of Anthropocene biotas. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 375, 20190113. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2019.0113) Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 11.
Hooper DU 2005 Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol. Monogr. 75, 3-35. (doi:10.1890/04-0922) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 12.
Isbell F 2017 Linking the influence and dependence of people on biodiversity across scales. Nature 546, 65-72. (doi:10.1038/nature22899) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 13.
Isbell F 2022 Expert perspectives on global biodiversity loss and its drivers and impacts on people. Front. Ecol. Environ. 21, 94-103. (doi:10.1002/fee.2536) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 14.
Díaz S 2015 The IPBES conceptual framework—connecting nature and people. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 14, 1-16. (doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 15. CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity). 2020 Global biodiversity outlook 5. Montreal, Canada: CBD. See https://www.cbd.int/gbo5. Google Scholar
- 16.
Díaz SM 2019 The global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services: summary for policy makers. Bonn, Germany: Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Google Scholar - 17.
Midgley GF, Bond WJ . 2015 Future of African terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystems under anthropogenic climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 823-829. (doi:10.1038/nclimate2753) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 18.
Baruch Z, Belsky AJ, Bulla L, Franco CA, Garay I, Haridasan M, Lavelle P, Medina E, Sarmiento G . 1996 Biodiversity as regulator of energy flow, water use and nutrient cycling in savannas. In Biodiversity and savanna ecosystem processes (edsSolbrig OT, Medina E, Silva JF ), pp. 175-194. Berlin, Germany: Springer. (doi:10.1007/978-3-642-78969-4_10) Google Scholar - 19.
Harrison PA 2014 Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: a systematic review. Ecosyst. Serv. 9, 191-203. (doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.05.006) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 20.
Scherer-Lorenzen M, Gessner MO, Beisner BE, Messier C, Paquette A, Petermann JS, Soininen J, Nock CA . 2022 Pathways for cross-boundary effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning. Trends Ecol. Evol. 37, 454-467. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2021.12.009) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 21.
Richter DD, Billings SA . 2015 ‘One physical system’: Tansley's ecosystem as Earth's critical zone. New Phytol. 206, 900-912. (doi:10.1111/nph.13338) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 22.
Fanin N, Gundale MJ, Farrell M, Ciobanu M, Baldock JA, Nilsson MC, Kardol P, Wardle DA . 2018 Consistent effects of biodiversity loss on multifunctionality across contrasting ecosystems. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 269-278. (doi:10.1038/s41559-017-0415-0) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 23.
Barry KE 2019 The future of complementarity: disentangling causes from consequences. Trends Ecol. Evol. 34, 167-180. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2018.10.013) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 24.
Barnes AD, Jochum M, Lefcheck JS, Eisenhauer N, Scherber C, O'Connor MI, de Ruiter P, Brose U . 2018 Energy flux: the link between multitrophic biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 186-197. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2017.12.007) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 25.
Bannar-Martin KH 2018 Integrating community assembly and biodiversity to better understand ecosystem function: the Community Assembly and the Functioning of Ecosystems (CAFE) approach. Ecol. Lett. 21, 167-180. (doi:10.1111/ele.12895) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 26.
Hahn T, Koh NS, Elmqvist T . 2022 No net loss of biodiversity, green growth, and the need to address drivers. One Earth 5, 612-614. (doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2022.05.022) Crossref, Google Scholar - 27.
Cafaro P, Hansson P, Götmark F . 2022 Overpopulation is a major cause of biodiversity loss and smaller human populations are necessary to preserve what is left. Biol. Conserv. 272, 109646. (doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109646) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 28.
Achieng AO, Opaa B, Obiero KO, Osano O, Kaunda-Arara B . 2022 Watershed management in Kenya; societal implications, drivers of change and governance needs. In Encyclopedia of inland waters, 2nd edn (edsMehner T, Tockner K ), pp. 464-474. Oxford, UK: Science Direct, Elsevier. (doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-819166-8.00157-2) Crossref, Google Scholar - 29.
Siddig AA . 2019 Why is biodiversity data-deficiency an ongoing conservation dilemma in Africa? J. Nat. Conserv. 50, 125719. (doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2019.125719) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 30.
Stephenson PJ, Ntiamoa-Baidu Y, Simaika JP . 2020 The use of traditional and modern tools for monitoring wetlands biodiversity in Africa: challenges and opportunities. Front. Environ. Sci. 8, 61. (doi:10.3389/fenvs.2020.00061) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 31.
