Assuring that use of nature is sustainable is foundational to human security and welfare, as contributions from nature provide essential benefits both direct and indirect to people across all income levels and all parts of global society

The use of wild species directly contributes to the well-being, resources, and income of billions of people globally [1]. This is the case in developing and developed countries, for economically and culturally important activities, on a day-to-day basis in informal and formal markets, and is particularly important to people in vulnerable situations. For example, wild pollinators support the farming of crops critical for food security and nutrition [6] and of approximately 28,000 plants used for medicines [7]. Wild-caught aquatic species comprise 50% of all those traded globally [8].

There is a dichotomy between the harvest of species from the wild (e.g., hunting, gathering, fishing, logging) and varied levels of intensified harvest and culture in primary production sectors (e.g., agriculture, forestry, aquaculture). Nevertheless, all rely on a gradient of ecosystem functions and services. Forestry, for example, may rely on a broad scope of activities from timber harvesting to gathering of non-timber forest products from the wild. In general, production sectors tend to involve higher levels of management to increase the focal output. Unsustainable agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and other production sectors, and indeed the global food system itself, have a very him impact on biodiversity, through direct extraction, nutrient and chemical pollution, and land/sea use change [9]. This is in spite of these production sectors having the greatest dependence on sustaining productivity from biodiversity. All these pressures and drivers must be brought within local and global limits to assure long-term sustainability—not just of biodiversity, but of social and economic systems as well [2].

In this regard, not just Targets 5 (use of wild species) and 9 (sharing benefits from use), but also Targets 10 (sustainable production), 15 (production footprint), and 16 (consumption factors) are critical to achieving SU and conservation goals (B and A, respectively).

Sustainable use is an equity and conservation priority (Targets 5 and 9)

People living in poverty and vulnerable situations have very few assets that buffer them from shocks and depend disproportionately on ecosystem services and benefits from nature (e.g., for food, shelter, medicines, hazard protection) [1]. Ensuring use of biodiversity is sustainable is thus not just important for conservation but also for supporting local livelihoods and ensuring equity. As such SU, which reflects the provisioning from natural assets of direct and then indirect benefits to people, contributes significantly to achievement of Sustainable Development Goals.

From this equity perspective, the roles, rights, and agency of Indigenous peoples and local communities, in particular for customary SU, and of women, are foundational to SU. Targets 21 and 22 address these rights, as do some introductory paragraphs in the GBF text [4] and proposed but still-unresolved paragraph B(bis). But failures to fully address these rights historically have led to many Parties inserting equity requirements in multiple targets as a safeguard.

Acknowledging this equity dimension, many Parties assert that the GBF should not just minimize damaging, unsafe, informal, and illegal practices, but should directly promote SU. This is consistent with original wording of the objectives of the Convention, in which assuring SU is given equal priority to conserving biodiversity.

Given the importance of SU of biodiversity at local and national levels, it is critical that monitoring is conducted within national frameworks, addressing locally relevant challenges, before data are aggregated into global indicators. Incorporating data from relevant use sectors (e.g., wild species use, agriculture, forestry) and development of new indicators will be needed. For example, a new “Sustainable Use of Wild Species” indicator for monitoring Target 5 (https://www.post-2020indicators.org/pdfs/174?type=headline) would complement the proposed target “Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels.”

Production systems must transform to ensure their demands and reliance on natural functions and services are sustainable (Targets 10, 15, 16)

Target 10 refers to the management of areas under production sectors, including agriculture, aquaculture and forestry, and potentially fisheries. It addresses 40% of the Earth’s ice-free land surface and the growing portions of freshwater and marine ecosystems used to produce food and other material goods. Targets 15 and 16 address production and consumption factors driving biodiversity loss, respectively. Success in implementing all 3 targets is essential for a nature positive outcome [10,11], as reducing use to sustainable levels will be needed in concert with direct action targets [12] to “bend the curve” of biodiversity loss [13].

Historical approaches have maximized production of individual outputs from nature. The result has been an undermining of the full diversity of nature’s contributions on which people depend [9]. Primary production sectors tied to natural assets—agriculture, forestry, aquaculture and fisheries—have been particularly instrumental in driving this decline, and all must continue to shift to more ecosystem-based approaches and include more holistic relationships between people and nature [14].

Food production and consumption, manufacturing, industry and service industries are significant supply-side drivers of biodiversity loss and addressed by Target 15. Demand side factors (Target 16), stimulated by economic and social values reinforcing constant growth are key drivers. Transforming both will be necessary to reduce the footprint of economic activities to sustainable levels.

The importance of the second objective of the CBD on sustainable use of biodiversity is growing as we approach and exceed limits to biodiversity use from local to global levels. Targets related to SU address all levels in the result chain illustrated in Fig 1, across nature, economy, and societal tiers [15]. By contrast, the traditional focus on conservation in the CBD prioritizes just the bottom tier and has been criticized from social, cultural, and rights perspectives. Our findings (and see [5]) provide support for the concept and practice of sustainable use to gain in importance and profile in the convention and be actively promoted as a pillar for achieving all 3 objectives of the convention, with direct relevance and linkages to supporting implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals.