Research offers nature-positive path to end and reverse biodiversity loss

A recent paper in Frontiers in Science argues that tracking ecosystem health and natural processes — not just counting species numbers — is essential to stop and reverse biodiversity loss.
The paper promotes the “Three Global Conditions Framework” (3Cs), which categorizes regions by human-impact level to guide targeted conservation efforts ahead of the 2030 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework deadline ending the loss of biodiversity.
Experts say implementation is a lingering challenge, in part because the Global Biodiversity Framework isn’t legally binding.
They say real progress depends on the actions of individual countries and addressing who bears the social and economic costs of these solutions.

From its nests high in the canopy of the Amazon, the harpy eagle depends on — and is critical to — the health of the forest around it. The species controls the numbers of animals such as sloths and monkeys that, unchecked, could consume too many leaves and turn the canopy into lace.

But the massive loss of trees in the world’s largest rainforest has hampered the survival of the harpy eagle (Harpia harpyja). Too few tall trees in the vicinity of their nests means fledgling chicks don’t have enough safe places to land as they learn to fly. Habitat loss, along with hunting, has led to the bird’s listing as vulnerable by the IUCN. Removing it entirely could accelerate the demise of the entire ecosystem, conservationist Harvey Locke told Mongabay in an interview, which could have knock-on effects such as diminished rainfall on farmland in the region.

“The harpy eagle is not just an amazingly cool bird,” said Locke, the co-founder of the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative based in Canada. “It’s not a luxury in that biome. It’s vital to it.”
Just as other keystone species, such as elephants, beavers and bison, play similar roles in their respective environments, harpy eagles help hold together even heavily impacted ecosystems, Locke said.

“If we pull these pieces out, it unravels,” he added.

Research shows keystone species, such as the harpy eagle (Harpia harpyja) pictured here with a tufted capuchin (Cebus apella), play essential roles in maintaining the health of the Amazon ecosystem. Image by Jiang Chunsheng via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 4.0). — Research shows keystone species, such as the harpy eagle (*Harpia harpyja*) pictured here with a tufted capuchin (*Cebus apella*), play essential roles in maintaining the health of the Amazon ecosystem. Image by Jiang Chunsheng via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 4.0).

In a paper, Locke and his colleagues use the harpy eagle as one example of the importance of tracking broad natural processes and the health of ecosystems alongside species number counts. They published their research calling for nature-positive approaches to addressing biodiversity loss on April 8 in the journal Frontiers in Science.

With the looming deadline to stop and reverse the loss of nature globally by 2030 set by the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), the idea of pursuing a “nature-positive” future has gained prominence. The Nature Positive Initiative, an organization representing conservation groups, institutions and businesses, has used that goal to define the term. On July 14, the initiative opened a summit in Kumamoto, Japan, ahead of U.N. meetings later in 2026 on desertification and biological diversity.

Marco Lambertini, convener with the Nature Positive Initiative, has said that 2030 “is fast approaching.”

“[T]he message is once again that we are behind,” Lambertini said in a statement. “But, by bringing innovative examples from around the world, the Summit will demonstrate that we can and we know how to embrace nature-positive practices in the way we run our business and finances, and in how we govern our cities, territories and countries.”

The authors of the paper advocate the use of the Three Global Conditions Framework, first introduced by Locke and his colleagues in 2019, to tackle the goals of the Global Biodiversity Framework. The 3Cs, as the framework is known, categorizes different parts of the Earth by the extent of human impact on ecosystems. The idea is that this information can then guide the solutions that will ultimately stem the global loss of biodiversity.

A Borneo pygmy elephant (Elephas maximus borneensis) in Malaysia. Image by John Cannon/Mongabay. — A Borneo pygmy elephant (*Elephas maximus borneensis*) in Malaysia. Image by John Cannon/Mongabay.

Society and nature in harmony

As momentum grows behind the calls for nature-positive practices, questions have arisen around how they will play out in reality, particularly regarding economic impacts.

