Abstract
Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a “Green List of Species” (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species’ progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species’ viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species’ recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1833-1849 |
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | Conservation Biology |
Volume | 35 |
Issue number | 6 |
Early online date | Jul 2021 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Dec 2021 |
Access to Document
Other files and links
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver
}
Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact. / Grace, Molly K.; Akçakaya, H. Resit; Bennett, Elizabeth L.; Brooks, Thomas M.; Heath, Anna; Hedges, Simon; Hilton-Taylor, Craig; Hoffmann, Michael; Hochkirch, Axel; Jenkins, Richard; Keith, David A.; Long, Barney; Mallon, David P.; Meijaard, Erik; Milner-Gulland, E. J.; Rodriguez, Jon Paul; Stephenson, P. J.; Stuart, Simon N.; Young, Richard P.; Acebes, Pablo; Alfaro-Shigueto, Joanna; Alvarez-Clare, Silvia; Andriantsimanarilafy, Raphali Rodlis; Arbetman, Marina; Azat, Claudio; Bacchetta, Gianluigi; Badola, Ruchi; Barcelos, Luís M.D.; Barreiros, Joao Pedro; Basak, Sayanti; Berger, Danielle J.; Bhattacharyya, Sabuj; Bino, Gilad; Borges, Paulo A.V.; Boughton, Raoul K.; Brockmann, H. Jane; Buckley, Hannah L.; Burfield, Ian J.; Burton, James; Camacho-Badani, Teresa; Cano-Alonso, Luis Santiago; Carmichael, Ruth H.; Carrero, Christina; Carroll, John P.; Catsadorakis, Giorgos; Chapple, David G.; Chapron, Guillaume; Chowdhury, Gawsia Wahidunnessa; Claassens, Louw; Cogoni, Donatella; Constantine, Rochelle; Craig, Christie Anne; Cunningham, Andrew A.; Dahal, Nishma; Daltry, Jennifer C.; Das, Goura Chandra; Dasgupta, Niladri; Davey, Alexandra; Davies, Katharine; Develey, Pedro; Elangovan, Vanitha; Fairclough, David; Febbraro, Mirko Di; Fenu, Giuseppe; Fernandes, Fernando Moreira; Fernandez, Eduardo Pinheiro; Finucci, Brittany; Földesi, Rita; Foley, Catherine M.; Ford, Matthew; Forstner, Michael R.J.; García, Néstor; Garcia-Sandoval, Ricardo; Gardner, Penny C.; Garibay-Orijel, Roberto; Gatan-Balbas, Marites; Gauto, Irene; Ghazi, Mirza Ghazanfar Ullah; Godfrey, Stephanie S.; Gollock, Matthew; González, Benito A.; Grant, Tandora D.; Gray, Thomas; Gregory, Andrew J.; van Grunsven, Roy H.A.; Gryzenhout, Marieka; Guernsey, Noelle C.; Gupta, Garima; Hagen, Christina; Hagen, Christian A.; Hall, Madison B.; Hallerman, Eric; Hare, Kelly; Hart, Tom; Hartdegen, Ruston; Harvey-Brown, Yvette; Hatfield, Richard; Hawke, Tahneal; Hermes, Claudia; Hitchmough, Rod; Hoffmann, Pablo Melo; Howarth, Charlie; Hudson, Michael A.; Hussain, Syed Ainul; Huveneers, Charlie; Jacques, Hélène; Jorgensen, Dennis; Katdare, Suyash; Katsis, Lydia K.D.; Kaul, Rahul; Kaunda-Arara, Boaz; Keith-Diagne, Lucy; Kraus, Daniel T.; de Lima, Thales Moreira; Lindeman, Ken; Linsky, Jean; Louis, Edward; Loy, Anna; Lughadha, Eimear Nic; Mangel, Jeffrey C.; Marinari, Paul E.; Martin, Gabriel M.; Martinelli, Gustavo; McGowan, Philip J.K.; McInnes, Alistair; Teles Barbosa Mendes, Eduardo; Millard, Michael J.; Mirande, Claire; Money, Daniel; Monks, Joanne M.; Morales, Carolina Laura; Mumu, Nazia Naoreen; Negrao, Raquel; Nguyen, Anh Ha; Niloy, Md Nazmul Hasan; Norbury, Grant Leslie; Nordmeyer, Cale; Norris, Darren; O'Brien, Mark; Oda, Gabriela Akemi; Orsenigo, Simone; Outerbridge, Mark Evan; Pasachnik, Stesha; Pérez-Jiménez, Juan Carlos; Pike, Charlotte; Pilkington, Fred; Plumb, Glenn; Portela, Rita de Cassia Quitete; Prohaska, Ana; Quintana, Manuel G.; Rakotondrasoa, Eddie Fanantenana; Ranglack, Dustin H.; Rankou, Hassan; Rawat, Ajay Prakash; Reardon, James Thomas; Rheingantz, Marcelo Lopes; Richter, Stephen C.; Rivers, Malin C.; Rogers, Luke Rollie; da Rosa, Patrícia; Rose, Paul; Royer, Emily; Ryan, Catherine; de Mitcheson, Yvonne J.Sadovy; Salmon, Lily; Salvador, Carlos Henrique; Samways, Michael J.; Sanjuan, Tatiana; Souza dos Santos, Amanda; Sasaki, Hiroshi; Schutz, Emmanuel; Scott, Heather Ann; Scott, Robert Michael; Serena, Fabrizio; Sharma, Surya P.; Shuey, John A.; Silva, Carlos Julio Polo; Simaika, John P.; Smith, David R.; Spaet, Julia L.Y.; Sultana, Shanjida; Talukdar, Bibhab Kumar; Tatayah, Vikash; Thomas, Philip; Tringali, Angela; Trinh-Dinh, Hoang; Tuboi, Chongpi; Usmani, Aftab Alam; Vasco-Palacios, Aída M.; Vié, Jean Christophe; Virens, Jo; Walker, Alan; Wallace, Bryan; Waller, Lauren J.; Wang, Hongfeng; Wearn, Oliver R.; van Weerd, Merlijn; Weigmann, Simon; Willcox, Daniel; Woinarski, John; Yong, Jean W.H.; Young, Stuart.
