Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species‐level data...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Conservation biology 2022-04, Vol.36 (2), p.e13844-n/a |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | n/a |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | e13844 |
container_title | Conservation biology |
container_volume | 36 |
creator | Marsh, Sophie M. E. Hoffmann, Michael Burgess, Neil D. Brooks, Thomas M. Challender, Daniel W. S. Cremona, Patricia J. Hilton‐Taylor, Craig Micheaux, Flore Lafaye Lichtenstein, Gabriela Roe, Dilys Böhm, Monika |
description | Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species‐level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data‐sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28–29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752–2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597–1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one‐third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use‐related red‐list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.
Predominio del Uso Sustentable y No Sustentable de Especies Silvestres Inferido a partir de la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN
Resumen
La explotación insostenible de especies silvestres representa una verdadera amenaza para la biodiversidad y el sustento de las comunidades locales y los pueblos indígenas. Sin embargo, el uso sostenible gestionado tiene el potencial para prevenir extinciones, auxiliar en la recuperación y satisfacer las necesidades humanas. Analizamos los datos a nivel de especie correspondientes a 30,923 especies de 13 grupos taxonómicos localizados en la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la Unión Internacional para |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/cobi.13844 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9299080</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2579089001</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-8ba66a953a24476cb80e2ac9c6c5c0bcc224094197a192cfeaaa8279ae048e43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9v0zAYhy0EYt3gwgdAlrgwpI7Xjp3YF6RRAatUMQTlbDnuG-opdTo7Kdq3x1nGNHbAF0s_P37850fIKwZnLI_3rqv9GSuUEE_IjElezFlV6KdkBkqpuVKaH5HjlK4AQEsmnpOjQpQgoYIZGb5FPNgWg0PaNTQNqbc-2LpFasOGDuFhMqRb6LdvNzTt0XlM1IcGY8QNbWK3o_0W6fLn4iv9npOVT_3Ir7cRbY8hRz-mXS_Is8a2CV_ezSdk_fnTenExX11-WS7OV3MnRCnmqrZlabUsLBeiKl2tALl12pVOOqid41yAFkxXlmnuGrTWKl5piyAUiuKEfJi0-6He4cZh6KNtzT76nY03prPe_LsS_Nb86g5Gc61BQRacToLto20X5yszZlCUkvMCDiyzb-8Oi931gKk3O58ctq0N2A3JcFllpwYY0TeP0KtuiCH_hOGlBCilZEWm3k2Ui11KEZv7GzAwY_FmLN7cFp_h1w-feo_-bToDbAJye3jzH5VZXH5cTtI_ybW4vg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2650065513</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Marsh, Sophie M. E. ; Hoffmann, Michael ; Burgess, Neil D. ; Brooks, Thomas M. ; Challender, Daniel W. S. ; Cremona, Patricia J. ; Hilton‐Taylor, Craig ; Micheaux, Flore Lafaye ; Lichtenstein, Gabriela ; Roe, Dilys ; Böhm, Monika</creator><creatorcontrib>Marsh, Sophie M. E. ; Hoffmann, Michael ; Burgess, Neil D. ; Brooks, Thomas M. ; Challender, Daniel W. S. ; Cremona, Patricia J. ; Hilton‐Taylor, Craig ; Micheaux, Flore Lafaye ; Lichtenstein, Gabriela ; Roe, Dilys ; Böhm, Monika</creatorcontrib><description>Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species‐level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data‐sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28–29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752–2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597–1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one‐third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use‐related red‐list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.
