Applying IUCN Red List criteria to birds at different geographical scales: similarities and differences
Article Sidebar
Google Scholar citations
Main Article Content
M. Charra
M. Sarasa
Extinction risk and conservation status of species are assessed at the global scale by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). To ensure objectivity, repeatability and traceability, assessments follow a standardized process that uses reliable and verifiable information. Assessments are synthesized according to guidelines, which have recently been adjusted for application at sub–global scales. Nevertheless, species may have several, different or overlapping conservation status. To quantitatively compare assessments from global to sub–national scales, in this study we analyzed 15 assessment lists for 66 game bird species in France. Assessments were declared to be made following IUCN guidelines. Overall, our results reveal that (1) assessments at large spatial scales tend to give lower threat status than small–scale assessments; (2) large–scale assessments made it possible to formally verify information whereas smaller–scale assessments usually did not; (3) large–scale assessments are more likely to be based on standardized evidence of reduction in population size and are less exposed to ‘scale–effects’ and ‘edge–effects’; (4) large–scale assessments are also more often based on scientific literature sensu stricto; and (5) sources are more accurately synthesized than red lists at small spatial scales. Our results suggest that small–scale red lists do not fully match IUCN guidelines and differ significantly in their assessment processes when compared to global standards. The use of subjective and unreliable data in small–scale red lists (above all in national and sub–national lists) may jeopardise the original aim of IUCN Red Lists to provide comprehensive and scientifically rigorous information, and could thus compromise the credibility and prestige of IUCN red lists in the eyes of researchers, the general public, and other stakeholders.
Article Details
How to Cite
Charra, M.; and Sarasa, M. “Applying IUCN Red List criteria to birds at different geographical scales: similarities and differences”. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, vol.VOL 41, no. 1, pp. 75-95, doi:10.32800/abc.2018.41.0075.
Rights
Copyright
The authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work available simultaneously under a Creative Commons attribution license that allows sharing of the work with third parties, as long as they recognize authorship and the initial publication in this journal.
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- C. De Danieli, M. Sarasa, Population estimates, density–dependence and the risk of disease outbreaks in the Alpine ibex Capra ibex , Animal Biodiversity and Conservation: Vol. 38 No. 1 (2015)
- A. Gée, M. Sarasa, O. Pays, Long–term variation of demographic parameters in four small game species in Europe: opportunities and limits to test for a global pattern , Animal Biodiversity and Conservation: Vol. 41 No. 1 (2018)
- M. Sarasa, J.-A. Sarasa, Intensive monitoring suggests population oscillations and migration in wild boar Sus scrofa in the Pyrenees , Animal Biodiversity and Conservation: Vol. 36 No. 1 (2013)
- M. Sarasa, Trophy hunting, size, rarity and willingness to pay: inter–specific analyses of trophy prices require reliable specific data , Animal Biodiversity and Conservation: Vol. 36 No. 2 (2013)
- L. Dumont, E. Lauer, S. Zimmermann, P. Roche, P. Auliac, M. Sarasa, Monitoring black grouse Tetrao tetrix in Isère, northern French Alps: cofactors, population trends and potential biases , Animal Biodiversity and Conservation: Vol. 42 No. 2 (2019)
- M. Sarasa, Common names of the Asiatic ibex superspecies at a turning point in its taxonomy and management , Animal Biodiversity and Conservation: Vol. 46 No. 1 (2023)