DOCSLIB.ORG

Long Delays in Banning Trade in Threatened Species Eyal G

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Long Delays in Banning Trade in Threatened Species Eyal G INSIGHTS Downloaded from http://science.sciencemag.org/ on July 23, 2019 POLICY FORUM CONSERVATION cess of regulating trade in threatened species lags considerably behind the IUCN identifi- cation of species in need of protection from Long delays in banning trade trade. Such delay in the application of scien- tific knowledge to policy formulation could result in species extinctions. With signatories in threatened species to CITES set to gather in May to determine which species merit protection, we suggest Scientific knowledge should be applied with more urgency opportunities to improve this process. By Eyal G. Frank1 and David S. Wilcove2 trade is the Convention on International IMPORTANT TOOLS Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna The CITES treaty, which has been ratified by he harvesting of wild animals and and Flora (CITES). Given that CITES aims to 183 party members, was formalized in 1973 plants for international trade affects be as scientifically based as possible (6), we and entered into force in 1975 in order to co- thousands of species, and compounds analyzed how quickly species that are identi- ordinate and regulate international trade in ongoing extinction threats such as fied by the International Union for Conser- wildlife products. The strongest tool CITES habitat loss and climate change (1–4). vation of Nature (IUCN) Red List as being has is to list a species in Appendix I, which The loss of overexploited species can threatened from trade are subsequently pro- restricts trade in that species to “exceptional Tresult in cascading effects that reduce over- tected under CITES. The Red List represents circumstances” only (7). This, in effect, places all ecosystem functioning (4, 5). The primary an authoritative body of scientific knowledge a trade ban on specimens or their body parts international framework for preventing the regarding extinction risks. We find that in that are caught in the wild for commercial loss of species due to international wildlife nearly two-thirds of the cases, the CITES pro- purposes, although it still allows trade for ARK/ PHOTO GEOGRAPHIC SARTORE/NATIONAL JOEL PHOTO: COLLECTION IMAGE GEOGRAPHIC NATIONAL 686 15 FEBRUARY 2019 • VOL 363 ISSUE 6428 sciencemag.org SCIENCE Published by AAAS International wildlife trade can develop quickly, Endangered in 2015 (10). The Tapah Islands dangered and Critically Endangered species threatening species with extinction, such as this race of the white-rumped shama (Copsy- that are traded internationally and have an helmeted hornbill, in just a few years. chus malabaricus opisthochrus) went from intentional use impact factor of 9 are listed being common to nearly extinct in the wild in CITES Appendix I or II; only one Vulner- personal or scientific reasons, such as the after only 5 to 7 years of intensive trapping able species with an intentional use impact shipping of pets and trophies or the moving for the pet trade (10). An estimated one mil- score of 9 remains unlisted. Thus, trade in of live specimens for captive propagation. lion pangolins (Manidae) were trafficked the most highly exploited and threatened CITES can also list species in Appendix from 2000 to 2013 (11). Although all pango- species has indeed been banned or restricted II, which requires monitoring of trade in lin species had been added to Appendix II via CITES. However, for species with impact those species. Trade in species listed in Ap- by 2000, with trade quotas for some species scores of 8 and below, there are many En- pendix II requires an export permit after a set to zero, seven of the eight species were dangered and even Critically Endangered determination that the level of trade is not added to Appendix I only in 2017 in the face species that, to date, have received no pro- detrimental to the survival of the species and of rapidly escalating international trade. tection under CITES. that the specimens were obtained in a legal Beyond examining whether species re- manner (under domestic laws). Signatories IUCN ASSESSMENT AND CITES LISTING ceive protection under CITES, there is the to the treaty meet every 2 to 3 years at a Con- We collected data on how species targeted by issue of how long it takes them to receive ference of Parties (CoP) where they vote on the international wildlife trade were classi- that protection. We focus on three catego- listing decisions. Listing in Appendix I or II fied by the IUCN and treated by CITES (12, ries: (i) species assessed by the IUCN as requires approval by a two-thirds majority of 13) (see supplementary materials for details). threatened at least partly by international party members. We started with species that the IUCN has trade and subsequently protected by CITES, The overall effectiveness of CITES at pro- assessed as Vulnerable, Endangered, or Criti- (ii) species assessed as threatened at least Downloaded from tecting species from international trade cally Endangered and for which