Integration of ecological–biological thresholds in conservation decision making

In the Anthropocene, coupled human and natural systems dominate and only a few natural systems remain relatively unaffected by human influence. On the one hand, conservation criteria based on areas of minimal human impact are not relevant to much of the biosphere. On the other hand, conservation criteria based on economic factors are problematic with respect to their ability to arrive at operational indicators of well‐being that can be applied in practice over multiple generations. Coupled human and natural systems are subject to economic development which, under current management structures, tends to affect natural systems and cross planetary boundaries. Hence, designing and applying conservation criteria applicable in real‐world systems where human and natural systems need to interact and sustainably coexist is essential. By recognizing the criticality of satisfying basic needs as well as the great uncertainty over the needs and preferences of future generations, we sought to incorporate conservation criteria based on minimal human impact into economic evaluation. These criteria require the conservation of environmental conditions such that the opportunity for intergenerational welfare optimization is maintained. Toward this end, we propose the integration of ecological–biological thresholds into decision making and use as an example the planetary‐boundaries approach. Both conservation scientists and economists must be involved in defining operational ecological–biological thresholds that can be incorporated into economic thinking and reflect the objectives of conservation, sustainability, and intergenerational welfare optimization.     

Establishing IUCN Red List Criteria for Threatened Ecosystems

Abstract: The potential for conservation of individual species has been greatly advanced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) development of objective, repeatable, and transparent criteria for assessing extinction risk that explicitly separate risk assessment from priority setting. At the IV World Conservation Congress in 2008, the process began to develop and implement comparable global standards for ecosystems. A working group established by the IUCN has begun formulating a system of quantitative categories and criteria, analogous to those used for species, for assigning levels of threat to ecosystems at local, regional, and global levels. A final system will require definitions of ecosystems; quantification of ecosystem status; identification of the stages of degradation and loss of ecosystems; proxy measures of risk (criteria); classification thresholds for these criteria; and standardized methods for performing assessments. The system will need to reflect the degree and rate of change in an ecosystem's extent, composition, structure, and function, and have its conceptual roots in ecological theory and empirical research. On the basis of these requirements and the hypothesis that ecosystem risk is a function of the risk of its component species, we propose a set of four criteria: recent declines in distribution or ecological function, historical total loss in distribution or ecological function, small distribution combined with decline, or very small distribution. Most work has focused on terrestrial ecosystems, but comparable thresholds and criteria for freshwater and marine ecosystems are also needed. These are the first steps in an international consultation process that will lead to a unified proposal to be presented at the next World Conservation Congress in 2012.     

Using decision science to evaluate global biodiversity indices

Global biodiversity indices are used to measure environmental change and progress toward conservation goals, yet few indices have been evaluated comprehensively for their capacity to detect trends of interest, such as declines in threatened species or ecosystem function. Using a structured approach based on decision science, we qualitatively evaluated 9 indices commonly used to track biodiversity at global and regional scales against 5 criteria relating to objectives, design, behavior, incorporation of uncertainty, and constraints (e.g., costs and data availability). Evaluation was based on reference literature for indices available at the time of assessment. We identified 4 key gaps in indices assessed: pathways to achieving goals (means objectives) were not always clear or relevant to desired outcomes (fundamental objectives); index testing and understanding of expected behavior was often lacking; uncertainty was seldom acknowledged or accounted for; and costs of implementation were seldom considered. These gaps may render indices inadequate in certain decision-making contexts and are problematic for indices linked with biodiversity targets and sustainability goals. Ensuring that index objectives are clear and their design is underpinned by a model of relevant processes are crucial in addressing the gaps identified by our assessment. Uptake and productive use of indices will be improved if index performance is tested rigorously and assumptions and uncertainties are clearly communicated to end users. This will increase index accuracy and value in tracking biodiversity change and supporting national and global policy decisions, such as the post-2020 global biodiversity framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity.     

