Allocating money for species conservation on the basis of threatened species listings is not the most cost-effective way of promoting recovery or minimizing extinction rates. Using ecological and social factors in addition to threat categories, we designed a decision-support process to assist policy makers in their allocation of resources for the management of native wildlife and to clarify the considerations leading to a priority listing. Each species is scored on three criteria at the scale of the relevant jurisdiction: (1) threat category, (2) consequences of extinction, and (3) potential for successful recovery. This approach provides opportunity for independent input by policy makers and other stakeholders (who weight the relative importance of the criteria) and scientists (who score the species against the criteria). Thus the process explicitly separates societal values from the technical aspects of the decision-making process while acknowledging the legitimacy of both inputs. We applied our technique to two Australian case studies at different spatial scales: the frogs of Queensland (1,728,000 km(2); 116 species) and the mammals of the Wet Tropics bioregion (18,500 km(2); 96 species). We identified 7 frog and 10 mammal species as priorities for conservation. The frogs included 1 of the 9 species classified as endangered under Queensland legislation, 3 of the 10 species classified as vulnerable, 2 of the 22 species classified as rare, and 1 of the 75 species classified as least concern. The mammals identified included 3 of the 6 species classified as endangered, 1 of the 4 species classified as vulnerable, 5 of the 11 species classified as rare, and 1 of the 75 species classified as least concern. The methods we used to identify species were robust to comparisons across the two taxonomic groups. We concluded that (1) our process facilitates comparisons of data required to make transparent, cost-effective, and strategic management decisions across taxonomic groups and (2) the process should be used to short-list species for further discussion rather than for allocating resources per se.

World Heritage is the pinnacle of the recognition of the natural, aesthetic, and cultural value of a place on the planet. Since its inception in 1972, over 1100 sites have received World Heritage status. Many of these places are being challenged by the effects of climate change. Urgent action is needed to build the resilience and adaptive capacity of World Heritage sites in the face of climate change threats to come. The Wet Tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area (WTWHA) is one of the most effectively regulated and managed protected Areas in the world. This includes the scientific evidence upon which that regulation and management is based. However, there is growing evidence that climate change impacts are a clear and present threat to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) upon which the listing is based. This challenges the very concept of OUV and points to the business-as-usual regulation and management not being sufficient to deal with the threat. It also calls for quantum changes in the approaches to protecting natural and cultural heritage and the OUV in World Heritage Areas. This WTWHA case study gives insights into the journey travelled and the pathways that need to be laid out to protect our most cherished internationally recognised natural and cultural landscapes. We demonstrate the importance of evidence in support of advocacy and management action to address the clear impacts of climate change on species, ecosystems, people, and societies living in the WTWHA. The strategic and climate adaptation plans provide the framework upon which these actions take place. Community engagement in the delivery of mitigation, adaptation, and resilience policy is key to the long-term future of the WTWHA.