DOCSLIB.ORG

J Loh OECD World Forum Paper

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
J Loh OECD World Forum Paper The Living Planet Index and Ecological Footprint : Tracking the State of Global Biodiversity and Human Pressures on the Biosphere Jonathan Loh WWF International Honorary Research Associate, Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London Abstract WWF’s Living Planet Report has been published biennially since 1998. It was developed as an attempt to quantify and communicate the gravity of the crisis faced by the earth’s biodiversity and the challenge for humanity to live within the capacity of the biosphere. Two indicators have been used to measure the state of and pressure on the earth’s ecosystems. The Living Planet Index (LPI) tracks the state of global biodiversity by aggregating trends in thousands of populations of vertebrate species living in the world’s terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems, starting from a baseline set to 1.0 in 1970. The LPI database has now been expanded to the extent that it is possible to produce sub- global LPIs on particular biomes, taxonomic groups, regions or countries. The Ecological Footprint measures humanity’s demand on the biosphere through the consumption of natural renewable resources and the burning of fossil fuels. It can be used to compare countries, regions, or humanity as whole against the biological capacity of the earth. These two indicators have been adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to measure progress towards achieving its target of reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. Living Planet Report The indicators discussed in this paper were developed for the WWF Living Planet Report (see http://www.panda.org/news_facts/publications/living_planet_report/index.cfm) over the last decade. The LPR began ten years ago as part of a campaign leading up to the new millennium. Its aim was to attempt to quantify, monitor and communicate the declining state of the world’s biodiversity and the growing human pressures on the biosphere from the consumption of natural resources. The first LPR was published in 1998 and has since been updated biennially. The measure of the state of biodiversity is called the Living Planet Index and was developed by the author and colleagues based at the World Conservation Monitoring Centre specifically for the Living Planet Report. The indicator of human pressure on the biosphere is called the Ecological Footprint, and was developed originally by Mathis Wackernagel and colleagues and has been used and subsequently modified in the Living Planet Report since 2000. The last report was published in 2006 and was a collaborative effort with the Zoological Society of London, WWF’s partner now working on the Living Planet Index, and the Global Footprint Network, based in Oakland, California, which is responsible for producing the Ecological Footprint. 1 The 2010 Biodiversity Target In 2001, at a meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 190 of the world's governments adopted a target to “achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth”. This target was endorsed the following year at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. Such public commitments mean that, for the first time, the public can hold its leaders accountable for their success or failure in meeting measurable and quantifiable objectives on this critical issue. WWF and other NGOs are monitoring their progress and, wherever possible, contributing to the achievement of this target. Equally, they will not fail to point out where nations are falling short of their stated aims and will continue to call for much-needed action. Focal Areas Within the context of the CBD, governments agreed to monitor and report on progress under seven focal areas relating to the overall 2010 target. These are: 1. Status and trends of the components of biological diversity 2. Sustainable use 3. Threats to biodiversity 4. Ecosystem integrity and ecosystem goods and services 5. Status of traditional knowledge, innovations and practices 6. Status of access and benefit-sharing 7. Status of resource transfers This paper focuses only on the first two of these focal areas. 2010 Target Indicators For each of the seven focal areas, indicators have been selected. In reality, only a few of the selected indicators are sufficiently well developed or have sufficient data available to enable them to measure progress towards the focal area of the 2010 target. Some indicators, therefore, have been chosen “for immediate testing” and others for “further development”. Because the target explicitly calls for a reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss, the data used to measure progress must go back many years prior to 2010, or preferably decades. Only a few of the selected indicators currently have datasets available that allow changes over decadal timescales to be measured. Under the focal area 1, status and trends of the components of biological diversity, there are good datasets for four of the selected indicators • trends in the extent of selected biomes, ecosystems and habitats – although currently time-series data at the global scale exist only for forests, and possibly coral reefs • trends in abundance of selected species (Living Planet Index) • coverage of protected areas, although this does not in fact measure the status of global biodiversity but one of the responses to its decline, and • changes in status of threatened species (Red List Index) 2 Under focal area 2, sustainable use, global-level time-series data exist only for the ecological footprint. The Living Planet Index The Living Planet Index (LPI) is an indicator of the state of the world’s biodiversity; it aggregates trends in thousands of populations of vertebrate species from all around world into a single index, starting at 1.0 in 1970. Separate indices are produced for terrestrial, marine and freshwater species, so the LPI can also be considered to be a measure of trends in ecosystem health for Living Planet Index different biomes or habitats. 