4. Strategic objective 4: To generate global environmental benefits through effective implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

4.1. SO 4-1 – Trends in carbon stocks above and below ground

Trends in carbon stocks above and below ground is a multipurpose indicator used to measure progress towards strategic objectives (SOs) 1 and 4. Quantitative data and a qualitative assessment of trends in this indicator are reported under SO 1 (progress indicator SO 1-3).

4.2. SO 4-2 – Trends in abundance and distribution of selected species

4.2.1. Introduction

The world’s species are impacted by several threatening processes, including habitat destruction and degradation, overexploitation, invasive alien species, human disturbance, pollution and climate change. On-ground land restoration actions under the implementation of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) can mitigate threatening processes and reduce species extinction risk. The Red List Index (RLI) can be used to assess overall changes in the extinction risk of groups of species because of these threats and the extent to which threats are being mitigated. The RLI is also Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicator 15.5.11. The RLI estimates trends in the overall extinction risk of sets of species to determine trends in biodiversity status. It is based on changes in the number of species in each category of extinction risk on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species2.

The RLI value ranges from 1 (all species are categorized as ‘Least Concern’) to 0 (all species are categorized as ‘Extinct’), and so indicates how far the set of species has moved overall towards extinction. Thus, the RLI allows comparisons between sets of species in both their overall level of extinction risk (i.e. how threatened they are on average) and in the rate at which this risk changes over time. A downward trend in the RLI over time means that the expected rate of future species extinctions is worsening (i.e. the rate of biodiversity loss is increasing). An upward trend means that the expected rate of species extinctions is declining (i.e. the rate of biodiversity loss is decreasing), and a horizontal line means that the expected rate of species extinctions is remaining the same, although in each of these cases it does not mean that biodiversity loss has stopped. Currently, the RLI is available for five taxonomic groups: birds, mammals, amphibians, cycads and warm-water reef-forming corals. It has also been aggregated into a single index for these five groups3.

The main output of the reporting process for SO 4-2 is a set of officially verified annual estimates of RLI values for 2000–2020. National reporting is facilitated through the provision of default data pre-filled from the SDG database for indicator 15.5.1.

4.2.2. Prerequisites for reporting

• An in-depth reading of SDG indicator 15.5.1 metadata document;

• Consultation with national experts on biodiversity, species extinction risk, and land management and conservation; Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) national focal points; national statistical offices and IUCN State Members;

• Familiarity with the ‘Advanced Search’ function on the IUCN Red List website to enable customized calculation of the RLI: https://www.iucnredlist.org/search.

4.2.3. Reporting process and step-by-step procedures

The step-by-step procedure for reporting is described in the following.

Step 1: Report Red List Index data

Note

Related areas in the PRAIS 4 platform: table SO4-2.T1

The RLI is SDG indicator 15.5.1. Therefore, the RLI data are pre-filled from the SDG database, including the national-level index value as well as the upper and lower bounds of uncertainty around the national estimate. No further action is required if Parties choose to use the default data.

Parties may decide to customize/complement the values to be reported in table SO4-2.T1. Customised RLI values can be produced from the Red List website4. The RLI can be disaggregated to produce RLIs for different subsets of species with different policy relevance (e.g. migratory species, etc.) or for all species showing trends driven by different threatening processes (e.g. invasive alien species, biological resource use, etc.). At present, disaggregated RLI data is only available at subregional, regional or global scales and it is not available for single countries.

Parties may want to report on regional-scale subsets of species that are more relevant to the implementation of the UNCCD. National experts on biodiversity, species extinction risk, and land management and land conservation actions implemented to mitigate extinction risk should be involved here to decide what disaggregation to use to complete the report.

Details on the customization of the RLI values should be reported in the ‘General Comments’ section provided in the PRAIS 4 platform.

Step 2: Qualitatively assess the Red List Index data

Note

Related areas in the PRAIS 4 platform: table SO4-2.T2

Countries are encouraged to identify and then rank which drivers directly or indirectly cause negative changes or downward trends. Countries are also encouraged to comment on the policy responses or levers that have caused positive changes, upward trends or reversal of negative trends in the RLI5.

Step 3: Verify the results

The reliability of the default RLI data needs to be verified by national experts to detect and highlight situations where the confidence level of the obtained results might be low. This would qualitatively assess the reliability of the estimates based on expert knowledge and on a correct interpretation of the data.

Step 4: Generate reports

Once verified by the Parties, the estimates of the RLI indicator as well as the qualitative assessment should be officially submitted to UNCCD.

Parties have the option to use the ‘General Comment’ field to add any relevant information, or to report on specific country or regional situations.

