The Impact of Spatial Delineation on the Assessment of Species Recovery Outcomes
The Impact of Spatial Delineation on the Assessment of Species Recovery Outcomes
复制标题
DOI：
10.3390/d14090742
复制
发表时间：
2022-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Grace;H. Akçakaya;E. Bennett;M. J. Boyle;C. Hilton‐Taylor;M. Hoffmann;Daniel Money;A. Prohaska;Rebecca E. Young;R. Young;B. Long
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Grace;H. Akçakaya;E. Bennett;M. J. Boyle;C. Hilton‐Taylor;M. Hoffmann;Daniel Money;A. Prohaska;Rebecca E. Young;R. Young;B. Long
2021 年，国际自然保护联盟 (IUCN) 推出了一种评估物种恢复和保护影响的新方法：IUCN 物种绿色状态。绿色状态使用称为绿色分数的指标来标准化恢复，其范围从 0% 到 100%。本研究重点关注绿色状态方法中的一个关键步骤——将物种范围划分为所谓的“空间单位”——并评估划分空间单位的不同方法是否会影响评估结果（即绿色得分）。我们将使用基于生物学的空间单位（推荐方法）生成的绿色得分与使用基于生态或基于国家的空间单位生成的欧洲 29 种鸟类和哺乳动物的绿色得分进行了比较。我们发现，虽然使用生态区域和国家（细尺度）划分的空间单元比基于生物的空间单元产生了更多的平均空间单元数量和显着较低的平均绿色得分，但使用生物群落和高于范围比例阈值的国家划分的粗尺度空间单元与基于生物的平均空间单元数量或平均绿色得分结果没有显着差异。然而，侧重于单个物种（而不是群体平均值）结果的案例研究表明，根据物种分布的特征，即使是这些生态或国家空间单元的粗尺度划分，与基于生物的空间单元相比，也常常高估或低估了绿色得分。我们讨论了建议或不鼓励使用基于生态或基于国家的空间单位的案例，希望我们的结果能够加强新的绿色状态框架并确保应用的一致性。
In 2021, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) introduced a novel method for assessing species recovery and conservation impact: the IUCN Green Status of Species. The Green Status standardizes recovery using a metric called the Green Score, which ranges from 0% to 100%. This study focuses on one crucial step in the Green Status method—the division of a species’ range into so-called “spatial units”—and evaluates whether different approaches for delineating spatial units affect the outcome of the assessment (i.e., the Green Score). We compared Green Scores generated using biologically based spatial units (the recommended method) to Green Scores generated using ecologically based or country-based spatial units for 29 species of birds and mammals in Europe. We found that while spatial units delineated using ecoregions and countries (fine-scale) produced greater average numbers of spatial units and significantly lower average Green Scores than biologically based spatial units, coarse-scale spatial units delineated using biomes and countries above a range proportion threshold did not differ significantly from biologically based results for average spatial unit number or average Green Score. However, case studies focusing on results for individual species (rather than a group average) showed that, depending on characteristics of the species’ distribution, even these coarse-scale delineations of ecological or country spatial units often over- or under-predict the Green Score compared to biologically based spatial units. We discuss cases in which the use of ecologically based or country-based spatial units is recommended or discouraged, in hopes that our results will strengthen the new Green Status framework and ensure consistency in application.