Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Conserv Biol ; 35(6): 1833-1849, 2021 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34289517

RESUMEN

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a "Green List of Species" (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species' progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species' viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species' recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.


RESUMEN: Reconociendo que era imperativo evaluar la recuperación de especies y el impacto de la conservación, la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) convocó en 2012 al desarrollo de una "Lista Verde de Especies" (ahora el Estatus Verde de las Especies de la UICN). Un marco de referencia preliminar de una Lista Verde de Especies para evaluar el progreso de las especies hacia la recuperación, publicado en 2018, proponía 2 componentes separados pero interconectados: un método estandarizado (i.e., medición en relación con puntos de referencia de la viabilidad de especies, funcionalidad y distribución antes del impacto) para determinar el estatus de recuperación actual (puntuación de recuperación de la especie) y la aplicación de ese método para estimar impactos en el pasado y potenciales de conservación basados en 4 medidas (legado de conservación, dependencia de conservación, ganancia de conservación y potencial de recuperación). Probamos el marco de referencia con 181 especies representantes de diversos taxa, historias de vida, biomas, y categorías (riesgo de extinción) en la Lista Roja de la IUCN. Con base en la distribución observada de la puntuación de recuperación de las especies, proponemos las siguientes categorías de recuperación de la especie: totalmente recuperada, ligeramente mermada, moderadamente mermada, mayormente mermada, gravemente mermada, extinta en estado silvestre, e inderterminada. Cincuenta y nueve por ciento de las especies se consideraron mayormente o gravemente mermada. Aunque hubo una relación negativa entre el riesgo de extinción y la puntuación de recuperación de la especie, la variación fue considerable. Algunas especies en las categorías de riesgo bajas fueron evaluadas como más lejos de recuperarse que aquellas con alto riesgo. Esto enfatiza que la recuperación de especies es diferente conceptualmente al riesgo de extinción y refuerza la utilidad del Estado Verde de las Especies de la UICN para comprender integralmente el estatus de conservación de especies. Aunque el riesgo de extinción no predijo el legado de conservación, la dependencia de conservación o la ganancia de conservación, se correlacionó positivamente con la potencial de recuperación. Solo 1.7% de las especies probadas fue categorizado como cero en los 4 indicadores de impacto de la conservación, lo que indica que la conservación ha jugado, o jugará, un papel en la mejoría o mantenimiento del estatus de la especie la gran mayoría de ellas. Con base en nuestros resultados, diseñamos una versión actualizada del marco de referencia para la evaluación que introduce la opción de utilizar una línea de base dinámica para evaluar los impactos futuros de la conservación en el corto plazo y redefine corto plazo como 10 años.


Asunto(s)
Especies en Peligro de Extinción , Extinción Biológica , Animales , Biodiversidad , Conservación de los Recursos Naturales , Ecosistema , Riesgo
2.
Conserv Biol ; 30(6): 1338-1346, 2016 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27197021

RESUMEN

Conservation actions, such as habitat protection, attempt to halt the loss of threatened species and help their populations recover. The efficiency and the effectiveness of actions have been examined individually. However, conservation actions generally occur simultaneously, so the full suite of implemented conservation actions should be assessed. We used the conservation actions underway for all threatened and near-threatened birds of the world (International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species) to assess which biological (related to taxonomy and ecology) and anthropogenic (related to geoeconomics) factors were associated with the implementation of different classes of conservation actions. We also assessed which conservation actions were associated with population increases in the species targeted. Extinction-risk category was the strongest single predictor of the type of conservation actions implemented, followed by landmass type (continent, oceanic island, etc.) and generation length. Species targeted by invasive nonnative species control or eradication programs, ex situ conservation, international legislation, reintroduction, or education, and awareness-raising activities were more likely to have increasing populations. These results illustrate the importance of developing a predictive science of conservation actions and the relative benefits of each class of implemented conservation action for threatened and near-threatened birds worldwide.


Asunto(s)
Aves , Conservación de los Recursos Naturales , Especies en Peligro de Extinción , Animales , Ecosistema , Islas
3.
Conserv Biol ; 30(4): 867-82, 2016 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26711716

RESUMEN

Approaches to prioritize conservation actions are gaining popularity. However, limited empirical evidence exists on which species might benefit most from threat mitigation and on what combination of threats, if mitigated simultaneously, would result in the best outcomes for biodiversity. We devised a way to prioritize threat mitigation at a regional scale with empirical evidence based on predicted changes to population dynamics-information that is lacking in most threat-management prioritization frameworks that rely on expert elicitation. We used dynamic occupancy models to investigate the effects of multiple threats (tree cover, grazing, and presence of an hyperaggressive competitor, the Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala) on bird-population dynamics in an endangered woodland community in southeastern Australia. The 3 threatening processes had different effects on different species. We used predicted patch-colonization probabilities to estimate the benefit to each species of removing one or more threats. We then determined the complementary set of threat-mitigation strategies that maximized colonization of all species while ensuring that redundant actions with little benefit were avoided. The single action that resulted in the highest colonization was increasing tree cover, which increased patch colonization by 5% and 11% on average across all species and for declining species, respectively. Combining Noisy Miner control with increasing tree cover increased species colonization by 10% and 19% on average for all species and for declining species respectively, and was a higher priority than changing grazing regimes. Guidance for prioritizing threat mitigation is critical in the face of cumulative threatening processes. By incorporating population dynamics in prioritization of threat management, our approach helps ensure funding is not wasted on ineffective management programs that target the wrong threats or species.


