1. New analysis of the potential social impacts of 30×30 at global level, under various scenarios for implementation. This will include analysis of affected populations disaggregated as far as possible by wealth, ethnicity, voice in decision making and other important social variables.
2. A more detailed analysis of one case study country (likely to be in Central Africa).
3. Feasible proposals for how 30×30 could be implemented at the country level in a way that maximises social benefits while minimising social harms, co-developed with implementation partners.
4. Improved dialogue and a strong foundation for future inter-disciplinary and cross-sectoral research collaboration between people with different perspectives on area-based conservation.

1a. Prioritize surveillance to focus on high-risk interfaces by synthesizing data on health impacts on wildlife, existing wildlife health surveillance systems, missing cases of wildlife health events and detection bias, and socio-ecological interfaces and high spillover risk practices;

1b. Address sustainability through analyses of data and creation of tools to estimate cost effectiveness and benefits of surveillance, drawing from existing wildlife or livestock surveillance systems;

2a. Communicate a co-developed theory of change that connects multilateral agreements (e.g., SDGs) and international frameworks to the practical implementation of wildlife surveillance systems;

2b. Formalize the consortium through the drafting of a collaboration agreement with endorsements from respective member institutions describing how we work together in the long term and identify capabilities, synergies, and gaps among stakeholders in the implementation of sustainable wildlife health surveillance globally.

• Provide consensus view of the key features of new marine interventions and examples of application of these features in climate-vulnerable systems.
• Co-design a marine intervention governance protocol and self-assessment tool to help decisionmakers identify governance capacity and needs, and to provide guidance on approaches to ensure responsible and effective intervention.
• Work with leaders of marine organizations to tailor results and products for global, national, and regional application in temperate and tropical oceans.

• Develop a toolkit that the finance sector and relevant companies can use to develop and deploy their biodiversity safeguards on-the-ground, and which can help them meet global standards to address biodiversity risks and the impacts of their investments

• Engage with policymakers, companies and practitioners from financial institutions to ensure the toolkit is practical and adaptable for targeted BRI stakeholders in the government, business and the finance sectors

• Compile guidance and tools that working group members and their partners have used and proved useful for supporting community-based natural resource governance
• Create succinct use cases summarizing real-world examples of providing support to communities seeking to strengthen their natural resources governance capacity, including both successful and not-so-successful efforts
• Develop a short primer to help groups that support communities to strengthen their natural resource governance capacity to better understand their roles and responsibilities and point them to guidance and tools they will likely find useful

• Identify knowledge needs among marine conservation and sanitation practitioners to improve collaboration on sanitation management challenges
• Develop evidence-based wastewater pollution guideline values for coral reef ecosystems to help managers set pollution targets that are complementary to existing health targets
• Design sanitation planning process guides to help conservation and sanitation practitioners work together on sanitation management interventions that meet public and ecosystem health goals

• Review and Identify advances that have been made in the use of natural defenses in policy and practice.
• Identify gaps in science, policy and practice that still limit the use of natural defenses
• Discover and develop innovative approaches to fill these gaps and expand the use of natural defense

• Synthesize data to map benefits and drawbacks from wildlife corridor restoration projects in the agricultural landscape, evaluate conflict tolerance and identify mitigation solutions
• Use the evidence to answer questions on what tree species to plant to benefit wildlife and people, and how to manage corridors for ecological and human well-being
• Work with farmers (small-holder and industry), government and the conservation sector to co-develop guidance for practice and policy contexts, to guide natural wildlife corridor restoration

• Promote science-based knowledge to overcome the myths regarding mange disease and management
• Collate and compare mange severity, impact, and management data across the range
• Identify potential common predictors of severe mange infestations
• Develop a framework to facilitate holistic data sharing across the livestock-wildlife-human sectors
• Develop ecologically informed management plans that mitigate disease impacts by informing and supporting central animal health agencies