bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Hilton-Taylor, C.

Publications and source records attributed to Hilton-Taylor, C..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

The Global Environment Facility approach for allocating biodiversity funding to countries

Biodiversity is not evenly distributed across the globe and some areas have greater potential to contribute to biodiversity conservation than others. Whilst there are multiple ways to determine priority areas for conservation, for a global institution like the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the funding mechanism for the Convention on Biological Diversity and the largest multilateral source of funding for developing countries focused on enhancing biodiversity outcomes and promoting sustainable use, it is important to fund the top-ranked countries whilst also ensuring that all eligible countries are able to undertake some biodiversity conservation actions in accordance with the Convention. To this end, the GEF uses the System for Transparent Allocation of Resources (STAR) to allocate funding in separate funding rounds to eligible countries. This country focus means that all prioritization analyses need to be undertaken within that political framework, while also considering the intrinsic patterns in biodiversity that dont respect national borders. We present the 2018 update of the biodiversity component of GEF-STAR, investigate how the weighting system affects the ranking of countries. We show that top ranked and bottom ranked countries are robust to changes in the weighting of analytical elements, but the weighting can significantly alter the importance of middle ranking countries, affecting their funding allocation. This analysis has been used by the GEF, along with other data, to allocate over $1 billion in biodiversity funding (GEF-7 = $1.2 billion) to improve country and global prospects for conservation. However, this large funding allocation for conservation needs to be set against the vastly larger funding flows that decrease natural values around the world, and the need for systems level change remains evident across the entire planet.

ecology↗

Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List

Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. Research to date has focused on unsustainable biological resource use with little consideration of sustainable use; we infer the current prevalence of both. We analyzed species-level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the IUCN Red List. Our results demonstrate the broad taxonomic prevalence of use, with 40% of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data-sufficient taxonomic groups) documented as being used. The main purposes of use are pets, display animals and horticulture, and human consumption. Use often has an adverse impact on species extinction risk (we define this as biologically unsustainable): intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for over a quarter of all threatened or Near Threatened (NT) species (2,752 - 2,848 of 9,753 species). Intentional use also threatens 16% of all species used (1,597 - 1,631 of 10,098). However, 72% of species that are used (7,291 of 10,098) are Least Concern (LC), of which nearly half (3,469) also have stable or improving population trends. The remainder of used species are not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. Around a third of species that have use documented as a threat do not currently receive targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. We offer suggestions for improving use-related Red List data. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policymaking, including the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.

ecology↗