Biodiversity Informatics Goals idea

The Biodiversity Informatics Goals A Proposed Coordinated Response to the Aichi Targets

David Remsen A Concept for the Biodiversity Informatics Community November 2012, updated June 2014

The aim of this presentation

Mobilize the collective biodiversity informatics community toward supporting regional, national and multi-national goals and targets. Suggest informatics activities this community should focus on for the next 10 years and why? Suggest a key role for GBIF to play in the coordination and fulfillment of these activities Illustrate this role using the Catalogue of Life as an example.

We begin with the Aichi Targets

Ratified by nearly every country (except USA*)

In 2010 at COP 10 in Nagoya, Japan, the Parties of the CBD adopted a Strategic Plan for Biodiversity to achieve 20 targets before 2020.

These 20 targets came to be known as the Aichi Targets *USA signed the CBD but as not ratified it.

Aichi Target 19 focuses on the improvement, sharing and application of knowledge

“ All countries need information to identify threats to biodiversity and determine priorities for conservation and sustainable use. … the absence or difficulty in accessing relevant information is an obstacle to the implementation of the goals of the Convention.”

•  Our understanding of the role and function of species within ecosystems is poorly understood. How do species interact with each other and the world around us to provide valuable services?

•  Information regarding status and trends is needed for the majority of species. We need such information to determine if our responses to biodiversity loss is having any effect and to identify patterns of change.

•  Little available information on the consequences of biodiversity loss which is crucial in creating momentum for conservation.

Improved scientific biodiversity information is needed to be widely shared and transferred so that it can be applied to better serve

science and society

Nearly all of the targets require access to data or information related to biodiversity

Their endorsement by so many countries presents an opportunity

A Biodiversity Informatics response to the Aichi Targets is warranted

Who should respond and how?

Biodiversity Informatics presents a confusing ecosystem of acronyms *

MorphBank

VERTNET

HERPNET

ORNIS

iDigBio

MANIS

BioCASE

iNatCephBase

FishBase

DiscLife

DanBIF

GBIF

InBio

ALA

SANBI

PRECIS

BugGuide

AmphibiaWeb

CalImages

Euro+Med

BDWD

MSW

WoRMSOBIS

AquaMaps

USDAPlants

ITIS

SP2000

CoL DIGiR

TAPIR

DwC

ABCD

SDD

TreeBase

IUCNRedList

GBIFES

NBN

PESI

ViBRANT

EOL

FNA

WikiSpecies

Canadensys

IPNI

IF

GSPC

GTI

IPT

CRIA

Map ofLife

LifeMapper

Plazi

USDAPlantsKEmu

GRIN

NZOR

FaEu

CIAT

EDIT

TDWG

NLBIF

LuCID

GNA

MycoBank

ZooBank

SMEBD

Artenbank

HoL

ZooTAXA

TCS

SPM

GUIDLSID

EML

ZooRec

FAO

CONABIO

OGC

MAXENT

AntBase

ERMS

* This is a small subset of the informatics landscape

There are many connections between these parts

MorphBank

VERTNET

HERPNET

ORNIS

iDigBio

MANIS

BioCASE

iNatCephBase

FishBase

DiscLife

DanBIF

GBIF

InBio

ALA

SANBI

PRECIS

BugGuide

AmphibiaWeb

CalImages

Euro+Med

BDWD

MSW

WoRMSOBIS

AquaMaps

USDAPlants

ITIS

SP2000

CoL DIGiR

TAPIR

DwC

ABCD

SDD

TreeBase

IUCNRedList

GBIFES

NBN

PESI

ViBRANT

EOL

FNA

WikiSpecies

Canadensys

IPNI

IF

GSPC

GTI

IPT

CRIA

Map ofLife

LifeMapper

Plazi

USDAPlantsKEmu

GRIN

NZOR

FaEu

CIAT

EDIT

TDWG

NLBIF

LuCID

GNA

MycoBank

ZooBank

SMEBD

Artenbank

HoL

ZooTAXA

TCS

SPM

GUIDLSID

EML

ZooRec

FAO

CONABIO

OGC

MAXENT

AntBase

ERMS

But it’s hard to know how it all comes together. Or if it comes together at all.