1.4 Although vertebrates 1.2 represent only a 1.0 fraction of all known species, it 0.8 is assumed that 0.6 their population LPI trends are typical 0.4 of global 95% CI biodiversity as a 0.2 95% CI whole. 0.0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 The LPI is based on trends in about 5,000 populations of nearly 1,500 species. It is calculated as the average of three separate indices that measure trends in populations of 752 terrestrial species, 389 freshwater species and 310 marine species (see Table 1). Between 1970 and 2003 (the most recent year for which sufficient data are available) the LPI fell by about 30%. This is also the case for the terrestrial, marine and freshwater LPIs, which confirms that the earth is losing its biodiversity at a rate unprecedented in human history. Table 1: No.s of species in the LPI Species Terrestrial Freshwater Marine Total Fishes 0 111 129 240 Amphibians 2 75 0 77 Reptiles 14 25 7 46 Birds 531 164 121 816 Mammals 205 14 53 272 Total 752 389 310 1451 Temperate and Tropical Terrestrial LPIs The decline in terrestrial species populations by about 30% between 1970 and 2003 masks a significant difference between species in temperate regions and species in the tropics. While temperate species populations remained reasonably stable on average, tropical species declined by more than 50%. This rapid fall in tropical species populations 3 reflects the rapid conversion of natural habitat to cropland or pasture over the last fifty years, driven ultimately by the growth in human population and increasing world demand for food, fibre and timber. The conversion of natural habitat to farmland in temperate regions, on the other hand, largely occurred long before 1970, and the consequent decline in species populations is not therefore reflected in the temperate index. The LPI does not say that the current state of biodiversity is worse in the tropics than temperate regions, but that the trends over the last three decades have been worse. Temperate and Tropical Terrestrial Indices 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 Temperate Index Low CI 0.4 High CI Tropical Index Low CI High CI 0.2 0.0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 National LPIs LPI Canada Terrestrial, 1970-2003 With around 5,000 species 1.4 populations in the 1.2 LPI database it is possible to 1 analyze the data to look at trends in 0.8 particular regions, biomes or 0.6 taxonomic group. 0.4 Birds For some Mammals countries, it is 0.2 LPI Canada Terrestrial possible to 0 analyze trends in 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 biodiversity at the national level, and this has been done for Canada and Uganda. Although they are very different countries in size, climate and economy, the same methodology can be used to produce a national LPI. The results illustrate the differences between the temperate and tropical regions very well. The Canadian LPI shows no overall trend, although Canadian birds have fared much better than Canadian mammals, while the Ugandan LPI shows a dramatic decline, also worse for mammals than birds. While it is true to say that these aggregated indices hide some species population trends that run counter to the national average, for example declines in Canadian prairie grassland birds, these national LPIs broadly reflect trends in biodiversity in temperate and tropical countries respectively. The Ugandan LPI would suggest that Uganda will meet the 2010 target as there has been a 4 LPI Uganda significant reduction in 1.4 the rate of All Species N = 35 1.2 biodiversity Birds N = 9 loss since 1 Mammals N = 26 1995.
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]
  • Strategic Goal C: to Improve the Status of Biodiversity by Safeguarding Ecosystems, Species and Genetic Diversity
    BIPTPM 2012 Strategic Goal C: To improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species and genetic diversity Target 11 - Protected areas Indicator Name Indicator Partners Last Next Description CBD Operational Indicator(s) Update Update Protected Area Management University of 2010 2013 Trends in extent of marine protected areas, coverage of Effectiveness (PAME) Queensland, IUCN, KPAs and management effectiveness (A) WCPA, University of Trends in protected area condition and/or management Oxford, UNEP- effectiveness including more equitable management WCMC Trends in the delivery of ecosystem services and equitable benefits from PAs Protected area status of inland McGill University, New 2013? Trends in coverage of protected waters WWF, UNEP-WCMC areas Arctic Protected Areas indicator CBMP, UNEP- 2010 2015? Trends in representative coverage WCMC, Protected of PAs areas agencies Trends in PA condition and across Arctic management effectiveness countries Living Planet Index WWF, ZSL 2012 2014 Trends in species populations inside (and outside) protected areas Arctic Species Trend Index CBMP, ZSL, WWF 2012 2014 Trends in PA condition and management effectiveness Important Bird Area state, Birdlife Trends in PA condition and measure and response values management effectiveness Protected area coverage of Birdlife, IUCN etc Trends in representative coverage important sites for biodiversity of Pas and sites of particular (IBAs, KBA etc) importance for biodiversity Red List Index for Species with Birdlife, IUCN etc N/A Protected /
    [Show full text]
  • Download-Report-2
