The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Projecting terrestrial biodiversity intactness with GLOBIO 4
Open accessAbstract
Scenario‐based biodiversity modelling is a powerful approach to evaluate how possible future socio‐economic developments may affect biodiversity. Here, we evaluated the changes in terrestrial biodiversity intactness, expressed by the mean species abundance (MSA) metric, resulting from three of the shared socio‐economic pathways (SSPs) combined with different levels of climate change (according to representative concentration pathways [RCPs]): a future oriented towards sustainability (SSP1xRCP2.6), a future determined by a politically divided world (SSP3xRCP6.0) and a future with continued global dependency on fossil fuels (SSP5xRCP8.5). To this end, we first updated the GLOBIO model, which now runs at a spatial resolution of 10 arc‐seconds (~300 m), contains new modules for downscaling land use and for quantifying impacts of hunting in the tropics, and updated modules to quantify impacts of climate change, land use, habitat fragmentation and nitrogen pollution. We then used the updated model to project terrestrial biodiversity intactness from 2015 to 2050 as a function of land use and climate changes corresponding with the selected scenarios. We estimated a global area‐weighted mean MSA of 0.56 for 2015. Biodiversity intactness declined in all three scenarios, yet the decline was smaller in the sustainability scenario (−0.02) than the regional rivalry and fossil‐fuelled development scenarios (−0.06 and −0.05 respectively). We further found considerable variation in projected biodiversity change among different world regions, with large future losses particularly for sub‐Saharan Africa. In some scenario‐region combinations, we projected future biodiversity recovery due to reduced demands for agricultural land, yet this recovery was counteracted by increased impacts of other pressures (notably climate change and road disturbance). Effective measures to halt or reverse the decline of terrestrial biodiversity should not only reduce land demand (e.g. by increasing agricultural productivity and dietary changes) but also focus on reducing or mitigating the impacts of other pressures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Global Biodiversity Scenarios for the Year 2100
Sala, O. E., Stuart Chapin, F., III, Armesto, J. J., Berlow, E., Bloomfield, J., Dirzo, R., Huber-Sanwald, E., Huenneke, L. F., Jackson, R. B., et al. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.287.5459.1770 · Cited by 9,280
O’Neill, B. C., Kriegler, E., Ebi, K. L., Kemp-Benedict, E., Riahi, K., Rothman, D. S., van Ruijven, B. J., van Vuuren, D. P., Birkmann, J., Kok, K., et al. (2017) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.004 · Cited by 3,359
Biodiversity: The ravages of guns, nets and bulldozers
Maxwell, S. L., Fuller, R. A., Brooks, T. M., & Watson, J. E. M. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/536143a · Cited by 1,979 · cited 1×
“This is line with other recent analyses that ranked pressures affecting community composition and spe‐ cies' populations (IPBES, 2019; Maxwell et al., 2016; Newbold, 2018).”
ResultA better lemon squeezer? maximum-likelihood regression with beta-distributed dependent variables.
Smithson, M., & Verkuilen, J. (2006) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.11.1.54 · Cited by 1,788
Future threats to biodiversity and pathways to their prevention
Tilman, D., Clark, M., Williams, D. R., Kimmel, K., Polasky, S., & Packer, C. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature22900 · Cited by 1,341
A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets
Tittensor, D. P., Walpole, M., Hill, S. L. L., Boyce, D. G., Britten, G. L., Burgess, N. D., Butchart, S. H. M., Leadley, P. W., Regan, E. C., Alkemade, R., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1257484 · Cited by 1,227
Self-citationQuantifying the evidence for ecological synergies
Darling, E. S., & Côté, I. M. (2008) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01243.x · Cited by 723
The impact of hunting on tropical mammal and bird populations
Benítez-López, A., Alkemade, R., Schipper, A. M., Ingram, D. J., Verweij, P. A., Eikelboom, J. A. J., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaj1891 · Cited by 663
Self-citationA biodiversity intactness index
Scholes, R. J., & Biggs, R. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03289 · Cited by 577
Exploring the biophysical option space for feeding the world without deforestation
Erb, K.-H., Lauk, C., Kastner, T., Mayer, A., Theurl, M. C., & Haberl, H. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms11382 · Cited by 352
Research works printed but not linked: 52
- 10.1073/pnas.1011013108 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10021-009-9229-5 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41586-018-0301-1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.009 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000247 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/cobi.12081 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.1606036114 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.tree.2008.03.011 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.32614/RJ-2017-066 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/sdata.2016.7 · DOI · Paper page
- CBD, 2010, Strategic plan for biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi targets