Outsiders see a crowded space all shouting for attention

MorphBank

VERTNET

HERPNET

ORNIS

iDigBio

MANIS

BioCASE

iNatCephBase

FishBase

DiscLife

DanBIF

GBIF

InBio

ALA

SANBI

PRECIS

BugGuide

AmphibiaWeb

CalImages

Euro+Med

BDWD

MSW

WoRMSOBIS

AquaMaps

USDAPlants

ITIS

SP2000

CoL DIGiR

TAPIR

DwC

ABCD

SDD

TreeBase

IUCNRedList

GBIFES

NBN

PESI

ViBRANT

EOL

FNA

WikiSpecies

Canadensys

IPNI

IF

GSPC

GTI

IPT

CRIA

Map ofLife

LifeMapper

Plazi

USDAPlantsKEmu

GRIN

NZOR

FaEu

CIAT

EDIT

TDWG

NLBIF

LuCID

GNA

MycoBank

ZooBank

SMEBD

Artenbank

HoL

ZooTAXA

TCS

SPM

GUIDLSID

EML

ZooRec

FAO

CONABIO

OGC

MAXENT

AntBase

ERMS

Insiders often find it hard to explain how their objectives and directions relate to those of others.

Can and should the Biodiversity Informa9cs community respond with a single voice?

If so, how?

In 2012, GBIF hosted the Global Biodiversity Informatics Conference

“The Global Biodiversity Informatics Conference (GBIC) aims to discuss how informatics can best meet the challenges posed by biodiversity science and policy.”

The output of the conference is a “Global Biodiversity Informatics Outlook”

The Global Biodiversity Informatics Outlook defines a framework of 20 components grouped into four strategic areas.

This framework does a very good job of describing a biodiversity informatics instrument.

Content Discovery andAccess

Models andVisualizations

Foundations and Context

ORG

ANIZE

ANALYZE AND INTERPRETUNDERPIN ENHANCE

REFINE

Field surveys and observations

Sequences andgenomes

Collections andspecimens

Published materials

Remote-sensedobservations

Fitness-for-useand annotations

Taxonomicframework

Integrated occurrencedata

Aggregated speciestrait data

Comprehensiveknowledge access

Multiscalar spatialmodelling

Trends and predictions

Modelling biologicalsystems

Prioritizing newdata capture

Visualizationand dissemination

Open access and reuse culture Biodiversity knowledge network

Data standardsPolicy incentives

Persistent storage and archival

But what questions should this instrument address?

And how might the community be directed to answer them.




ORG

ANIZE

ANALYZE AND INTERPRET

UNDERPIN ENHANCE

REFINE




Published materials



Taxonomicframework












??

?

?

Many of us have been asked some variant of these questions regarding species.

“What is it called?” “Where ( did | does | will ) it live?”

“Is it endangered?”

“How many are there?”

“What other species live around here?”

“What is it related to?”

“What does it do?”

“What does it look like?”

Are these the sorts of questions being addressed within biodiversity informatics today?

“What good is it?”

“How are they doing?”

Yes! They are.

These organiza9ons/ini9a9ves work on those ques9ons.

We* propose that the Biodiversity Informatics community set its own targets by establishing four goals




ORG

ANIZE


UNDERPIN ENHANCE

REFINE




Published materials



Taxonomicframework












DGOAL

CGOAL

BGOAL

AGOAL

And articulate these goals in a simple and non-technical manner.

