9.9. Klok

Keynote Presentations from the 2nd ALTER-Net Summer School, Peyresq 1 - 13 September 2007

Abstract

European biodiversity is under threat. To mitigate further loss, the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) defined the 2010 Biodiversity Target which was endorsed by the European Community. Aggregation of biodiversity indicators into indices may generate valuable instruments to monitor progress towards the 2010 Target. Moreover, given their relative comprehensibility aggregated indices are helpful policy instruments to communicate biodiversity to the wider public. In this paper we discuss the scientific quality of five indices for biodiversity. Three of these assess the status of biodiversity (Natural Capital Index, Red List Index and Species Trend Index) one pressure on biodiversity (Critical Load Exceedance) and one the functionality and integrity of ecosystems (Connectivity Index). We interviewed policymakers to rank the use and appreciation of these indices as instruments to communicate biodiversity status and change. Moreover, we explored the added value of current ongoing monitoring programs in Long Term Ecological Research-like (LTER-like) sites for the data availability and application of the indices at a European scale. The results show that the indices currently have scientific approval and are used and appreciated by policy makers, and that LTER-like sites could have added value in the parameterization of indices.

Recommended background literature on this presentation

• Baillie J, Groombridge B (eds.) (1996) 1996 IUCN Red List of threatened animals. IUCN Switzerland Gland.
• Balmford A, Bennun L, ten Brink B, Cooper D, Côté IL, Crane P, Dobson A, Dudley N, Dutton I, Green RE, Gregory RD, Harrison J, Kennedy ET, Kremen C, Leader-Williams N, Lovejoy TE, Mace G, May R, Mayaux P, Morling P, Phillips J, Taylor KR, Ricketts TH, Rodríguez JP, Sanjayan M, Schei PJ, van Jaarsveld AS, Walther BA (2005) The Convention on Biological Diversity’s 2010 Target. Science 307:212-213, doi 10.1126/science.1106281
• Butchart SHM, Stattersfield AJ, Baillie J, Bennun LA, Stuart SN, Akçakaya HR, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace GM (2005) Using red list indices to measure progress towards the 2010 target and beyond. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 360:255-268 doi 10.1098/rstb.2004.1583.
• Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)http://www.biodiv.org/default.shtml
• European Environment Agency (2006) Progress towards halting the loss of biodiversity by 2010. EEA report No 5. (pdf: 19MB)
• Fifth Ministerial Conference Environment for Europe (2003) Kyiv Resolution on Biodiversity. ECE/CEP/96.
• Hilton-Taylor C (2000) 2000 IUCN Red lists of threatened species. IUCN Switzerland Gland.
• IUCN (World Conservation Union) 2001. IUCN Red list categories. Version 3.1. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, United Kingdom. http://www.iucnredlist.org/info/categories_criteria2001.
• Lamoreux J, Akçakaya HR, Bennun L, Collar NJ, Boitani L, Brackett D, Bräutigam A, Brooks TM, da Fonseca GAB, Mittermeier RA, Rylands AB, Gärdenfors U, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace G, Stein BA, Stuart1 S (2003) Value of the IUCN Red List. Trends Ecol Evol 18:214-215 doi doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00090-9.
• Mace GM (2005) An index of intactness. Nature 434:32-33, doi 10.1038/434032a.
• Scholes RJ, Biggs R (2005) A biodiversity intactness index. Nature 434:45-49 doi 10.1038/nature03289.
• Tischendorf L, Fahrig L, (2000) On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos 90:7–19 doi 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.900102.x