Effective research, policy, and management rely on focused and precise effort; however, it is easy to lose coherence when integrating and mobilising information associated with complex, multi-faceted entities such as ecosystems. This is especially the case when working across multiple disciplines and geopolitical regions: operating amidst a wide range of conceptualisations, terminologies, and disharmonious standards can readily lead to unforeseen and often undesirable consequences. Such semantic difficulties have inhibited vital efforts to consistently protect biodiversity, ensure environmental justice, and transparently monitor progress towards conservation, ecosystem management, and ecologically-sensitive development. For example, faceted and conflicting understandings of “forest” environments associated with the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation initiative (REDD and, subsequently, REDD+) have contributed to scenarios in which the value of biodiversity was not fully appreciated or assessed before natural ecosystems were impacted. Similar issues are to be expected in a wide range of natural and anthropogenically-managed environments subsumed in complex, international undertakings such as the establishment and maintenance of Marine Protected Areas.

Within this context, the creation, extension, and (re)use of ontologies which contend with aspects of biodiversity have the potential to promote coherence, both for humans and machine agents. To this end, the Environment Ontology (ENVO; www.environmentontology.org) is interoperating with other domain ontologies closely linked to the representation of biodiversity in order to better interface with efforts such as Darwin Core and initiatives to promote the achievement of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). ENVO is in the process of expanding and refining its controlled representations of environments, ecosystems, habitats, and related entities from a growing list of standards, taking special note of the role of biodiversity in each. While ontologies cannot, in themselves, settle disputed definitions, align standards, or integrate data silos, they can create a foundation for doing so by representing the entities of concern as well as the relationships between them with greater precision. Thus, their application promotes focused debate and enhances operationalisation, discoverability, interoperability, and communication. This presentation will describe how environmental semantics may support standards for sustaining biodiversity and serves as an invitation to all who wish to contribute to the ontology's future development.