In: Conservation Biology, Vol. 35, No. 6, 12.2021, p. 1833-1849.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact
AU - Grace, Molly K.
AU - Akçakaya, H. Resit
AU - Bennett, Elizabeth L.
AU - Brooks, Thomas M.
AU - Heath, Anna
AU - Hedges, Simon
AU - Hilton-Taylor, Craig
AU - Hoffmann, Michael
AU - Hochkirch, Axel
AU - Jenkins, Richard
AU - Keith, David A.
AU - Long, Barney
AU - Mallon, David P.
AU - Meijaard, Erik
AU - Milner-Gulland, E. J.
AU - Rodriguez, Jon Paul
AU - Stephenson, P. J.
AU - Stuart, Simon N.
AU - Young, Richard P.
AU - Acebes, Pablo
AU - Alfaro-Shigueto, Joanna
AU - Alvarez-Clare, Silvia
AU - Andriantsimanarilafy, Raphali Rodlis
AU - Arbetman, Marina
AU - Azat, Claudio
AU - Bacchetta, Gianluigi
AU - Badola, Ruchi
AU - Barcelos, Luís M.D.
AU - Barreiros, Joao Pedro
AU - Basak, Sayanti
AU - Berger, Danielle J.
AU - Bhattacharyya, Sabuj
AU - Bino, Gilad
AU - Borges, Paulo A.V.
AU - Boughton, Raoul K.
AU - Brockmann, H. Jane
AU - Buckley, Hannah L.
AU - Burfield, Ian J.
AU - Burton, James
AU - Camacho-Badani, Teresa
AU - Cano-Alonso, Luis Santiago
AU - Carmichael, Ruth H.
AU - Carrero, Christina
AU - Carroll, John P.
AU - Catsadorakis, Giorgos
AU - Chapple, David G.
AU - Chapron, Guillaume
AU - Chowdhury, Gawsia Wahidunnessa
AU - Claassens, Louw
AU - Cogoni, Donatella
AU - Constantine, Rochelle
AU - Craig, Christie Anne
AU - Cunningham, Andrew A.
AU - Dahal, Nishma
AU - Daltry, Jennifer C.
AU - Das, Goura Chandra
AU - Dasgupta, Niladri
AU - Davey, Alexandra
AU - Davies, Katharine
AU - Develey, Pedro
AU - Elangovan, Vanitha
AU - Fairclough, David
AU - Febbraro, Mirko Di
AU - Fenu, Giuseppe
AU - Fernandes, Fernando Moreira
AU - Fernandez, Eduardo Pinheiro
AU - Finucci, Brittany
AU - Földesi, Rita
AU - Foley, Catherine M.
AU - Ford, Matthew
AU - Forstner, Michael R.J.
AU - García, Néstor
AU - Garcia-Sandoval, Ricardo
AU - Gardner, Penny C.
AU - Garibay-Orijel, Roberto
AU - Gatan-Balbas, Marites
AU - Gauto, Irene
AU - Ghazi, Mirza Ghazanfar Ullah
AU - Godfrey, Stephanie S.
AU - Gollock, Matthew
AU - González, Benito A.
AU - Grant, Tandora D.
AU - Gray, Thomas
AU - Gregory, Andrew J.
AU - van Grunsven, Roy H.A.
AU - Gryzenhout, Marieka
AU - Guernsey, Noelle C.
AU - Gupta, Garima
AU - Hagen, Christina
AU - Hagen, Christian A.
AU - Hall, Madison B.