And align the four Biodiversity Informatics Goals with the Aichi Targets

Goals that support national priorities through delivering scientific biodiversity data and information products and services

The Biodiversity Informatics Goals The Aichi Targets

AGOAL By 2020, enable all countries to have a clear

understanding of the status and trends in the range and abundance of all species occurring within their borders

THE BIODIVERSITY INFORMATICS GOALS

BGOAL By 2020, provide the means to describe how species

interact with each other and surrounding natural and man-made landscapes to form ecosystems

CGOAL By 2020, ensure that all countries have a complete and

up-to-date national species registry and key species lists through an integrated global taxonomic information system

DGOAL By 2020, provide all countries with the means to

precisely identify any target species or species group (invasive, threatened, trade-restricted, etc).

Incorporating the Goals into the GBIO enhances the landscaping by further distinguishing actors and their roles amongst the goals

It starts to bring order, context and direction to the “ecosystem of acronyms”




ORG

ANIZE


UNDERPIN ENHANCE

REFINE

AGOAL

Natural HistoryCollections

Observation Networks

Trawler Surveys

Expert knowledge

Remote sensed data

Herbaria

Environmental Impact Ass.

Citizen Science Networks

Publications

Protect Area Data

OGCDiGIRTAPIR

ABCDDwCCreative Comm.

IPTBioCASE

SpecifyBrahmsK-Emu

GBIFOBISMANISORNISHERPNETVERTNETEBIRDAKNNBNALAIABIN

GBIF NodesSANBI

CRIACandensys

EML

OpenModellerEcological Niche ModelCIATAquaMapsIUCN Species ProgramGROMSProtected PlanetUNEP/WCMCGEO-BONEoLMapping LifeResearch CommunityEarth Observation communityIPBES

Funding AgenciesUN conventionsNational LegislaturesCollaboration networks

TDWG

DGOAL

CGOAL

BGOAL

Collectively, the Goals link all actors, via their roles, directly toward support of the Aichi Targets

This supports refined and directed objectives among participating actors. Alignment to the Goals provides alignment to the Aichi Targets

Conversely, the Aichi Targets help establish priorities and focus for the GBIO Framework…

…while the Goals provide taxonomic, geospatial and other measures from which to identify gaps and establish indicators of progress

Collectively, we possess the means to describe what we intend to do, why we will do it, and how it will be done.

One question remains

How? Why? What?

Other targets and priorities may be substituted here

Who is going to help organize all this?

MorphBank

VERTNET

HERPNET

ORNIS

iDigBio

MANIS

BioCASE

iNatCephBase

FishBase

DiscLife

DanBIF

GBIF

InBio

ALA

SANBI

PRECIS

BugGuide

AmphibiaWeb

CalImages

Euro+Med

BDWD

MSW

WoRMSOBIS

AquaMaps

USDAPlants

ITIS

SP2000

CoL DIGiR

TAPIR

DwC

ABCD

SDD

TreeBase

IUCNRedList

GBIFES

NBN

PESI

ViBRANT

EOL

FNA

WikiSpecies

Canadensys

IPNI

IF

GSPC

GTI

IPT

CRIA

Map ofLife

LifeMapper

Plazi

USDAPlantsKEmu

GRIN

NZOR

FaEu

CIAT

EDIT

TDWG

NLBIF

LuCID

GNA

MycoBank

ZooBank

SMEBD

Artenbank

HoL

ZooTAXA

TCS

SPM

GUIDLSID

EML

ZooRec

FAO

CONABIO

OGC

MAXENT

AntBase

ERMS

Even with the GBIO, self-organization towards achieving goals is unlikely without some coordination.

GBIF is one clear choice *

* Others may also emerge and should not be discouraged.

Here is why…

First, this is what GBIF was established to do.

Final Report of the OECD Megascience Forum, Working Group on Biological Informatics, January 1999

“An international mechanism is needed to make biodiversity data and information accessible worldwide. The existence of such a mechanism will produce many economic and social benefits. For example, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) obligates nations to implement provisions relating to conservation, use, and equitable sharing of biodiversity. A scientific information resource that could facilitate fulfillment of these obligations is greatly needed.”

Among other things, GBIF is a facility.* GBIF could operate as a facilitator to coordinate the support of the GBIO framework and

associated Goals.

