Biology subjects

Tallowin, O.

Publications and source records attributed to Tallowin, O..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2023

Assessing the global prevalence of wild birds in trade

Trade represents a significant threat to many wild species and is often clandestine and poorly monitored. Information on which species are most prevalent in trade, and potentially threatened by it, therefore remains fragmentary. We mobilised seven global datasets on birds in trade to identify the species or groups of species that might be at particular risk. These datasets sample different parts of the broad trade spectrum but we nevertheless find a statistically strong congruence between them in which species are recorded in trade. Furthermore, the frequency with which species are recorded within datasets is positively correlated with their occurrence across datasets. This allows us to propose a trade prevalence score that can be applied to all bird species globally. This score discriminates well between species known from semi-independent assessments to be heavily or unsustainably traded and all other species. Globally, 45.1% of all bird species, and 36.7% of globally threatened bird species, were recorded in at least one of the seven datasets. Species listed in Appendices I or II of CITES, species with large geographical distributions and non-songbirds had higher trade prevalence scores. Speciose orders with high mean trade prevalence scores include the Falconiformes, Psittaciformes, Accipitriformes, Anseriformes, Bucerotiformes and Strigiformes. Despite their low mean prevalence score, Passeriformes accounted for the highest overall number of traded species of any order but had low representation in CITES Appendices. Geographical hotspots where large numbers of traded species co-occur differed between songbirds (South-East Asia and Eurasia) and non-songbirds (central South America, sub-Saharan Africa and India). This first attempt to quantify and map the relative prevalence in trade of all bird species globally can be used to identify species and groups of species which may be at particular risk of harm from trade and can inform conservation and policy interventions to reduce its adverse impacts. Article impact statementThe first metric to estimate the prevalence in trade of all the worlds bird species is presented.

ecology↗

bioRxiv2022

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↗

bioRxiv2020

Areas of global importance for terrestrial biodiversity, carbon, and water

Summary paragraphTo meet the ambitious objectives of biodiversity and climate conventions, countries and the international community require clarity on how these objectives can be operationalized spatially, and multiple targets be pursued concurrently1. To support governments and political conventions, spatial guidance is needed to identify which areas should be managed for conservation to generate the greatest synergies between biodiversity and natures contribution to people (NCP). Here we present results from a joint optimization that maximizes improvements in species conservation status, carbon retention and water provisioning and rank terrestrial conservation priorities globally. We found that, selecting the top-ranked 30% (respectively 50%) of areas would conserve 62.4% (86.8%) of the estimated total carbon stock and 67.8% (90.7%) of all clean water provisioning, in addition to improving the conservation status for 69.7% (83.8%) of all species considered. If priority was given to biodiversity only, managing 30% of optimally located land area for conservation may be sufficient to improve the conservation status of 86.3% of plant and vertebrate species on Earth. Our results provide a global baseline on where land could be managed for conservation. We discuss how such a spatial prioritisation framework can support the implementation of the biodiversity and climate conventions.

ecology↗