In recent years, the term biocultural diversity has been promoted to raise awareness for the interrelationship between culture and biodiversity. Whereas the term is hard to conceptualize in general, specific links between culture and biodiversity can be explored. In this paper, we focus on land use, which is on one hand culturally coined, and has on the other hand far-reaching impacts on biodiversity. The specific effects of land use on biodiversity depend on its intensity, which can be parameterized in different way, not the least depending on the scale of observation. Based on a short review of different approaches on how to assess land use intensity (LUI), we propose a new conceptual framework reflecting the scaled nature of the linkages between land management and biodiversity. From the plot to the landscape level, different aspects of LUI are becoming relevant, some of which we illustrate with case studies from China, Greece and Switzerland. We conclude on how the framework proposed can further our understanding on the interconnectedness of humans and their environment.

Context: Landscape ecology thinking and social–ecological system (SES) thinking investigate human–environment relationships from the perspective of ‘space’ and ‘system’, respectively. To date, empirical landscape ecology studies attempting to understand SES complexities are rare. Objectives: Using the Tibetan pastoral landscape as an empirical example, we conceptualize the black-soil formation as SES regime shifts. We seek to illustrate the spatial patterns of black-soil formation in the Tibetan SES, and to reveal their underlying ecological processes. Methods: We conducted interdisciplinary research in a Tibetan pastoral village. We obtained quantitative data on historical land-use intensity (LUI) and the associated management narratives. Landsat-based NDVI time series were used to derive a grassland productivity proxy and to reconstruct the process leading to the up-scaling of the regime shift of degradation. Results: Important SES features, such as LUI, productivity and degradation risk are heterogeneously distributed in space. Land-use intensification at farm-scales in the 1990s increased landscape-scale degradation risks. Eventually the regime shift of degradation scaled up from the plot level to the landscape level in the 2010s. The time lag was related to the gradual invasion of a native burrowing animal, the plateau pika, which inhabits low-vegetation height pastures. Conclusions: Our study shows that landscape ecology thinking provides an important spatial perspective to understanding SES complexities. The finding that unfavorable SES regime shifts are strongly linked across spatial scales implies that an ‘entry point’ into an adaptive management circle should be initiated when local-scale regime shifts are perceived and interpreted as early warning signals.

Understanding biodiversity's contributions to human health is the first step toward fostering synergies between biodiversity conservation and health promotion - two major targets of UN's Sustainable Development Goals. The One Health approach acknowledges the health of people and biodiversity are interconnected and facing common threats. In this study, we aimed to unveil the geographical association between avian biodiversity and population health across the US. In this ecological study, we combined citizen science bird data from eBird, population health data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, and county-level statistics of population characteristics, including socio-economics, healthcare service etc. Multivariate linear regression analyses were performed between bird biodiversity (measured by rarefied species richness of birds), key indicators of general public health (e.g., cause-specific mortality rate), and socio-economic health determinants of 2751 US counties. We found that a higher number of bird species was significantly associated with longer life expectancy after confounding adjustment (regression coefficient (95% CIs), 0·005 (0·003, 0·008)). Bird species richness calculated using the rarefied method consistently accounted for variance in age-specific mortality risks in both very young and old age groups (R² from 2% to 4%). Rarefied species richness of birds was negatively correlated with the majority of cause-specific deaths (12 out of 21 mutually exclusive causes of death), indicating a general synergy effect between biodiversity and human health. The associations with the top causes of deaths were regarded as highly significant, with considerable effect sizes, for example, for cardiovascular diseases (regression coefficient (95% CIs), −0·242 (−0·311, −0·174)). Our findings show human health is inseparable from the health of the shared environment and the well-being of all species. Bird species richness offers a valuable means to understand large-scale relationships between human health and the health of the environment. To enable equitable sharing of biodiversity's benefits to human health, more efforts should be made to understand two-way socio-ecological mechanism underlying human–biodiversity interactions.

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework puts forward a new conservation target to enhance urban biodiversity. Cities have a great potential for sustaining biodiversity and nurturing a healthy relationship between people and our nearest nature. It is especially important in developing countries such as China, which has a rich biodiversity and a rapidly growing urban population. Using citizen science data, we show that 48% of the national bird diversity and 42% of its threatened species have been recorded in the top-20 most avian-diverse cities of China. Urban bird diversity hotspots clustered along the eastern coast, indicating the importance of establishing an inter-city conservation network along the East Asian-Australasian Flyway. This urban conservation network would be a starting point to promote social recognition of biodiversity’s relational value in a country with a vast population and an increasingly important role in meeting UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.

Background: Vaccination reduces the overall burden of COVID-19, while its allocation procedure may introduce additional health inequality, since populations characterized with certain social vulnerabilities have received less vaccination and been affected more by COVID-19. We used structural equation modeling to quantitatively evaluate the extent to which vaccination disparity would amplify health inequality, where it functioned as a mediator in the effect pathways from social vulnerabilities to COVID-19 mortality. Methods: We used USA nationwide county (n = 3112, 99% of the total) level data during 2021 in an ecological study design. Theme-specific rankings of social vulnerability index published by CDC (latest data of 2018, including socioeconomic status, household composition & disability, minority status & language, and housing type & transportation) were the exposure variables. Vaccination coverage rate (VCR) during 2021 published by CDC was the mediator variable, while COVID-19 case fatality rate (CFR) during 2021 published by John Hopkinson University, the outcome variable. Results: Greater vulnerabilities in socioeconomic status, household composition & disability, and minority status & language were inversely associated with VCR, together explaining 11.3% of the variance of VCR. Greater vulnerabilities in socioeconomic status and household composition & disability were positively associated with CFR, while VCR was inversely associated with CFR, together explaining 10.4% of the variance of CFR. Our mediation analysis, based on the mid-year data (30^th June 2021), found that 37.6% (mediation/total effect, 0.0014/0.0037), 10% (0.0003/0.0030) and 100% (0.0005/0.0005) of the effects in the pathways involving socioeconomic status, household composition & disability and minority status & language, respectively, were mediated by VCR. As a whole, the mediation effect significantly counted for 30.6% of COVID-19 CFR disparity. Such a mediation effect was seen throughout 2021, with proportions ranging from 12 to 32%. Conclusions: Allocation of COVID-19 vaccination in the USA during 2021 led to additional inequality with respect to COVID-19 mortality. Viable public health interventions should be taken to guarantee an equitable deployment of healthcare recourses across different population groups.