AU - Hallerman, Eric
AU - Hare, Kelly
AU - Hart, Tom
AU - Hartdegen, Ruston
AU - Harvey-Brown, Yvette
AU - Hatfield, Richard
AU - Hawke, Tahneal
AU - Hermes, Claudia
AU - Hitchmough, Rod
AU - Hoffmann, Pablo Melo
AU - Howarth, Charlie
AU - Hudson, Michael A.
AU - Hussain, Syed Ainul
AU - Huveneers, Charlie
AU - Jacques, Hélène
AU - Jorgensen, Dennis
AU - Katdare, Suyash
AU - Katsis, Lydia K.D.
AU - Kaul, Rahul
AU - Kaunda-Arara, Boaz
AU - Keith-Diagne, Lucy
AU - Kraus, Daniel T.
AU - de Lima, Thales Moreira
AU - Lindeman, Ken
AU - Linsky, Jean
AU - Louis, Edward
AU - Loy, Anna
AU - Lughadha, Eimear Nic
AU - Mangel, Jeffrey C.
AU - Marinari, Paul E.
AU - Martin, Gabriel M.
AU - Martinelli, Gustavo
AU - McGowan, Philip J.K.
AU - McInnes, Alistair
AU - Teles Barbosa Mendes, Eduardo
AU - Millard, Michael J.
AU - Mirande, Claire
AU - Money, Daniel
AU - Monks, Joanne M.
AU - Morales, Carolina Laura
AU - Mumu, Nazia Naoreen
AU - Negrao, Raquel
AU - Nguyen, Anh Ha
AU - Niloy, Md Nazmul Hasan
AU - Norbury, Grant Leslie
AU - Nordmeyer, Cale
AU - Norris, Darren
AU - O'Brien, Mark
AU - Oda, Gabriela Akemi
AU - Orsenigo, Simone
AU - Outerbridge, Mark Evan
AU - Pasachnik, Stesha
AU - Pérez-Jiménez, Juan Carlos
AU - Pike, Charlotte
AU - Pilkington, Fred
AU - Plumb, Glenn
AU - Portela, Rita de Cassia Quitete
AU - Prohaska, Ana
AU - Quintana, Manuel G.
AU - Rakotondrasoa, Eddie Fanantenana
AU - Ranglack, Dustin H.
AU - Rankou, Hassan
AU - Rawat, Ajay Prakash
AU - Reardon, James Thomas
AU - Rheingantz, Marcelo Lopes
AU - Richter, Stephen C.
AU - Rivers, Malin C.
AU - Rogers, Luke Rollie
AU - da Rosa, Patrícia
AU - Rose, Paul
AU - Royer, Emily
AU - Ryan, Catherine
AU - de Mitcheson, Yvonne J.Sadovy
AU - Salmon, Lily
AU - Salvador, Carlos Henrique
AU - Samways, Michael J.
AU - Sanjuan, Tatiana
AU - Souza dos Santos, Amanda
AU - Sasaki, Hiroshi
AU - Schutz, Emmanuel
AU - Scott, Heather Ann
AU - Scott, Robert Michael
AU - Serena, Fabrizio
AU - Sharma, Surya P.
AU - Shuey, John A.
AU - Silva, Carlos Julio Polo
AU - Simaika, John P.
AU - Smith, David R.
AU - Spaet, Julia L.Y.
AU - Sultana, Shanjida
AU - Talukdar, Bibhab Kumar
AU - Tatayah, Vikash
AU - Thomas, Philip
AU - Tringali, Angela
AU - Trinh-Dinh, Hoang
AU - Tuboi, Chongpi
AU - Usmani, Aftab Alam
AU - Vasco-Palacios, Aída M.
AU - Vié, Jean Christophe
AU - Virens, Jo
AU - Walker, Alan
AU - Wallace, Bryan
AU - Waller, Lauren J.
AU - Wang, Hongfeng
AU - Wearn, Oliver R.
AU - van Weerd, Merlijn
AU - Weigmann, Simon
AU - Willcox, Daniel
AU - Woinarski, John
AU - Yong, Jean W.H.
AU - Young, Stuart
N1 - Funding Information: M.G. was supported by a NERC Knowledge Exchange Fellowship and the IUCN SSC and the World Wildlife Fund. H.R.A. was supported by the Stony Brook University OVPR Seed Grant Program. This project received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under a Marie Skłodowska‐Curie grant agreement 766417 to M.F. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Society for Conservation Biology Copyright: Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a “Green List of Species” (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species’ progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species’ viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species’ recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.
AB - Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a “Green List of Species” (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species’ progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species’ viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species’ recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.
KW - acciones de conservación
KW - categorías de recuperación
KW - conservation action
KW - estatus verde de especies
KW - Green Status of species
KW - IUCN
KW - lista roja
KW - recovery categories
KW - red list
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85110328381&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/cobi.13756
DO - 10.1111/cobi.13756
M3 - Article
C2 - 34289517
AN - SCOPUS:85110328381
VL - 35
SP - 1833
EP - 1849
JO - Conservation Biology
JF - Conservation Biology
SN - 0888-8892
IS - 6
ER -