10 - Development and implementation of the IUCN - World Conservation Union's Red List and its application by governments and conservation organisations worldwide
Submitting Institution
Imperial College LondonUnit of Assessment
Biological SciencesSummary Impact Type
EnvironmentalResearch Subject Area(s)
Environmental Sciences: Environmental Science and Management
Biological Sciences: Ecology, Genetics
Summary of the impact
Research staff in the Centre for Population Biology (CPB) at Imperial
developed a range of species conservation assessment tools and
methodologies based on population modelling carried out by CPB research
staff. The introduction in 1994 of a scientifically rigorous approach to
determine risks of extinction that is applicable to all species, based on
underlying research at Imperial and described in paper [6], has led to a
rigorous and robust approach that is used by governments, conservation
organisations and researchers worldwide. In particular, these tools have
been applied in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ and have
made a fundamental contribution to this conservation measure. This Red
List is widely recognized as the most comprehensive, objective global
approach for evaluating the conservation status of plant and animal
species. It plays a prominent role in guiding conservation activities of
governments, NGOs and scientific institutions and has led to the formation
of the Red List Index. Results from the Red List Index have led to
worldwide bodies rethinking conservation targets and indicators and
strongly influenced the Convention on Biological Diversity's 2020 Aichi
targets.
Underpinning research
Researchers at the Centre for Population Biology (CPB) at Imperial
College London carried out ground-breaking research into the relationships
between extinction risk, range size and population dynamics [1, 2]. The
Imperial research showed that it was possible to predict extinction risk
based upon range size, changes in abundance and biological characteristics
such as fecundity and meta-population structure. Based upon this
scientific foundation, G. Mace and R. Lande proposed new criteria for
assessing the extinction risk of all species based on a simple population
model, which were then developed into a new IUCN Red Listing process which
was launched in 1994. Red lists categorise species into threatened
categories (Critically endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable) and other
categories (Near Threatened, Least Concern, Data Deficient, Extinct in the
Wild and Extinct) based on threshold values for key biological
characteristics, including the rate of population decline, population
fragmentation and range size. These categories and their criteria are
simple and generalisable enough to be used on any species, from fungi to
elephants, but are based on strong principles of population ecology to
which researchers at the Imperial College CPB had significant inputs [1,
2]. IUCN formed a working group to develop, test and review these
categories and criteria, which was chaired by Georgina Mace, and ran from
1992 to 1998. The group included Kevin Gaston and E.J. Milner-Gulland.
Gaston was a Royal Society URF at Imperial College from 1994-1995. E.J.
Milner-Gulland was chosen to sit on the working group based on her
research expertise, developed at Imperial from 1998-1991.
In 2003-2006, researchers at Imperial College explored the application of
the red listing process at regional and national levels, using Central
Asia as a case study [3]. This research formed the basis for a better
understanding of the role red listing might play in national conservation
policy, and found that there should be a more nuanced use of the
categories and criteria because national borders are not necessarily
biologically meaningful (e.g. a country may contain very few individuals
of a globally common species). In 2006-2012, Georgina Mace was involved in
a number of high profile research projects using the red lists to assess
the status of the world's biodiversity, which informed global conservation
policy [4, 5]. The full scientific background of the IUCN Red List
criteria exists in informal publications, but the science was summarised
and developed in [6]. This paper is the top-cited paper in the journal Conservation
Biology since 2008 (out of 840 papers published at 12/3/2012).
The key researchers carrying out research underpinning the development of
the red listing process during the assessment period were:
- John Lawton, Professor, Director of CPB until 1999, at Imperial
01/04/89-30/09/07
- Tim Blackburn, Research Associate, at Imperial 01/05/91-30/09/00
- Georgina Mace, Chair in Conservation Science and Director of CPB, at
Imperial 01/11/06-31/07/12
- E.J. Milner-Gulland, Professor of Conservation Science, at Imperial
01/10/88-30/09/91 and 01/01/99 - present
References to the research
(* References that best indicate quality of underpinning research)
[1] * Lawton, J. H., "Range, population abundance and
conservation", Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol 8, Issue 11,
409-413 (1993). DOI,
343 citations (on 15/4/13)
[2] Gaston, K. J. and T. M. Blackburn, "Conservation
Implications of Georaphic Range Size—Body Size Relationships",
Conservation Biology, 10(2), 638-646 (1996). DOI,
79 citations (on 15/4/13)
[3] Collen, B., Bykova, E., Ling, S., Milner-Gulland,
E.J., Purvis, A., "Extinction risk: a comparative analysis of
Central Asian vertebrates", Biodiversity and Conservation, 15,
1859-1871 (2006). DOI,
9 citations (on 15/4/13)
[4] * M. Hoffmann,...,G.M. Mace, et al (2010) "The Impact of
Conservation on the Status of the World's Vertebrates", Science, 330
(6010), 1503-1509 (2010). DOI,
108 citations (on 15/4/13)
[5] Baillie J.E.M, Collen, B., Amin, R., Akçakaya, H.R., Butchart,
S.H.M., Brummitt, N., Meagher, T.R., Ram, M., Hilton-Taylor, C. and Mace,
G.M., "Toward monitoring global biodiversity", Conservation
Letters, 1(1): 18-26 (2008). DOI,
43 citations (on 15/4/13)
[6] * Mace G.M., Collar N.J., Gaston K.J., Hilton-Taylor C.,
Akcakaya H.R., Leader-Williams N., Milner-Gulland E.J. &
Stuart S.N., "Quantification of Extinction Risk: IUCN's System for
Classifying Threatened Species". Conserv. Biol., 22, 1424-1442
(2008). DOI,
136 citations (on 15/4/13)
Grants to Imperial College for this research:
[G1] NERC Core funding to the CPB, PI Georgina Mace, 2006-2011.