4.2.4. Dependencies

The SO 4-2 indicator has no interdependencies with other SOs.

4.2.5. Challenges

Data interpretation

• The main challenge is the interpretation of changes in the indicator and specifically understanding the drivers of trends in the indicator. The RLI is an aggregate indicator across a small number of taxa and therefore does not include all species in a country. National experts on biodiversity, species extinction risk, and land management and land conservation actions implemented to mitigate extinction risk will be crucial for correct interpretation.

• There are also several sources of uncertainty in the RLI values and trends pertaining to lack of knowledge about species extinction risk, poor data on species, and delays in learning about changes to species extinction risk. The RLI metadata for SDG indicator 15.5.1 should be consulted for more information.

4.2.6. Summary

Key actions for reporting on RLI are as follows:

1. Report RLI data: Parties can use the default data or can choose to report using customized RLI values.

2. Qualitatively assess the RLI data: Parties can report on the direct and indirect drivers of trends in the RLI and any levers used to bring about positive and transformative change.

3. Verify the results: Aware of the limitations of the RLI values, Parties may verify the accuracy and reliability of such indicators in their countries before officially submitting estimates for UNCCD reporting.

4. Generate reports: Once verified by the Parties, the data and supporting narrative should be officially submitted to UNCCD.

4.2.7. Further reading

• SDG indicator 15.5.1 metadata document (https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-15-05-01.pdf).

• Butchart et al. (2006) Biodiversity indicators based on trends in conservation status: strengths of the IUCN Red List Index. Conservation Biology 20: 579–581 (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00410.x/abstract).

• Butchart et al (2010) Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines, Science, 328 (5982), pp. 1164–1168 (https://science.sciencemag.org/content/328/5982/1164).

4.3. SO 4-3 Trends in protected area coverage of important biodiversity areas

4.3.1. Introduction

Protecting important sites for biodiversity is critical to halting the decline in biodiversity and ensuring the long-term and sustainable use of terrestrial natural resources. Establishing protected areas is an important mechanism for achieving this aim, and this indicator measures progress toward the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems and their services.

Protected areas as defined by the IUCN6 are clearly defined geographical spaces, recognized, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values. A variety of specific management objectives and levels of access are recognized within this definition, spanning conservation, restoration and sustainable use.

In addition to protecting biodiversity, protected areas have high social and economic value because they support local livelihoods, protect watersheds from erosion, contain a wealth of genetic resources, support recreation and tourism industries, provide for science, research and education, and contain many cultural and other non-material values.

The metric average proportion of terrestrial Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) covered by protected areas, which is SDG indicator 15.1.2b, shows temporal trends in the mean percentage of each important site for terrestrial biodiversity (i.e. those that contribute significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity) that is covered by designated protected areas.

The metadata for SDG indicator 15.1.2 includes other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) in addition to protected areas. OECMs are defined as ‘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’.

KBAs are sites that contribute significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity and are identified following global criteria7 applied at national levels. The KBAs include:

• Important bird and biodiversity areas, which are sites that contribute significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity, identified using data on birds, of which >13,000 sites in total have been identified from all of the world’s countries;

• Alliance for Zero Extinction sites, which are sites holding effectively the entire population of at least one species assessed as critically endangered or endangered on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 853 sites have been identified for 1,483 species of mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, freshwater crustaceans, reef-building corals, conifers, cycads and other taxa; and

• KBAs identified using an earlier version of the KBA criteria, including those identified in ecosystem hotspot profiles developed with the support of the Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund.

Data on protected areas are managed in the World Database on Protected Areas by the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC)8.

Data on OECMs are managed in the World Database on OECMs by the UNEP-WCMC9.

Data on KBAs are managed in the World Database of Key Biodiversity Areas by BirdLife International on behalf of the Key Biodiversity Areas Partnership10.

The main output of the reporting process for SO 4-3 is a set of officially verified annual estimates of the values of average proportion of terrestrial KBAs covered by protected areas for 2000–2020. National reporting is facilitated through the provision of default data pre-filled from the SDG database for indicator 15.1.2b.

4.3.2. Prerequisites for reporting

• An in-depth reading of the SDG indicator 15.1.2 metadata document;

• Consultation with national experts on KBA and protected areas, CBD national focal points, national statistical offices, IUCN State Members and KBA regional focal points.

4.3.3. Reporting process and step-by-step procedures

The step-by-step procedure for reporting is described in the following.