the IUCN partly by international trade and not pro- remains an open empirical question. Plac- has listed direct harvesting (intentional use) tected by CITES (as of 2018), and (iii) spe- ing restrictions on trade can potentially in- as a threatening factor. We then drew infor- cies that CITES protected ahead of any Red crease demand if doing so signals that the mation from IUCN assessments, academic ar- List determination that they were threat- species might become extinct in the near fu- ticles, and reports to determine how many of ened at least partly by international trade. ture. Also, if trade shifts from legal to illegal these species were involved in international We also summarize the gap (in years) be- http://science.sciencemag.org/ markets, it becomes harder to monitor and trade (eliminating those for which direct har- tween when each species was assessed by enforce a trade ban. Nonetheless, CITES is vesting appeared to be for domestic use only). the IUCN as threatened and when it was the only global agreement of its kind and, we This resulted in 958 threatened species protected under CITES (see the figure, bot- would argue, an important tool in stemming for which we can link international trade tom). Out of 958 species that the Red List extinctions due to international trade. as a factor in their endangerment. Because classifies as threatened due to intentional Estimating the true degree of threat fac- CITES held its two most recent CoPs in 2013 use and which are traded internationally, ing wildlife populations is challenging. The and 2016, we restricted our data to IUCN sta- 271 (28.18%) lack CITES protection, 334 IUCN is widely considered to be the global tus assessments from 1994 to 2013, to ensure (34.86%) received CITES protection after authority on the extinction risk of different that assessments were based on the IUCN’s they were assessed by the Red List, and 353 species, which it assesses using quantitative more rigorous criteria implemented in 1994 species (36.84%) were protected under CITES on July 23, 2019 criteria and compiles into the Red List. The (14) and to allow CITES a minimum of 3 before they were assessed by the IUCN as be- IUCN compiles data on factors that imperil years to respond to the IUCN assessments. ing threatened by international trade. species, such as population declines, habi- Information spanning from 1975 to 2018 is For this last group of 353 species, it is pos- tat loss, and direct harvesting. These assess- presented in fig. S1 and table S3. sible that the parties to CITES had access ments follow a systematic process that aims Of the 958 threatened, internationally to information indicating threats posed by to make them comparable through time and traded species that warranted CITES pro- trade before such information was available across taxonomic groups (8, 9). Species clas- tection under Appendix I or II, 28.18% were to the IUCN. However, it is also the case that sified as Vulnerable, Endangered, or Criti- not listed in either appendix. This is a strik- many of the species listed by CITES ahead cally Endangered (hereafter “threatened”) ing, heretofore unrecorded gap in protec- of the IUCN were the result of higher taxo- are considered to be at risk of extinction; tion from international trade. There were, nomic groups (for example, entire genera or a species identified as having “intentional however, notable differences in protection families) being added en masse to Appendix use” as a threat is one that is being directly relative to the severity of harvest pressure. I or II. This is sometimes done to ensure that targeted by collectors, hunters, or trappers. The Red List assesses the severity of harvest- threatened species cannot be easily misla- With growth in international commerce ing by assigning species an intentional use beled as similar-looking, nonthreatened spe- and wildlife markets, coupled with unsus- impact score of 0 (lowest rate of harvest cies and therefore slipped into trade. tainable levels of legal and/or illegal trade, but harvest definitely occurring) to 9 (high- Moreover, the process of evaluating species species can become endangered quickly est). For each impact score, we determined for the Red List is subject to constraints on (1, 2). For example, the helmeted hornbill the percentage of Red List threatened spe- staffing, funding, or the gathering of scientific (Rhinoplax vigil) was listed as only Near- cies that actually received protection under information. As a result, certain taxonomic Threatened in the Red List in 2012, but a CITES Appendix I or II (see the figure, top). groups have been evaluated by the Red List sudden increase in demand around 2011 For threatened species for which direct only relatively recently (15). Thus, the large resulted in it being upgraded to Critically harvesting is an extremely severe threat outlier of 127 species added to CITES 18 years (impact score 9) and which can be linked before they were assessed by the IUCN (see 1Harris School of Public Policy and the Energy Policy Institute, with international trade, 75% of species were the figure, bottom) is driven by one group of at the University of Chicago (EPIC), Chicago, IL, USA.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SDG Indicator Metadata (Harmonized Metadata Template - Format Version 1.0)
