Book contents
- The Living Planet
- The Living Planet
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- One Introduction and the Evolution of Life on Earth
- Two Flowering Plants
- Three Bryophytes and Pteridophytes: Spore-Bearing Land Plants
- Four Terrestrial Mammals
- Five Marine Mammals: Exploited for Millennia, But Still Holding On
- Six How Birds Reveal the Scale of the Biodiversity Crisis
- Seven Reptiles
- Eight Amphibians
- Nine Freshwater Fishes: Threatened Species and Threatened Waters on a Global Scale
- Ten The Amazing Yet Threatened World of Marine Fishes
- Eleven Insects
- Twelve Marine Invertebrates
- Thirteen Non-Insect Terrestrial Arthropods
- Fourteen Terrestrial Invertebrates Other Than Arthropods and Molluscs
- Fifteen Non-Marine Molluscs
- Sixteen An Account of the Diversity and Conservation of Fungi and Their Close Relatives
- Seventeen Simple Life Forms
- Eighteen Assessing Species Conservation Status: The IUCN Red List and Green Status of Species
- Nineteen Problems with the World’s Ecosystems: The Future and Attempts to Mitigate Decline
- Twenty Conservation Methods and Successes
- Twenty One What Does the Future Hold for Our Planet and its Wildlife?
- Species Index
- Subject Index
- References
Eighteen - Assessing Species Conservation Status: The IUCN Red List and Green Status of Species
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 April 2023
By
Edited by
Book contents
- The Living Planet
- The Living Planet
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- One Introduction and the Evolution of Life on Earth
- Two Flowering Plants
- Three Bryophytes and Pteridophytes: Spore-Bearing Land Plants
- Four Terrestrial Mammals
- Five Marine Mammals: Exploited for Millennia, But Still Holding On
- Six How Birds Reveal the Scale of the Biodiversity Crisis
- Seven Reptiles
- Eight Amphibians
- Nine Freshwater Fishes: Threatened Species and Threatened Waters on a Global Scale
- Ten The Amazing Yet Threatened World of Marine Fishes
- Eleven Insects
- Twelve Marine Invertebrates
- Thirteen Non-Insect Terrestrial Arthropods
- Fourteen Terrestrial Invertebrates Other Than Arthropods and Molluscs
- Fifteen Non-Marine Molluscs
- Sixteen An Account of the Diversity and Conservation of Fungi and Their Close Relatives
- Seventeen Simple Life Forms
- Eighteen Assessing Species Conservation Status: The IUCN Red List and Green Status of Species
- Nineteen Problems with the World’s Ecosystems: The Future and Attempts to Mitigate Decline
- Twenty Conservation Methods and Successes
- Twenty One What Does the Future Hold for Our Planet and its Wildlife?
- Species Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
The conservation status of the taxa in this book is measured using the criteria of the Red List of Threatened Species™. The Red List is overseen by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), and categorises species according to extinction risk. This chapter summarises the history of the Red List and explains the criteria used to assess species’ extinction risk, as well as the quality control procedures in place today. This chapter also introduces a new part of the Red List, formalised in 2021: The Green Status of Species, a set of metrics which assess species’ progress towards functional recovery across its range and the impact of conservation actions.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Living PlanetThe State of the World's Wildlife, pp. 333 - 348Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Akçakaya, H.R., Keith, D.A., Burgman, M., et al. (2017) Inferring extinctions III: a cost-benefit framework for listing extinct species. Biol Conserv 214: 336–342.Google Scholar
Akçakaya, H.R., Bennett, E.L., Brooks, T.M., et al. (2018) Quantifying species recovery and conservation success to develop an IUCN Green List of Species. Conserv Biol 32: 1128–1138.Google Scholar
Akçakaya, H.R., Ferson, S., Burgman, M.A., et al. (2000) Making consistent IUCN classifications under uncertainty. Conserv Biol 14(4): 1001–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, J.A. (2003) The context of Red Data Books, with a complete bibliography of the IUCN publications. In: de Iongh, H.H., Bánki, O.S., Bergmans, W. and van der Werff ten Bosch, M.J. (Eds.), The Harmonization of Red Lists for Threatened Species in Europe, Proceedings of an International Seminar 27 and 28 November 2002. Mededelingen No. 38. Leiden, the Netherlands: The Netherlands Commission for International Protection.Google Scholar
Dahlberg, A. (2015) Sarcosoma globosum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T58515314A58515381. www.iucnredlist.org/species/58515314/58515381 (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
Dudley, N. and Timmins, H.L. (Eds.) (2021) A Survey of User Attitudes Towards the Proposed IUCN Green Status of Species. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, S. and Talukdar, B. (2020) Rhinoceros sondaicus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e.T19495A18493900. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/19495/18493900 (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
Fisher, J., Simon, N. and Vincent, J. (1969). The Red Book: Wildlife in Danger. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Fitter, R. and Fitter, M. (Eds). (1987). The Road to Extinction, pp. 1-5. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Gorener, V., Harvey-Brown, Y. and Barstow, M. (2017) Quercus canariensis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T78809256A78809271. www.iucnredlist.org/species/78809256/78809271 (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
Grace, M., Akçakaya, H.R., Bennett, E.L., et al. (202 coauthors). (2021a) Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact. Conserv Biol 35(6): 1833–1849.Google Scholar
