Presenting the scientific discourse of biodiversity loss through drivers, solutions, and responsibilities.

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Willem van Doorninck, Jelle Behagel
{"title":"Presenting the scientific discourse of biodiversity loss through drivers, solutions, and responsibilities.","authors":"Willem van Doorninck, Jelle Behagel","doi":"10.1111/cobi.70385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Biodiversity loss is considered a major global issue, but at the same time, scientists interpret it differently, identifying varied drivers, solutions, and responsibilities in their published works. These interpretations shape the scientific narratives these scientists use to discuss biodiversity loss, which, in turn, affects policy through the biodiversity science-policy interface. However, a comprehensive overview of these different narratives within biodiversity loss literature is lacking. To address this gap in knowledge, we conducted a literature review of contemporary, global biodiversity literature and a discursive network analysis based on biodiversity loss drivers, solutions, and responsibilities. We identified seven narratives that represent an overview of the scientific discourse on biodiversity loss. We determined that the narratives identify different key drivers of biodiversity loss and often focus primarily on either drivers, solutions, or responsibilities, whereas some neglect societal dimensions. Moreover, our research showed that the commonly used Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) categorization of direct drivers of biodiversity loss is reflected in only one of the seven narratives, thereby indicating its limited prevalence across the literature. Thus, this study will help biodiversity scientists develop more holistic biodiversity loss narratives by recognizing the limitations of the narratives they currently use. Additionally, our findings can assist policymakers in identifying relevant but less common narratives in the biodiversity science-policy literature that may help them develop policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e70385"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70385","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Biodiversity loss is considered a major global issue, but at the same time, scientists interpret it differently, identifying varied drivers, solutions, and responsibilities in their published works. These interpretations shape the scientific narratives these scientists use to discuss biodiversity loss, which, in turn, affects policy through the biodiversity science-policy interface. However, a comprehensive overview of these different narratives within biodiversity loss literature is lacking. To address this gap in knowledge, we conducted a literature review of contemporary, global biodiversity literature and a discursive network analysis based on biodiversity loss drivers, solutions, and responsibilities. We identified seven narratives that represent an overview of the scientific discourse on biodiversity loss. We determined that the narratives identify different key drivers of biodiversity loss and often focus primarily on either drivers, solutions, or responsibilities, whereas some neglect societal dimensions. Moreover, our research showed that the commonly used Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) categorization of direct drivers of biodiversity loss is reflected in only one of the seven narratives, thereby indicating its limited prevalence across the literature. Thus, this study will help biodiversity scientists develop more holistic biodiversity loss narratives by recognizing the limitations of the narratives they currently use. Additionally, our findings can assist policymakers in identifying relevant but less common narratives in the biodiversity science-policy literature that may help them develop policies.

从驱动因素、解决方案和责任方面介绍生物多样性丧失的科学论述。
生物多样性的丧失被认为是一个重大的全球问题,但与此同时,科学家们对它有不同的解释,在他们发表的作品中确定了不同的驱动因素、解决方案和责任。这些解释塑造了这些科学家用来讨论生物多样性丧失的科学叙述,这反过来又通过生物多样性科学-政策界面影响政策。然而,缺乏对生物多样性丧失文献中这些不同叙述的全面概述。为了解决这一知识缺口,我们对当代全球生物多样性文献进行了文献综述,并基于生物多样性丧失的驱动因素、解决方案和责任进行了话语网络分析。我们确定了七种叙述,它们代表了对生物多样性丧失的科学论述的概述。我们确定,这些叙述确定了生物多样性丧失的不同关键驱动因素,通常主要关注驱动因素、解决方案或责任,而有些则忽视了社会层面。此外,我们的研究表明,常用的生物多样性和生态系统服务政府间科学政策平台(IPBES)对生物多样性丧失直接驱动因素的分类仅反映在7种叙述中的一种,从而表明其在文献中的普及程度有限。因此,本研究将帮助生物多样性科学家认识到他们目前使用的叙事的局限性,从而发展出更全面的生物多样性丧失叙事。此外,我们的研究结果可以帮助决策者识别生物多样性科学政策文献中相关但不太常见的叙述,这些叙述可能有助于他们制定政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书