Asunto(s)
Biodiversidad , Aves , Conservación de los Recursos Naturales , Animales , Australia , Bosques
4.
Conserv Biol ; 29(4): 1228-1234, 2015 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25704365

RESUMEN

Effective ecosystem-based management requires understanding ecosystem responses to multiple human threats, rather than focusing on single threats. To understand ecosystem responses to anthropogenic threats holistically, it is necessary to know how threats affect different components within ecosystems and ultimately alter ecosystem functioning. We used a case study of a Mediterranean seagrass (Posidonia oceanica) food web and expert knowledge elicitation in an application of the initial steps of a framework for assessment of cumulative human impacts on food webs. We produced a conceptual seagrass food web model, determined the main trophic relationships, identified the main threats to the food web components, and assessed the components' vulnerability to those threats. Some threats had high (e.g., coastal infrastructure) or low impacts (e.g., agricultural runoff) on all food web components, whereas others (e.g., introduced carnivores) had very different impacts on each component. Partitioning the ecosystem into its components enabled us to identify threats previously overlooked and to reevaluate the importance of threats commonly perceived as major. By incorporating this understanding of system vulnerability with data on changes in the state of each threat (e.g., decreasing domestic pollution and increasing fishing) into a food web model, managers may be better able to estimate and predict cumulative human impacts on ecosystems and to prioritize conservation actions.


Hacia un Marco de Trabajo para la Evaluación y el Manejo de los Impactos Humanos Acumulativos sobre las Redes Alimenticias Marinas Resumen El manejo efectivo con base en los ecosistemas requiere entender la respuesta de los ecosistemas a múltiples amenazas humanas en lugar de enfocarse en amenazas individuales. Para entender holísticamente la respuesta de los ecosistemas a las múltiples amenazas antropogénicas es necesario saber cómo estas amenazas afectan a los diferentes componentes dentro de los ecosistemas y cómo alteran finalmente el funcionamiento de los ecosistemas. Usamos el estudio de caso de la red alimenticia del pasto marino del Mediterráneo (Posidonia oceanica) y la obtención de conocimiento de expertos en una aplicación de los pasos iniciales de un método para la evaluación de los impactos humanos acumulativos sobre las redes alimenticias. Produjimos un modelo de red alimenticia de pastos marinos, determinamos las principales relaciones tróficas, identificamos a las principales amenazas para los componentes de la red y evaluamos la vulnerabilidad de los componentes a esas amenazas. Algunas amenazas tuvieron impactos altos (p. ej.: infraestructura costera) o bajos (p. ej.: escorrentía agrícola) sobre todos los componentes de la red, mientras que otros (p. ej.: carnívoros introducidos) tuvieron impactos muy diferentes sobre cada componente. Partir al ecosistema en sus componentes nos permitió identificar amenazas no vistas previamente y reevaluar la importancia de las amenazas percibidas comúnmente como mayores. Al incorporar este entendimiento de la vulnerabilidad del sistema con datos sobre los cambios en el estado de cada amenaza (p. ej.: disminución de la contaminación doméstica e incremento de la pesca) al modelo de red alimenticia, los manejadores pueden ser capaces de estimar y predecir de mejor manera los impactos humanos acumulativos sobre los ecosistemas y priorizar las acciones de conservación.


Asunto(s)
Alismatales/fisiología , Conservación de los Recursos Naturales/métodos , Cadena Alimentaria , Explotaciones Pesqueras , Humanos , Mar Mediterráneo , Contaminación Química del Agua/efectos adversos
5.
Conserv Biol ; 28(6): 1484-96, 2014 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25381959

RESUMEN

An opportunity represents an advantageous combination of circumstances that allows goals to be achieved. We reviewed the nature of opportunity and how it manifests in different subsystems (e.g., biophysical, social, political, economic) as conceptualized in other bodies of literature, including behavior, adoption, entrepreneur, public policy, and resilience literature. We then developed a multidisciplinary conceptualization of conservation opportunity. We identified 3 types of conservation opportunity: potential, actors remove barriers to problem solving by identifying the capabilities within the system that can be manipulated to create support for conservation action; traction, actors identify windows of opportunity that arise from exogenous shocks, events, or changes that remove barriers to solving problems; and existing, everything is in place for conservation action (i.e., no barriers exist) and an actor takes advantage of the existing circumstances to solve problems. Different leverage points characterize each type of opportunity. Thus, unique stages of opportunity identification or creation and exploitation exist: characterizing the system and defining problems; identifying potential solutions; assessing the feasibility of solutions; identifying or creating opportunities; and taking advantage of opportunities. These stages can be undertaken independently or as part of a situational analysis and typically comprise the first stage, but they can also be conducted iteratively throughout a conservation planning process. Four types of entrepreneur can be identified (business, policy, social, and conservation), each possessing attributes that enable them to identify or create opportunities and take advantage of them. We examined how different types of conservation opportunity manifest in a social-ecological system (the Great Barrier Reef) and how they can be taken advantage of. Our multidisciplinary conceptualization of conservation opportunity strengthens and legitimizes the concept.


Asunto(s)
Conservación de los Recursos Naturales/métodos , Conservación de los Recursos Naturales/economía , Estudios de Factibilidad , Modelos Teóricos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA