Impacts of the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems on Conservation Policy and Practice

Abstract

In 2014, the International Union for Conservation of Nature adopted the Red List of Ecosystems (IUCN RLE) criteria as the global standard for assessing risks to terrestrial, marine, and freshwater ecosystems. Identifying and quantifying the impacts of biodiversity assessments on the status of nature is key to justifying continued investment in assessments and enabling strategic planning to maximize future impact. In this policy perspective, we use an established impact evaluation framework to identify the impacts of the IUCN RLE since its inception. To date, 1,397 ecosystem units in 100 countries have been assessed following the IUCN RLE protocol. Systematic assessments are complete or underway in more than 25 countries and two continental regions (the Americas and Europe). Countries with established ecosystem red lists have already used them to inform legislation, land-use planning, protected area expansion, monitoring and reporting, and ecosystem management. IUCN RLE indices based on systematic assessments have high potential to inform global biodiversity reporting for the Aichi Targets and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Expanding the coverage of IUCN RLE assessments, building capacity to undertake them, and establishing stronger policy instruments to manage red-listed ecosystems will be key to maximizing conservation impacts over the coming decades.

Ecosystem indices to support global biodiversity conservation

“…( Table 1) (Bland et al, 2019). In particular, indicators based on change in ecosystem area and health are strongly aligned with targets under the CBD and SDGs and associated indicators based on the retention of intact ecosystems (Maron, Simmonds, & Watson, 2018) and goals surrounding restoration.…”

“…Indicators calculated at national scales inform national conservation legislation, policy, planning, and reporting (Jones et al., ). Most RLE assessments are at the national level and used to inform decision making and reporting the status of threatened ecosystems against the National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) (Bland et al., ). Continental‐ and global‐level indicators provide broader information about biodiversity loss and can increase public awareness (Jones et al., ).…”

“…The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Ecosystems (RLE) is a valuable data source on ecosystem status (Brooks et al., ; Figure ). Over 2,800 assessments have been conducted in 100 countries across all continents (Bland et al., ). Assessments examine key symptoms of decline to estimate ecosystem collapse risk (Bland, Keith, Miller, Murray, & Rodríguez, et al., ; Figure ; Supporting Information Appendix A).…”

Essential Indicators for Measuring Area-Based Conservation Effectiveness in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework

“…We recommend that the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework recognizes the mission-critical values of such remote sensed data and calls for the development of scientifically robust products towards this end. The satellites to deliver such data are already in orbit and existing efforts are providing a foundation to build on for near-future development of a comprehensive ecosystem-classification which goes beyond forests to cover all ecosystems and biomes -including freshwater and marine (Bland et al 2019;Kissling et al 2018).…”

Operationalizing the IUCN Red List of Ecosystems in public policy

“…In contrast, ecosystem‐level diversity has been neglected, although the recently developed Red List of Ecosystems (RLE) offers an opportunity to accomplish internationally agreed conservation goals such as Aichi Targets and Sustainable Development Goals, and to correct the extinction debt at this level of ecological organization (Bland, Keith, Miller, Murray, & Rodríguez, ). Methodological guidelines have been developed to support applications of national and subnational RLE (Bland et al., ; Keith et al., ) and the initial policy impact has been substantial (Bland et al., ); however, there is yet little guidance on how to operationalize RLE in public policy (Keith et al., ).…”