Predominio del Uso Sustentable y No Sustentable de Especies Silvestres Inferido a partir de la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN
Resumen
La explotación insostenible de especies silvestres representa una verdadera amenaza para la biodiversidad y el sustento de las comunidades locales y los pueblos indígenas. Sin embargo, el uso sostenible gestionado tiene el potencial para prevenir extinciones, auxiliar en la recuperación y satisfacer las necesidades humanas. Analizamos los datos a nivel de especie correspondientes a 30,923 especies de 13 grupos taxonómicos localizados en la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) para investigar los patrones del uso intencional de recursos biológicos. Usamos el 40% de las especies analizadas (10,098 de 25,009 especies pertenecientes a diez grupos taxonómicos con suficiente información). Los principales motivos para el uso de vida silvestre fueron como mascotas, animales de exhibición, horticultura y consumo humano. El uso intencional está actualmente contribuyendo a un riesgo elevado de extinción para 28 ‐ 29% de las especies amenazadas o casi amenazadas (NT) (2,752 ‐ 2,848 de 9,753 especies). El uso intencional también afectó al 16% de todas las especies utilizadas (1,597 ‐ 1,631 de 10,098). Sin embargo, el 72% de las especies utilizadas (7,291 de 10, 098) pertenecen a la categoría de preocupación menor, de las cuales casi la mitad (3,469) también contaban con tendencias poblacionales estables o de mejoría. Las especies restantes no estaban documentadas como amenazadas por el uso de recursos biológicos, incluyendo al menos 172 especies amenazadas o NT con poblaciones estables o en aumento. Casi un tercio de las especies que tienen documentado el uso como una amenaza no cuentan con acciones de manejo para abordar directamente esta amenaza. Para mejorar la información de la lista roja relacionada con el uso, sugerimos pequeñas modificaciones a los esquemas relevantes de clasificación y la documentación de apoyo requerida. Nuestros descubrimientos sobre el predominio del uso sustentable y no sustentable, y la variación entre taxones, puede orientar la formulación de políticas internacionales, incluyendo a la Plataforma Intergubernamental de Políticas Científicas sobre Biodiversidad y Servicios Ecosistémicos, el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica y la Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas.
Article impact statement: Of 10,098 species on the IUCN Red List that are harvested, use is likely biologically unsustainable for 16% and sustainable for 34%.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0888-8892</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1523-1739</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13844</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34605070</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>acción de conservación ; Animals ; Biodiversity ; Biodiversity and Ecology ; CITES ; CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) ; Commerce ; conservation action ; Conservation of Natural Resources ; Contributed Paper ; Contributed Papers ; Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica ; Convention on Biological Diversity ; Ecosystem ; Ecosystem services ; Endangered & extinct species ; Endangered Species ; Environmental Sciences ; Exploitation ; explotación ; fauna silvestre ; Horticulture ; Indigenous peoples ; International policies ; International policy ; International trade ; Internationality ; IPBES ; Livelihoods ; Local communities ; Nature conservation ; Pets ; Prevalence ; Rare species ; Species extinction ; Sustainability ; Sustainable use ; Taxonomy ; Threatened species ; unsustainable uses ; uso sustentable ; usos no sustentables ; wildlife ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>Conservation biology, 2022-04, Vol.36 (2), p.e13844-n/a</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology</rights><rights>2021 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.</rights><rights>2021. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-8ba66a953a24476cb80e2ac9c6c5c0bcc224094197a192cfeaaa8279ae048e43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-8ba66a953a24476cb80e2ac9c6c5c0bcc224094197a192cfeaaa8279ae048e43</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0585-0832 ; 0000-0003-4785-2254 ; 0000-0001-8159-3116 ; 0000-0001-6084-2048 ; 0000-0002-0606-1715 ; 0000-0003-1163-1425 ; 0000-0003-0662-3260 ; 0000-0002-6547-6427 ; 0000-0002-6197-8841 ; 0000-0002-1717-0941 ; 0000-0001-5025-6467</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fcobi.13844$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fcobi.13844$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,782,786,887,1419,27931,27932,45581,45582</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34605070$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-03652230$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Marsh, Sophie M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffmann, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, Neil D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brooks, Thomas M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Challender, Daniel W. S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cremona, Patricia J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hilton‐Taylor, Craig</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Micheaux, Flore Lafaye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lichtenstein, Gabriela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roe, Dilys</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Böhm, Monika</creatorcontrib><title>Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species</title><title>Conservation biology</title><addtitle>Conserv Biol</addtitle><description>Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species‐level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data‐sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28–29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752–2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597–1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one‐third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use‐related red‐list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.