Stephenson PJ 2017 Unblocking the flow of biodiversity data for decision-making in Africa. Biol. Conserv. 213, 335-340. (doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.003) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 32.
Zallé O . 2019 Natural resources and economic growth in Africa: the role of institutional quality and human capital. Resour. Policy 62, 616-624. (doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.11.009) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 33.
Lock JM . 2013 Africa, ecosystems of. Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 2nd edn, pp. 45-57. Oxford, UK: Science Direct, Elsevier. Google Scholar - 34.
Happold D, Lock JM . 2013The biotic zones of Africa . In Mammals of Africa, vol. 1 (edsKingdon J, Happold DCD, Hoffmann M, Happold M, Kalina J ), pp. 57-74. London, UK: Bloomsbury. Google Scholar - 35.
Achieng AO, Lawrence TJ, Flavin B, Migeni AZ, Coffey TJ, Otieno MJ, Stein H, Irvine K, Opaa B . 2022 The future of education and training in aquatic science within African Great Lakes. J. Gt. Lakes Res. (doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2022.08.012) Crossref, Google Scholar - 36.
Plisnier PD 2022 Need for harmonized long-term multi-lake monitoring of African Great Lakes. J. Gt. Lakes Res. (doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2022.01.016) Crossref, Google Scholar - 37.
Salzburger W, Van Bocxlaer B, Cohen AS . 2014 Ecology and evolution of the African great lakes and their faunas. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 45, 519-545. (doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091804) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 38.
Archer E 2018 Summary for policymakers of the regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Africa of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Bonn, Germany: Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Google Scholar - 39.
Chapman CA 2022 The future of sub-Saharan Africa's biodiversity in the face of climate and societal change. Front. Ecol. Evol. 10, 744. (doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.790552) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 40.
Abrams RW, Abrams JF . 2020 Why should we care so much about old world tropical rainforests? Encycl. World's Biomes 3, 67-77. (doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-409548-9.11969-4) Google Scholar - 41.
Decker C, Griffiths C, Prochazka K, Ras C, Whitfield A . 2003 Marine biodiversity in Sub-Saharan Africa: the known and the unknown. In Workshop reports: summary of the first two days (Vol. 284, p. 285).Cape Town, South Africa ,23–26 September 2003 . See https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292752291_National_Report_Marine_biodiversity_in_Mozambique_-_the_known_and_the_unknown. Google Scholar - 42.
Beresford AE, Donald PF, Buchanan GM . 2020 Repeatable and standardised monitoring of threats to Key Biodiversity Areas in Africa using Google Earth Engine. Ecol. Indic. 109, 105763. (doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105763) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 43.
Holland RA, Darwall WRT, Smith KG . 2012 Conservation priorities for freshwater biodiversity: the key biodiversity area approach refined and tested for continental Africa. Biol. Conserv. 148, 167-179. (doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2012.01.016) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 44.
Waide RB . 2008 Tropical rainforest. Encycl. Ecol. 2, 679-683. (doi:10.1016/B978-0-444-63768-0.00333-4) Google Scholar - 45.
Burgess ND, Hales JDA, Ricketts TH, Dinerstein E . 2006 Factoring species, non-species values and threats into biodiversity prioritisation across the ecoregions of Africa and its islands. Biol. Conserv. 127, 383-401. (doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.08.018) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 46.
Vernaz G 2021 Mapping epigenetic divergence in the massive radiation of Lake Malawi cichlid fishes. Nat. Commun. 12, 1-13. (doi:10.1038/s41467-021-26166-2) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 47.
Assis J, Failler P, Fragkopoulou E, Abecasis D, Touron-Gardic G, Regalla A, Sidina E, Dinis H, Serrao E . 2021 Potential biodiversity connectivity in the network of marine protected areas in Western Africa. Front. Mar. Sci. 8, 765053. (doi:10.3389/fmars.2021.765053) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 48.
Wegmann M, Santini L, Leutner B, Safi K, Rocchini D, Bevanda M, Latifi H, Dech S, Rondinini C . 2014 Role of African protected areas in maintaining connectivity for large mammals. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130193. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2013.0193) Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 49.
Stephenson PJ 2021 Conservation science in Africa: mainstreaming biodiversity information into policy and decision-making. In Closing the knowledge-implementation gap in conservation science. Wildlife Research Monographs, vol. 4, pp. 287-321. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. (doi:10.1007/978-3-030-81085-6_11) Crossref, Google Scholar - 50.
