They then mapped these impacts onto an NCP classification system first laid out in 2018 by IPBES, the U.N.\u2019s Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.<\/p>\n
Chaplin-Kramer\u2019s team found that wildlife is integral to at least 12 of IPBES\u2019s 18 NCPs. Examples of NCPs supported by wildlife include the creation of habitat and the regulation of water, as well as the inspiration people get from seeing animals in their environment and the importance of species to cultural identity.<\/p>\n
The researchers published their findings in the inaugural issue of the journal Nature Reviews Biodiversity on Jan. 15.<\/p>\n
But why focus on NCPs? Chaplin-Kramer explained that, while satellite imagery and remote sensing are typically the go-to method for measuring ecosystem health, \u201cThat\u2019s not necessarily the most important component of what we actually care about.\u201d She and her colleagues cautioned that when scientists use only remote sensing to assess the important services ecosystems offer to humanity, the world\u2019s \u201cwildlife was getting left behind.\u201d<\/p>\n
That\u2019s because researchers often use vegetation cover as a proxy for ecosystem health. But that doesn\u2019t account for the added value offered by the species that inhabit those places. And critically, overlooking the contributions of wildlife in the present day could result in those species not being prized and actively protected, which could mean their services disappear in the future as populations fall, then vanish.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe often keep species and ecosystem targets separate in monitoring,\u201d Chaplin-Kramer said, adding that we risk \u201cwinding up with empty forests.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cMaybe we keep our forest cover, but they\u2019re devoid of the life that actually provides the benefits that we\u2019re used to receiving,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
This is especially concerning due to the drastic declines seen in wildlife planetwide. Scientists say we\u2019re living through the sixth mass extinction of life on Earth, this time propelled by human activity, with some species dying out altogether and the populations of others dwindling at worrying rates. WWF\u2019s 2024 Living Planet report tracked a 73% decline in wildlife numbers globally. A 2023 study calculated that 48% of all vertebrates are trending downward, while a new study published Jan. 8 revealed that around 25% of freshwater animals could go extinct, including fish on which human communities rely for food.<\/p>\n
\u201cA species extinction is a travesty,\u201d Chaplin-Kramer said, \u201cbut just lowering their abundances is when we\u2019re going to start to see declining function.\u201d<\/p>\n
While that\u2019s concerning, she noted that surviving populations also provide an opportunity: \u201cThese declines are something we can reverse, [and] can do something about,\u201d Chaplin-Kramer said. \u201cIt\u2019s not too late.\u201d<\/p>\n
Some benefits that wildlife offer are more obvious than others \u2014 the food fish provide to people, for example. Others are harder to recognize or quantify, though often no less important. Think the cultural value the American bison embodies for the First Nations of the American plains, or the way in which restored bison populations improve grassland habitat and carbon storage \u2014 a hedge against human-caused climate change.<\/p>\n
\u201cHaving a broad and diverse assessment of wildlife contributions to people is valuable because, as the authors point out, many contributions are not immediately visible and can be indirect,\u201d said Sarah Weiskopf, a research ecologist with the U.S. Geological Survey\u2019s National Climate Adaptation Science Center, in an email. \u201cThis can make them easy to overlook and lead to unintended consequences of [policy] decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n
Lacking a complete picture of the services nature provides, including the species integral to those services, could result in inadequate or misdirected land protection, land use, and species conservation initiatives.<\/p>\n
\u201cMany studies mapping and projecting nature\u2019s contributions to people do not explicitly consider biodiversity, especially wildlife, which can lead to overly optimistic assessments,\u201d Weiskopf said. \u201cAccurate understanding of nature\u2019s contributions to people and how drivers of change will affect nature\u2019s contributions \u2026 are important for developing effective policies to meet conservation and sustainable development goals.\u201d<\/p>\n
Achieving this deep understanding is no easy matter, but it\u2019s a goal Chaplin-Kramer said is attainable. She pointed to the 21st-century research methods that have \u201cgone gangbusters\u201d in teasing apart ecosystem services as a useful WCP model. Techniques such as eDNA, acoustic monitoring and camera traps could fill in the knowledge gaps about what wild species bring to ecosystems. New satellites slated to be deployed in 2025 by NASA, the U.S. space agency, could also provide a more detailed view from above.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m super optimistic,\u201d Chaplin-Kramer said. The study\u2019s authors say they hope stronger links between wildlife and the enriching services they offer to humanity will lead to more effective conservation policies.<\/p>\n Many conservationists are advocating urgency to ensure needed resources are put in place quickly to protect biodiversity and, by extension, wildlife services. And that process appears to be moving ahead, though more slowly than some would wish. Nearly half the conservation goals set by the 2022 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) cited ecosystem services and NCPs. But the October 2024 COP16 biodiversity summit in Cali, Colombia, left many wanting a stronger GBF commitment by the world\u2019s nations, especially financially. There are hopes for more progress at the upcoming resumption of U.N. biodiversity discussions in Rome starting Feb. 25.<\/p>\n It\u2019s still early days for the American bison to begin replicating the sorts of ecological engineering feats that the species brought to the prairie in earlier times. But scientists say they expect restoration to act as a demonstration of how species elevate ecosystems for the benefit of humanity.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have to be reframing the way that we talk about ecosystem services so that it includes species because we can\u2019t miss those opportunities,\u201d Chaplin-Kramer said. \u201cThere\u2019s just too little time.\u201d<\/p>\n Chaplin-Kramer, R., Miller, C. R., Dee, L. E., Bennett, N. J., Echeverri, A., Gould, R. K., \u2026 Zhao, J. (2025). Wildlife\u2019s contributions to people. Nature Reviews Biodiversity, 1(1), 68-81. doi:10.1038\/s44358-024-00006-9<\/p>\n D\u00edaz, S., Pascual, U., Stenseke, M., Mart\u00edn-L\u00f3pez, B., Watson, R. T., Moln\u00e1r, Z., . . . Shirayama, Y. (2018). Assessing nature\u2019s contributions to people. Science. doi:10.1126\/science.aap8826<\/p>\n Sayer, C. A., Fernando, E., Jimenez, R. R., Macfarlane, N. B., Rapacciuolo, G., B\u00f6hm, M., . . . Darwall, W. R. (2025). One-quarter of freshwater fauna threatened with extinction. Nature, 1-8. doi:10.1038\/s41586-024-08375-z<\/p>\nCitations:<\/h2>\n