For decades, even centuries, people have taken deliberate, targeted actions for the conservation and management of species and ecosystems. Originally empirical and driven by utilitarian or aesthetic reasons, over time, evidence-based interventions have become the gold standard []. In this Special Issue, we focus on the Species Conservation Cycle, a conceptual framework developed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Species Survival Commission (SSC) to provide structure to its scientific network of thousands of species conservation experts []. The backdrop is the Biodiversity Paradox, or the inequitable distribution of human, financial, and institutional resources to address biodiversity decline and loss []. Species conservation does not need only evidence-based conservation, but also significant expansion in the distribution of the funding and resource base [,,].
Seventeen articles are included in this Special Issue of Diversity on “Assessments, Planning and Action for Conservation of Species and Ecosystems at Multiple Spatial Scales.” These were written by 209 authors from 55 countries and territories, including 12 in Africa, 14 in Meso and South America, 2 in North America and the Caribbean, 4 in Oceania, 10 in South and East Asia, and 12 in West Europe. West Asia is the only IUCN Statutory Region with no contributions, except one coauthor of this editorial. It was a truly collaborative effort, spanning 302 printed pages and a wealth of supplementary materials. All stages of the Species Conservation Cycle were addressed, with a particular focus on Assess and Communicate (Table 1). The latter is predictable, as publishing an article is part of communicating a group’s activities, while Assess continues to be the most cited focus of the work of SSC groups [].
Table 1.
Stages of the Species Conservation Cycle addressed by type of article included in this Special Issue of Diversity on “Assessments, Planning and Action for Conservation of Species and Ecosystems at Multiple Spatial Scales”.
Table 1.
Stages of the Species Conservation Cycle addressed by type of article included in this Special Issue of Diversity on “Assessments, Planning and Action for Conservation of Species and Ecosystems at Multiple Spatial Scales”.
| Species Conservation Cycle | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Article Type | General Subject | Assess | Plan | Act | Network | Communicate | Ref. |
| Research | Tiger and Asian elephants in India | X | X | X | [] | ||
| Freshwater fishes in Central America | X | X | X | [] | |||
| Cheer pheasant in the Western Himalayas | X | X | [] | ||||
| Species conservation planning | X | X | [] | ||||
| Green status of species | X | X | [] | ||||
| Global status of fungi | X | X | [] | ||||
| Academic networks and student engagement | X | X | X | [] | |||
| Look-alike bears in India | X | X | [] | ||||
| Atlantic humpback dolphin in coastal Africa | X | X | X | X | X | [] | |
| Prioritizing species conservation and action | X | X | X | [] | |||
| Global Red List and species conservation in Seychelles | X | X | [] | ||||
| Review | Intact habitats for extinct species in the wild | X | X | [] | |||
| Black-faced spoonbill in East Asia | X | X | X | X | X | [] | |
| Species conservation monitoring | X | X | [] | ||||
| Primate conservation planning | X | X | X | X | X | [] | |
| Opinion | Global status of trees | X | X | [] | |||
| Biodiversity Paradox | X | X | [] | ||||
The conclusion that one can derive from this collection of articles is that scientific research to support conservation action is alive and well. Species-specific contributions, such as those by Menon et al. [], Kaul et al. [], Garshelis et al. [], Minton et al. [], and Cano-Alonso et al. [], illustrate how meticulous fieldwork serves to inform conservation interventions and set the baseline for monitoring their progress. Geographical and taxonomic perspectives, such as the work by Contreras-MacBeath et al. [], Mueller at al. [], Bullock et al. [], Reuter et al. [], and Harvey-Brown et al. [], highlight the value of synthetic analyses to design conservation interventions that simultaneously address the needs of multiple species. Thematic approaches, such as those of Byers et al. [], Grace et al. [], Lacher et al. [], and Stephenson et al. [], show the value of cross-cutting research that transcends geography and taxonomy. Böhm et al. [] also invite us to consider innovative capacity building approaches that go beyond the conventions of SSC in compiling the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species [], while Dalrymple et al. [] bring to our attention the case of Extinct in the Wild species, undoubtedly the most threatened animals, fungi, and plants, and show us that the efforts of aquariums, botanical gardens, and zoos need to be integrated with the protection of natural ecosystems for these species to thrive in the wild.
