CIFOR-ICRAF aborda retos y oportunidades locales y, al mismo tiempo, ofrece soluciones a los problemas globales relacionados con los bosques, los paisajes, las personas y el planeta.

Aportamos evidencia empírica y soluciones prácticas para transformar el uso de la tierra y la producción de alimentos: conservando y restaurando ecosistemas, respondiendo a las crisis globales del clima, la malnutrición, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la desertificación. En resumen, mejorando la vida de las personas.

CIFOR-ICRAF produce cada año más de 750 publicaciones sobre agroforestería, bosques y cambio climático, restauración de paisajes, derechos, políticas forestales y mucho más, y en varios idiomas. .

CIFOR-ICRAF aborda retos y oportunidades locales y, al mismo tiempo, ofrece soluciones a los problemas globales relacionados con los bosques, los paisajes, las personas y el planeta.

Aportamos evidencia empírica y soluciones prácticas para transformar el uso de la tierra y la producción de alimentos: conservando y restaurando ecosistemas, respondiendo a las crisis globales del clima, la malnutrición, la pérdida de biodiversidad y la desertificación. En resumen, mejorando la vida de las personas.

CIFOR–ICRAF publishes over 750 publications every year on agroforestry, forests and climate change, landscape restoration, rights, forest policy and much more – in multiple languages.

CIFOR–ICRAF addresses local challenges and opportunities while providing solutions to global problems for forests, landscapes, people and the planet.

We deliver actionable evidence and solutions to transform how land is used and how food is produced: conserving and restoring ecosystems, responding to the global climate, malnutrition, biodiversity and desertification crises. In short, improving people’s lives.

Using Red List Indices to monitor extinction risk at national scales

Exportar la cita

The Red List Index (RLI) measures change in the aggregate extinction risk of species. It is a key indicator for tracking progress toward nine of the Aichi and many proposed post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework Targets. Here, we consider two formulations of the RLI used for reporting biodiversity trends at national scales. Disaggregated global RLIs measure changing national contributions to global extinction risk and are currently based on five taxonomic groups, while national RLIs measure changing national extinction risk and are based on taxonomic groups assessed multiple times in country. For 74% of nations, the disaggregated global RLI is currently based on three or fewer taxonomic groups. Meanwhile, national RLIs from selected pilot countries Finland, South Africa, and Brazil are computed from twelve, eight, and nine taxonomic groups, respectively. The national RLI and the disaggregated global RLI measure different aspects of biodiversity, in that the former detects national trends in populations of species for which each country is responsible while the latter provides standardized comparisons of nations' contributions to the global extinction risk of the same species groups. As governments commit to the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, we encourage them to monitor a standard set of taxonomic groups representing different biomes using both RLI formulations to ensure effective target tracking and accurate feedback on their conservation investments.

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12854
Puntuación Altmetric:
Dimensiones Recuento de citas:

Publicaciones relacionadas