    Last updated: 4 January 2021 SDG indicator metadata (Harmonized metadata template - format version 1.0) 0. Indicator information 0.a. Goal Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss 0.b. Target Target 15.5: Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species 0.c. Indicator Indicator 15.5.1: Red List Index 0.d. Series 0.e. Metadata update 4 January 2021 0.f. Related indicators Disaggregations of the Red List Index are also of particular relevance as indicators towards the following SDG targets (Brooks et al. 2015): SDG 2.4 Red List Index (species used for food and medicine); SDG 2.5 Red List Index (wild relatives and local breeds); SDG 12.2 Red List Index (impacts of utilisation) (Butchart 2008); SDG 12.4 Red List Index (impacts of pollution); SDG 13.1 Red List Index (impacts of climate change); SDG 14.1 Red List Index (impacts of pollution on marine species); SDG 14.2 Red List Index (marine species); SDG 14.3 Red List Index (reef-building coral species) (Carpenter et al. 2008); SDG 14.4 Red List Index (impacts of utilisation on marine species); SDG 15.1 Red List Index (terrestrial & freshwater species); SDG 15.2 Red List Index (forest-specialist species); SDG 15.4 Red List Index (mountain species); SDG 15.7 Red List Index (impacts of utilisation) (Butchart 2008); and SDG 15.8 Red List Index (impacts of invasive alien species) (Butchart 2008, McGeoch et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Critically Endangered - Wikipedia
    Critically endangered - Wikipedia Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history Critically endangered From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Main page Contents This article is about the conservation designation itself. For lists of critically endangered species, see Lists of IUCN Red List Critically Endangered Featured content species. Current events A critically endangered (CR) species is one which has been categorized by the International Union for Random article Conservation status Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild.[1] Donate to Wikipedia by IUCN Red List category Wikipedia store As of 2014, there are 2464 animal and 2104 plant species with this assessment, compared with 1998 levels of 854 and 909, respectively.[2] Interaction Help As the IUCN Red List does not consider a species extinct until extensive, targeted surveys have been About Wikipedia conducted, species which are possibly extinct are still listed as critically endangered. IUCN maintains a list[3] Community portal of "possibly extinct" CR(PE) and "possibly extinct in the wild" CR(PEW) species, modelled on categories used Recent changes by BirdLife International to categorize these taxa. Contact page Contents Tools Extinct 1 International Union for Conservation of Nature definition What links here Extinct (EX) (list) 2 See also Related changes Extinct in the Wild (EW) (list) 3 Notes Upload file Threatened Special pages 4 References Critically Endangered (CR) (list) Permanent
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Doc. 8.50 CONVENTION on INTERNATIONAL TRADE
    Doc. 8.50 CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA ____________ Eighth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties Kyoto (Japan), 2 to 13 March 1992 Interpretation and Implementation of the Convention CRITERIA FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPENDICES (The Kyoto Criteria) This document is submitted by Botswana, Malawi, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Background The attached draft resolution is intended to replace the existing criteria for listing species in the appendices of the Convention, for transferring species between the appendices and for deletion of species from the appendices. In addition, it incorporates and consolidates the provisions of various other Resolutions relevant to this topic and provides a basis for their removal from the list of Resolutions of the Convention. Since the Berne Criteria (Resolutions Conf. 1.1 and 1.2) have formed the basis for amendments to the appendices of the Convention since 1976, it is necessary to provide substantial justification for their replacement. General issues International trade 1. CITES was established to address international trade in wild fauna and flora. It is unable to influence the survival of species which are not exploited for trade or species which are exploited within States for domestic consumption. Perhaps the greatest threat to species is the loss or fragmentation of habitats in the countries where they occur: this problem has to be addressed through other measures. International trade may be one of the less important factors influencing the survival of the majority of species and this should be recognized. CITES is an international conservation treaty with a circumscribed role limited to those species which are genuinely threatened with extinction, or which could become so, in which there is significant international trade.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 5: Threatened Species in Each Country (Totals by Taxonomic Group)