A greater amount of money is spent globally in unsustainably exploiting nature than in protecting it []. Evidence shows that if we give nature a chance to recover, restoration is possible. There are numerous examples of conservation success stories, products of carefully planned conservation interventions [,]. The IUCN Species Survival Commission, our partners and collaborators, stand ready to support evidence-based conservation worldwide. In order to bend the curve of the biodiversity decline [], and achieve the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework [], we will need to convene expertise that is geographically, disciplinarily, institutionally, gender, and age diverse. It is not a matter of simply bringing different points of view together, it is about assuring that everyone has a role to play and about strengthening and supporting those best placed to deliver change.
Author Contributions
All authors participated in the conceptualization and writing of the original draft, review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding. Article publication costs in this Special Issue on “Assessments, Planning and Action for Conservation of Species and Ecosystems at Multiple Spatial Scales” received partial support through a grant from the Environmental Agency in Abu Dhabi in support of the office of the Chair of the IUCN Species Survival Commission.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Sutherland, W.J. Transforming Conservation: A Practical Guide to Evidence and Decision Making; Open Book Publishers: Cambridge, UK, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Rodríguez, J.P.; Sucre, B.; Mileham, K.; Sánchez-Mercado, A.; De Andrade, N.; Bezeng, S.B.; Croukamp, C.; Falcato, J.; García-Borboroglu, P.; González, S.; et al. Addressing the Biodiversity Paradox: Mismatch between the Co-Occurrence of Biological Diversity and the Human, Financial and Institutional Resources to Address Its Decline. Diversity 2022, 14, 708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez, J.P.; Simonetti, J.A.; Premoli, A.; Marini, M.A. Conservation in Austral and Neotropical America: Building scientific capacity equal to the challenges. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19, 969–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodríguez, J.P.; Rodríguez-Clark, K.M.; Oliveira-Miranda, M.A.; Good, T.; Grajal, A. Professional capacity building: The missing agenda in conservation priority setting. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20, 1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parks, D.; Al-Fulaij, N.; Brook, C.; Butchart, S.H.M.; Collomb, J.-G.; Cope, D.; Dowell, S.; Falkingham, B.; Frick, W.F.; Gibbs, D.; et al. Funding evidence-based conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2022, 36, e13991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- IUCN. 2020 Report of the Species Survival Commission and the Global Species and Key Biodiversity Area Programme. International Union for Conservation of Nature: Gland, Switzerland, 2022; p. 455. [Google Scholar]
- Menon, V.; Bhattacharyya, K.; Sinha, S.K.; Tiwari, S.K.; Kaul, R. Shared Landscapes: Optimising Conservation Strategies Using Tiger and Elephant Sympatry in India. Diversity 2022, 14, 1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Contreras-MacBeath, T.; Ardón, D.A.; Quintana, Y.; Angulo, A.; Lyons, T.; Lardizabal, C.; McMahan, C.D.; Elías, D.J.; Matamoros, W.A.; Barraza, J.E.; et al. Freshwater Fishes of Central America: Distribution, Assessment, and Major Threats. Diversity 2022, 14, 793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaul, R.; Kalsi, R.S.; Singh, R.; Basnet, H.; Awan, M.N. Cheer Pheasant (Catreus wallichii) and the Conservation Paradox: Importance of Unprotected Areas. Diversity 2022, 14, 785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Byers, O.; Copsey, J.; Lees, C.; Miller, P.; Traylor-Holzer, K. Reversing the Decline in Threatened Species through Effective Conservation Planning. Diversity 2022, 14, 754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grace, M.K.; Akçakaya, H.R.; Bennett, E.L.; Boyle, M.J.W.; Hilton-Taylor, C.; Hoffmann, M.; Money, D.; Prohaska, A.; Young, R.; Young, R.; et al. The Impact of Spatial Delineation on the Assessment of Species Recovery Outcomes. Diversity 2022, 14, 