Aim: Raptors serve critical ecological functions, are particularly extinction‐prone and are often used as environmental indicators and flagship species. Yet, there is no global framework to prioritize research and conservation actions on them. We identify for the first time the factors driving extinction risk and scientific attention on raptors and develop a novel research and conservation priority index (RCPI) to identify global research and conservation priorities.Location: Global.Methods: We use random forest models based on ecological traits and extrinsic data to identify the drivers of risk and scientific attention in all raptors. We then map global research and conservation priorities. Lastly, we model where priorities fall relative to country‐level human social indicators.Results: Raptors with small geographic ranges, scavengers, forest‐dependent species and those with slow life histories are particularly extinction‐prone. Research is extremely biased towards a small fraction of raptor species: 10 species (1.8% of all raptors) account for one‐third of all research, while one‐fifth of species have no publications. Species with small geographic ranges and those inhabiting less developed countries are greatly understudied. Regions of Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia are identified as particularly high priority for raptor research and conservation. These priorities are highly concentrated in developing countries, indicating a global mismatch between priorities and capacity for research and conservation.Main conclusions: A redistribution of scientific attention and conservation efforts towards developing tropical countries and the least‐studied, extinction‐prone species is critical to conserve raptors and their ecological functions worldwide. We identify clear taxonomic and geographic research and conservation priorities for all raptors, and our methodology can be applied across other taxa to prioritize scientific investment.

Reliance on fossil fuels is causing unprecedented climate change and is accelerating environmental degradation and global biodiversity loss. Together, climate change and biodiversity loss, if not averted urgently, may inflict severe damage on ecosystem processes, functions and services that support the welfare of modern societies. Increasing renewable energy deployment and expanding the current protected area network represent key solutions to these challenges, but conflicts may arise over the use of limited land for energy production as opposed to biodiversity conservation. Here, we compare recently identified core areas for the expansion of the global protected area network with the renewable energy potential available from land‐based solar photovoltaic, wind energy and bioenergy (in the form of Miscanthus × giganteus). We show that these energy sources have very different biodiversity impacts and net energy contributions. The extent of risks and opportunities deriving from renewable energy development is highly dependent on the type of renewable source harvested, the restrictions imposed on energy harvest and the region considered, with Central America appearing at particularly high potential risk from renewable energy expansion. Without restrictions on power generation due to factors such as production and transport costs, we show that bioenergy production is a major potential threat to biodiversity, while the potential impact of wind and solar appears smaller than that of bioenergy. However, these differences become reduced when energy potential is restricted by external factors including local energy demand. Overall, we found that areas of opportunity for developing solar and wind energy with little harm to biodiversity could exist in several regions of the world, with the magnitude of potential impact being particularly dependent on restrictions imposed by local energy demand. The evidence provided here helps guide sustainable development of renewable energy and contributes to the targeting of global efforts in climate mitigation and biodiversity conservation.

The prosperity and well‐being of human societies relies on healthy ecosystems and the services they provide. However, the biodiversity crisis is undermining ecosystems services and functions. Vultures are among the most imperiled taxonomic groups on Earth, yet they have a fundamental ecosystem function. These obligate scavengers rapidly consume large amounts of carrion and human waste, a service that may aid in both disease prevention and control of mammalian scavengers, including feral dogs, which in turn threaten humans. We combined information about the distribution of all 15 vulture species found in Europe, Asia, and Africa with their threats and used detailed expert knowledge on threat intensity to prioritize critical areas for conserving vultures in Africa and Eurasia. Threats we identified included poisoning, mortality due to collision with wind energy infrastructures, and other anthropogenic activities related to human land use and influence. Areas important for vulture conservation were concentrated in southern and eastern Africa, South Asia, and the Iberian Peninsula, and over 80% of these areas were unprotected. Some vulture species required larger areas for protection than others. Finally, countries that had the largest share of all identified important priority areas for vulture conservation were those with the largest expenditures related to rabies burden (e.g., India, China, and Myanmar). Vulture populations have declined markedly in most of these countries. Restoring healthy vulture populations through targeted actions in the priority areas we identified may help restore the ecosystem services vultures provide, including sanitation and potentially prevention of diseases, such as rabies, a heavy burden afflicting fragile societies. Our findings may guide stakeholders to prioritize actions where they are needed most in order to achieve international goals for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development.

Climate change is driving species to shift their distributions toward high altitudes and latitudes, while habitat loss and fragmentation may hamper species ability to follow their climatic envelope. These two drivers of change may act in synergy, with particularly disastrous impacts on biodiversity. Protected areas, PAs, may thus represent crucial buffers against the compounded effects of climate change and habitat loss. However, large‐scale studies assessing the performance of PAs as such buffers remain scarce and are largely based on species occurrence data. Conversely, abundance data have proven to be more reliable for addressing changes in wildlife populations under climate change. We evaluated changes in bird abundance from the 1970s–80s to the 2000s inside and outside PAs at the trailing range edge of 30 northern bird species and at the leading range edge of 70 southern species. Abundances of retracting northern species were higher and declined less inside PAs at their trailing range edge. The positive effect of PAs on bird abundances was particularly marked in northern species that rely strongly on PAs, that is, their density distribution is largely confined within PAs. These species were nearly absent outside PAs in the 2000s. The abundances of southern species were in general lower inside PAs and increased less from the 70s–80s to 2000s. Nonetheless, species with high reliance on PAs had much higher abundances inside than outside PAs in the 2000s. These results show that PAs are essential in mitigating the retraction of northern species, but also facilitate northward expansions of southern species highly reliant on PAs. Our study provides empirical evidence documenting the role of PAs in facilitating species to adjust to rapidly changing climatic conditions, thereby contributing to the mitigation of impending biodiversity loss. PAs may thus allow time for initiating wider conservation programs on currently unprotected land.