Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact

Grace MK 1 , Akçakaya HR 2 , Bennett EL 3 , Brooks TM 4 , Heath A 5 , Hedges S 3 Show all authors , Hilton-Taylor C 6 , Hoffmann M 2 , Hochkirch A 7 , Jenkins R 8 , Keith DA 2 , Long B 9 , Mallon DP 10 , Meijaard E 11 , Milner-Gulland EJ 12 , Rodriguez JP 2 , Stephenson PJ 13 , Stuart SN 2 , Young RP 14 , Acebes P 15 , Alfaro-Shigueto J 16 , Alvarez-Clare S 17 , Andriantsimanarilafy RR 18 , Arbetman M 19 , Azat C 20 , Bacchetta G 21 , Badola R 22 , Barcelos LMD 23 , Barreiros JP 24 , Basak S 22 , Berger DJ 25 , Bhattacharyya S 26 , Bino G 27 , Borges PAV 28 , Boughton RK 29 , Brockmann HJ 30 , Buckley HL 31 , Burfield IJ 32 , Burton J 33 , Camacho-Badani T 34 , Cano-Alonso LS 35 , Carmichael RH 36 , Carrero C 17 , Carroll JP 37 , Catsadorakis G 38 , Chapple DG 39 , Chapron G 40 , Chowdhury GW 41 , Claassens L 42 , Cogoni D 43 , Constantine R 44 , Craig CA 45 , Cunningham AA 46 , Dahal N 47 , Daltry JC 48 , Das GC 22 , Dasgupta N 22 , Davey A 48 , Davies K 49 , Develey P 50 , Elangovan V 51 , Fairclough D 52 , Febbraro MD 53 , Fenu G 43 , Fernandes FM 54 , Fernandez EP 55 , Finucci B 56 , Földesi R 57 , Foley CM 58 , Ford M 59 , Forstner MRJ 60 , García N 61 , Garcia-Sandoval R 62 , Gardner PC 63 , Garibay-Orijel R 64 , Gatan-Balbas M 65 , Gauto I 66 , Ghazi MGU 22 , Godfrey SS 67 , Gollock M 68 , González BA 69 , Grant TD 70 , Gray T 71 , Gregory AJ 72 , van Grunsven RHA 73 , Gryzenhout M 74 , Guernsey NC 75 , Gupta G 76 , Hagen C 77 , Hagen CA 78 , Hall MB 79 , Hallerman E 80 , Hare K 81 , Hart T 82 , Hartdegen R 83 , Harvey-Brown Y 49 , Hatfield R 84 , Hawke T 27 , Hermes C 32 , Hitchmough R 85 , Hoffmann PM 86 , Howarth C 14 , Hudson MA 14 , Hussain SA 22 , Huveneers C 87 , Jacques H 88 , Jorgensen D 75 , Katdare S 22 , Katsis LKD 89 , Kaul R 90 , Kaunda-Arara B 91 , Keith-Diagne L 92 , Kraus DT 93 , de Lima TM 94 , Lindeman K 95 , Linsky J 49 , Louis E 96 , Loy A 97 , Lughadha EN 98 , Mangel JC 16 , Marinari PE 99 , Martin GM 100 , Martinelli G 101 , McGowan PJK 76 , McInnes A 102 , Teles Barbosa Mendes E 94 , Millard MJ 103 , Mirande C 104 , Money D 105 , Monks JM 106 , Morales CL 19 , Mumu NN 107 , Negrao R 98 , Nguyen AH 108 , Niloy MNH 41 , Norbury GL 109 , Nordmeyer C 110 , Norris D 111 , O'Brien M 112 , Oda GA 113 , Orsenigo S 114 , Outerbridge ME 115 , Pasachnik S 116 , Pérez-Jiménez JC 117 , Pike C 68 , Pilkington F 48 , Plumb G 118 , Portela RCQ 119 , Prohaska A 120 , Quintana MG 121 , Rakotondrasoa EF 18 , Ranglack DH 122 , Rankou H 123 , Rawat AP 22 , Reardon JT 124 , Rheingantz ML 125 , Richter SC 126 , Rivers MC 49 , Rogers LR 122 , da Rosa P 101 , Rose P 127 , Royer E 110 , Ryan C 128 , de Mitcheson YJS 129 , Salmon L 130 , Salvador CH 131 , Samways MJ 132 , Sanjuan T 133 , Souza Dos Santos A 134 , Sasaki H 135 , Schutz E 136 , Scott HA 137 , Scott RM 137 , Serena F 138 , Sharma SP 22 , Shuey JA 139 , Silva CJP 140 , Simaika JP 141 , Smith DR 142 , Spaet JLY 143 , Sultana S 41 , Talukdar BK 144 , Tatayah V 145 , Thomas P 146 , Tringali A 147 , Trinh-Dinh H 108 , Tuboi C 22 , Usmani AA 22 , Vasco-Palacios AM 148 , Vié JC 149 , Virens J 51 , Walker A 150 , Wallace B 151 , Waller LJ 152 , Wang H 153 , Wearn OR 108 , van Weerd M 154 , Weigmann S 155 , Willcox D 156 , Woinarski J 157 , Yong JWH 158 , Young S 33

Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  • 2 IUCN Species Survival Commission, Caracas, Venezuela
  • 3 Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, New York, USA
  • 4 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Gland, Switzerland
  • 5 Synchronicity Earth, London, UK
  • 6 IUCN Red List Unit, Cambridge, UK
  • 7 Department of Biogeography, Trier University, Trier, Germany
  • 8 IUCN Global Species Programme, Cambridge, UK
  • 9 Re:wild, Washington, DC, USA
  • 10 Division of Biology and Conservation Ecology, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
  • 11 IUCN SSC Wild Pig Specialist Group and Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  • 12 Merton College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
  • 13 IUCN SSC Species Monitoring Specialist Group, Gingins, Switzerland
  • 14 Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, Trinity, UK