Han X 2014 A biodiversity indicators dashboard: addressing challenges to monitoring progress towards the Aichi biodiversity targets using disaggregated global data. PLoS One 9, e112046. (doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0112046) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 51.
Yevide AS, Wu B, Khan AS, Zeng Y, Liu J . 2016 Bibliometric analysis of ecosystem monitoring-related research in Africa: implications for ecological stewardship and scientific collaboration. Int. J. Sust. Dev. World Ecol. 23, 412-422. (doi:10.1080/13504509.2015.1129998) Crossref, Google Scholar - 52.
Di Marco M 2017 Changing trends and persisting biases in three decades of conservation science. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 10, 32-42. (doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2017.01.008) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 53.
Masese FO, Achieng’ AO, Raburu PO, Lawrence T, Ives JT, Nyamweya C, Kaunda-Arara B . 2020 Distribution patterns and diversity of riverine fishes of the Lake Victoria Basin, Kenya. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol. 105, 171-184. (doi:10.1002/iroh.202002039) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 54.
Sayer CA, Máiz-Tomé L, Darwall WRT . 2018 Freshwater biodiversity in the Lake Victoria basin: guidance for species conservation, site protection, climate resilience and sustainable livelihoods (edsSayer C, Máiz-Tomé L, Darwall WRT ). Cambridge, UK: International Union for Conservation of Nature. Crossref, Google Scholar - 55.
Achieng AO, Masese FO, Kaunda-Arara B . 2020 Fish assemblages and size-spectra variation among rivers of Lake Victoria Basin, Kenya. Ecol. Indic. 118, 106745. (doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106745) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 56.
Achieng AO, Masese FO, Coffey TJ, Raburu PO, Agembe SW, Febria CM, Kaunda-Arara B . 2021 Assessment of the ecological health of Afrotropical rivers using fish assemblages: a case study of selected rivers in the Lake Victoria Basin, Kenya. Front. Water 2, 620704. (doi:10.3389/frwa.2020.620704) Crossref, Google Scholar - 57.
Waldron A, Mooers AO, Miller DC, Nibbelink N, Redding D, Kuhn TS, Roberts JT, Gittleman JL . 2013 Targeting global conservation funding to limit immediate biodiversity declines. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 12 144-12 148. (doi:10.1073/pnas.1221370110) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 58.
Beaudry C, Mouton J . 2018 The next generation of scientists in Africa. Cape Town, South Africa: African Minds. Crossref, Google Scholar - 59.
Jowi JO . 2021 Doctoral training in African universities: recent trends, developments and issues. J. Br. Acad. 9(s1), 159-181. (doi:10.5871/jba/009s1.159) Crossref, Google Scholar - 60.
Atickem A, Stenseth NChr, Fashing PJ, Nguyen N, Chapman CA, Bekele A, Mekonnen A, Omeja PA, Kalbitzer U . 2019 Build science in Africa. Nature 570, 297-300. (doi:10.1038/d41586-019-01885-1) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 61.
Irvine K, Castello L, Junqueira A, Moulton T . 2016 Linking ecology with social development for tropical aquatic conservation. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 26, 917-941. (doi:10.1002/aqc.2706) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 62.
Kundu O, Matthews NE . 2019 The role of charitable funding in university research. Sci. Public Policy 46, 611-619. (doi:10.1093/scipol/scz014) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 63.
Ahrends A 2011 Funding begets biodiversity. Divers. Distrib. 17, 191-200. (doi:10.1111/j.1472-4642.2010.00737.x) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 64.
Wang J, Lee YN, Walsh JP . 2018 Funding model and creativity in science: competitive versus block funding and status contingency effects. Evol. Hum. Behav. 47, 1070-1083. (doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.014) Google Scholar - 65.
Malcom J, Schwartz MW, Evansen M, Ripple WJ, Polasky S, Gerber LR, Lovejoy TE, Talbot LM, Miller JR and 1648 signatories. 2019 Solve the biodiversity crisis with funding. Science 365, 1256. (doi:10.1126/science.aay9839) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 66.
North MA, Hastie WW, Craig MH, Slotow R . 2022 Tracing primary sources of funding for, and patterns of authorship in, climate change research in Africa. Environ. Sci. Policy 127, 196-208. (doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2021.10.023) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 67.
Cobo JG, Dercon G, Cadisch G . 2010 Nutrient balances in African land use systems across different spatial scales: a review of approaches, challenges and progress. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 136, 1-15. (doi:10.1016/j.agee.2009.11.006) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 68.