In an email to Mongabay, Nathalie Pettorelli, a conservation biologist and professor at the Zoological Society of London’s Institute of Zoology who was not involved in the research, pointed to the example of the British government, which has embraced the position that economic growth and nature’s vitality go hand in hand. “The difficulty here is to agree on what that environment should look like,” Pettorelli said. “This is a rather more complex question, which does need to be sorted to move from concept to implementation.”

In Locke’s view, even well-meaning efforts to find a path that works for economics and biodiversity are often based on “a fundamental misapprehension of how the world actually works.”

“We’ve been carrying on as though the environment is a competing interest with society and the economy, looking for the sweet spot of intersection, which we call sustainable development policy,” Locke said. But rather than merely overlapping, the economy and society are fully embedded in nature, he added. “The Earth is the context for everything humans do.”

Rather than searching for areas where the interests of human society and the economy overlap with benefits to the environment, the study's authors argue that these should be seen as embedded in the environment. Image courtesy of Locke et al., 2026 (CC BY 4.0). — Rather than searching for areas where the interests of human society and the economy overlap with benefits to the environment, the study’s authors argue that these should be seen as embedded in the environment. Image courtesy of Locke et al., 2026 (CC BY 4.0).

Locke explained that the past 250 years show that resources on our planet are not infinite and that, in fact, we live in “a closed system” in which human actions, whether the burning of carbon-rich fossil fuels, the destruction of forests like the Amazon or the elimination of species, have real consequences.

“If you look at traditions — Taoism, Hinduism, traditional Indigenous thought — they’re not confused about this,” Locke added. “If we don’t stop and turn around the loss of nature, we’re giving ourselves a very challenging and bumpy future.”

In 2009, one of the study’s co-authors, Johan Rockström, a professor of environmental science at Sweden’s Stockholm University and founding director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, led the team that came up with the concept of planetary boundaries, which set out the safe limits within which human society can operate for nine key metrics. As of 2025, we’ve crossed seven of those boundaries, according to Rockström and his colleagues.

Logistical hurdles

“It is important to continue to regularly highlight that we need nature to thrive,” Pettorelli told Mongabay. “I just think that what we need now are implementable, specific and tailored solutions that countries can see working for them.”

She added that the paper does not specifically examine how individual countries can address the goals of the GBF.

“This in my view is a central issue, given [for example] that the GBF is not legally binding,” Pettorelli said, “and so ultimately it is a lot about what countries decide to do and how they operationalize alignment.”

She said that the social impacts of the actions aimed at boosting biodiversity must also be taken into account, including questions “such as who defines priorities, whose perspective counts and who bears the costs of the ‘identified’ solutions.”

“Without addressing the elephant in the room though (that is, people and the social aspects of moving toward a sustainable future), we are unlikely to go anywhere,” Pettorelli added.

A map shows the 3Cs, or the Three Global Conditions Framework, which reveals the extent of human impact across ecosystems globally. Image courtesy of Locke et al., 2026 (CC BY 4.0).

Banner image: A harpy eagle (Harpia harpyja) in Venezuela. Image by Brendan Ryan via Flickr (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

John Cannon is a staff features writer with Mongabay. Find him on Bluesky and LinkedIn.

Citations:

Locke, H., Rockström, J., Plowright, R. K., Laffoley, D., Little Bear, L., Peres, C. A., . . . Hauer, F. R. (2026). Nature Positive: halting and reversing biodiversity loss toward restoring Earth system stability. Frontiers in Science, 4. doi:10.3389/fsci.2026.1609998

Locke, H., Ellis, E. C., Venter, O., Schuster, R., Ma, K., Shen, X., . . . Watson, J. E. M. (2019). Three global conditions for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use: an implementation framework. National Science Review, 6(6), 1080-1082. doi:10.1093/nsr/nwz136

Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin III, F. S., Lambin, E. F., . . . Schellnhuber, H. J. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472-475. doi:10.1038/461472a

FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.

Cite this article

John Cannon (2026). Research offers nature-positive path to end and reverse biodiversity loss. Mongabay Conservation news. DOI: https://doi.org/10.66709/news-323143