Step 1: Report indicator data

Note

Related areas in the PRAIS 4 platform: table SO4-3.T1

Default data for this indicator is pre-filled in table SO4-3.T1 from the SDG database (SDG indicator 15.1.2b), including the national-level value as well as the upper and lower bounds of uncertainty around the national estimate11. For data specifications for the SO 4-3 indicator, see the official metadata for SDG indicator 15.1.2.

A Party may choose to report using the default data or alternative national data sources, if available. Any deviation from the guidance provided should be reported and justified in the ‘Comment’ column of the reporting table.

Step 2: Qualitatively assess the results

Note

Related areas in the PRAIS 4 platform: table SO4-3.T2

Parties are encouraged to provide comments on the interpretation of the indicator, including the direction of indicator change. While it may be difficult to attribute specific causal factors to changes in the indicator, countries are encouraged to indicate which direct and/or indirect drivers are presumably behind the observed changes using the comment box in table SO4-3.T2 in the PRAIS 4 platform.

Step 3: Verify the results

The reliability of the default SO 4-3 indicator data needs to be verified by national experts to detect and highlight situations where the confidence level of the obtained results might be low. This would qualitatively assess the reliability of the estimates based on expert knowledge and on a correct interpretation of the data.

Step 4: Generate reports

Once verified by the Parties, the estimates of the SO 4-3 indicator as well as the qualitative assessment should be officially submitted to UNCCD.

Parties have the option to include additional information in the ‘General Comments’ field to add any relevant information or to report on specific country or regional situations.

4.3.4. Dependencies

The SO 4-3 indicator has no interdependencies with other SOs.

4.3.5. Challenges

Data availability and quality

• KBAs focus mainly on subsets of biodiversity such as birds and highly threatened species. There are plans to improve KBAs with wider taxonomic coverage.

Data interpretation

• This indicator and metric are very intuitive and only minor challenges exist. The reporting Party should understand where and why there are KBAs in their country, otherwise the metric will have less meaning.

• Data on KBAs and protected areas is generally widely available; however, challenges exist at the national level in ensuring the designated protected areas are effective at reducing biodiversity loss.

4.3.6. Summary

Key actions for reporting on RLI are as follows:

1. Report indicator data: Parties can use the default data or can choose to report using national data.

2. Qualitatively assess the results: Changes in the indicator should be described in table SO4-3.T2.

3. Verify the results: Aware of the limitations of the SO 4-3 indicator values, Parties may verify the accuracy and reliability of such indicator in their countries before officially submitting estimates for UNCCD reporting.

4. Generate reports: Once verified by the Parties, the data and supporting narrative should be officially submitted to UNCCD.

4.3.7. Further reading

• SDG indicator 15.1.2 metadata document (https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-15-01-02.pdf).

• Butchart, S. H. M. et al. (2012). Protecting important sites for biodiversity contributes to meeting global conservation targets. PLoS One 7(3): e32529 (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0032529).

• Eken, G. et al. (2004). Key biodiversity areas as site conservation targets. BioScience 54: 1110–1118 (http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/54/12/1110.short).

• IUCN (2016). A Global Standard for the Identification of Key Biodiversity Areas. International Union for Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland (https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/46259).

• Donald, P. et al. (2018) Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas (IBAs): the development and characteristics of a global inventory of key sites for biodiversity. Bird Conservation International. 29:177–198.

• Ricketts, T. H. et al. (2005). Pinpointing and preventing imminent extinctions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. 102: 18497–18501 (http://www.pnas.org/content/102/51/18497.short).

• Langhammer, P. F. et al. (2007). Identification and Gap Analysis of Key Biodiversity Areas: Targets for Comprehensive Protected Area Systems. IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 15. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland (https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/9055).

---

1

https://sdg.tracking-progress.org/indicator/15-5-1-red-list-index/.

2

IUCN 2021. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2021-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org.

3

For methodology see: Butchart et al (2010) Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines, Science, 328 (5982), pp. 1164–1168. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/328/5982/1164.

4

https://www.iucnredlist.org/search.

5

The direct and indirect drivers available for selection in the table and the levers which can reverse negative trends are summarized from the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity (IPBES) (2019): Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. E. S. Brondizio, J. Settele, S. Díaz, and H. T. Ngo (editors). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 1148 pages. Available at: https://ipbes.net/global-assessment.

6

For an explanation of categories, see: https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/about/protected-area-categories.

7

For a detailed methodology, see: A Global Standard for the Identification of Key Biodiversity Areas (IUCN 2016). https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-048.pdf.

8

See https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/wdpa?tab=WDPA.

9

www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/oecms.

10

www.keybiodiversityareas.org/kba-data.

11

SDG indicator 15.1.2b data is updated each November/December using the latest versions of the datasets on protected areas, OECMs and KBAs.