[G2] INTAS (European Community) "Correlates of extinction risk
for Central Asian Biodiversity". PI: E.J. Milner-Gulland.
Collaborators: Institutes of Zoology, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and
Tadjikistan; Institute of Deserts, Turkmenistan; Institute of Botany,
Kazakhstan; Swedish Threatened Species Unit; the World Conservation Union.
(€146,500, Oct 2000 - April 2003).
Details of the impact
The impact of the work is in the contribution of a scientifically
rigorous approach for determining extinction risk, applicable to all
species, to the development, evaluation and implementation of the leading
measure of global species conservation status, the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species™ [A]. This is a list of the threat status of
63,837 species, including nearly all of the world's birds, mammals, and
amphibians, of which 31% are threatened with extinction [B]. The IUCN Red
List is a major data source with detailed documentation on the threats,
distribution and conservation actions for the species. The Red List for
threatened birds has 1,132 citations in Google Scholar [10/4/13], and the
2000 Red List of threatened species also has over 1,000 citations
[10/4/12]. Alterations to the Red List are announced on an annual basis,
and always garner substantial press attention [e.g. C].
The IUCN Red List "contains the most comprehensive assessment of the
status of the world's plants and animals" [D]. As such it "plays
an important role in multiple international agreements" [D] and
informs international policy processes including:
1) providing unbiased data on species status in order to demonstrate
progress made towards implementation of the 2020 Aichi Targets of the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) [B]
2) the UN Millennium Development Goals, which use the IUCN Red List to
track progress towards targets of reducing biodiversity loss [D, E]
3) National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs). Data from
the Red List has informed the NBSAPs, which are the principal instruments
for the implementation of the CBD, of 177 countries [D]
4) multi-lateral agreements, such as the Convention on the International
Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) [D]
Non-governmental organizations also make use of the Red List. For
example:
5) Conservation International uses data from the Red List to inform
spatial prioritization schemes and to select targets for conservation
projects [D]
6) The Zoological Society of London has developed a sampled approach to
assess the conservation status of entire taxa, such as invertebrates,
which would have been impossible without the data in the Red List [D]
7) International funding bodies, such as the Critical Ecosystem
Partnership Fund, use the Red List to assess proposals [D]
In order to produce the Red List, the IUCN Species Programme within the
IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) draws on and mobilizes a network of
IUCN members, comprising scientists and partner organizations working in
almost every country in the world, who collectively hold the most complete
scientific knowledge base on the biology and conservation status of
species. Researchers at Imperial College, particularly those at the Centre
for Population Biology, have played a "pivotal role in both the
formulation and continual development of this list" [D]. The Chair
of the SSC of the IUCN confirms that science carried out at Imperial
formed a "fundamental part of the scientific underpinning of the Red
List Categories and Criteria, as demonstrated by the highly cited paper
on the Red List methodology by Mace et al. (2008) [6] . As well
as supplying much of the fundamental science, Imperial College
researchers were also deeply involved in the actual formulation of the
Red List Categories, into which species are placed, as well as the rules
used by assessors to allocate species to these Categories" [B].
Georgina Mace, Kevin Gaston and E.J. Milner-Gulland were all part of the
group that developed and tested these Categories, which required a
trade-off between scientific rigour and usability by the conservation
community, before their general rollout [B].
The IUCN confirms that Imperial researchers have also contributed to the
"adaptation of the Red List to the regional and national scales"
[B]. This was "very much wanted by governments, who were keen to see
how their own species were faring" but was "not straightforward
because political boundaries are not often meaningful in biological
terms" [B]. The Imperial project, led by E.J. Milner-Gulland in
Central Asia and resulting in paper [3], was "one of the earliest
large-scale exercises in developing and testing Red Lists at the
regional and national scales, and also represented a major
capacity-building effort, bringing rigorous and repeatable Red Listing
methods to the newly independent states of the Former Soviet Union.