  • 15 Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global, Departamento de Ecología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
  • 16 Carrera de Biologia Marina, Universidad Cientifica del Sur, Lima, Peru
  • 17 The Morton Arboretum, Lisle, Illinois, USA
  • 18 Madagasikara Voakajy, Antananarivo, Madagasikara
  • 19 Grupo Ecología de la Polinización, INIBIOMA, Universidad Nacional del Comahue, CONICET, Bariloche, Argentina
  • 20 Sustainability Research Centre & PhD Programme in Conservation Medicine, Faculty of Life Sciences, Universidad Andres Bello, Santiago, Chile
  • 21 Centre for Conservation of Biodiversity, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
  • 22 Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India
  • 23 Azorean Biodiversity Group, Centre for Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Changes, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of the Azores, Angra do Heroísmo, Portugal
  • 24 Universidade dos Açores, Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e do Ambiente, Rua Capitão João d'Ávila, Angra do Heroísmo, Portugal
  • 25 School of Natural Resources, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
  • 26 Centre for Ecological Sciences, Indian Institute of Sciences, Bangalore, India
  • 27 University of New South Wales, Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia
  • 28 Departamento de Ciências e Engenharia do Ambiente Universidade dos Açores, Azores, Portugal
  • 29 Range Cattle Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
  • 30 Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
  • 31 Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
  • 32 BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK
  • 33 IUCN SSC Asian Wild Cattle Specialist Group, Cedar House, Chester, UK
  • 34 Museo de Historia Natural Alcide d' Orbigny, Cochabamba, Bolivia
  • 35 Department of Zoology and Physical Anthropology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain
  • 36 Dauphin Island Sea Lab, Dauphin Island, Alabama, USA
  • 37 University of Nebraska, School of Natural Resources, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
  • 38 Society for the Protection of Prespa, Agios Germanos, Greece
  • 39 School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
  • 40 Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Riddarhyttan, Sweden
  • 41 Department of Zoology, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh
  • 42 Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
  • 43 Dipartimento di Scienze della Vita e dell'Ambiente, Centro Conservazione Biodiversità, Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
  • 44 School of Biological Sciences & Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
  • 45 Endangered Wildlife Trust, Office 8 & 9, Centre for Biodiversity Conservation, Cape Town, South Africa
  • 46 Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, UK
  • 47 CSIR-Institute of Himalayan Bioresource Technology, Palampur, India
  • 48 Fauna & Flora International, Cambridge, UK
  • 49 Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Richmond, UK
  • 50 BirdLife/SAVE Brasil, Fernão Dias, Brazil
  • 51 University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
  • 52 Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Department of Fisheries, Hillarys, Western Australia, Australia
  • 53 University of Molise, Pesche, Italy
  • 54 Sociedade de Amigos da Fundação Zoobotânica de Belo Horizonte, (Pampulha), Belo Horizonte, Brazil
  • 55 Brazilian National Centre for Flora Conservation, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • 56 National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Wellington, New Zealand
  • 57 Institute of Crop Science and Resource Conservation, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
  • 58 Hawai'i Institute of Marine Biology, University of Hawai'i at Mānoa, Kaneohe, Hawai'i, USA
  • 59 Museum für Naturkunde, Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science, Berlin, Germany
  • 60 Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas, USA
  • 61 Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia
  • 62 Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Circuito exterior s/n, Ciudad Universitaria, Coyoacán, Mexico
