IPBES Global Assessment Chapter 3 Supplementary Online Materials Contents S3.1 Quantitative analysis of progress towards the Aichi Targets ............................................ 3 S3.1.1 Methods .................................................................................................................................................. 3 S3.1.2 Indicator factsheets ................................................................................................................................. 9 S3.2 Methods for literature search for assessment of progress towards Aichi Targets ......... 116 S3.3 Extended review of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities .......................................................................................................................... 118 S3.4 Methods for literature search for assessment of progress towards SDGs ..................... 164 S3.5 Further information on progress to the Sustainable Development Goals ...................... 166 S3.6 Quantitative analysis of progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals ........... 176 S3.7 Extended review of the SDGs and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities ......... 192 S3.8 Methods for literature search for assessment of progress towards other conventions related to nature and nature’s contributions to people. .......................................................... 212 S3.9 Coordination between the CBD and other MEAs. ........................................................ 214 S3.10 The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) ............................................................................................................................ 215 S3.11 The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea .............................................. 217 S3.12 Polar agreements and cooperative arrangements ......................................................... 217 S3.13 Methods for cross-cutting synthesis across goals and targets ..................................... 219 S3.14 Additional information on knowledge gaps ................................................................ 228 S3.15 Supplementary References .......................................................................................... 228 List of Tables Table S3.1 Indicators used in the quantitative analysis of progress towards the Aichi Targets, their characteristics, and projected trends. Table S3.2 Selected indicator trends for different regions Table S3.3 Search terms used for literature search for assessment of progress towards Aichi Targets. Table S3.4 Search terms for literature search for assessment of progress towards SDGs Table S3.5. Mechanisms linking biodiversity change and human health at different levels. 1 Table S3.6 Indicators used in the quantitative analysis of progress towards SDGs 6, 14 and 15, their characteristics, and parojected trends. Table S3.7 Graphs for indicator extrapolations used in the quantitative analysis of progress towards SDGs 6, 14 and 15. Table S3.8 Search terms used for literature search for assessment of progress towards other biodiversity and ecosystem service-related conventions. Table S3.9. The composition of the nine overarching themes (containing all Aichi Targets, SDG goals, and the 42 selected SDG targets) identified during the clustering exercise. Table S3.10 Relationships between targets (Aichi Targets [A1–A20], SDG goals [1– 17], and selected SDG targets [1.1–15.9], see short names in Table S3.9) and the components of Nature (N01-N17, as defined in Fig. 3.1). Table S3.11 Relationships between targets (Aichi Targets [A1–A20], SDG goals [1– 17], and selected SDG targets [1.1–15.9], see short names in Table S3.9) and NCPs (C01–C18, as defined in Fig. 3.1). List of figures Figure S3.1. Limits and alternatives for global food security, showing (a) food production against agriculture-induced impacts, with green shading indicating a safe space where global food demands are met; and alternative scenarios of ecological (b) and continued conventional (c) intensification. Figure S3.2. Benefits to health from exposure to natural environments. Figure S3.3. Challenges and solutions for promoting education for sustainable development. Figure S3.4. Interactions between inequality and the biosphere in social-ecological systems. Figure. S3.5. Global distribution of ~20 million OBIS records across depth zones of the ocean. (A) Continental shelf (0-200 m), (B) Mesopelagic continental slope (200- 1000), (C) Bathypelagic continental slope (1000-4000), (D) Abyssal plain (4000- 6000), (E) Hadal (>6000) zones. 