Predominio del Uso Sustentable y No Sustentable de Especies Silvestres Inferido a partir de la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN
Resumen
La explotación insostenible de especies silvestres representa una verdadera amenaza para la biodiversidad y el sustento de las comunidades locales y los pueblos indígenas. Sin embargo, el uso sostenible gestionado tiene el potencial para prevenir extinciones, auxiliar en la recuperación y satisfacer las necesidades humanas. Analizamos los datos a nivel de especie correspondientes a 30,923 especies de 13 grupos taxonómicos localizados en la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) para investigar los patrones del uso intencional de recursos biológicos. Usamos el 40% de las especies analizadas (10,098 de 25,009 especies pertenecientes a diez grupos taxonómicos con suficiente información). Los principales motivos para el uso de vida silvestre fueron como mascotas, animales de exhibición, horticultura y consumo humano. El uso intencional está actualmente contribuyendo a un riesgo elevado de extinción para 28 ‐ 29% de las especies amenazadas o casi amenazadas (NT) (2,752 ‐ 2,848 de 9,753 especies). El uso intencional también afectó al 16% de todas las especies utilizadas (1,597 ‐ 1,631 de 10,098). Sin embargo, el 72% de las especies utilizadas (7,291 de 10, 098) pertenecen a la categoría de preocupación menor, de las cuales casi la mitad (3,469) también contaban con tendencias poblacionales estables o de mejoría. Las especies restantes no estaban documentadas como amenazadas por el uso de recursos biológicos, incluyendo al menos 172 especies amenazadas o NT con poblaciones estables o en aumento. Casi un tercio de las especies que tienen documentado el uso como una amenaza no cuentan con acciones de manejo para abordar directamente esta amenaza. Para mejorar la información de la lista roja relacionada con el uso, sugerimos pequeñas modificaciones a los esquemas relevantes de clasificación y la documentación de apoyo requerida. Nuestros descubrimientos sobre el predominio del uso sustentable y no sustentable, y la variación entre taxones, puede orientar la formulación de políticas internacionales, incluyendo a la Plataforma Intergubernamental de Políticas Científicas sobre Biodiversidad y Servicios Ecosistémicos, el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica y la Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas.
Article impact statement: Of 10,098 species on the IUCN Red List that are harvested, use is likely biologically unsustainable for 16% and sustainable for 34%.</description><subject>acción de conservación</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Biodiversity and Ecology</subject><subject>CITES</subject><subject>CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species)</subject><subject>Commerce</subject><subject>conservation action</subject><subject>Conservation of Natural Resources</subject><subject>Contributed Paper</subject><subject>Contributed Papers</subject><subject>Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica</subject><subject>Convention on Biological Diversity</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Ecosystem services</subject><subject>Endangered & extinct species</subject><subject>Endangered Species</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Exploitation</subject><subject>explotación</subject><subject>fauna silvestre</subject><subject>Horticulture</subject><subject>Indigenous peoples</subject><subject>International policies</subject><subject>International policy</subject><subject>International trade</subject><subject>Internationality</subject><subject>IPBES</subject><subject>Livelihoods</subject><subject>Local communities</subject><subject>Nature conservation</subject><subject>Pets</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Rare species</subject><subject>Species extinction</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable use</subject><subject>Taxonomy</subject><subject>Threatened species</subject><subject>unsustainable uses</subject><subject>uso sustentable</subject><subject>usos no sustentables</subject><subject>wildlife</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>0888-8892</issn><issn>1523-1739</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU9v0zAYhy0EYt3gwgdAlrgwpI7Xjp3YF6RRAatUMQTlbDnuG-opdTo7Kdq3x1nGNHbAF0s_P37850fIKwZnLI_3rqv9GSuUEE_IjElezFlV6KdkBkqpuVKaH5HjlK4AQEsmnpOjQpQgoYIZGb5FPNgWg0PaNTQNqbc-2LpFasOGDuFhMqRb6LdvNzTt0XlM1IcGY8QNbWK3o_0W6fLn4iv9npOVT_3Ir7cRbY8hRz-mXS_Is8a2CV_ezSdk_fnTenExX11-WS7OV3MnRCnmqrZlabUsLBeiKl2tALl12pVOOqid41yAFkxXlmnuGrTWKl5piyAUiuKEfJi0-6He4cZh6KNtzT76nY03prPe_LsS_Nb86g5Gc61BQRacToLto20X5yszZlCUkvMCDiyzb-8Oi931gKk3O58ctq0N2A3JcFllpwYY0TeP0KtuiCH_hOGlBCilZEWm3k2Ui11KEZv7GzAwY_FmLN7cFp_h1w-feo_-bToDbAJye3jzH5VZXH5cTtI_ybW4vg</recordid><startdate>202204</startdate><enddate>202204</enddate><creator>Marsh, Sophie M. E.</creator><creator>Hoffmann, Michael</creator><creator>Burgess, Neil D.