Abstract
The signatory countries of the Convention on Biological Diversity agreed to significantly reduce the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. How will we know, however, if we have achieved this goal? Eight groups of hindrances in evaluating the global conservation status of threatened taxon are identified: (1) the extreme heterogeneity and (2) restricted availability of relevant data; (3) the uncertainty in species number and taxonomic division of the given taxon (Linnean shortfall); (4) the fragmentary distribution knowledge (Wallacean shortfall); (5) the incomplete or incorrect red-listing across the whole distribution area; (6) the lack of homogeneous and exhaustive population trend data; (7) the threat knowledge shortfall; (8) the incomplete general biological knowledge on a given taxon. The Linnean and Wallacean shortfalls lay the foundation of all other hindrances. So long as this dramatic shortfall situation does not change, the adequate assessment of the global status for overwhelming majority of extant taxa will remain a utopia.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bini LM, Diniz-Filho JAF, Ranger TFLVB, Bastos RP, Plaza Pinto M (2006) Challenging Wallacean and Linnean shortfalls: knowledge gradients and conservation planning in a biodiversity hotspot. Divers Distrib 12:475–482
Brooks T, Kennedy E (2004) Biodiversity barometers. Nature 431:1046–1047
Brown JH, Lomolino MV (1998) Biogeography. Sinauer Press, Sunderland
Burgman MA, Keith AD, Walshe TV (1999) Uncertainty in comparative risk analysis for threatened Australian plant species. Risk Anal 19:585–598
Butchart SHM, Stattersfield AJ, Bennun SM, Shutes SM, Akçakaya HR, Baillie JEM, Stuart SN, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace GM (2004) Measuring global trends in the status of biodiversity: red list indices for birds. PLoS Biol 2:2294–2304
Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Snyder PK (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–573
Gärdenfors U, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace GM, Rodriguez JP (2001) The application of IUCN red list criteria at regional levels. Conserv Biol 15:1206–1212
Green DM (2005) Designatable units for status assessment of endangered species. Conserv Biol 19:1813–1820
Jenkins M (2003) Prospects for biodiversity. Science 302:1175–1177
Keller V, Zbinden N, Schmid H, Volet B (2005) A case study in applying the IUCN regional guidelines for national Red Lists and justifications for their modification. Conserv Biol 19:1827–1834
Lomolino MV, Heaney LR (eds) (2004) Frontiers of biogeography: new directions in the geography of nature. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland
Marris E (2007) The species and the specious. Nature 446:250–253
Master LL (1991) Assessing threats and seting priorities for conservation. Conserv Biol 5:559–563
McLean IFG, Wight AD, Williams G (1999) The role of legislation in conserving Europe’s threatened species. Conserv Biol 13:966–969
Roberge J-M, Angelstam P (2004) Usefulness of the umbrella species concept as a conservation tool. Conserv Biol 18:76–85
Rodrigues ASL (2006) Are global conservation efforts successful? Science 313:1051–1052
Todd CR, Burgman MA (1998) Assessment of threat and conservation priorities under realistic levels of uncertainty and reliability. Conserv Biol 12:966–974
Whittaker RJ, Araujo MB, Jepson P, Ladle RJ, Watson JEM, Willis KJ (2005) Conservation biogeography: assessment and project. Divers Distrib 11:3–23
Wilson EO (1992) The diversity of life. Belknap Press, Cambridge
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kozlowski, G. Is the global conservation status assessment of a threatened taxon a utopia?. Biodivers Conserv 17, 445–448 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9278-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-007-9278-z