Grace, M., Timmins, H., Long, B., et al. (2021b) Engaging end-users to maximise uptake and effectiveness of a new species recovery assessment. Conserv Soc 19(3): 150–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilton-Taylor, C. (2014) A history of the IUCN Red List. In: Smart, J.S., Hilton-Taylor, C. and Mittermeier, R.A. (Eds.), The IUCN Red List: 50 Years of Conservation. Washington, DC: Cemex and Earth in Focus, Inc.Google Scholar
IUCN. (1994) IUCN Red List Categories. Version 2.3. IUCN Species Survival Commission. Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge, UK: IUCN.Google Scholar
IUCN. (2001) IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge, UK: IUCN.Google Scholar
IUCN. (2012) Guidelines for Application of IUCN Red List Criteria at Regional and National Levels: Version 4.0. Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge, UK: IUCN.Google Scholar
IUCN. (2016) IUCN Green List of Protected and Conserved Areas: Standard, Version 1.1. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
IUCN. (2021) IUCN Green Status of Species: A Global Standard for Measuring Species Recovery and Assessing Conservation Impact. Version 2.0. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
IUCN Species Conservation Success Task Force (IUCN SCSTF). (2020) Background and Guidelines for the IUCN Green Status of Species. Version 1.0. Prepared by the IUCN Species Conservation Success Task Force. www.iucnredlist.org/resources/green-status-assessment-materials (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
IUCN Standards and Petitions Committee (IUCN SPC). (2022). Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 14. https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/redlistguidelines (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group. (2022) Oryx dammah. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T15568A50191470. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-2.RLTS.T15568A50191470.en (accessed October 2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keith, D.A., Butchart, S.H., Regan, H.M., et al. (2017). Inferring extinctions I: a structured method using information on threats. Biol Conserv 214: 320–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambdon, P.W. and Ellick, S. (2016) Dryopteris cognata. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T67373923A67373935. www.iucnredlist.org/species/67373923/67373935 (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
Lumsden, L., Racey, P.A. and Hutson, A.M. (2017) Pipistrellus murrayi. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T136769A518894. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/136769/209549918 (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
Mace, G. M. and Lande, R. (1991) Assessing extinction threats: toward a reevaluation of IUCN threatened species categories. Conserv Biol 5(2): 148–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mace, G.M., Collar, N., Cooke, J., et al. (1992) The development of new criteria for listing species on the IUCN Red List. Species 19: 16–22.Google Scholar
Mace, G.M., Collar, N.J., Gaston, K.J., et al. (2008) Quantification of extinction risk: IUCN’s system for classifying threatened species. Conserv Biol 22: 1424–1442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mallon, D.P. and Jackson, R.M. (2017) A downlist is not a demotion: Red List status and reality. Oryx 51(4): 605–609.Google Scholar
Melville, R. (1970–1971). IUCN Red Data Book, Vol. 5. Angiospermae. Morges, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Miller, R.R. (1968-1977). IUCN Red Data Book, Vol. 4. Pisces. Morges, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Nowell, K. and Jackson, P. (1996). Wild Cats. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge, UK: IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group.Google Scholar
Papworth, S.K., Rist, J., Coad, L. and Milner‐Gulland, E.J. (2009) Evidence for shifting baseline syndrome in conservation. Conserv Lett 2: 93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripple, W.J. and Beschta, R.L. (2006) Linking a cougar decline, trophic cascade, and catastrophic regime shift in Zion National Park. Biol Conserv 133(4): 397–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ripple, W.J. and Beschta, R.L. (2008) Trophic cascades involving cougar, mule deer, and black oaks in Yosemite National Park. Biol Conserv 141(5): 1249–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, A.S., Pilgrim, J.D., Lamoreux, J.F., Hoffmann, M. and Brooks, T.M. (2006) The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 21(2): 71–76.Google Scholar
Scott, P., Burton, J.A. and Fitter, R. (1987) Red Data Books: the historical background. In: Fitter, R. and Fitter, M. (Eds.), The Road to Extinction. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Simon, N. (1966–1971). IUCN Red Data Book, Vol. 1. Mammalia. Morges, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Thompson, C.J., Koshkina, V., Burgman, M.A., Butchart, S.H. and Stone, L. (2017) Inferring extinctions II: A practical, iterative model based on records and surveys. Biol Conserv 214: 328–335.Google Scholar
Thornback, J. and Jenkins, M. (1982) The IUCN Mammal Red Data Book, Part 1. Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge, UK: IUCN.Google Scholar
van Strien, N.J., Steinmetz, R., Manullang, B., et al. (2008) Rhinoceros sondaicus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2008: e.T19495A8925965. www.iucnredlist.org/species/19495/18493900 (accessed October 2022).Google Scholar
Vincent, J. (1966–1971). IUCN/ICBP Red Data Book, Vol. 2. Aves. Morges, Switzerland: IUCN.Google Scholar
Wells, S., Pyle, R.M. and Collins, N.M. (1983) IUCN Invertebrate Red Data Book. Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge, UK: IUCN.Google Scholar
- 1
- Cited by