2 S3.1 Quantitative analysis of progress towards the Aichi Targets S3.1.1 Methods Datasets for a total of 68 indicators were compiled to assess progress towards the Aichi Targets (Table S3.1). This included all of the those considered by Tittensor et al. (2014), apart from Red List Index for seabirds (replaced by Red List Index showing impacts of fisheries), Protected area coverage of Alliance for Zero Extinction sites and Protected area coverage of Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (both of which were combined into a new indicator Protected area coverage of Key Biodiversity Areas), Insecticide use (incorporated within a new indicator Pesticde use), rate of mammal and bird extinctions (which has not been updated since the 2000-2010 datapoint), and Protected area coverage of freshwater ecoregions (dropped as it is now judged to be a poor indicator given the large size of these areas and the high proportion of non-freshwater habitat included). Datasets were updated for all bu 22 of these indicators. An additional 16 indicators were included: Red List Index (internationally traded species), Area of tree cover loss (ha), Red List index (forest specialists), Marine trophic index, Nitrogen use balance (kg/km2), Climatic Impact Index for birds, Area of mangrove forest cover (km2), Number of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture secured in conservation facilities, Red List Index (wild relatives of farmed and domesticated species), Percentage change in local species richness, Red List Index (species used for food and medicine), Percentage of global rural population with access to improved water resources, Percentage of countries that have ratified the Nagoya Protocol, Percentage of countries with revised NBSAPs, Species Status Information Index, and Proportion of known species assessed through the IUCN Red List (Table 3.3, S3.1). Table S3.1 Indicators used in the quantitative analysis of progress towards the Aichi Targets, their characteristics, and projected trends. Numbered target elements correspond to Table 3.3. Indicators marked with † are considered ‘IPBES core indicators’. Spatial coverage is scored as poor (1-2 continents, or 3-4 continents and <10 countries), moderate (3- 4 continents and ≥10 countries, or ≥5 continents and <20 countries), or good (or ≥5 continents and ≥20 countries). Asterisks indicate time-series updated since Tittensor et al. (2014) or indicators additional to (or replacing indicators used by) Tittensor et al. (2014). Strat- Aichi Target Indicator name Type Spatial Align- Sampling Projected egic Target Ele- coverage ment dates trend to Goal ment 2020 A 1 1.1 Biodiversity Barometer (% of Response Poor High 2009-2016* Significant respondents that have heard of increase biodiversity) A 1 1.1 Biodiversity Barometer (% of Response Poor High 2009-2016* Significant respondents giving correct definition of increase biodiversity) A 1 1.1 Funding towards environmental Response Good Low 1995-2010 Non- education ($) significant decline A 1 1.2 Online interest in biodiversity Response Good Medium 2004-2016* Non- (proportion of google searches) significant decrease 3 A 2 2.2 Funding towards Environmental Impact Response Good Low 1995-2012 Non- Assessment ($) significant decrease A 2 2.4 Number of research studies involving Response Good Low 1974-2010 Significant economic valuation increase A 3 3.2 World Trade Organisation ' green box' Response Good Medium 1995-2011 Non- agricultural subsidies ($) significant increase A 3 3.2 Funding towards institutional capacity Response Good Low 1995-2012 Non- building in fisheries ($) significant increase A 4 4.1 Percentage of countries that are Response Good High 1994-2016* Significant Category 1 CITES Parties† increase A 4 4.2 Ecological Footprint (number of earths Pressure Good High 1961-2012* Non- needed to support human society)† significant increase A 4 4.2 Red List Index (impacts of utilisation) Pressure Good High 1986-2016* Significant decrease A 4 4.2 Red List Index (internationally traded State Good Medium 1988-2016* Significant species) decrease A 4 4.2 Human appropriation of net primary Pressure Good Low 1910-2005 Significant productivity (Pg C) increase A 4 4.2 Human appropriation of fresh water Pressure Good High 1995-2009 Significant (water footprint) (thousand km3)† increase B 5 5.1 Wetland Extent Trends Index State Good Medium 1970-2015* Significant decrease B 5 5.1 Area of tree cover loss (ha)† State Good High 2001-2016* Significant increase B 5 5.1 Percentage natural habitat extent State Good High 1961-2011 Significant decrease B 5 5.2 Wild Bird Index (habitat specialists) State Poor Low 1968-2014* Significant decrease B 5 5.2 Red List index (forest specialists) State Good Low 1988-2016* Significant decrease B 6 6.1 Proportion of fish stocks in safe State Good High 1974-2013* Non- biological limits† significant decrease B 6 6.1 Marine Stewardship Council