    Gao et al. BMC Plant Biology (2020) 20:430 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-020-02646-3 REVIEW Open Access Plant extinction excels plant speciation in the Anthropocene Jian-Guo Gao1* , Hui Liu2, Ning Wang3, Jing Yang4 and Xiao-Ling Zhang5 Abstract Background: In the past several millenniums, we have domesticated several crop species that are crucial for human civilization, which is a symbol of significant human influence on plant evolution. A pressing question to address is if plant diversity will increase or decrease in this warming world since contradictory pieces of evidence exit of accelerating plant speciation and plant extinction in the Anthropocene. Results: Comparison may be made of the Anthropocene with the past geological times characterised by a warming climate, e.g., the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) 55.8 million years ago (Mya)—a period of “crocodiles in the Arctic”, during which plants saw accelerated speciation through autopolyploid speciation. Three accelerators of plant speciation were reasonably identified in the Anthropocene, including cities, polar regions and botanical gardens where new plant species might be accelerating formed through autopolyploid speciation and hybridization. Conclusions: However, this kind of positive effect of climate warming on new plant species formation would be thoroughly offset by direct and indirect intensive human exploitation and human disturbances that cause habitat loss, deforestation, land use change, climate change, and pollution, thus leading to higher extinction risk than speciation in the Anthropocene. At last, four research directions are proposed to deepen our understanding of how plant traits affect speciation and extinction, why we need to make good use of polar regions to study the mechanisms of dispersion and invasion, how to maximize the conservation of plant genetics, species, and diverse landscapes and ecosystems and a holistic perspective on plant speciation and extinction is needed to integrate spatiotemporally.
    [Show full text]
  • Improvements to the Red List Index Stuart H
    Improvements to the Red List Index Stuart H. M. Butchart1*, H. Resit Akc¸akaya2, Janice Chanson3, Jonathan E. M. Baillie4, Ben Collen4, Suhel Quader5,8, Will R. Turner6, Rajan Amin4, Simon N. Stuart3, Craig Hilton-Taylor7 1 BirdLife International, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2 Applied Biomathematics, Setauket, New York, United States of America, 3 Conservation International/Center for Applied Biodiversity Science-World Conservation Union (IUCN)/Species Survival Commission Biodiversity Assessment Unit, IUCN Species Programme, Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, Washington, D. C., United States of America, 4 Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, United Kingdom, 5 Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 6 Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, Washington, D. C., United States of America, 7 World Conservation Union (IUCN) Species Programme, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 8 Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Sandy, United Kingdom The Red List Index uses information from the IUCN Red List to track trends in the projected overall extinction risk of sets of species. It has been widely recognised as an important component of the suite of indicators needed to measure progress towards the international target of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. However, further application of the RLI (to non-avian taxa in particular) has revealed some shortcomings in the original formula and approach: It performs inappropriately when a value of zero is reached; RLI values are affected by the frequency of assessments; and newly evaluated species may introduce bias. Here we propose a revision to the formula, and recommend how it should be applied in order to overcome these shortcomings.
    [Show full text]
  • Distributions of Extinction Times from Fossil Ages and Tree Topologies: the Example of Some Mid-Permian Synapsid Extinctions
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.06.11.448028; this version posted June 11, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Distributions of extinction times from fossil ages and tree topologies: the example of some mid-Permian synapsid extinctions Gilles Didier1 and Michel Laurin2 1IMAG, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, Montpellier, France 2CR2P (“Centre de Recherches sur la Paléobiodiversité et les Paléoenvironnements”; UMR 7207), CNRS/MNHN/UPMC, Sorbonne Université, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France June 11, 2021 Abstract Given a phylogenetic tree of extinct and extant taxa with fossils where the only temporal infor- mation stands in the fossil ages, we devise a method to compute the distribution of the extinction time of a given set of taxa under the Fossilized-Birth-Death model. Our approach differs from the previous ones in that it takes into account the possibility that the taxa or the clade considered may diversify before going extinct, whilst previous methods just rely on the fossil recovery rate to estimate confidence intervals. We assess and compare our new approach with a standard previous one using simulated data. Results show that our method provides more accurate confidence intervals. This new approach is applied to the study of the extinction time of three Permo-Carboniferous synapsid taxa (Ophiacodontidae, Edaphosauridae, and Sphenacodontidae) that are thought to have disappeared toward the end of the Cisuralian, or possibly shortly thereafter. The timing of extinctions of these three taxa and of their component lineages supports the idea that a biological crisis occurred in the late Kungurian/early Roadian.
