(C) PLOS One This story was originally published by PLOS One and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Ambiguous data licences undermine global ecosystem mapping efforts [1] ['Falko Buschke', 'Global Ecosystems Atlas', 'Group On Earth Observations', 'Geo', 'Secretariat', 'Geneva', 'David Patterson', 'Benjamin J. Cresswell', 'College Of Science', 'Engineering'] Date: 2026-09 To be accurate and useful, global ecosystem maps must bring together local expertise from various sources. Unclear data licensing conditions are a major obstacle to such efforts. Custodians of ecosystem information should be explicit about how their data can be reused. Copyright: © 2026 Buschke et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. A quarter of the way into the 21st century, we still lack a comprehensive, authoritative, and scientifically-sound map of the world’s ecosystems. Despite advances in satellite imagery and automated classification algorithms, ecosystem mapping remains resistant to top-down global approaches. Local expertise remains fundamental to develop, or at least validate, ecosystem maps [1,2]. Local input can stem from scientists or local communities and take the form of field surveys of species composition, annotations of point-based records of ecosystem classes, or manual refinements of historical maps. Creating a modern map of the world’s ecosystems should build on existing local information, not to mention decades of preceding investment. However, integrating essential local knowledge is hindered when it is unclear whether this information may be used to map, manage, and conserve ecosystems. Ecosystem maps, like all other creative works, remain under exclusive copyright as a default unless clearly stated otherwise [3]. This means that even when providers make their ecosystem data downloadable from public websites, users should assume that these data are protected and cannot be reused without prior permission. In this context, permission takes the form of an explicit statement of a data licence or the direct authorisation by the data provider. As the team working on the Global Ecosystems Atlas (https://globalecosystemsatlas.org/) [4], we urge the custodians of ecosystem datasets to develop explicit licences that consider the variety of ways users may repurpose these data. The Global Ecosystems Atlas is a cross-sector collaborative initiative to compile the first comprehensive, standardised, and open resource on the extent of the world’s ecosystems. The Ecosystems Atlas brings together existing ecosystem information from trusted sources (e.g., National authorities, nongovernmental organisations, or the peer-reviewed scientific literature) and fills remaining informational gaps using ecosystem classification models developed using annotated point-based training data evaluated by experts. Outputs from the Global Ecosystems Atlas are made available under open licences consistent with donor requirements and the guidance policy by its convening organisation, the Group on Earth Observations (GEO) [5]. As of January 2026, our team has compiled a catalogue of 343 candidate ecosystem datasets [6] that could be combined—with full attribution to data owners—to develop a global map of ecosystems. However, almost one-third (29.7%) of the datasets do not provide users with explicit guidance on how the data may be reused (Fig 1). A further 20.4% can be reused under custom licences (e.g., legal terms and conditions tailored to a specific dataset), which can be difficult for nonexperts to navigate. Custom licenses vary from institutional policies by national governments or large research institutions, to personalised modifications of standard licenses. Data owners can even provide different licence conditions to different end-users (e.g., data owners might allow free use to individuals and small businesses but restrict use to large corporations that exceed a certain size). Custom licences introduce legal overheads to ensure that licence conditions are met. Moreover, when custom licences include conditions that any derivative works must be shared under the same licence conditions (i.e., a legal technique known as “copyleft”), it severely limits their uptake in derivative works. PNG larger image TIFF original image Download: Fig 1. The data licences of 343 ecosystem datasets in the Global Ecosystems Atlas Data Catalogue. (The trademarked Creative Commons logos and icons are depicted according to the reuse policy: https://creativecommons.org/policies/). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pesy.0000017.g001 Less than half of the datasets (47.8%) in the Global Ecosystems Atlas Data Catalogue are shared under widely applied Creative Commons licences, which are standardised public licences that establish how works may be reused [7]. Of these datasets shared under Creative Commons licences, the majority (39.6%) require attribution to the data owner (CC-BY), while a minority (4%) restrict reuse to noncommercial purposes (CC-BY-NC) (Fig 1). Even if only a small minority of datasets are restricted to noncommercial use, these restrictions can have significant ramifications for synthesised global products. Derived products made up of multiple datasets must be licensed according to the most stringent conditions of its constituent parts. For example, including a single dataset with a ‘noncommercial’ (NC) condition would restrict any commercial uses for the whole composite product, hampering its uptake for commercial applications like corporate biodiversity reporting [8]. Similarly, adding a ‘no-derivatives’ (ND) condition would prohibit works from being combined with any other datasets, while ‘share-alike’ (SA) conditions would constrain the licence of derived products and introduce conflicts with other datasets that do not share the exact same licence. It is tempting to advocate for all ecosystem data to be made publicly available under nonrestrictive open access licences, as others have done before [9]. However, such blanket recommendations overlook the many valid reasons data owners may have to control how their data are reused or acknowledged. Biodiversity data can be seen as social infrastructure [10] and respecting data sovereignty is essential for equitable and effective conservation outcomes [11,12], especially in marginalised groups [13,14]. Similarly, selling commercial access to biodiversity information is one way to recoup the costs of producing and maintaining that information [15], but this is only possible when the commercial rights of data owners are protected. In our experience discussing licensing arrangements with data owners—including scientists, government officials, and NGO researchers—we found that licensing issues are often an afterthought. Stakeholders may have received little guidance on how to select and apply licences to support the intended use of their data. Against this backdrop, we offer three specific recommendations to the custodians of ecosystem data (Box 1), favouring open licenses that allow for unrestricted reuse with or without attribution (compatible with Creative Commons licenses CC0 and CC-BY, respectively). Initiatives like the Global Ecosystems Atlas are not meant to replace existing information on the world’s ecosystems. Instead, they aim to build on what already exists and add value by bringing datasets together. This is only possible when we recognise the effort and investment behind existing ecosystem maps [16]. Clear data licences are an essential, though often overlooked, requirement for creating bottom-up global ecosystem maps. [END] --- [1] Url: https://journals.plos.org/ecosystems/article?id=10.1371/journal.pesy.0000017 Published and (C) by PLOS One Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons - Attribution BY 4.0. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/plosone/