IUCN’s Red List of Ecosystems: An Evolving Tool for Risk Assessment to Support Priority Setting & Landscape Action Edmund Barrow (Ecosystem Management Programme), Jon Paul Rodríguez & David Keith (Commission for Ecosystem Management) TCD Dublin May 2013
52
Embed
IUCN’s Red List of Ecosystems: An Evolving Tool for Risk Assessment to Support Priority Setting & Landscape Action
IUCN’s Red List of Ecosystems: An Evolving Tool for Risk Assessment to Support Priority Setting & Landscape Action. Edmund Barrow ( Ecosystem Management Programme), Jon Paul Rodríguez & David Keith ( Commission for Ecosystem Management) TCD Dublin May 2013. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
IUCN’s Red List of Ecosystems: An Evolving Tool for Risk
Assessment to Support Priority Setting & Landscape Action
Edmund Barrow (Ecosystem Management Programme), Jon Paul Rodríguez & David Keith
(Commission for Ecosystem Management)
TCD Dublin May 2013
www.iucnredlistofecosystems.org
• Documents, support, case studies, communications.• English, Spanish and French.
IUCN Red List of Ecosystems
@redlisteco
IUCN Red List of Ecosystems
Complement to IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (http://www.iucnredlist.org/)
Red Lists and Red Data Books of Threatened Species
• IUCN maintains threatened species lists since 1950s.
• “Red Data Books” popularized in 1960s: birds & mammals.
• “Information explosion” in 1990s:– Europe: 3,562 known red lists.– >100 countries have produced RL for at least one
taxon (www.nationalredlist.org).
1990s: major paradigm shift
• Species assigned to categories on the basis of quantitative criteria and thresholds.
• Separation of risk assessment (scientific) from definition of conservation priorities (societal process).
Quantitative criteria: Categories for IUCN red lists
Thresholds
Criticallyendangered
Endangered
Vulnerable
Population decline
Small range: fragmented / decline / fluctuation
Very small or restricted population
Quantitative assessment
Reproductive populationsmall and declining
Georgina M. Mace Russell S. Lande
Conservation Priorities
Weighting system
Conservation priorities
Extinction Risk
Logistical Factors
Economic Factors
Societal Values
Distributional Factors
Other Factors (legal, institutional, etc.)
Biological Factors
Analysis, studies, choices, politics,
land use etc
Extinction risk vs. Conservation Priorities
TroupialIcterus icterus
Anopheles sp.
http
://w
ww
.kin
gsna
ke.c
om/w
estin
dian
/icte
rusi
cter
usrid
gway
i2.J
PG
http
://pa
thm
icro
.med
.sc.
edu/
para
sito
logy
/mal
8.jp
ght
tp://
ucce
.ucd
avis
.edu
/file
s/fil
elib
rary
/543
4/19
394.
jpg
Least Concern
Motivation for a “Red List” categories system for ecosystems
• Abundant experience with red list categories for species. Red list “explosion” world-wide (> 100 countries have applied them).
• Increased capability of geographical information systems:– more powerful and inexpensive computers.– cheaper and more user-friendly software packages
(Quantum GIS – free). • Increased availability of remotely-sensed data,
covering 20-40 years.
Why focus on ecosystem status?
• May more effectively represent biodiversity as a whole than individual species.
• Ecosystem loss more apparent than species loss: clean water, food, fuel – service losses
• More time-efficient than species-by-species assessments (<3% species evaluated by IUCN).
• Ecosystem loss and degradation might precede species declines (e.g. extinction debt).
• Combined with species Red List, more powerful assessment of biodiversity status.
Official listing of threatened ecosystems is already taking place
• Gov. of W. Australia: quantitative categories & criteria for threatened ecosystems, also Victoria.
• S. African National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act: identification of over 200 threatened ecosystems.
• Austria, Germany, Finland, Norway & partially in other EU states (based on NATURA 2000, EUNIS). Venezuela, Senegal (draft); and
• Colombia, Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Peru in process
• EC about to launch a tender for Red List of Habitats for Europe process
Mandates from the IUCN World Conservation Congresses (Barcelona
2008, Jeju 2012)
• Consolidation of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems:– Formal adoption of RLE categories and criteria.– Formal allocation of funds/staff.– Global assessment of ecosystems.– Provision of support to national assessments.– View RLS and RLE as an integrated tool (also with
other IUCN key Knowledge Products).
Major scientific challenges
I. What is an ecosystem?
II. When is an ecosystem “extinct”?– Disappearance, transformation or collapse?
III. How to assess ecosystem change?– distribution– function
I. Defining ecosystems
No global classification (but maybe getting nearer), ecosystems may be defined at various scales (raindrop to biosphere)
• Specific set of ecosystems that can be nested (local, national, global) use of different schemes – c.f. NatureServe (Classification & Description of World Formation Types); EUNIS
• Nesting into administrative & other means of dividing – e.g. overall major ecosystem types in a country, or a district, or land/water use
• Trade-offs between conceptual definitions & practical reality!
• We respect & will use national ecosystem classifications, but will seek to nest them
Defining ecosystems – Our Operational basis
Data integration, nesting & access
Data integration, nesting & access
NatureServe
Data integration, nesting & access
NatureServe
Coming to Global consensus on Ecosystems – but not there yet!
RISK – the probability of a bad outcome over a specified time frame
Define the bad outcome•An endpoint to ecosystem decline
– Ecosystems rarely disappear or go “extinct” (cf. species)
– “Collapse”: transformation of identity, loss of defining features (characteristic biota & function), replacement by a novel ecosystem (e.g. invasives, agriculture, plantation)
II. The concept of ‘risk’
• RISK – the probability of a bad outcome over a specified time frame
Specify the time frame for assessing change
II. The concept of risk
• long enough to detect trends, • short enough to inform action, • long enough to consider lags & debts
– past, present, future
III. Assessing ecosystem change Guiding principles for design of a protocol• Evidence-based risk assessment using all
available data & information• Transparent derivation from relevant
ecological theories• Generic concepts and methods adaptable
across a range of organisational & spatial scales and all ecological domains – terrestrial, freshwater, marine, subterranean
• Logically consistent with IUCN Red List criteria for species
III. Assessing Ecosystem Change
Risk model for ecosystems:
• threats to defining features (distribution, biota & function)
• multiple mechanisms (causes of threat)
• 4 symptoms (of decline) = 4 criteria
• plus one overarching criterion (probability of collapse)
Threatening processes
Threatening processes
Risk of loss of characteristic
native biota
A Declining distribution
C Environmt’l degradation
D Altered biotic processes
Ecosystem distribution
Ecosystem function
B Small distribution
E Quantitative risk analysis
Categories
Collapse
Critically Endangered
Endangered
Vulnerable
Near Threatened
Least Concern (so reward, PES)
Data Deficient
Not EvaluatedNE
CO
CR
EN
VU
NT
LC
DD
Threatened
Example of Senegal atNational, Ecosystem or Administrative levels
NE
CR
EN
VU
LC
Barkadji district
1987
2009
Barkedji District RLE in N.E. Senegal – RLE at different
scales
RLE for District
A. Decline in distribution
•Time series data (maps, sightings) 2 observations
•Data quality & interpretation are important– “garbage in, garbage out”