Second, in order to re-invigorate the GBIF membership and realize the vision of the current strategic plan

Vision: “To be the foremost global resource for biodiversity information.”

“An effective GBIF global network requires the engagement of the world’s biodiversity community. It also requires increasing GBIF’s recognition, visibility and ‘brand leadership’ in biodiversity informatics.”

What is special about GBIFs membership?

It is composed of countries.

!! This is a yearly opportunity waiting to be catalyzed !!

Consider the annual GBIF Governing Board meeting as a unique venue where delegates from national ministries are available for three days to hear what

biodiversity informatics could do for their country.

GBIF is a multi-lateral initiative, established by, and governed by countries. Countries are represented by a Governing Board of national delegates.

One way of doing so might be demonstrate the potential synergy between GBIF Associate Organizational Participants

and GBIFs national members.

GBIF NATIONAL PARTICIPANTS

GBIF ORGANIZATIONAL PARTICIPANTS

Requires solutions

Provides solutions

One way of doing so might be demonstrate the potential synergy between GBIF Associate Organizational Participants

and GBIFs national members.

The Catalogue of Life is just such an Associate Participant in GBIF

GBIF NATIONAL PARTICIPANTS

GBIF ORGANIZATIONAL PARTICIPANTS

Requires solutions

Provides solutions

Facilitates solutions

The GBIO provides a framework where COL can identify where it fits in the overall informatics landscape

COL, for instance, provides capacity as a foundational component for discovery and access of all biodiversity information

ContentDiscovery

andAccess

Models and

Analyses

Foundations and ContextO

RGANIZE


UNDERPIN ENHANCE

REFINE

The Biodiversity Informatics Goals refine this focus toward specific data and information domains

COL is a clear leader in support of Goal C – a national species register system for all countries.

ContentDiscovery

andAccess

Models and

Analyses


ORG

ANIZE


UNDERPIN ENHANCE

REFINEA

GOAL

WHERE

BGOAL

WHAT

CGOAL

WHO

DGOAL

HOW

GBIF provides the organizational framework to facilitate the development and implementation of the system within

countries.

COL is a clear leader in support of Goal C – a national species register system for all countries.

CGOAL

WHO

A National Checklist Registry system

National Species Lists

GBIF National NodesGBIF Organizational Participants

Delivers ImplementsFacilitates

GBIF has the convening power to provide the venue through which solutions can be proposed

The GBIF Governing Board is THE forum for delivering multi-national biodiversity information solutions

CGOAL

WHO

A National Checklist Registry system

National Species Lists

GBIF National DelegatesGBIF Organizational Participants

Delivers SupportsFacilitates

This is the framework where COL may articulate clear support to national priorities

The GBIF model provides just such a venue and the national Node of a country can serve as a focal point for building capacity

How? Why? What?

Country A

+ +

It supports a consistent and streamlined process for directing a consortium of activity toward national priorities

This framework, operating at a multi-national level, supports an increased sense of purpose and direction for Organizational Associate Participants

How? Why? What?

GBIF ORGANIZATIONAL PARTICIPANTS GBIF NATIONAL PARTICIPANTS

National priorities

Improved support

This same sense of purpose and direction may be equally adopted by other collaborators within biodiversity informatics

…who are likewise provided with a framework to clearly identify relevance and contribution.

It’s not just the Aichi Targets. The Goals & GBIO can also be applied toward other national and regional targets,

conventions and priorities

Providing a sharpened informatics instrument to bear on priority biodiversity science and policy issues

Millenium Development Goals

Participant National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans

EU Biodiversity strategy to 2020 Convention on Migratory

Species Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity & Ecosystem Services

Various draft documents provide details

Additional input is very much appreciated

The Goals mapped to the Aichi Targets

The Goals and the Global Taxonomy Initiate

Implications for GBIF

Click to view them

Thank you.

David Remsen [email protected]

Biodiversity Informatics Goals idea

Technology

biodiversity informatics

biodiversity science

informatics activities

informatics landscape

catalogue of life

relevant information

aichi targets david

function of species