Home About National indicators Partners Resources

Red List Index (impacts of fisheries)

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

State

Applicable for national use

Yes

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Indicator type

State

Applicable for national use

Yes

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Last update

2016

Coverage

Global

Availability

Not freely available

Partners

Birdlife aug2013

BirdLife International

Iucn logo en

IUCN

Nslogocolortagtrans

NatureServe

Kew logo 2015 k

Kew Gardens

Zsl logo stacked cmyk

Zoological Society of London

Contact point

Indicator description

Fishing practices can have a number of direct and indirect effects on non-target species for example, as bycatch, mortality in fishing gear, or through disturbance from fishing activities. This version of the RLI is shows trends in the status of birds and mammals worldwide driven only by the negative impacts of fisheries or the positive impacts of measures to control or manage fisheries sustainably.

Related Aichi Targets

Primary target

6

Target 6:

By 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested sustainably, legally and applying ecosystem based approaches, so that overfishing is avoided, recovery plans and measures are in place for all depleted species, fisheries have no significant adverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts of fisheries on stocks, species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limits.

Primary target

6

Target 6:

By 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested sustainably, legally and applying ecosystem based approaches, so that overfishing is avoided, recovery plans and measures are in place for all depleted species, fisheries have no significant adverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts of fisheries on stocks, species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limits.

6

Related SDGs

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 14

GOAL 14 - Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.

Target 14.4| Relevant indicator

By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological characteristics.

Target 14.7| Relevant indicator

By 2030, increase the economic benefits to Small Island developing States and least developed countries from the sustainable use of marine resources, including through sustainable management of fisheries, aquaculture and tourism.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 14

GOAL 14 - Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 14

Other related MEAs and processes

Cms logo blue4c

CMS

Target 5| Relevant indicator

Governments, key sectors and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable production and consumption, keeping the impacts of natural resource use on migratory species well within safe ecological limits to promote the favourable conservation status of migratory species and maintain the quality, integrity, resilience, and connectivity of their habitats and migratory routes.

Target 6| Relevant indicator

Fisheries and hunting have no significant direct or indirect adverse impacts on migratory species, their habitats or their migration routes, and impacts of fisheries and hunting are within safe ecological limits.

Target 7| Relevant indicator

Multiple anthropogenic pressures have been brought to levels that are not detrimental to the conservation of migratory species or to the functioning, integrity, ecological connectivity and resilience of their habitats.

Target 8| Relevant indicator

The conservation status of threatened migratory species has considerably improved throughout their range.

Indicator icon

IPBES Global Assessment Chapters

Chapter 2| Official indicator

Status and trends; indirect and direct drivers of change

Chapter 3| Official indicator

Progress towards meeting major international objectives related to biodiversity and ecosystem services

Indicator icon

IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters

Chapter 3| Official indicator

Status, trends and future dynamics of biodiversity and ecosystems underpinning nature’s benefits to people

Chapter 4| Official indicator

Direct and indirect drivers of change in the context of different perspectives of quality of life

Ramsar.logo

Ramsar

Target 9| Relevant indicator

The wise use of wetlands is strengthened through integrated resource management at the appropriate scale, inter alia, within a river basin or along a coastal zone.

Target 13| Relevant indicator

Enhanced sustainability of key sectors such as water, energy, mining, agriculture, tourism, urban development, infrastructure, industry, forestry, aquaculture and fisheries when they affect wetlands, contributing to biodiversity conservation and human livelihoods

Cms logo blue4c

CMS

Indicator icon

IPBES Global Assessment Chapters

Indicator icon

IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters

Ramsar.logo

Ramsar

Cms logo blue4c
Indicator icon
Indicator icon
Ramsar.logo

Themes

Marine

Marine & freshwater habitats

View related indicators >
Marine
Bip species

Partners

Birdlife aug2013
Iucn logo en
Nslogocolortagtrans
Kew logo 2015 k
Zsl logo stacked cmyk

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

State

Applicable for national use

Yes

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Indicator type

State

Applicable for national use

Yes

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Last update

2016

Coverage

Global

Availability

Not freely available

Indicator description

Fishing practices can have a number of direct and indirect effects on non-target species for example, as bycatch, mortality in fishing gear, or through disturbance from fishing activities. This version of the RLI is shows trends in the status of birds and mammals worldwide driven only by the negative impacts of fisheries or the positive impacts of measures to control or manage fisheries sustainably.

Contact point

Graphs / Diagrams

Current storyline

The Red List Index (RLI) shows changes in the aggregate extinction risk of sets of species over time. It is an index of rate at which species move through categories on the IUCN Red List towards or away from extinction. It is calculated from the number of species in each Red List category (ranging from Least Concern to Extinct), and the number changing categories between assessments as a result of genuine improvement or deterioration in status (category changes owing to improved knowledge or revised taxonomy are excluded).

