The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has recently developed a global ecosystem typology (IUCN typology) based on the functional characteristics of the ecosystems. However, its low spatial resolution and lack of recognition of certain categories in Japan limits effective and precise habitat analysis for global comparisons. In this data paper, we used the Japanese vegetation map provided by the Ministry of Environment (MOE) to align Japanese vegetation categories with the IUCN typology scheme up to Level 4, Regional subgroups, developing a correspondence table and a high-resolution spatial dataset focusing on terrestrial ecosystems. In addition, we also integrated the land-use classification developed by the National Institute for Environmental Studies. The dataset includes tables describing the integration of Japanese habitat classification with IUCN typology from Level 1 to 4 (Realms, Biomes, Ecosystem functional groups, Regional subgroups), explanation of land-use categories, and the main corresponding table as well as high-resolution integrated GIS data. This integration supports both global and local studies, with the tables including English and Japanese names of the classification tree.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature has recently developed a global ecosystem typology (IUCN typology) based on functional characteristics. However, the existing global maps for Level 3 of the typology (Ecosystem functional groups, EFGs) have low spatial resolution and fail to recognize certain categories in Japan limiting precise ecosystem analysis for global comparisons. To address these, we developed Level 6 classification, Subglobal ecosystem types (SETs), of the IUCN typology in Japan, directly under EFGs, by using the Japanese vegetation maps provided by the Ministry of Environment. First, we systematically identified potential parent EFGs for each Japanese vegetation categories, then conducted repeated iterative expert reviews until consensus was reached. Finally, we incorporated the land-use classification developed by the National Institute for Environmental Studies. The resulting correspondence tables and high-resolution spatial dataset include 133 SETs, belonging to 28 EFGs, 14 Biomes, and 7 Realms, focusing on terrestrial and related ecosystems. Within these Realms, the Intensive land-use Biome had the largest surface area, followed by Temperate-boreal forests and woodlands. Compared to the global maps, we identified seven new EFGs in Japan and extended the northern geographical range of some subtropical EFGs. SETs along climatic and anthropogenic gradients were challenging to align with existing EFGs, as were SETs related to characteristic vegetation communities in Japan and Asia, such as bamboo forests. The SETs created in this study enhance national assessments by providing spatially explicit information on ecosystem distribution and land-use, therefore can form an integral part of regional and global biodiversity monitoring.

Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) have emerged as a crucial tool for monitoring biodiversity change and provide a framework for standardized and integrated data that align with national and global conservation targets. While EBVs have static definitions, they offer considerable flexibility in their specific data products, allowing regions with diverse geographies, biota, and cultures to develop unique implementation strategies. To guide EBV data products for Japan, we compare data availability and gaps with Finland, a country with similar environments. We review the status of primary data for EBVs in terrestrial ecosystems in these two countries and then compare them with Europe. Phenology and model-based approaches have emerged as cost-effective methods covering multiple EBV classes and assessing changes across diverse biomes and temporal scales. We found that Japan had adequate or surplus data for many EBV classes, particularly for species distributions, phenology, and environmental disasters, and we also note additional data unique to Japan. However, we also identified gaps in Japan such as data for products in Genetic Composition, Species Traits, and Ecosystem Structure EBV classes relative to Finland and Europe. We then discuss how EBVs can contribute to calculate indicators for Japan, such as the “30 by 30,” and highlight the remaining data gaps to realize them. Lastly, we provide our perspectives on calculating EBVs at the national scale, focusing on Japan. As countries and regions develop EBV products, comparative regional analyses help elucidate key commonalities and differences that can inform more coordinated and effective responses to the global biodiversity crisis.