    [Show full text]
  • A Users' Guide to Biodiversity Indicators
    European Academies’ Science Advisory Council A users’ guide to biodiversity indicators 29 November 2004 CONTENTS 1 Summary briefing 1.1 Key points 1.2 The EASAC process 1.3 What is meant by biodiversity? 1.4 Why is it important? 1.5 Can biodiversity be measured? 1.6 What progress is being made at European and global levels? 1.7 What could be done now? 1.8 What is stopping it? 1.9 Is this a problem? 1.10 What further needs to be done to produce a better framework for monitoring? 1.11 Recomendations 2 Introduction 2.1 What is biodiversity? 2.2 Biodiversity in Europe 2.3 Why does it matter? 2.4 What is happening to biodiversity? 2.5 The need for measurement and assessment 2.6 Drivers of change 2.7 Progress in developing indicators 2.8 Why has it been so difficult to make progress? 3 Conclusions and recommended next steps 3.1 Immediate and short term – what is needed to have indicators in place to assess progress against the 2010 target 3.2 The longer term – developing indicators for the future Annexes A Assessment of available indicators A.1 Trends in extent of selected biomes, ecosystems and habitats A.2 Trends in abundance and distribution of selected species A.3 Change in status of threatened and/or protected species A.4 Trends in genetic diversity of domesticated animals, cultivated plants and fish species of major socio- economic importance A.5 Coverage of protected areas A.6 Area of forest, agricultural, fishery and aquaculture ecosystems under sustainable management A.7 Nitrogen deposition A.8 Number and costs of alien species A.9
    [Show full text]
  • Living Planet Report 2018: Aiming Higher
    REPORT INT 2018 SOUS EMBARGO JUSQU’AU 30 OCTOBRE 2018 - 01H01 CET Living Planet Report 2018: Aiming higher WWF Living Planet Report 2016 page 1 Institute of Zoology (Zoological Society of London) Founded in 1826, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) is an CONTENTS international scientific, conservation and educational organization. Its mission is to achieve and promote the worldwide conservation of animals and their habitats. ZSL runs ZSL London Zoo and ZSL Whipsnade Zoo; Foreword by Marco Lambertini 4 carries out scientific research in the Institute of Zoology; and is actively involved in field conservation worldwide. ZSL manages the Living Planet Index® in a collaborative partnership with WWF. WWF Executive summary 6 WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conservation organizations, with over 5 million supporters and a global network active in more than 100 countries. WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and to build a Setting the scene 10 future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world’s biological diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable, and promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption. Chapter 1: Why biodiversity matters 12 Chapter 2: The threats and pressures wiping out our world 26 Chapter 3: Biodiversity in a changing world 88 Chapter 4: Aiming higher, what future do we want? 108 Citation WWF. 2018. Living Planet Report - 2018: Aiming Higher. Grooten, M. and Almond, R.E.A.(Eds). WWF, Gland, Switzerland. The path ahead 124 Design and infographics by: peer&dedigitalesupermarkt References 130 Cover photograph: © Global Warming Images / WWF Children dive into the sea at sunset, Funafuti, Tuvalu ISBN 978-2-940529-90-2 fsc logo to be Living Planet Report® added by printer and Living Planet Index® are registered trademarks This report has been printed of WWF International.
    [Show full text]
  • Living Planet Report 2020 a Deep Dive Into the Living Planet Index
    LIVING PLANET REPORT 2020 A DEEP DIVE INTO THE LIVING PLANET INDEX A DEEP DIVE INTO THE LPI 1 WWF WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conservation organizations, with over 5 million supporters and a global network active in more than 100 countries. WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world’s biological diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable, and promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption. Institute of Zoology (Zoological Society of London) Founded in 1826, ZSL (Zoological Society of London) is an international conservation charity working to create a world where wildlife thrives. ZSL’s work is realised through ground-breaking science, field conservation around the world and engaging millions of people through two zoos, ZSL London Zoo and ZSL Whipsnade Zoo. ZSL manages the Living Planet Index® in a collaborative partnership with WWF. LIVING PLANET Citation WWF (2020) Living Planet Report 2020. Bending the curve of biodiversity loss: a deep dive into the Living Planet Index. Marconi, V., McRae, L., Deinet, S., Ledger, S. and Freeman, F. in Almond, R.E.A., Grooten M. and Petersen, T. (Eds). WWF, Gland, Switzerland. REPORT 2020 Design and infographics by: peer&dedigitalesupermarkt Cover photograph: Credit: Image from the Our Planet series, A DEEP DIVE INTO THE © Hugh Pearson/Silverback Films / Netflix The spinner dolphins thrive off the coast of Costa Rica where they feed on lanternfish.
