Summary: Crop diversity underpins the productivity, resilience and adaptive capacity of agriculture. Loss of this diversity, termed crop genetic erosion, is therefore concerning. While alarms regarding evident declines in crop diversity have been raised for over a century, the magnitude, trajectory, drivers and significance of these losses remain insufficiently understood. We outline the various definitions, measurements, scales and sources of information on crop genetic erosion. We then provide a synthesis of evidence regarding changes in the diversity of traditional crop landraces on farms, modern crop cultivars in agriculture, crop wild relatives in their natural habitats and crop genetic resources held in conservation repositories. This evidence indicates that marked losses, but also maintenance and increases in diversity, have occurred in all these contexts, the extent depending on species, taxonomic and geographic scale, and region, as well as analytical approach. We discuss steps needed to further advance knowledge around the agricultural and societal significance, as well as conservation implications, of crop genetic erosion. Finally, we propose actions to mitigate, stem and reverse further losses of crop diversity.

Global conservation policy and action have largely neglected protecting and monitoring genetic diversity—one of the three main pillars of biodiversity. Genetic diversity (diversity within species) underlies species’ adaptation and survival, ecosystem resilience, and societal innovation. The low priority given to genetic diversity has largely been due to knowledge gaps in key areas, including the importance of genetic diversity and the trends in genetic diversity change; the perceived high expense and low availability and the scattered nature of genetic data; and complicated concepts and information that are inaccessible to policymakers. However, numerous recent advances in knowledge, technology, databases, practice, and capacity have now set the stage for better integration of genetic diversity in policy instruments and conservation efforts. We review these developments and explore how they can support improved consideration of genetic diversity in global conservation policy commitments and enable countries to monitor, report on, and take action to maintain or restore genetic diversity.

Mitigating loss of genetic diversity is a major global biodiversity challenge^1–4. To meet recent international commitments to maintain genetic diversity within species^5,6, we need to understand relationships between threats, conservation management and genetic diversity change. Here we conduct a global analysis of genetic diversity change via meta-analysis of all available temporal measures of genetic diversity from more than three decades of research. We show that within-population genetic diversity is being lost over timescales likely to have been impacted by human activities, and that some conservation actions may mitigate this loss. Our dataset includes 628 species (animals, plants, fungi and chromists) across all terrestrial and most marine realms on Earth. Threats impacted two-thirds of the populations that we analysed, and less than half of the populations analysed received conservation management. Genetic diversity loss occurs globally and is a realistic prediction for many species, especially birds and mammals, in the face of threats such as land use change, disease, abiotic natural phenomena and harvesting or harassment. Conservation strategies designed to improve environmental conditions, increase population growth rates and introduce new individuals (for example, restoring connectivity or performing translocations) may maintain or even increase genetic diversity. Our findings underscore the urgent need for active, genetically informed conservation interventions to halt genetic diversity loss.

The rate and extent of global biodiversity change is surpassing our ability to measure, monitor and forecast trends. We propose an interconnected worldwide system of observation networks — a global biodiversity observing system (GBiOS) — to coordinate monitoring worldwide and inform action to reach international biodiversity targets.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List is an important and widely used tool for conservation assessment. The IUCN uses information about a species’ range, population size, habitat quality and fragmentation levels, and trends in abundance to assess extinction risk. Genetic diversity is not considered, although it affects extinction risk. Declining populations are more strongly affected by genetic drift and higher rates of inbreeding, which can reduce the efficiency of selection, lead to fitness declines, and hinder species’ capacities to adapt to environmental change. Given the importance of conserving genetic diversity, attempts have been made to find relationships between red‐list status and genetic diversity. Yet, there is still no consensus on whether genetic diversity is captured by the current IUCN Red List categories in a way that is informative for conservation. To assess the predictive power of correlations between genetic diversity and IUCN Red List status in vertebrates, we synthesized previous work and reanalyzed data sets based on 3 types of genetic data: mitochondrial DNA, microsatellites, and whole genomes. Consistent with previous work, species with higher extinction risk status tended to have lower genetic diversity for all marker types, but these relationships were weak and varied across taxa. Regardless of marker type, genetic diversity did not accurately identify threatened species for any taxonomic group. Our results indicate that red‐list status is not a useful metric for informing species‐specific decisions about the protection of genetic diversity and that genetic data cannot be used to identify threat status in the absence of demographic data. Thus, there is a need to develop and assess metrics specifically designed to assess genetic diversity and inform conservation policy, including policies recently adopted by the UN's Convention on Biological Diversity Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.