Biodiversity Informatics Goals idea
-
Upload
david-remsen -
Category
Technology
-
view
1.147 -
download
4
description
Transcript of 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.
Content Discovery andAccess
Models andVisualizations
Foundations and Context
ORG
ANIZE
ANALYZE AND INTERPRET
UNDERPIN 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
??
?
?
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
Content Discovery andAccess
Models andVisualizations
Foundations and Context
ORG
ANIZE
ANALYZE AND INTERPRET
UNDERPIN 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
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”
Content Discovery andAccess
Models andVisualizations
Foundations and Context
ORG
ANIZE
ANALYZE AND INTERPRET
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
ANALYZE AND INTERPRET
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
Foundations and Context
ORG
ANIZE
ANALYZE AND INTERPRET
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]