- 10.1111/gcb.14663 · DOI
- 10.1093/biosci/bix014 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.014 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.12.025 · DOI
- 10.1002/ece3.2104 · DOI
- 10.1002/ece3.2579 · DOI · Paper page
- IPBES, 2016, Assessment report on scenarios and models of biodiversity and ecosystem services
- IPBES, 2019, Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services
- 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.06.004 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/0144164032000068920 · doi:10.1080/0144164032000068920
- 10.5194/gmd-11-4537-2018 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11625-016-0354-8 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.091 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tree.2014.11.006 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1088/1748-9326/aabd42 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.5194/acp-11-1417-2011 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/geb.12856 · DOI · Paper page
- Nellemann C., 2001, GLOBIO. Global methodology for mapping human impacts on the biosphere
- 10.1098/rspb.2018.0792 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s10584-019-02420-x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.12.011 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1196624 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2001.01089.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.01.004 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.10.002 · DOI · Paper page
- R Core Team, 2017, R: A language and environment for statistical computing
- 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.009 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1098/rsos.160498 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41559-017-0273-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.08.024 · DOI · Paper page
- Schipper A. M., 2016, The GLOBIO model
- 10.1111/gcb.13292 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tree.2015.11.005 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0 · DOI · Paper page
- Stehfest E., 2014, Integrated assessment of global environmental change with IMAGE 3.0. Model description and policy applications
- 10.1038/s41467-019-09945-w · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/s41467-019-09519-w · DOI · Paper page
- Traas T. P., 2002, Species sensitivity distributions in ecotoxicology, 315
- 10.1007/s10584-011-0148-z · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.05.008 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/ncomms12558 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
The direct drivers of recent global anthropogenic biodiversity loss
Jaureguiberry, P., Titeux, N., Wiemers, M., Bowler, D. E., Coscieme, L., Golden, A. S., Guerra, C. A., Jacob, U., Takahashi, Y., Settele, J., et al. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abm9982 · Cited by 1,121
“If we are to maximize our options for managing inevitable changes ( 31 , 32 ) and widen the currently narrow ( 49 , 60 ) path to a sustainable future, the results presented here show clearly that this nature-positive transformation must tackle these indirect drivers of land/ sea use change and…”
Newbold, T. (2018) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0792 · Cited by 473
Global trends and scenarios for terrestrial biodiversity and ecosystem services from 1900 to 2050
Pereira, H. M., Martins, I. S., Rosa, I. M. D., Kim, H., Leadley, P., Popp, A., van Vuuren, D. P., Hurtt, G., Quoss, L., Arneth, A., et al. (2024) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adn3441 · Cited by 308
Self-citationQuantifying Earth system interactions for sustainable food production via expert elicitation
Chrysafi, A., Virkki, V., Jalava, M., Sandström, V., Piipponen, J., Porkka, M., Lade, S. J., La Mere, K., Wang-Erlandsson, L., Scherer, L., et al. (2022) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-022-00940-6 · Cited by 41
Do Investors Care About Biodiversity?
Garel, A., Romec, A., Sautner, Z., & Wagner, A. F. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4398110 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Schipper, A. M., Hilbers, J. P., Meijer, J. R., Antão, L. H., Benítez‐López, A., de Jonge, M. M. J., Leemans, L. H., Scheper, E., Alkemade, R., Doelman, J. C., Mylius, S., Stehfest, E., van Vuuren, D. P., van Zeist, W., & Huijbregts, M. A. J.
- Venue
- Global Change Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-11-03
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 760-771
- ISSN
- 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2486
- OpenAlex
- W2986331582
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 9.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- Funders
- Jane ja Aatos Erkon Säätiö
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Projecting terrestrial biodiversity intactness with GLOBIO 4. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/gcb.14848
- The paper
- Schipper, A. M., Hilbers, J. P., Meijer, J. R., Antão, L. H., Benítez‐López, A., de Jonge, M. M. J., Leemans, L. H., Scheper, E., Alkemade, R., Doelman, J. C., Mylius, S., Stehfest, E., van Vuuren, D. P., van Zeist, W., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2020). Projecting terrestrial biodiversity intactness with GLOBIO 4. Global Change Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14848
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