Effect of Information Availability on Assessment and Designation of Species at Risk

Abstract: Information required to evaluate the extent to which species are at risk of extinction is usually limited and characterized as highly uncertain. In this context, we define information availability as the presence or absence of information used to determine the value of an ecological variable. We examined which of three hypothetical approaches best matched how levels of risk are assigned to species: (1) precautionary approach in which analysts designate levels of risk regardless of the amount of information available, (2) worst‐case approach in which analysts assign the maximum level of risk possible from the criteria, and (3) insurance approach in which analysts assign poorly known species to a high‐risk category when little information is available. We used the quantitative assessment criteria of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) as a case study. We created a binary (0/1) matrix of all 2.4192 × 10⁷ logical combinations of available information for the 14 ecological variables included in the quantitative criteria. We processed each combination of information availability represented in the matrix with a computer algorithm designed to emulate COSEWIC decision‐making rules. Low information availability was associated with a relatively high frequency of not being able to assign a candidate taxon to a risk category, which does not follow the precautionary principle. Information availability and the level of risk assigned to species were directly related, which is associated with the worst‐case approach, and counter to the insurance approach. Our results suggest that information availability can have a major effect on the level of risk assigned to a species. We recommend a conscious determination of whether such effects are desired, and we recommend the development of methods to explicitly characterize and incorporate information availability and other sources of uncertainty in decision‐making processes.     

Participatory Planning of Interventions to Mitigate Human–Wildlife Conflicts

Abstract: Conservation of wildlife is especially challenging when the targeted species damage crops or livestock, attack humans, or take fish or game. Affected communities may retaliate and destroy wildlife or their habitats. We summarize recommendations from the literature for 13 distinct types of interventions to mitigate these human–wildlife conflicts. We classified eight types as direct (reducing the severity or frequency of encounters with wildlife) and five as indirect (raising human tolerance for encounters with wildlife) interventions. We analyzed general cause‐and‐effect relationships underlying human–wildlife conflicts to clarify the focal point of intervention for each type. To organize the recommendations on interventions we used three standard criteria for feasibility: cost‐effective design, wildlife specificity and selectivity, and sociopolitical acceptability. The literature review and the feasibility criteria were integrated as decision support tools in three multistakeholder workshops. The workshops validated and refined our criteria and helped the participants select interventions. Our approach to planning interventions is systematic, uses standard criteria, and optimizes the participation of experts, policy makers, and affected communities. We argue that conservation action generally will be more effective if the relative merits of alternative interventions are evaluated in an explicit, systematic, and participatory manner.     

Use of standardized methods to improve extinction-risk classification

Standardized classification methods based on quantifiable risk metrics are critical for evaluating extinction threats because they increase objectivity, consistency, and transparency of listing decisions. Yet, in the United States, neither federal nor state agencies use standardized methods for listing species for legal protection, which could put listing decisions at odds with the magnitude of the risk. We used a recently developed set of quantitative risk metrics for California herpetofauna as a case study to highlight discrepancies in listing decisions made without standardized methods. We also combined such quantitative metrics with classification tree analysis to attempt to increase the transparency of previous listing decisions by identifying the criteria that had inherently been given the most weight. Federally listed herpetofauna in California scored significantly higher on the risk-metric spectrum than those not federally listed, whereas state-listed species did not score any higher than species that were not state listed. Based on classification trees, state endemism was the most important predictor of listing status at the state level and distribution trend (decline in a species’ range size) and population trend (decline in a species’ abundance at localized sites) were the most important predictors at the federal level. Our results emphasize the need for governing bodies to adopt standardized methods for assessing conservation risk that are based on quantitative criteria. Such methods allow decision makers to identify criteria inherently given the most weight in determining listing status, thus increasing the transparency of previous listing decisions, and produce an unbiased comparison of conservation threat across all species to promote consistency, efficiency, and effectiveness of the listing process.     

Understanding Publication Bias in Reintroduction Biology by Assessing Translocations of New Zealand's Herpetofauna