</creator><creator>Brooks, Thomas M.</creator><creator>Challender, Daniel W. S.</creator><creator>Cremona, Patricia J.</creator><creator>Hilton‐Taylor, Craig</creator><creator>Micheaux, Flore Lafaye</creator><creator>Lichtenstein, Gabriela</creator><creator>Roe, Dilys</creator><creator>Böhm, Monika</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0585-0832</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4785-2254</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8159-3116</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6084-2048</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0606-1715</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1163-1425</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0662-3260</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6547-6427</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6197-8841</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1717-0941</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5025-6467</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202204</creationdate><title>Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species</title><author>Marsh, Sophie M. E. ; Hoffmann, Michael ; Burgess, Neil D. ; Brooks, Thomas M. ; Challender, Daniel W. S. ; Cremona, Patricia J. ; Hilton‐Taylor, Craig ; Micheaux, Flore Lafaye ; Lichtenstein, Gabriela ; Roe, Dilys ; Böhm, Monika</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4464-8ba66a953a24476cb80e2ac9c6c5c0bcc224094197a192cfeaaa8279ae048e43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>acción de conservación</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Biodiversity and Ecology</topic><topic>CITES</topic><topic>CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species)</topic><topic>Commerce</topic><topic>conservation action</topic><topic>Conservation of Natural Resources</topic><topic>Contributed Paper</topic><topic>Contributed Papers</topic><topic>Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica</topic><topic>Convention on Biological Diversity</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Ecosystem services</topic><topic>Endangered & extinct species</topic><topic>Endangered Species</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Exploitation</topic><topic>explotación</topic><topic>fauna silvestre</topic><topic>Horticulture</topic><topic>Indigenous peoples</topic><topic>International policies</topic><topic>International policy</topic><topic>International trade</topic><topic>Internationality</topic><topic>IPBES</topic><topic>Livelihoods</topic><topic>Local communities</topic><topic>Nature conservation</topic><topic>Pets</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Rare species</topic><topic>Species extinction</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable use</topic><topic>Taxonomy</topic><topic>Threatened species</topic><topic>unsustainable uses</topic><topic>uso sustentable</topic><topic>usos no sustentables</topic><topic>wildlife</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Marsh, Sophie M. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffmann, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, Neil D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brooks, Thomas M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Challender, Daniel W. S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cremona, Patricia J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hilton‐Taylor, Craig</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Micheaux, Flore Lafaye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lichtenstein, Gabriela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roe, Dilys</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Böhm, Monika</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Conservation biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Marsh, Sophie M. E.</au><au>Hoffmann, Michael</au><au>Burgess, Neil D.</au><au>Brooks, Thomas M.</au><au>Challender, Daniel W. S.</au><au>Cremona, Patricia J.</au><au>Hilton‐Taylor, Craig</au><au>Micheaux, Flore Lafaye</au><au>Lichtenstein, Gabriela</au><au>Roe, Dilys</au><au>Böhm, Monika</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species</atitle><jtitle>Conservation biology</jtitle><addtitle>Conserv Biol</addtitle><date>2022-04</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>e13844</spage><epage>n/a</epage><pages>e13844-n/a</pages><issn>0888-8892</issn><eissn>1523-1739</eissn><abstract>Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species‐level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data‐sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28–29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752–2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597–1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one‐third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use‐related red‐list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.