Elrys AS, Abdel-Fattah MK, Raza S, Chen Z, Zhou J . 2019 Spatial trends in the nitrogen budget of the African agro-food system over the past five decades. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 124091. (doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab5d9e) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 69.
Perrings C, Halkos G . 2015 Agriculture and the threat to biodiversity in sub-Saharan Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 10, 095015. (doi:10.1088/1748-9326/10/9/095015) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 70.
Dasgupta P, Levin S . 2023 Economic factors underlying biodiversity loss. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 378, 20220197. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2022.0197). Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 71.
Wangai PW, Burkhard B, Müller F . 2016 A review of studies on ecosystem services in Africa. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 5, 225-245. (doi:10.1016/j.ijsbe.2016.08.005) Crossref, Google Scholar - 72.
Malhi Y, Adu-Bredu S, Asare RA, Lewis SL, Mayaux P . 2013 African rainforests: past, present and future. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 368, 20120312. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0312) Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 73.
Kehoe L, Romero-Muñoz A, Polaina E, Estes L, Kreft H, Kuemmerle T . 2017 Biodiversity at risk under future cropland expansion and intensification. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1129-1135. (doi:10.1038/s41559-017-0234-3) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 74.
Wittemyer G, Northrup JM, Blanc J, Douglas-Hamilton I, Omondi P, Burnham KP . 2014 Illegal killing for ivory drives global decline in African elephants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 13 117-13 121. (doi:10.1073/pnas.1403984111) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 75.
Sintayehu DW . 2018 Impact of climate change on biodiversity and associated key ecosystem services in Africa: a systematic review. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 4, 225-239. (doi:10.1080/20964129.2018.1530054) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 76.
Mantyka-Pringle CS, Visconti P, Di Marco M, Martin TG, Rondinini C, Rhodes JR . 2015 Climate change modifies risk of global biodiversity loss due to land-cover change. Biol. Conserv. 187, 103-111. (doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.04.016) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 77.
Aleman JC, Blarquez O, Staver CA . 2016 Land-use change outweighs projected effects of changing rainfall on tree cover in sub-Saharan Africa. Glob. Change Biol. 22, 3013-3025. (doi:10.1111/gcb.13299) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 78.
Newbold T, Boakes EH, Hill SL, Harfoot MB, Collen B . 2017 The present and future effects of land use on ecological assemblages in tropical grasslands and savannas in Africa. Oikos 126, 1760-1769. (doi:10.1111/oik.04338) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 79.
Witt AB . 2010 Biofuels and invasive species from an African perspective—a review. GCB Bioenergy 2, 321-329. (doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2010.01063.x) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 80.
Eckert S, Hamad A, Kilawe CJ, Linders TE, Ng WT, Mbaabu PR, Shiferaw H, Witt A, Schaffner U . 2020 Niche change analysis as a tool to inform management of two invasive species in Eastern Africa. Ecosphere 11, e02987. (doi:10.1002/ecs2.2987) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 81.
Gichua M, Njorage G, Shitanda D, Ward D . 2013 Invasive species in East Africa: current status for informed policy decisions and management. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 15, 45-55. (https://www.ajol.info/index.php/jagst/article/view/112780) Google Scholar - 82.
Egoh BN, O'Farrell PJ, Charef A, Gurney LJ, Koellner T, Abi HN, Egoh M, Willemen L . 2012 An African account of ecosystem service provision: use, threats and policy options for sustainable livelihoods. Ecosyst. Serv. 2, 71-81. (doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.09.004) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 83.
Fayiga AO, Ipinmoroti MO, Chirenje T . 2018 Environmental pollution in Africa. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 20, 41-73. (doi:10.1007/s10668-016-9894-4) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 84.
Knippertz P, Evans MJ, Field PR, Fink AH, Liousse C, Marsham JH . 2015 The possible role of local air pollution in climate change in West Africa. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 815-822. (doi:10.1038/nclimate2727) Crossref, Google Scholar - 85.
Verheyen E 2016 Oil extraction imperils Africa's Great Lakes. Science 354, 561-562. (doi:10.1126/science.aal1722) Crossref, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 86.
Smith P 2015 Biogeochemical cycles and biodiversity as key drivers of ecosystem services provided by soils. Soil 1, 665-685. (doi:10.5194/soil-1-665-2015) Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar - 87.
Achieng AO . 2023 Monitoring biodiversity loss in rapidly changing Afrotropical ecosystems: an emerging imperative for governance and research. Figshare. (doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6607490) Google Scholar