The intentional translocation of animals is an important tool for species conservation and ecosystem restoration, but reported success rates are low, particularly for threatened and endangered species. Publication bias further distorts success rates because the results of successful translocations may be more likely to be published than failed translocations. We conducted the first comprehensive review of all published and unpublished translocations of herpetofauna in New Zealand to assess publication bias. Of 74 translocations of 29 species in 25 years, 35 have been reported in the published literature, and the outcomes of 12 have been published. Using a traditional definition of success, publication bias resulted in a gross overestimate of translocation success rates (41.7% and 8.1% for published and all translocations, respectively), but bias against failed translocations was minimal (8.3% and 6.8%, respectively). Publication bias against translocations with uncertain outcomes, the vast majority of projects, was also strong (50.0% and 85.1% for published and all translocations, respectively). Recent translocations were less likely to be published than older translocations. The reasons behind translocations were related to publication. A greater percentage of translocations for conservation and research were published (63.3% and 40.0%, respectively) than translocations for mitigation during land development (10.0%). Translocations conducted in collaboration with a university were more frequently published (82.7% and 24.4%, respectively). To account for some of this publication bias, we reassessed the outcome of each translocation using a standardized definition of success, which takes into consideration the species’ life history and the time since release. Our standardized definition of translocation success provided a more accurate summary of success rates and allows for a more rigorous evaluation of the causes of translocation success and failure in large‐scale reviews. Entendiendo el Sesgo de Publicaciones en la Biología de la Reintroducción Mediante el Estudio de Traslocaciones de la Herpetofauna de Nueva Zelanda     

Status Assessment of New Zealand's Naturally Uncommon Ecosystems

Abstract: Globally, ecosystems are under increasing anthropogenic pressure; thus, many are at risk of elimination. This situation has led the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to propose a quantitative approach to ecosystem‐risk assessment. However, there is a need for their proposed criteria to be evaluated through practical examples spanning a diverse range of ecosystems and scales. We applied the IUCN's ecosystem red‐list criteria, which are based on changes in extent of ecosystems and reductions in ecosystem processes, to New Zealand's 72 naturally uncommon ecosystems. We aimed to test the applicability of the proposed criteria to ecosystems that are naturally uncommon (i.e., those that would naturally occur over a small area in the absence of human activity) and to provide information on the probability of ecosystem elimination so that conservation priorities might be set. We also tested the hypothesis that naturally uncommon ecosystems classified as threatened on the basis of IUCN Red List criteria contain more threatened plant species than those classified as nonthreatened. We identified 18 critically endangered, 17 endangered, and 10 vulnerable ecosystems. We estimated that naturally uncommon ecosystems contained 145 (85%) of mainland New Zealand's taxonomically distinct nationally critical, nationally endangered, and nationally vulnerable plant species, 66 (46%) of which were endemic to naturally uncommon ecosystems. We estimated there was a greater number of threatened plant species (per unit area) in critically endangered ecosystems than in ecosystems classified as nonthreatened. With their high levels of endemism and rapid and relatively well‐documented history of anthropogenic change, New Zealand's naturally uncommon ecosystems provide an excellent case‐study for the ongoing development of international criteria for threatened ecosystems. We suggest that interactions and synergies among decline in area, decline in function, and the scale of application of the criteria be used to improve the IUCN criteria for threatened ecosystems.     

Predicting Recovery Criteria for Threatened and Endangered Plant Species on the Basis of Past Abundances and Biological Traits

Recovery plans for species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act are required to specify measurable criteria that can be used to determine when the species can be delisted. For the 642 listed endangered and threatened plant species that have recovery plans, we applied recursive partitioning methods to test whether the number of individuals or populations required for delisting can be predicted on the basis of distributional and biological traits, previous abundance at multiple time steps, or a combination of traits and previous abundances. We also tested listing status (threatened or endangered) and the year the recovery plan was written as predictors of recovery criteria. We analyzed separately recovery criteria that were stated as number of populations and as number of individuals (population‐based and individual‐based criteria, respectively). Previous abundances alone were relatively good predictors of population‐based recovery criteria. Fewer populations, but a greater proportion of historically known populations, were required to delist species that had few populations at listing compared with species that had more populations at listing. Previous abundances were also good predictors of individual‐based delisting criteria when models included both abundances and traits. The physiographic division in which the species occur was also a good predictor of individual‐based criteria. Our results suggest managers are relying on previous abundances and patterns of decline as guidelines for setting recovery criteria. This may be justifiable in that previous abundances inform managers of the effects of both intrinsic traits and extrinsic threats that interact and determine extinction risk. Predicción de Criterios de Recuperación para Especies de Plantas en Peligro y Amenazadas con Base en Abundancias Pasadas y Atributos Biológicos