Standard

Problems in Threatened Species Conservation: Differences in National Red Lists Assessments with Global Standards. / Бродский, Андрей Константинович; Абакумов, Евгений Васильевич; Кириллова, Юлия Александровна.

In: Diversity, Vol. 15, No. 3, 337, 27.02.2023.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

BibTeX

@article{d5f2c0b0562c457993ad8a3a2b563340,
title = "Problems in Threatened Species Conservation: Differences in National Red Lists Assessments with Global Standards",
abstract = "The solution of transnational environmental problems in the field of the protection of threatened species and conservation biology directly depends on the level of international communication, which can significantly decrease due to differences in Red Lists and Red Data Books of different levels. In order to identify the similarities and differences in approaches to the assessment ofnational Red Lists and Books of the Baltic Sea region countries (Russia, Denmark, Germany, Lithuania, Finland, Poland and Sweden) with the IUCN Red List, a comparative analysis was carried out. It was determined that the level of discrepancy between Red Data Lists and Books varies considerably,with differences in the scales of species categories, species lists and categories. Most of the threatened species at the national level are not listed under the IUCN Red List, while species in a more stringent category at the national level prevail (37% and 3% on average, respectively). However, national Red Lists and Red Data Books do not take into account the global trend of the risk of extinction of species. The percentage of species with insufficient information to define a category at the national or global level ranges from 6% to 28%. These discrepancies make it difficult to exchange data on threatenedspecies and create a unified database with information on protected species at different levels and, therefore, reduce the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation activities at regional and internationallevels. The results also demonstrate that countries have an international responsibility to conserve a species, and the cases identified can provide useful additional information to guide a national conservation strategy.",
keywords = "red lists, red data books, Baltic region, threatened species;, species categories",
author = "Бродский, {Андрей Константинович} and Абакумов, {Евгений Васильевич} and Кириллова, {Юлия Александровна}",
note = "Brodsky, A.; Abakumov, E.; Kirillova, I. Problems in Threatened Species Conservation: Differences in National Red Lists Assessments with Global Standards. Diversity 2023, 15, 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/ d15030337",
year = "2023",
month = feb,
day = "27",
doi = "10.3390/d15030337",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
journal = "Diversity",
issn = "1424-2818",
publisher = "MDPI AG",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Problems in Threatened Species Conservation: Differences in National Red Lists Assessments with Global Standards

AU - Бродский, Андрей Константинович

AU - Абакумов, Евгений Васильевич

AU - Кириллова, Юлия Александровна

N1 - Brodsky, A.; Abakumov, E.; Kirillova, I. Problems in Threatened Species Conservation: Differences in National Red Lists Assessments with Global Standards. Diversity 2023, 15, 337. https://doi.org/10.3390/ d15030337

PY - 2023/2/27

Y1 - 2023/2/27

N2 - The solution of transnational environmental problems in the field of the protection of threatened species and conservation biology directly depends on the level of international communication, which can significantly decrease due to differences in Red Lists and Red Data Books of different levels. In order to identify the similarities and differences in approaches to the assessment ofnational Red Lists and Books of the Baltic Sea region countries (Russia, Denmark, Germany, Lithuania, Finland, Poland and Sweden) with the IUCN Red List, a comparative analysis was carried out. It was determined that the level of discrepancy between Red Data Lists and Books varies considerably,with differences in the scales of species categories, species lists and categories. Most of the threatened species at the national level are not listed under the IUCN Red List, while species in a more stringent category at the national level prevail (37% and 3% on average, respectively). However, national Red Lists and Red Data Books do not take into account the global trend of the risk of extinction of species. The percentage of species with insufficient information to define a category at the national or global level ranges from 6% to 28%. These discrepancies make it difficult to exchange data on threatenedspecies and create a unified database with information on protected species at different levels and, therefore, reduce the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation activities at regional and internationallevels. The results also demonstrate that countries have an international responsibility to conserve a species, and the cases identified can provide useful additional information to guide a national conservation strategy.

AB - The solution of transnational environmental problems in the field of the protection of threatened species and conservation biology directly depends on the level of international communication, which can significantly decrease due to differences in Red Lists and Red Data Books of different levels. In order to identify the similarities and differences in approaches to the assessment ofnational Red Lists and Books of the Baltic Sea region countries (Russia, Denmark, Germany, Lithuania, Finland, Poland and Sweden) with the IUCN Red List, a comparative analysis was carried out. It was determined that the level of discrepancy between Red Data Lists and Books varies considerably,with differences in the scales of species categories, species lists and categories. Most of the threatened species at the national level are not listed under the IUCN Red List, while species in a more stringent category at the national level prevail (37% and 3% on average, respectively). However, national Red Lists and Red Data Books do not take into account the global trend of the risk of extinction of species. The percentage of species with insufficient information to define a category at the national or global level ranges from 6% to 28%. These discrepancies make it difficult to exchange data on threatenedspecies and create a unified database with information on protected species at different levels and, therefore, reduce the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation activities at regional and internationallevels. The results also demonstrate that countries have an international responsibility to conserve a species, and the cases identified can provide useful additional information to guide a national conservation strategy.

KW - red lists

KW - red data books

KW - Baltic region

KW - threatened species;

KW - species categories

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/d6c1b7a0-d2a6-32b0-88fc-e1348cd4f780/

U2 - 10.3390/d15030337

DO - 10.3390/d15030337

M3 - Article

VL - 15

JO - Diversity

JF - Diversity

SN - 1424-2818

IS - 3

M1 - 337

ER -

ID: 103947038