The Global Biogeography Initiative

Biogeography​is​inherently​a​search​for​patterns​and​processes​that​ link​the​local​occurrences​of​organisms​(often,​but​not​solely,​species​ [Mishler,​2023])​with​local,​regional​and​global​drivers​of​their​dynamics.​Increasingly,​such​information​is​critical​for​informing​biodiversity​ conservation​and​management​decisions​in​the​current​period​of​extreme​global​change.​One​might​expect,​therefore,​that​biogeography​ should​bring​a​global​perspective​from​a​diverse​set​of​practitioners​ working​locally​and​collaborating​globally.​However,​a​global​perspective​is​hindered​by​the​uneven​distribution​of​biogeographical​studies​and​of​biogeographers​themselves,​which​leads​to​systematically​ biased​gaps​in​data​availability​(e.g.​see​maps​of​ignorance;​Rocchini​ et​al.,​2011)​and​shortfalls​in​knowledge​(Hortal​et​al.,​2015).​While​ these​shortfalls​are​increasingly​obvious—​skimming​just​this​journal's​ pages​will​quickly​illustrate​published​papers​are​not​representative​ of​ the​ full​ spatial​diversity​of​ important​biogeographical​questions,​ nor​ of​ the​ people​who​might​ ask​ them—​our​ ability​ to​ fill​ the​ gaps​ remains​limited​because​opportunity​and​resources​also​are​unevenly​ distributed.​Addressing​these​shortfalls​is​an​essential​consideration​ for​the​future​of​biogeography.​Self-​evidently,​we​cannot​understand​ how​the​world​has​changed​or​predict​how​it​will​change​if​our​sampling​of​it​is​geographically,​taxonomically​or​otherwise​biased,​which​ is​currently​the​case​(Vasconcelos,​2023).​Moreover,​addressing​systematic​biases​has​the​potential​to​unearth​substantial​epistemological​benefits​(Fehr,​2011).​More​research​from​understudied​areas​and​ systems​will​ both​ increase​ knowledge​ of​ biogeographical​ patterns​ globally​and​enrich​our​understanding​of​processes;​ it​ also​has​ the​ potential​to​change​perspectives​and​generate​new​paradigms. The​Journal of Biogeography​(JBI)​has​a​long-​standing​commitment​to​ intellectual​pluralism​(Dawson​et​al.,​2023;​Linder,​2016;​Watts,​1974; Whittaker,​ 2005)​ and,​ for​ the​ aforementioned​ reasons,​ marked​ its​ 50th​anniversary​by​announcing​a​new​initiative​in​Global Biogeography,​ which​seeks​to​better​represent​the​geographical​diversity​of​biogeography​and​biogeographers​(Dawson​et​al.,​2023).​This​initiative​began​ with​a​virtual​issue​on Global​Biogeography,​compiling​most-​cited​studies​from​JBI's​back-​catalogue​that​were​conducted​in​countries​around​ the​world​by​biogeographers​employed​at​ institutions​ in​ those​same​ countries.​The​same​principles​underwrite​ the​new​recurring​ ‘Global​ Biogeography’​section​debuting​in​this​issue.​Our​intention​is​to​raise​ the​profile​of​novel​and​underrepresented​perspectives​on​biogeography​such​as​studies​in​underrepresented​areas,​systems​and​taxa​with​a​ density​and​intensity​of​knowledge​that​reveals​intimate​understanding.​ Such​studies​may​span​a​continuity​of​spatial​and/or​temporal​scales​ that​is​difficult​to​acquire​through​occasional​visits​for​data​collection,​ and​promotes​integration,​not​mere​inference,​of​pattern​and​process.​ This​may​require​stronger​coupling​with​local​scientific​and​Indigenous​ knowledge​(sensu​Petzold​et​al.​2020;​e.g.,​Indigenous​Contributions​to​ Molecular Ecology),​a​rethinking​of​collaborations​that​leads​to​mutual​ benefits​beyond​data​collection,​and​embracing​knowledge​generation​ and​transfer​across​world​regions​(e.g.,​Carroll​et​al.​2021).​It​is​worth​ noting​that​while​this​work​may​most​easily​address​the​largest​gaps​ in​poorly​covered​parts​of​the​world,​it​is​also​work​that​could​benefit​ from​being​done​on​the​doorsteps​of​prestigious​institutions. It​should​be​clear,​however,​that​a​new​section​highlighting​more​ diverse​publications​is​only​the​tip​of​the​iceberg:​much​else​that​precedes​ publication​ needs​ enhancement—​for​ example,​ inclusive​ epistemic​communities,​training​and​resources—​while​the​changing​climate​ of​ publishing​ continues​ to​ raise​ new​ problems​ (Hortal​ et​ al.,​2019; McGill​et​al.,​2018;​Peterson​et​al.,​2019).​The​suite​of​issues​that​require​attention​extends​far​beyond​the​scope​of​this​editorial,​but​we​ highlight​ four​ key​ challenges​ at​ the​ intersection​ of​ pre-​publication​ processes​and​the​changing​publishing​environment​as​examples.