Application of the Red‐List Index at a National Level for Multiple Species Groups

Abstract

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List Index (RLI) is recognized as one of the key indicators of trends in the status of species. The red-list assessment done by Finnish authorities of species in Finland is taxonomically one of the most extensive national assessments. We used the Finnish Red Lists from 2000 and 2010 to calculate for the first time the national RLIs for 11 taxonomic groups at different trophic levels and with different life cycles. The red-list index is calculated on the basis of changes in red-list categories and indicates trends in the status of biological diversity of sets of species. The RLI value ranges from 0 to 1. The lower the value the faster the set of species is heading toward extinction. If the value is 1, all species in the set are least concern and if the value is 0, all species are (regionally) extinct. The overall RLI of Finnish species decreased. This means that, in Finland, these taxonomic groups were heading toward extinction faster in 2010 than in 2000. Of the analyzed groups of organisms, RLIs of 5 decreased and RLIs of 6 increased. At the national level, the RLIs and status trends varied markedly between species groups. Thus, we concluded that generalizations on the basis of RLIs of a few taxa only may yield a biased view of ongoing trends in the status of biological diversity at the species level. In addition, one overall RLI that includes many different species groups may also be misleading if variation in RLI among species groups is not considered and if RLI values are not presented separately for each group.

Trends of extinction risk for Lepidoptera in Finland: the first national Red List Index of butterflies and moths

“…The Red List categories get the same weights as proposed by previous authors (Least Concern = 0, Near Threatened = 1, Vulnerable = 2, Endangered = 3, Critically Endangered = 4, Regionally Extinct = 5). We included the Regionally Extinct taxa to the calculations as they have the possibility to re‐spread to the country (see Juslén et al ., , for the discussion). The number of taxa in each category was multiplied by the respective weight.…”

Spatially Explicit Trends in the Global Conservation Status of Vertebrates

“…This is confirmed by applications of the IUCN Red List Index at national scales, calculated from changes in species' threat status according to national red lists. National red list indices have, for example, revealed a recent deterioration in the conservation status of birds in Finland [17] and in Australia [18], but an improvement in Denmark [19] and in China [20].…”

“…But wheras attention to biodiversity indicators at the national [17]–[20] and even sub-national [21],[22] levels is increasing, there is little understanding of conservation performance at these spatial scales adds up to the global trajectories of biodiversity loss.…”

Effectiveness of “Тhe IUCN red list of threatened species” application on a regional scale: current state of the “Red Data books” of Russia

“…It could be useful for the relatively small well-studied countries or for some well-known taxa, but the assessment of big territories or scarcely studied groups always result in difficulties with its use. So, the assessment of biodiversity of Finland (Juslén et al, 2013), birds of Britain (Eaton et al, 2005) or Switzerland (Keller et al, 2005), butterflies of Flanders (Maes et al, 2012), re-assessment of 163 rare species of Asian countries (Millner-Gulland et al, 2006) did not provoke serious disagreements with IUCN schemes. On the contrary, comparison of the IUCN list with US Endangered species act (Harris et al, 2013) or with the red lists of Brazil, Colombia, China and the Philippines (Brito et al, 2010) revealed numerous mismatches.…”