Using Red List Indices to monitor extinction risk at national scales

被引:16
作者
Raimondo, Domitilla [1 ]
Young, Bruce E. [2 ]
Brooks, Thomas M. [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Cardoso, Pedro [6 ]
van der Colff, Dewidine [1 ]
de Souza Dias, Braulio Ferreira [7 ]
Vercillo, Ugo [8 ]
de Souza, Estevao [8 ]
Juslen, Aino [6 ]
Hyvarinen, Esko [9 ]
von Staden, Lize [1 ]
Tolley, Krystal [1 ,10 ]
McGowan, Philip J. K. [11 ]
机构
[1] Biodivers Assessment & Monitoring Directorate Sou, Pretoria, South Africa
[2] NatureServe, Arlington, VA USA
[3] Int Union Conservat Nat IUCN, Gland, Switzerland
[4] Univ Philippines Los Banos, World Agroforestry Ctr ICRAF, Laguna, Philippines
[5] Univ Tasmania, Inst Marine & Antarctic Studies, Hobart, Tas, Australia
[6] Univ Helsinki, Finnish Museum Nat Hist LUOMUS, Helsinki, Finland
[7] Univ Brasilia, Inst Ciencias Biol, Dept Ecol, Brasilia, DF, Brazil
[8] Inst Chico Mendes Conservnao Biodiversidade ICMBi, Brasilia, DF, Brazil
[9] Minist Environm, Helsinki, Finland
[10] Univ Johannesburg, Ctr Ecol Genom & Wildlife Conservat, Johannesburg, South Africa
[11] Newcastle Univ, Sch Nat & Environm Sci, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne & Wear, England
关键词
disaggregated global Red List Index; indicators; national Red List Index; species monitoring; BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; INDICATORS; PROGRESS; DRIVES;
D O I
10.1111/csp2.12854
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
The Red List Index (RLI) measures change in the aggregate extinction risk of species. It is a key indicator for tracking progress toward nine of the Aichi and many proposed post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework Targets. Here, we consider two formulations of the RLI used for reporting biodiversity trends at national scales. Disaggregated global RLIs measure changing national contributions to global extinction risk and are currently based on five taxonomic groups, while national RLIs measure changing national extinction risk and are based on taxonomic groups assessed multiple times in country. For 74% of nations, the disaggregated global RLI is currently based on three or fewer taxonomic groups. Meanwhile, national RLIs from selected pilot countries Finland, South Africa, and Brazil are computed from twelve, eight, and nine taxonomic groups, respectively. The national RLI and the disaggregated global RLI measure different aspects of biodiversity, in that the former detects national trends in populations of species for which each country is responsible while the latter provides standardized comparisons of nations' contributions to the global extinction risk of the same species groups. As governments commit to the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we encourage them to monitor a standard set of taxonomic groups representing different biomes using both RLI formulations to ensure effective target tracking and accurate feedback on their conservation investments.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   Toward monitoring global biodiversity [J].
Baillie, Jonathan E. M. ;
Collen, Ben ;
Amin, Rajan ;
Akcakaya, H. Resit ;
Butchart, Stuart H. M. ;
Brummitt, Neil ;
Meagher, Thomas R. ;
Ram, Mala ;
Hilton-Taylor, Craig ;
Mace, Georgina M. .
CONSERVATION LETTERS, 2008, 1 (01) :18-26
[2]   Uneven use of biodiversity indicators in 5th National Reports to the Convention on Biological Diversity [J].
Bhatt, Rashi ;
Gill, Michael J. ;
Hamilton, Healy ;
Han, Xuemei ;
Linden, Helaine M. ;
Young, Bruce E. .
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, 2020, 47 (01) :15-21
[4]   How similar are national red lists and the IUCN Red List? [J].
Brito, Daniel ;
Grace Ambal, Ruth ;
Brooks, Thomas ;
De Silva, Naamal ;
Foster, Matthew ;
Hao, Wang ;
Hilton-Taylor, Craig ;
Paglia, Adriano ;
Paul Rodriguez, Jon ;
Vicente Rodriguez, Jose .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2010, 143 (05) :1154-1158
[5]   Conservation biology - Biodiversity barometers [J].
Brooks, T ;
Kennedy, E .
NATURE, 2004, 431 (7012) :1046-1047
[6]  
Brooks Thomas M., 2015, Biodiversity (Ottawa), V16, P157, DOI 10.1080/14888386.2015.1075903
[7]   Green Plants in the Red: A Baseline Global Assessment for the IUCN Sampled Red List Index for Plants [J].
Brummitt, Neil A. ;
Bachman, Steven P. ;
Griffiths-Lee, Janine ;
Lutz, Maiko ;
Moat, Justin F. ;
Farjon, Aljos ;
Donaldson, John S. ;
Hilton-Taylor, Craig ;
Meagher, Thomas R. ;
Albuquerque, Sara ;
Aletrari, Elina ;
Andrews, A. Kei ;
Atchison, Guy ;
Baloch, Elisabeth ;
Barlozzini, Barbara ;
Brunazzi, Alice ;
Carretero, Julia ;
Celesti, Marco ;
Chadburn, Helen ;
Cianfoni, Eduardo ;
Cockel, Chris ;
Coldwell, Vanessa ;
Concetti, Benedetta ;
Contu, Sara ;
Crook, Vicki ;
Dyson, Philippa ;
Gardiner, Lauren ;
Ghanim, Nadia ;
Greene, Hannah ;
Groom, Alice ;
Harker, Ruth ;
Hopkins, Della ;
Khela, Sonia ;
Lakeman-Fraser, Poppy ;
Lindon, Heather ;
Lockwood, Helen ;
Loftus, Christine ;
Lombrici, Debora ;
Lopez-Poveda, Lucia ;
Lyon, James ;
Malcolm-Tompkins, Patricia ;
McGregor, Kirsty ;
Moreno, Laura ;
Murray, Linda ;
Nazar, Keara ;
Power, Emily ;
Tuijtelaars, Mireya Quiton ;
Salter, Ruth ;
Segrott, Robert ;
Thacker, Hannah .
PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (08)
[8]  
Bubb P.J., 2009, IUCN RED LIST INDEX
[9]   Three Key considerations for biodiversity conservation in multilateral agreements [J].
Burgass, Michael J. ;
Larrosa, Cecilia ;
Tittensor, Derek P. ;
Arlidge, William N. S. ;
Caceres, Hernan ;
Camaclang, Abbey ;
Hampton, Shannon ;
McLaverty, Ciaran ;
Nicholson, Emily ;
Muposhi, Victor K. ;
Pinto, Carolina M. ;
Rowland, Jessica A. ;
Stevenson, Simone L. ;
Watermeyer, Kate E. ;
Milner-Gulland, E. J. .
CONSERVATION LETTERS, 2021, 14 (02)
[10]   Using Red List Indices to measure progress towards the 2010 target and beyond [J].
Butchart, SHM ;
Stattersfield, AJ ;
Baillie, J ;
Bennun, LA ;
Stuart, SN ;
Akçakaya, HR ;
Hilton-Taylor, C ;
Mace, GM .
PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2005, 360 (1454) :255-268