    [Show full text]
  • A Robust Goal Is Needed for Species in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 16 April 2020 Title: A robust goal is needed for species in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework Running title: A post-2020 goal for species conservation Authors: Brooke A. Williams*1,2, James E.M. Watson1,2,3, Stuart H.M. Butchart4,5, Michelle Ward1,2, Nathalie Butt2, Friederike C. Bolam6, Simon N. Stuart7, Thomas M. Brooks8,9,10, Louise Mair6, Philip J. K. McGowan6, Craig Hilton-Taylor11, David Mallon12, Ian Harrison8,13, Jeremy S. Simmonds1,2. Affiliations: 1School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia 2Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Queensland, Australia. 3Wildlife Conservation Society, Global Conservation Program, Bronx, NY 20460, USA. 4BirdLife International, The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QZ, UK 5Department of Zoology, Cambridge University, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK 6School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK 7Synchronicity Earth, 27-29 Cursitor Street, London, EC4A 1LT, UK 8IUCN, 28 rue Mauverney, CH-1196, Gland, Switzerland 9World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), University of the Philippines Los Baños, Laguna, 4031, Philippines 10Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia 11IUCN, The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QZ, UK 12Division of Biology and Conservation Ecology, Manchester Metropolitan University, Chester St, Manchester, M1 5GD, U.K 13Conservation International, Arlington, VA 22202, USA Emails: Brooke A. Williams: [email protected]; James E.M. Watson: [email protected]; Stuart H.M.
    [Show full text]
  • Greening Wildlife Documentary’, in Libby Lester and Brett Hutchins (Eds) Environmental Conflict and the Media, New York: Peter Lang
    Morgan Richards (forthcoming 2013) ‘Greening Wildlife Documentary’, in Libby Lester and Brett Hutchins (eds) Environmental Conflict and the Media, New York: Peter Lang. GREENING WILDLIFE DOCUMENTARY Morgan Richards The loss of wilderness is a truth so sad, so overwhelming that, to reflect reality, it would need to be the subject of every wildlife film. That, of course, would be neither entertaining nor ultimately dramatic. So it seems that as filmmakers we are doomed either to fail our audience or fail our cause. — Stephen Mills (1997) Five years before the BBC’s Frozen Planet was first broadcast in 2011, Sir David Attenborough publically announced his belief in human-induced global warming. “My message is that the world is warming, and that it’s our fault,” he declared on the BBC’s Ten O’Clock News in May 2006. This was the first statement, both in the media and in his numerous wildlife series, in which he didn’t hedge his opinion, choosing to focus on slowly accruing scientific data rather than ruling definitively on the causes and likely environmental impacts of climate change. Frozen Planet, a seven-part landmark documentary series, produced by the BBC Natural History Unit and largely co-financed by the Discovery Channel, was heralded by many as Attenborough’s definitive take on climate change. It followed a string of big budget, multipart wildlife documentaries, known in the industry as landmarks1, which broke with convention to incorporate narratives on complex environmental issues such as habitat destruction, species extinction and atmospheric pollution. David Attenborough’s The State of the Planet (2000), a smaller three-part series, was the first wildlife documentary to deal comprehensively with environmental issues on a global scale.
    [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]
  • Living Blue Planet Report
    REPORT ITN 2015 Living Blue Planet Report Species, habitats and human well-being WWF WWF is one of the world’s largest and most experienced independent conservation organizations, with over 5 million supporters and a global network active in more than 100 countries. WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world’s biological diversity, ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is sustainable, and promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption. Zoological Society of London Founded in 1826, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) is an international scientific, conservation and educational organization. Its mission is to achieve and promote the worldwide conservation of animals and their habitats. ZSL runs ZSL London Zoo and ZSL Whipsnade Zoo; carries out scientific research in the Institute of Zoology; and is actively involved in field conservation worldwide. The ZSL manages the Living Planet Index® in a collaborative partnership with WWF. WWF International Avenue du Mont-Blanc 1196 Gland, Switzerland www.panda.org Institute of Zoology Zoological Society of London Regent’s Park,London NW1 4RY, UK www.zsl.org/indicators www.livingplanetindex.org Design by: millerdesign.co.uk Cover photograph: © naturepl.com / David Fleetham / WWF Living Planet Report WWF’s Living Planet Report, released every two years, is a leading science-based analysis on the health of our planet and the impact of human activity upon it. The Living Planet Report 2014 detailed alarming declines in biodiversity, showing species populations falling by half between 1970 and 2010.
    [Show full text]