    IUCN Red List version 2020-1: Table 5 Last updated: 19 March 2020 Table 5: Threatened species in each country (totals by taxonomic group) * Reptiles, fishes, molluscs, other invertebrates, plants, fungi & protists: please note that for these groups, there are still many species that have not yet been assessed for the IUCN Red List and therefore their status is not known (i.e., these groups have not yet been completely assessed). Therefore the figures presented below for these groups should be interpreted as the number of species known to be threatened within those species that have been assessed to date, and not as the overall total number of threatened species for each group. AFRICA Other Fungi & North Africa Mammals Birds Reptiles* Amphibians Fishes* Molluscs* Plants* Total* Inverts* Protists* Algeria 14 15 8 3 45 12 30 26 2 155 Egypt 18 14 13 0 62 1 56 8 0 172 Libya 10 8 6 0 38 1 4 8 0 75 Morocco 18 18 13 2 55 38 33 56 5 238 Tunisia 14 11 6 1 42 8 13 10 2 107 Western Sahara 10 5 1 0 39 2 1 0 0 58 Other Fungi & Sub-Saharan Africa Mammals Birds Reptiles* Amphibians Fishes* Molluscs* Plants* Total* Inverts* Protists* Angola 22 33 7 0 55 7 4 43 0 171 Benin 16 12 7 1 46 2 1 21 0 106 Botswana 11 16 1 0 2 0 0 3 0 33 Burkina Faso 11 12 3 0 4 1 0 5 0 36 Burundi 16 14 0 1 17 3 3 134 0 188 Cabo Verde 4 7 6 0 38 13 0 51 0 119 Cameroon 47 29 13 57 126 13 13 592 0 890 Central African Republic 19 16 5 0 4 0 0 29 0 73 Chad 16 16 5 0 1 4 0 6 0 48 Comoros 5 14 5 0 17 0 77 9 0 127 Congo 18 7 6 1 60 7 0 56 0 155 Congo, The Democratic Republic of the 42
    [Show full text]
  • Notification to the Parties No. 2018/031
    CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA NOTIFICATION TO THE PARTIES No. 2018/031 Geneva, 26 March 2018 CONCERNING: INDIA Ban on trade in wild fauna and flora, except certain specimens of Dalbergia latifolia and Dalbergia sissoo 1. The Management Authority of India has informed the Secretariat that the Government of India has banned the export for commercial purposes of all wild-taken specimens of species included in Appendices I, II and III, subject to paragraph 2 below. 2. India permits the export of cultivated varieties of plant species included in Appendices I and II and has indicated that all products, other than the wood and wood products in the form of logs, timber, stumps, roots, bark, chips, powder, flakes, dust and charcoal, produced from wild sourced (W) Dalbergia sissoo and Dalbergia latifolia and authorized for export by a CITES Comparable Certificate issued by the competent authorities of India are exempted from the general ban. Such Dalbergia sissoo and Dalbergia latifolia specimens are harvested legally as per the regional and national laws of India and as per the prescribed management (working) plans, which are based on silvicultural principles and all are covered under Legal Procurement Certificate; all the material are sold from the Government timber depots through auction or are legally procured and can be exported legally. 3. Starting on the date of this Notification, all the CITES Comparable Certificates will be issued with a footnote, stating that the wild (W) source specimens are covered under Legal Procurement Certificate as per regional and national laws in India.
    [Show full text]
  • CITES Permits and Certificates
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service CITES Permits and Certificates What is CITES and how does it apply to specimens that quality for other me? certificates (see below). The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and ! Export Flora (CITES) protects many species of The export of Appendix-I and -II animals and plants to ensure that specimens requires an export permit. commercial demand does not threaten Such a permit may be granted when their survival in the wild. It regulates the export will not be detrimental to trade in listed species and hybrids, the species’ survival and specimens including parts and products, through a were legally acquired. system of permits. The Division of Management Authority processes For Appendix-III species originating applications for CITES permits for the from the country that listed it, an United States. Under CITES, a species export permit is required. An export is listed at one of three levels of permit may be granted when the protection, which have different permit Management Authority determines requirements. that the specimens were not obtained in contravention of that country’s laws ! Appendix I includes species presently for the protection of animals and threatened with extinction that are or plants. may be affected by trade. CITES directs its most stringent controls at ! Re-export activities involving these species. A re-export certificate is required for the export of CITES-listed specimens ! Appendix II includes species that are that were previously imported, not presently threatened with including items subsequently extinction but may become so if not converted to manufactured goods.