Predominio del Uso Sustentable y No Sustentable de Especies Silvestres Inferido a partir de la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la UICN
Resumen
La explotación insostenible de especies silvestres representa una verdadera amenaza para la biodiversidad y el sustento de las comunidades locales y los pueblos indígenas. Sin embargo, el uso sostenible gestionado tiene el potencial para prevenir extinciones, auxiliar en la recuperación y satisfacer las necesidades humanas. Analizamos los datos a nivel de especie correspondientes a 30,923 especies de 13 grupos taxonómicos localizados en la Lista Roja de Especies Amenazadas de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) para investigar los patrones del uso intencional de recursos biológicos. Usamos el 40% de las especies analizadas (10,098 de 25,009 especies pertenecientes a diez grupos taxonómicos con suficiente información). Los principales motivos para el uso de vida silvestre fueron como mascotas, animales de exhibición, horticultura y consumo humano. El uso intencional está actualmente contribuyendo a un riesgo elevado de extinción para 28 ‐ 29% de las especies amenazadas o casi amenazadas (NT) (2,752 ‐ 2,848 de 9,753 especies). El uso intencional también afectó al 16% de todas las especies utilizadas (1,597 ‐ 1,631 de 10,098). Sin embargo, el 72% de las especies utilizadas (7,291 de 10, 098) pertenecen a la categoría de preocupación menor, de las cuales casi la mitad (3,469) también contaban con tendencias poblacionales estables o de mejoría. Las especies restantes no estaban documentadas como amenazadas por el uso de recursos biológicos, incluyendo al menos 172 especies amenazadas o NT con poblaciones estables o en aumento. Casi un tercio de las especies que tienen documentado el uso como una amenaza no cuentan con acciones de manejo para abordar directamente esta amenaza. Para mejorar la información de la lista roja relacionada con el uso, sugerimos pequeñas modificaciones a los esquemas relevantes de clasificación y la documentación de apoyo requerida. Nuestros descubrimientos sobre el predominio del uso sustentable y no sustentable, y la variación entre taxones, puede orientar la formulación de políticas internacionales, incluyendo a la Plataforma Intergubernamental de Políticas Científicas sobre Biodiversidad y Servicios Ecosistémicos, el Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica y la Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas.
Article impact statement: Of 10,098 species on the IUCN Red List that are harvested, use is likely biologically unsustainable for 16% and sustainable for 34%.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>34605070</pmid><doi>10.1111/cobi.13844</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0585-0832</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4785-2254</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8159-3116</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6084-2048</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0606-1715</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1163-1425</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0662-3260</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6547-6427</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6197-8841</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1717-0941</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5025-6467</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0888-8892 |
ispartof | Conservation biology, 2022-04, Vol.36 (2), p.e13844-n/a |
issn | 0888-8892 1523-1739 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9299080 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | acción de conservación Animals Biodiversity Biodiversity and Ecology CITES CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) Commerce conservation action Conservation of Natural Resources Contributed Paper Contributed Papers Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica Convention on Biological Diversity Ecosystem Ecosystem services Endangered & extinct species Endangered Species Environmental Sciences Exploitation explotación fauna silvestre Horticulture Indigenous peoples International policies International policy International trade Internationality IPBES Livelihoods Local communities Nature conservation Pets Prevalence Rare species Species extinction Sustainability Sustainable use Taxonomy Threatened species unsustainable uses uso sustentable usos no sustentables wildlife Wildlife conservation |
title | Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-05T10%3A32%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prevalence%20of%20sustainable%20and%20unsustainable%20use%20of%20wild%20species%20inferred%20from%20the%20IUCN%20Red%20List%20of%20Threatened%20Species&rft.jtitle=Conservation%20biology&rft.au=Marsh,%20Sophie%20M.%20E.&rft.date=2022-04&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=e13844&rft.epage=n/a&rft.pages=e13844-n/a&rft.issn=0888-8892&rft.eissn=1523-1739&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/cobi.13844&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2579089001%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2650065513&rft_id=info:pmid/34605070&rfr_iscdi=true |