IUCN Green List of Protected and Conserved Areas Standard

A protected or conserved area that reaches the IUCN Green List Standard is certified and recognised as achieving ongoing results for people and nature in a fair and effective way. A site that gains ‘Green List’ status demonstrates: Respect: for the local community through fair and meaningful engagement of rights-holders and stakeholders; Design: planning that identifies the needs to secure  the important values of the area; Effective management: monitoring of the status of these important values; Successful conservation results: for nature and for people; Clear contribution: to climate change responses, health and well-being and other challenges. The seventeen criteria collectively describe the efforts needed to fully achieve the global Sustainability Standard and all must be achieved for a site to be green-listed. The indicators can be adapted to suit the local context. Any site can join, and work towards achieving verified success, and then attain the Standard or further improve.

gsap
Visit page

Related content

image placeholder

Encyclopedia of Life

The Encyclopedia of Life (EoL) aims to provide global access to knowledge about life on Earth by collecting and sharing knowledge in an open, freely accessible digital resource. EoL identifies sources of biodiversity knowledge that are legally and practically shareable and enriches their structure with modern data tools to integrate them with other data.

EoL works with open access biodiversity knowledge providers around the world, including museums and libraries, universities and research centers, individual scientists, graduate students and citizen science communities, and a suite of international open data hubs. EOL receive information from many sources, and format and annotate it so that search tools can find similar content from different sources.

gsap
image placeholder

Global Taxonomy Initiative

The Global Taxonomy Initiative (GTI) was established by the CBD to address the lack of taxonomic information and expertise available in many parts of the world, and thereby to improve decision-making in conservation, sustainable use, and equitable sharing of the benefits derived from genetic resources. The GTI was developed by governments under the Convention on Biological Diversity and is implemented by governments, non-government and international organizations, taxonomists, and institutions.

The GTI is specifically intended to support implementation of the work programmes of the Convention on its thematic and cross-cutting issues. The Guide to the GTI includes an introduction, the programme of work, and links to further information. The European GTI Toolkit is a comprehensive tool that covers GTI topics in further detail.

gsap
image placeholder

Global Biodiversity Information Facility

GBIF is an international network and data infrastructure funded by the world’s governments. It provides open access to data on all types of life on Earth. GBIF provides data-holding institutions around the world with common standards, best practices and open-source tools enabling them to share information on species. The data derive from many sources, from museum specimens collected in the 18th and 19th centuries to DNA barcodes and citizen science smartphone photos.

The network collates these diverse data sources through data standards, including Darwin Core, which forms the basis for most of GBIF’s index of hundreds of millions of species occurrence records. Publishers provide open access to their datasets using machine-readable Creative Commons licence designations, allowing scientists, researchers, and others to apply the data.

gsap
image placeholder

IUCN SSC Guidelines on Applying Indigenous & Local Knowledge in the Red List

The aim of this document is to examine thoroughly all the issues and general principles surrounding the application of indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™, and to outline some key steps to enhance use of this information in Red List assessments. The document builds on and draws from discussions over at least the last decade between the IUCN CEESP-SSC Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group and the IUCN SSC Red List Committee, including earlier unpublished draft guidance, and complements this with insights gained from the development of the IPBES ILK Approach. The draft document was subject to two rounds of consultation, each lasting two months, within IUCN and among Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IPLC) networks.

gsap
image placeholder

eBird

eBird began with a simple idea—that every birdwatcher has unique knowledge and experience. Our goal is to gather this information in the form of checklists of birds, archive it, and freely share it to power new data-driven approaches to science, conservation and education. At the same time, we develop tools that make birding more rewarding. From being able to manage lists, photos and audio recordings, to seeing real-time maps of species distribution, to alerts that let you know when species have been seen, we strive to provide the most current and useful information to the birding community.

eBird is among the world’s largest biodiversity-related science projects, with more than 100 million bird sightings contributed annually by eBirders around the world and an average participation growth rate of approximately 20% year over year. A collaborative enterprise with hundreds of partner organizations, thousands of regional experts, and hundreds of thousands of users, eBird is managed by the Cornell Lab of Ornithology.

eBird data document bird distribution, abundance, habitat use, and trends through checklist data collected within a simple, scientific framework. Birders enter when, where, and how they went birding, and then fill out a checklist of all the birds seen and heard during the outing. eBird’s free mobile app allows offline data collection anywhere in the world, and the website provides many ways to explore and summarize your data and other observations from the global eBird community. Learn how to get started.

eBird is available worldwide, comprising a network of local, national, and international partners. eBird directly collaborates with hundreds of partner groups for regional data entry portals, outreach, engagement, and local impact. Explore regional collaborators.

Data quality is of critical importance. When entering sightings, observers are presented with a list of likely birds for that date and region. These checklist filters are developed by some of the most knowledgeable bird distribution experts in the world. When unusual birds are seen, or high counts are reported, the regional experts review these records. Learn more about eBird data quality.

eBird data are stored across secure facilities, archived daily, and are freely accessible to anyone. eBird data have been used in hundreds of conservation decisions and peer-reviewed papers, thousands of student projects, and help inform bird research worldwide. Learn more about eBird data use.

gsap
image placeholder

INaturalist

Contribute to Science

Every observation can contribute to biodiversity science, from the rarest butterfly to the most common backyard weed. We share your findings with scientific data repositories like the Global Biodiversity Information Facility to help scientists find and use your data. All you have to do is observe.

gsap
image placeholder

Wildlife Insights

Wildlife Insights streamlines decision-making by providing machine learning models and other tools to manage, analyze and share camera trap data. With access to reliable data, everyone can make better decisions to help wildlife thrive.

gsap
image placeholder

IWC Population (Abundance) Estimates

Estimates of current population size, known as abundance estimates, are derived from a combination of fieldwork and computer modelling.  Vessel-based and aerial sighting surveys, acoustic monitoring, and analysis of individual animal markings are techniques used independently or in conjunction with each other to count whales.  The information gathered from this fieldwork is used as the basis for population modelling which produces an abundance estimate.

In 2017, the IWC Scientific Committee established a new expert group to review and agree all the Abundance Estimates submitted to the Scientific Committee.  This new process ensures quality and consistency across all the estimates used by the IWC.

Click here to read more about the establishment and work of the Scientific Committee’s Working Group on Abundance Estimates (ASI).

It is impossible for cetacean abundance estimates to be completely precise and IWC estimates are presented as a ‘best estimate’ figure, accompanied by a 95% Confidence Interval, showing a range of plausible values for the population’s actual abundance.  As an example, the table below shows that the 1991/92-2003/4 abundance estimate for Southern Hemisphere blue whales is 2,300 with a 95% confidence interval of 1,150-4,500. This means that the range 1,150-4,500 was computed using a method that has a 95% chance of including the population’s actual abundance.

Increases or decreases in population are indicated within the table, where these have been identified.

At present the IWC has agreed estimates only for some species/areas.  With the establishment of the ASI group it is planned to update this table and fill in the gaps where possible.

gsap
image placeholder

IWC Population Status

The IWC assesses cetacean status by population rather than by species.  This is because the majority of species exist in several different areas and groups.  Within a single species there may be one population that is feared to be close to extinction and one that is believed to be thriving.  A good example of this is the North Pacific gray whale, considered healthy in the eastern North Pacific, but critically endangered in the west.

Within a single whale population, groups are further broken down into ‘stocks.’ Even within a single population some stocks may be healthy whilst others are not.  For example, discussions are currently ongoing to decide whether there is cause for concern regarding one/some of the stocks that make up the population of common minke whales in the North Pacific.

In broad terms, the status of a population is assessed by comparing the current population size with its original, undisturbed size, and then predicting its future size based on identified trends and known threats.  In the case of cetaceans, the main historical ‘disturbance’ that impacted on population size was whaling activity.

Understanding population status is vital to understanding whether a population is healthy or whether conservation action is required and if so, whether those actions should be considered a priority.

gsap
image placeholder

Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs)

KBAs are sites that ‘contribute significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity in terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems’. KBAs are identified on the basis of species or ecosystems, according to five criteria and 11 subcriteria, all supported by quantitative thresholds. The KBA Global Standard details the criteria and subcriteria. KBA sites must meet one of the criteria and be clearly delineated. Proposed sites are independently reviewed and once accepted are included in the World Database of KBAs.

KBAs are normally identified by a KBA National Coordination Group (NCG). However, anyone with appropriate data may propose a site as a KBA, but they are they are encouraged to work with the NCG if one exists and consultation with relevant stakeholders at the local and national level is required and needs to be documented in the proposal. Where a KBA NCG has not yet been established, proposers submit a site proposal directly.

The Key Biodiversity Areas Partnership is composed of 13 leading international organizations including IUCN. It maintains a KBA Committee, Secretariat, a Technical Working Group, a KBA Consultative Forum, and the World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas. An independent KBA Standards and Appeals Committee has been established under the authority of the elected SSC and WCPA Chairs.

How to use

gsap
image placeholder

Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECM)

The governments of the world adopted the following definition of an OECM in 2018: “A geographically defined area other than a Protected Area, which is governed and managed in ways that achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in-situ conservation of biodiversity, with associated ecosystem functions and services and where applicable, cultural, spiritual, socio–economic, and other locally relevant values”. OECMs complement protected areas through sustained, positive conservation outcomes, even though they may be managed primarily for other reasons. These sites are documented in the World Database on OECMs. This definition was only recently adopted and most countries have not yet provided data, but this does not mean that no OECMs exist in those countries. The World Database on OECMs is available on the Protected Planet website.

How to use

For IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) guidance on recognising OECMs:

https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PATRS.3.en

To search for information on an existing site on the World Database on OECMs:

https://resources.unep-wcmc.org/products/4c1733823f2a451e8d5ecbaaef3f1a06WDPA

gsap
image placeholder

IUCN Guidelines on Reintroductions and other Conservation Translocations

These Guidelines define terms and set out guidance on the justification, design, and implementation of any reintroduction or conservation translocation, including (i) reinforcement and reintroduction within a species’ indigenous range, and (ii) conservation introductions, comprising assisted colonisation and ecological replacement, outside a species’ indigenous range. The Guidelines focus on conservation translocations, namely a translocation that yields quantifiable conservation benefit. For this purpose, the beneficiaries should be the population or the ecosystem of the translocated species. Translocation needs rigorous justification. Feasibility assessment should include a balance of the conservation benefits against the costs and risks of both the translocation and alternative conservation actions. There are multiple  risks in a translocation, affecting the focal species, their associated communities and ecosystem functions in both source and destination areas; there are also risks around human concerns. Any proposed translocation should have a comprehensive risk assessment.

How to use

gsap