    [Show full text]
  • Traceability Study in Shark Products
    Traceability study in shark products Dr Heiner Lehr (Photo: © Francisco Blaha, 2015) Report commissioned by the CITES Secretariat This publication was funded by the European Union, through the CITES capacity-building project on aquatic species Contents 1 Summary.................................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Structure of the remaining document ............................................................................. 9 1.2 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... 10 2 The market chain ................................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Shark Products ............................................................................................................... 11 2.1.1 Shark fins ............................................................................................................... 12 2.1.2 Shark meat ............................................................................................................. 12 2.1.3 Shark liver oil ......................................................................................................... 13 2.1.4 Shark cartilage ....................................................................................................... 13 2.1.5 Shark skin ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
    CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA Our ref.:JMS/WWW His Excellency Manmohan Singh Your ref.: Prime Minister of India Prime Minister’s Office – Room 152 South Block NEW DELHI 11001 India Geneva, 12 April 2005 Your Excellency, India was the twenty-fifth nation State to become a Party to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. India has always played a very active role in the implementation of CITES, at a national, regional and international level. It has been both a member of the Standing Committee and a host country for a meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The CITES Secretariat has enjoyed a long and close working relationship with India’s national CITES Management Authority. India’s biodiversity is known and treasured throughout the world and its various habitats contain several examples of the world’s most endangered animal and plant species. In the case of animals, in particular, the population numbers of ‘flagship’ species such as the Royal Bengal tiger and Asian elephant are important indicators for not only the health of India’s wildlife but they also serve as pointers towards the health of our planet as a whole and the success, or otherwise, of the conservation efforts of homo sapiens. It has been my pleasure and privilege to see both tigers and elephants in the wild in India. It is, therefore, with considerable personal and professional concern that I have learned recently of the results of initial surveys in some tiger reserves in India indicating what appears to be an alarming reduction in tiger numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Appropriate Uses of Iucn Red List Data
    GUIDELINES FOR APPROPRIATE USES OF IUCN RED LIST DATA Incorporating, as Annexes, the 1) Guidelines for Reporting on Proportion Threatened (ver. 1.1); 2) Guidelines on Scientific Collecting of Threatened Species (ver. 1.0); and 3) Guidelines for the Appropriate Use of the IUCN Red List by Business (ver. 1.0) Version 3.0 (October 2016) Citation: IUCN. 2016. Guidelines for appropriate uses of IUCN Red List Data. Incorporating, as Annexes, the 1) Guidelines for Reporting on Proportion Threatened (ver. 1.1); 2) Guidelines on Scientific Collecting of Threatened Species (ver. 1.0); and 3) Guidelines for the Appropriate Use of the IUCN Red List by Business (ver. 1.0). Version 3.0. Adopted by the IUCN Red List Committee. THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™ GUIDELINES FOR APPROPRIATE USES OF RED LIST DATA The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is the world’s most comprehensive data resource on the status of species, containing information and status assessments on over 80,000 species of animals, plants and fungi. As well as measuring the extinction risk faced by each species, the IUCN Red List includes detailed species-specific information on distribution, threats, conservation measures, and other relevant factors. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is increasingly used by scientists, governments, NGOs, businesses, and civil society for a wide variety of purposes. These Guidelines are designed to encourage and facilitate the use of IUCN Red List data and information to tackle a broad range of important conservation issues. These Guidelines give a brief introduction to The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ (hereafter called the IUCN Red List), the Red List Categories and Criteria, and the Red List Assessment process, followed by some key facts that all Red List users need to know to maximally take advantage of this resource.
