DOI: 10.17605/osf.io/tz7ra
title: Governance of Taxonomic Lists Survey

description: Taxonomy is a foundational scientific discipline, shaping not only the work of biologists and ecologists, but also how people see and understand the living world around us. In its most basic form, taxonomy is the science of precise categorization of the diversity of life on Earth into a rigorous system of scientific names and taxonomic concepts that allows for common understanding of the full extent and relationships of this diversity. Like many other scientific disciplines, taxonomy has evolved, developing over the centuries an agreed set of rules, norms, and shared strategies for definition, classification, and nomenclature of the life forms on Earth — what governance scholars would refer to as the “institution of taxonomy.” There are long-established and widely accepted governance systems in place for some aspects of taxonomy, for example the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, which establishes rules for the establishment and use of scientific names for organisms known as “animals”. Other aspects of taxonomy, including the development and aggregation of species lists, currently lack similar governance institutions.
 
Since the initial development of Linnaean taxonomy, a diversity of approaches have been adopted for critical taxonomic decisions about synonymy and classification, introducing pluralism to taxonomic principles at different levels and resulting in disagreements about species hypotheses and development of species lists. While the basic principles of Linnaean taxonomy—that species are the fundamental units of taxonomy, binomial names of species, the international codes for naming of species—have wide agreement and adherence, there is variation in implementation of the process of taxonomy, such as from application of different species concepts that result in differences in hypothesized species boundaries and potentially overlapping or conflicting species definitions. When developing species lists, these differences can result in inconsistencies from one list to another depending on the preferences of the list developer. For users of species lists, these differences can cause confusion and uncertainty, with potential effects on issues ranging from conservation to medicine (Thomson et al. this issue). Recent debates within the discipline have pointed to the potential benefits of a unified governance system for the development of taxonomic lists across all taxonomic communities leading to a single, accepted list of all life on Earth.

To address this challenge, a group of taxonomists, philosophers of science, and governance scholars have established the Working Group on the Governance of Taxonomic Lists under the auspices of the International Union of Biological Sciences to investigate the development of a governance system for the aggregation of a single list of all life on Earth. As a part of this work, the Working Group is conducting a survey of taxonomists, scientists who utilize taxonomy in their work or research, and other users of taxonomic information to determine 1) if there is agreement that a single list is needed, 2) what form such a list should take, and 3) what governance mechanisms are most acceptable to taxonomists and users of taxonomic information. The results of the survey will be published in peer reviewed journals and used to inform the work of the Working Group going forward.