Journal Article

National Responsibilities in European Species Conservation: a Methodological Review

GRUBER, BERND, FRAMSTED, ERIK, BUDRYS, EDUARDAS, LENGYEL, SZABOLCS, HENLE, KLAUS, SCHMELLER, DIRK S.

2008

Overview

One particular challenge in reducing the loss of biodiversity by 2010, as agreed on at the Earth Summit in 2002, is to assign conservation tasks to geographic or administrative entities (e.g., countries or regions) on different geographical scales. To identify conservation tasks, it is imperative to determine the importance of a specific area for the global survival of a species. So far, these national or subnational responsibilities for the conservation of species have been included differently in methods prioritizing conservation. We reviewed how 12 European and 3 non-European methods determined national conservation responsibilities and evaluated the international importance of a biological population. Different countries used different methodologies, which made a direct comparison of assessments of national responsibilities among countries extremely difficult. Differences existed in the importance criteria used. Criteria included population decline, range reduction, rarity status, degree of isolation of a population, endemism, proportional distribution, and geographic location. To increase comparability, it is imperative to develop criteria for which data are generally available and to standardize the methodology among countries. A standardized method would allow conservation decisions to be based on the conservation status of a species and on the responsibility of a geographic or administrative entity for the survival of a species. We suggest that such a method should use a scalable index of proportional distribution, taxonomic status, and the distribution pattern of a taxon or species as key elements. Such a method would allow for the creation of hierarchical lists and would be highly relevant for parts of the world with multiple political jurisdictions or state unions and for nations with regional governmental structures. Conservation priorities could then be reasonably set by combining national responsibility assessments with the international conservation status of a species.

• Publisher: Blackwell Publishing Inc,Blackwell Publishing, Inc,Blackwell,Blackwell Publishing Ltd,Wiley
• Subject: Animal populations / Animal, plant and microbial ecology / Applied ecology / Biodiversity / Biodiversity conservation / Biodiversity loss / Biological and medical sciences / Birds / conservación de especies / Conservation / Conservation biology / conservation methods / Conservation of Natural Resources / Conservation of Natural Resources - methods / Conservation practices / conservation priorities / Conservation status / Conservation, protection and management of environment and wildlife / Countries / Demography / Distribution patterns / Ecosystem / Endemism / Environmental conservation / Environmental policy / Environmental Sciences / Europa / Europe / Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology / General aspects / Habitat conservation / International relations / Ione / Jurisdiction / methods / métodos de conservación / national responsibility / Parks, reserves, wildlife conservation. Endangered species: population survey and restocking / politics / Population decline / Population distributions / population dynamics / prioridades de conservación / Public Policy / Research methodology / responsabilidad nacional / Review / Species / species conservation / Survival / Taxa / Wildlife conservation