  • 63 Danau Girang Field Centre, c/o Sabah Wildlife Department, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
  • 64 Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Tercer Circuito s/n, Ciudad Universitaria, Ciudad de México, México
  • 65 Mabuwaya Foundation Inc., ISU Garita, Cabagan, Philippines
  • 66 Asociación Etnobotánica Paraguaya, Lambaré, Paraguay
  • 67 Department of Zoology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
  • 68 Zoological Society of London, London, UK
  • 69 Laboratorio de Ecología de Vida Silvestre, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales y de la Conservación de la Naturaleza, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
  • 70 San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research, San Diego, California, USA
  • 71 Wildlife Alliance, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
  • 72 Bowling Green State University, School of Earth Environment and Society, Bowling Green, Ohio, USA
  • 73 Dutch Butterfly Conservation, Wageningen, the Netherlands
  • 74 Department of Genetics, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa
  • 75 World Wildlife Fund Inc., Northern Great Plains Program, Bozeman, Montana, USA
  • 76 School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK
  • 77 BirdLife South Africa, Roggebaai, South Africa
  • 78 Department of Fisheries & Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA
  • 79 Department of Biology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA
  • 80 Department of Fish and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
  • 81 Urban Wildlife Trust, Wellington/Hamilton, New Zealand
  • 82 Department of Zoology, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
  • 83 Dallas Zoo, Dallas, Texas, USA
  • 84 The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, Portland, Oregon, USA
  • 85 Department of Conservation-Te Papa Atawhai, Wellington, New Zealand
  • 86 Sociedade Chauá, Rua Julio Gorski, Paraná, Brazil
  • 87 Southern Shark Ecology Group, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  • 88 IUCN Otter Specialist Group, Brie et Angonnesù, France
  • 89 Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Abingdon, UK
  • 90 Wildlife Trust of India, Noida, India
  • 91 Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, University of Eldoret, Eldoret, Kenya
  • 92 African Aquatic Conservation Fund, Thies, Senegal
  • 93 University of Waterloo, School of Environment, Resources and Sustainability, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • 94 Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • 95 Florida Institute of Technology, Program in Sustainability Studies, Melbourne, Florida, USA
  • 96 Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo and Aquarium, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
  • 97 Department of Biosciences and Territory, University of Molise, Pesche, Italy
  • 98 Royal Botanic Gardens, Richmond, Surrey, UK
  • 99 Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Front Royal, Virginia, USA
  • 100 Centro de Investigación Esquel de Montaña y Estepa Patagónica, CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • 101 National Center for Flora Conservation (CNCFlora), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • 102 Seabird Conservation Programme, BirdLife South Africa, Foreshore, South Africa
  • 103 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lamar, Pennsylvania, USA
  • 104 International Crane Foundation, Baraboo, Wisconsin, USA
  • 105 Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  • 106 Department of Conservation, Dunedin, New Zealand
  • 107 Center for Natural Resource Studies, Dhaka, Bangladesh
  • 108 Fauna & Flora International - Vietnam Programme, Hanoi, Vietnam
  • 109 Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, Alexandra, New Zealand
  • 110 Minnesota Zoo, Apple Valley, Minnesota, USA
  • 111 School of Environmental Sciences, Federal University of Amapá, Macapá, Brazil
  • 112 BirdLife International Pacific Regional Office, Suva, Fiji
  • 113 Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro - UFRRJ, Department of Environmental Sciences, Forestry Institute, Seropédica, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • 114 Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra e dell'Ambiente, Università di Pavia; Dipartimento di Scienze della Vita e dell'Ambiente, Centro Conservazione Biodiversità, Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy
  • 115 Bermuda Government, Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Paget, Bermuda
  • 116 International Iguana Foundation, Fort Worth, Texas, USA
  • 117 El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, Lerma, Campeche, Mexico
  • 118 US National Park Service, Livingston, Montana, USA
  • 119 Ecology Department, Biology Institute, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • 120 GeoGenetics Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  • 121 Division of Invertebrates, Argentine Museum of Natural Sciences, Buenos Aires, Argentina
  • 122 University of Nebraska Kearney, Kearney, Nebraska, USA
  • 123 IUCN SSC Orchid Specialist Group, Royal Botanic Gardens, Richmond, Surrey, UK
  • 124 Department of Conservation, New Zealand, Fiordland District Office, Te Anau, New Zealand
  • 125 Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Laboratório de Ecologia e Conservação de Populações, Centro de Ciências da Saúde - Instituto de Biologia, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
  • 126 Division of Natural Areas and Department of Biological Sciences, Eastern Kentucky University, Richmond, Kentucky, USA
  • 127 University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
  • 128 Auckland University of Technology, School of Science, Auckland City, New Zealand
  • 129 Swire Institute of Marine Science, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
  • 130 Nottingham Trent University, Brackenhurst Campus, Southwell, Nottinghamshire, UK
  • 131 Cooperative Caipora, Florianópolis, Brazil
  • 132 Department of Conservation Ecology & Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
  • 133 Grupo Micologos Colombia, Calle, Colmbia
  • 134 Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Health Science Centre, Biology Institute, Plant Ecology Laboratory, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • 135 Chikushi Jogakuen University, Dazaifu, Japan
  • 136 D'ABOVILLE Foundation and Demo Farm Inc, Makati, Philippines
  • 137 Namibia Crane Working Group, Swakopmund, Namibia
  • 138 Institute for Biological Resources and Marine Biotechnology, National Research Council-(CNR -IRBIM), Mazara del Vallo, Italy
  • 139 The Nature Conservancy, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
  • 140 Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Ingeniería, Universidad de Bogotá Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Bogotá, Colombia
  • 141 Department of Water Resources and Ecosystems, IHE Delft Institute for Water Education, Delft, The Netherlands
  • 142 U.S. Geological Survey, Kearneysville, West Virginia, USA
  • 143 Evolutionary Ecology Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  • 144 IUCN Asian Rhino Specialist Group, Guwahati, India
  • 145 Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, Vacoas, Mauritius
  • 146 Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, UK
  • 147 Archbold Biological Station, Venus, Florida, USA
  • 148 Grupo de Microbiología Ambiental - BioMicro, Escuela de Microbiología, Universidad de Antioquia, UdeA, Medellín, Colombia
  • 149 Fondation Franklinia, Genève, Switzerland
  • 150 Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science, Lowestoft, Suffolk, UK
  • 151 Ecolibrium Inc, Boulder, Colorado, USA
  • 152 Southern African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds, Cape Town, South Africa
  • 153 Northeast Forestry University, Harbin City, China
  • 154 Institute of Environmental Sciences (CML), Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands
  • 155 Elasmo-Lab, Elasmobranch Research Laboratory, Hamburg, Germany
  • 156 Save Vietnam's Wildlife, Cuc Phuong National Park, Ninh Bình Province, Vietnam
  • 157 Charles Darwin University, Casuarina, Northern Territory, Australia
  • 158 Department of Biosystems and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp, Sweden
Conserv Biol, 2021 12;35(6):1833-1849.
PMID: 34289517 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13756

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.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

MeSH terms
Similar publications