A new method for calculating Risk Tolerance in the assessment of threatened flora

Species Conservation Assessments in Oceanic Islands: the Consequences of Precautionary Versus Evidentiary Attitudes

“…Although the identification of conservation priorities considers a wide range of criteria such as phylogenetic uniqueness, cost of recovery and probability of success (e.g., Mooers et al 2008;Martin et al 2010), conservation status is important because it is often used as prioritization criteria itself, or even serve as a filter to select candidate species for prioritization (Ambal et al 2012;Croxall et al 2012;Dawson et al 2015). In this context, our study adds to previous evidence highlighting the importance of attitudes to uncertainty and risk for the correct allocation of conservation resources (Akçakaya et al 2000;Alonso-Redondo et al 2013). Therefore, we suggest that: (1) assessments should report the range of plausible categories rather than the single most plausible category, thereby recognizing the potential impact of uncertainty, (2) the attitudes to risk should be explicitly documented, eventually by specifying the risk tolerance value (or values) assumed, and (3) in line with IUCN recommendations, assessments should explore variation in species assignments when changing the risk tolerance along the precautionary-evidentiary gradient.…”

“…Like most other studies evaluating species conservation status (e.g., Akçakaya et al 2000;Lewis & Senior 2011;Alonso-Redondo et al 2013;Romeiras et al 2014), our assessment was greatly influenced by uncertainties in input data, which affected species threat classifications in relation to changes in risk tolerance. Although most species were assigned to a single-threat category, there was often a wide range of plausible categories representing uncertainty.…”

“…; Alonso‐Redondo et al . ). Specifically, we conducted different assessments for each species varying the risk tolerance from RT = 0.3 to RT = 0.8, at 0.1 intervals.…”

“…Uncertainty in assessments was due to the interval estimates used for some parameters (e.g., population size), and because population and range trends were often coded as unknown. To evaluate the consequences of precautionary versus evidentiary assessments, we used the Risk Tolerance (RT) parameter, which ranges from 0 (risk-averse) to 1 (risk-prone), and it was introduced in IUCN Red List assessments to deal with differences in attitude toward uncertainty (Akçakaya et al 2000;Alonso-Redondo et al 2013). Specifically, we conducted different assessments for each species varying the risk tolerance from RT = 0.3 to RT = 0.8, at 0.1 intervals.…”

A combined approach of methods for determining the regional assessment of the disjunct plant Primula pedemontana in Spain

“…The RAMAS Red List Professional 3.0.1.0 software (Akçakaya & Ferson 2007) was used in accordance with the recommendations of Alonso-Redondo et al (2012, 2013.…”