742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mueller, G.M.; Cunha, K.M.; May, T.W.; Allen, J.L.; Westrip, J.R.S.; Canteiro, C.; Costa-Rezende, D.H.; Drechsler-Santos, E.R.; Vasco-Palacios, A.M.; Ainsworth, A.M.; et al. What Do the First 597 Global Fungal Red List Assessments Tell Us about the Threat Status of Fungi? Diversity 2022, 14, 736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Böhm, M.; Waldien, D.L.; Setliff, G.P.; Abenis, K.O.; Aguirre, L.F.; Akite, P.; Alviola, M.S.; Alviola, P.A.; Aramayo Bejarano, J.L.; Badon, J.A.T.; et al. Catalyzing Red List Assessments of Underrepresented Taxa through Partner Networks and Student Engagement. Diversity 2022, 14, 723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garshelis, D.L.; Dharaiya, N.; Sharp, T.R.; Pigeon, K.E. Investigating Co-occurrence among Look-alike Species: The Case of Three Bears in Northeast India. Diversity 2022, 14, 717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minton, G.; Abel, G.; Collins, T.; Eniang, E.; Frisch-Nwakanma, H.; Keith-Diagne, L.; Kema Kema, J.R.; Takoukam Kamla, A.; Virtue, M.; Weir, C.; et al. Range-Wide Conservation Efforts for the Critically Endangered Atlantic Humpback Dolphin (Sousa teuszii). Diversity 2022, 14, 716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lacher, T.E.; Mallon, D.; Kennerley, R.J.; Relton, C.; Young, R.P. Tools and Metrics for Species Prioritization for Conservation Planning and Action: Case Studies for Antelopes and Small Mammals. Diversity 2022, 14, 704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bullock, R.W.; Grimmel, H.M.V.; Moulinie, E.E.; Pouponeau, D.K.; Lea, J.S.E. Using Global Red List Data to Inform Localised Research and Conservation Priorities—A Case Study in the Republic of Seychelles. Diversity 2022, 14, 681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalrymple, S.E.; Abeli, T.; Ewen, J.G.; Gilbert, T.C.; Hogg, C.J.; Lloyd, N.A.; Moehrenschlager, A.; Rodríguez, J.P.; Smith, D. Addressing Threats and Ecosystem Intactness to Enable Action for Extinct in the Wild Species. Diversity 2023, 15, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cano-Alonso, L.S.; Grace, M.K.; Yu, Y.-T.; Chan, S. Reversing the Decline in a Threatened Species: The Black-Faced Spoonbill Platalea minor. Diversity 2023, 15, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stephenson, P.J.; Londoño-Murcia, M.C.; Borges, P.A.V.; Claassens, L.; Frisch-Nwakanma, H.; Ling, N.; McMullan-Fisher, S.; Meeuwig, J.J.; Unter, K.M.M.; Walls, J.L.; et al. Measuring the Impact of Conservation: The Growing Importance of Monitoring Fauna, Flora and Funga. Diversity 2022, 14, 824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reuter, K.E.; Mittermeier, R.A.; Williamson, E.A.; Jerusalinsky, L.; Refisch, J.; Sunderland-Groves, J.; Byler, D.; Konstant, W.R.; Vercillo, U.E.; Schwitzer, C.; et al. Impact and Lessons Learned from a Half-Century of Primate Conservation Action Planning. Diversity 2022, 14, 751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harvey-Brown, Y.; Shaw, K.; Davies, K.; Rivers, M. Using the Global Tree Assessment at Multiple Scales of Planning and Action. Diversity 2022, 14, 891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IUCN. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species; Version 2022-2. 2022. Available online: http://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed on 13 February 2023).
- IPBES. Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; Brondizio, E.S., Settele, J., Díaz, S., Ngo, H.T., Eds.; IPBES Secretariat: Bonn, Germany, 2019; p. 1148. [Google Scholar]
- CBSG. Second Nature: Changing the Future for Endangered Species; Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (CBSG): St. Paul, MN, USA, 2017; p. 85. [Google Scholar]
- Mittermeier, R.A.; Rylands, A.B.; Sechrest, W.; Langhammer, P.F.; Mittermeier, J.C.; Parr, M.J.; Konstant, W.R.; Mast, R.B. Back from the Brink; CEMEX & Earth in Focus, Inc.: Qualicum Beach, BC, Canada, 2017; p. 273. [Google Scholar]
- Mace, G.M.; Barrett, M.; Burgess, N.D.; Cornell, S.E.; Freeman, R.; Grooten, M.; Purvis, A. Aiming higher to bend the curve of biodiversity loss. Nat. Sustain. 2018, 1, 448–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Convention on Biological Diversity. Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework; Decision adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Montréal, QC, Canada, 2022. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).