    [Show full text]
  • Problems in Enforcement of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Elisabeth M
    Brooklyn Journal of International Law Volume 27 Issue 2 Article 10 25th ANNIVERSARY ALUMNI ISSUE 2002 Problems in Enforcement of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Elisabeth M. McOmber Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil Recommended Citation Elisabeth M. McOmber, Problems in Enforcement of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, 27 Brook. J. Int'l L. (2002). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil/vol27/iss2/10 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brooklyn Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. PROBLEMS IN ENFORCEMENT OF THE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES "Good laws, if they are not obeyed, do not constitute good government."t I. INTRODUCTION A vast number of species in the world are currently experi- encing a very serious threat of extinction that, to a large ex- tent, has been brought about by human activity As a result, species are being brought to the brink of extinction at an alarming rate. In 1994, available figures indicated that there were thirty million or more species in the world, and that 20% could be extinct by the year 2000.2 In 1996, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature ("IUCN") estimated that a total of 11,046 species of plants and animals were facing a high risk of extinction in the near future, a figure that included 24% of mammal species and 12% of bird species.3 In 2000, the IUCN enumerated 18,276 species and subspecies on its list of endangered species, including a total of 520 species of mam- mals and 503 species of birds.4 While habitat destruction is arguably the most serious threat to endangered species,5 the t ARISTOTLE, PoLITICs (Ernest Barker trans., Oxford University Press 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT of 13 July 2012
    THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES: STRATEGIC PLAN 2017-2020 Citation: IUCN Red List Committee. 2017. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ Strategic Plan 2017 - 2020. Prepared by the IUCN Red List Committee. Cover images (left to right) and photographer credits: IUCN & Intu Boehihartono; Brian Stockwell; tigglrep (via Flickr under CC licence); IUCN & Gillian Eborn; Gianmarco Rojas; Michel Roggo; IUCN & Imene Maliane; IUCN & William Goodwin; IUCN & Christian Winter The IUCN Red List of Threatened SpeciesTM Strategic Plan 2017 – 2020 2 THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES: STRATEGIC PLAN 2017-2020 January 2017 The IUCN Red List Partnership ............................................................................................ 4 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5 The IUCN Red List: a key conservation tool ....................................................................... 6 The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Strategic Plan 2017-2020 ......................... 7 Result 1. IUCN Red List taxonomic and geographic coverage is expanded ............. 8 Result 2. More IUCN Red List Assessments are prepared at national and, where appropriate, at regional scales .......................................................................................... 8 Result 3. Selected species groups are periodically reassessed to allow the IUCN Red List Index to be widely used as an effective biodiversity indicator. ....................
    [Show full text]
  • Rules of Procedure for IUCN Red List Assessments 2017–2020
    Rules of Procedure for IUCN Red List Assessments 2017–2020 Version 3.0 Citation: IUCN. 2016. Rules of Procedure for IUCN Red List Assessments 2017–2020. Version 3.0. Approved by the IUCN SSC Steering Committee in September 2016. Downloadable from: http://cmsdocs.s3.amazonaws.com/keydocuments/Rules_of_Procedure_for_Red_List_2017- 2020.pdf Rules of Procedure for IUCN Red List Assessments 2017–2020 Version 3.0 Contents The IUCN Red List Assessment Process Establishment and Appointment of Red List Authorities Types of Red List Authority Red List Authority Roles and Responsibilities The Red List Authority Coordinator Red List Authority Coordinator Responsibilities Overlapping Red List Authority Jurisdictions Resources Nomenclature Annex 1: Required and Recommended Supporting Information for IUCN Red List Assessments Annex 2: Schematic Illustration of the IUCN Red List Assessment Process Annex 3: Details of the Steps Involved in the IUCN Red List Process Annex 4: IUCN Red List Assessment Resources Annex 5: Procedure for Handling of Petitions against Current Listings on the IUCN Red List of Threatened SpeciesTM Annex 6: Policy on Use of Pre-Publication IUCN Red List Data Annex 7: Sensitive Data Access Restrictions Policy for the IUCN Red List 1 A. The IUCN Red List Assessment Process The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC), the IUCN Global Species Programme and the Red List Partnership. In order to maintain the credibility of the IUCN Red List, the process by which species can be included on the Red List has been formalized. In particular, this process includes the designation of Red List Authorities (RLAs) and Red List Authority Coordinators, under the auspices of the SSC, the responsibilities of which (and whom) are outlined in this document.
    [Show full text]