Several of these governments now use the IUCN Red Lists as the basis for
their national conservation legislation" [B]. As an example, work
with Imperial College and in-country partners led to the application of
the IUCN Red List system of categories, criteria and methods to the
assessment of the "extinction risk of the threatened species of 5
Central Asian countries at the national, regional and global levels"
[F].
The beneficiaries of the Red List are conservation NGOs worldwide, who
use it to monitor the status of threatened species and as a component of
prioritisation and strategy-setting. It has also been used to develop a Red
List Index (RLI), which is one of the official indicators of the
status of biodiversity used by the 193 countries that are signatories to
the Convention on Biological Diversity [G]. The RLI "is based on the
movement of species through the categories of the IUCN Red List. The RLI
shows changes in the overall status (extinction risk) of sets of
species, with RLI values relating to the proportion of species expected
to remain extant in the near future without additional conservation
action" [H]. Governments have committed to halt the rate of loss of
biodiversity, and the RLI enables reporting on their progress towards this
target [G]. The CBD signatories committed to a reduction in the rate of
loss of biodiversity by 2010, with a set of indicators (including a Red
List index) determining whether they had reached this target. Failure to
meet the target led to a major rethinking of both targets and indicators
and to a substantial push to improve conservation action, outlined in the
CBD's 2020 Aichi targets [I]. The RLI [A] is a key metric that spurred
this action. The Red List (and RLI) is the primary indicator for Target 12
of the Aichi agreement: `By 2020, the extinction of known threatened
species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly
of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained' [J]. RLIs
are now widely adopted at the policy level and have been used to report on
and against various processes and indicators including the CBD's 2020
Aichi Biodiversity Targets, CBD's "2010 Biodiversity targets, the UN
Millennium Development Goals, by CITES, CMS, and for regional policy
fora (e.g., SEBI in Europe)" [G]. They have also "been well
profiled in global assessments such as the Global Biodiversity Outlook-3
and Global Environment Outlook 5" [G].
The IUCN Red List is, however, not intended just to chart the declines of
species; in addition its aim is to "raise awareness of the status and
threats to species in order to catalyse conservation action. The key to
halting the extinction crisis is to target efforts towards eradicating
the major threats faced by species and their environment; only then can
their future be secured. The IUCN Red List acts as a gateway to such
efforts, by providing decision makers with a goldmine of relevant
information. As an example of successful conservation action, the
Arabian Oryx was nearly hunted to extinction, with the last wild
individual believed to have been shot in 1972. Now thanks to concerted
conservation actions, the wild population stands at more than 1,000
individuals. In 2011, the species was downgraded from Endangered to
Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List, making history as the first species
once listed as Extinct in the Wild to have improved by three threat
categories" [B].
It is clear that the research efforts from the Centre for Population
Biology at Imperial College, which fundamentally influenced the
formulation of the Red List, as well as the associated Red List Index,
have had considerable impact. The IUCN Red List "is the gold standard
for international assessments of species status" [B] and through the
"Red List, the work of Imperial's researchers continues to have
significant impact on conservation priority setting and decision making"
[D].
Sources to corroborate the impact
[A] The IUCN Red List, http://www.iucnredlist.org
(archived at
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/qlf
on 31/5/13)
[B] Letter from Chair of the IUCN Species Survival Commission of the
IUCN, 3/5/13 (available on request from Imperial)
[C] Typical press attention to the annual launch of the IUCN Red List:
2012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18511312
(archived at
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/klf
on 29/5/13), 2011
http://news.mongabay.com/2011/0616-hance_iucn_redlist_2011.html
(archived at
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/rlf
on 31/5/13)
[D] Letter from Director of Conservation Programmes, Zoological Society
of London, 3/5/13 (available on request from Imperial)
[E] UN uses IUCN Red List to measure success of Millennium Development
Goals,
http://www.iucn.org/index.cfm?uNewsID=1611
(archived at
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/gtf
on 9/10/13)
[F] Letter from Executive Secretary, Saiga Conservation Alliance
(available on request)
[G] CBD-mandated Biodiversity Indicators Partnership webpage on the Red
List Index,
http://www.bipindicators.net/rli
(archived at https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/vlf
on 31/5/13)
[H] Bird Life International webpage on the status of the world's birds
over the last 20 years, which describes the Red List Index, http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/sowb/casestudy/72
(archived at https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/57f
on 15/11/13)
[I] CBD Aichi Biodiversity Targets, http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets
(archived at
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/zlf
on 31/5/13)
[J] Target 12 of the CBD 2020 Aichi Biodiversity targets,
http://www.cbd.int/sp/targets/rationale/target-12/
(archived at
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/ref/webarchive/ylf
on 31/5/13)