A decision tree for assessing the risks and benefits of publishing biodiversity data

Ayesha I. T. Tulloch, Nancy Auerbach, Stephanie Avery-Gomm, Elisa Bayraktarov, Nathalie Butt, Chris R. Dickman, Glenn Ehmke, Diana O. Fisher, Hedley Grantham, Matthew H. Holden, Tyrone H. Lavery, Nicholas P. Leseberg, Miles Nicholls, James O’Connor, Leslie Roberson, Anita K. Smyth, Zoe Stone, Vivitskaia Tulloch, Eren Turak, Glenda M. Wardle, James E. M. Watson

Inadequate information on the geographical distribution of biodiversity hampers decision-making for conservation. Major efforts are underway to fill knowledge gaps, but there are increasing concerns that publishing the locations of species is dangerous, particularly for species at risk of exploitation. While we recognize that well-informed control of location data for highly sensitive taxa is necessary to avoid risks, such as poaching or habitat disturbance by recreational visitors, we argue that ignoring the benefits of sharing biodiversity data could unnecessarily obstruct conservation efforts for species and locations with low risks of exploitation. We provide a decision tree protocol for scientists that systematically considers both the risks of exploitation and potential benefits of increased conservation activities. Our protocol helps scientists assess the impacts of publishing biodiversity data and aims to enhance conservation opportunities, promote community engagement and reduce duplication of survey efforts.