The RLI shows trends in the status of all mammals, birds and amphibians worldwide driven only by the negative impacts of fisheries or the positive impacts of measures to control or manage fisheries sustainably. It is based on data from the IUCN Red List, specifically the number of species in each Red List category of extinction risk, and the number moving categories between assessments owing to genuine improvement or deterioration in status driven by impacts utilisation or its control. All other changes are excluded, whether from improved knowledge, or genuine impacts of other threats or their control.

The index show that the extinction risk of these species groups is increasing over time. Analyses of the drivers of these shifts in status show that fisheries are having a net negative impact. Although some threatened species have improved in status (as a result of successful control or management of fisheries), more have been uplisted to higher categories of threat owing to the negative impacts of unsustainable fisheries.

The Red List Index for birds, mammals and amphibians showing trends driven by fisheries reveals the trends in the overall extinction risk of species as driven by the balance between unsustainable levels of fisheries impacts (leading to population declines) and successful measures to control or manage fisheries sustainably (leading to population increases or stable trends). A decreasing Red List Index (RLI) means that the rate of extinction driven by fisheries impacts is expected to increase, whereas a flat RLI means that the rate of extinctions driven by fisheries impacts is expected to remain relatively unchanged. Hence, the decline in the indicates that overall fisheries are unsustainable. Many species are now threatened with extinction owing to fisheries impacts. It is likely that these results will be mirrored for other wildlife groups once data become available.

The indicator is developed by IUCN and BirdLife International.

Underlying data come from the IUCN Red List, which is developed by IUCN and the Red List Partnership (Arizona State University, BirdLife International, Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Conservation International, NatureServe, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Sapienza University of Rome, Texas A&M University, and The Zoological Society of London.

Individual logos shown are those for Red List Partners who are also BIP partners.

Data and methodology

Coverage:

Global time series (1980 onwards, varying by taxonomic group. Aggregate index from 1993).

Regional/National time series (time periods variable).

Scale: Aggregated from species level data which may be collected nationally, regionally and/or globally.

Time series available: 1980-2016.

Possible disaggregations: by region, country. This indicator is a disaggregation of the Red List Index.

Methodology: The RLI was initially designed and tested using data on all bird species (Butchart el al., 2004) and then extended to amphibians (Butchart et al., 2005). The methodology was revised and improved in 2007 (Butchart et al., 2007), with methods for aggregating across taxonomic groups and for calculating confidence intervals published in 2010 (Butchart et al., 2010). RLIs for additional groups have been added subsequently.

RLIs have been published showing the negative impacts of invasive species (McGeoch et al., 2010) and trade (Butchart 2008), and the positive impacts of conservation action (Hoffmann et al., 2010) and protected areas (Butchart et al., 2012). An RLI to show the impact of a single conservation institution was published by Young et al. (2014). The spatial distribution of the RLI was mapped by Rodrigues et al. (2014). An RLI for pollinators was published by Regan et al. (2015).

For poorly known, species-rich groups (e.g. insects, fungi, plants, etc.), a sampled approach to Red Listing has been developed (Baillie et al., 2008; see also http://www.kew.org/science-research-data/directory/projects/SampledRedListIndexP.htm). Once the sample of species in these groups are reassessed, RLIs for each will be calculated.

National use of indicator

National RLIs can be calculated either by disaggregating the global indices, or by repeatedly assessing extinction risk at the national scale (Bubb et al., 2009). Examples of both approaches have been published. National indices based on national assessments of extinction risk are available for an increasing number of taxa and countries (see http://www.iucnredlist.org/about/publication/red-l...) while many other countries have completed national red lists (see www.nationalredlist.org), but not yet repeated these to produce an RLI. Such national RLIs may be more sensitive than globally downscaled RLIs.

However, they come with the disadvantage that their trends may be driven by changes in status of species with a trivial proportion of their global population within a given country (Rodrigues et al., 2014). This is because national RLIs do not take into account the fact that different countries have different levels of global responsibility towards the conservation of the species they harbour.

For example, the return of the Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) to Denmark as a breeding species contributed to this country’s improving national RLI, but was inconsequential to the global RLI, because Denmark holds a tiny fraction of this widespread species’ population. In contrast, an improvement in the conservation status of Albert’s Lyrebird (Menura alberti) in Australia (from Vulnerable to Near Threatened) is globally significant, because this species is a national endemic. Thus, a country can have an improving national index while making a negative contribution to the global RLI, if improvements concern mainly species that are marginally represented within the country and deteriorations in species for which the country is highly responsible (Rodrigues et al., 2014). To overcome this issue, national RLIs (disaggregated from the global RLI for all birds, mammals, amphibians, cycads and corals) weighted by the proportion of each species’ global distribution within the country have been calculated for all countries worldwide (UNSD 2016; see the Country Profiles at https://www.ibat-alliance.org/ibat-conservation/login).

More information about producing national RLIs can be found in the publication, IUCN Red List Index – Guidance for National and Regional Use available from: http://intranet.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SpeciesProg/RLI_Guidelines_Final_4march09.pdf.

Further resources

No further resources are available

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

State

Applicable for national use

Yes

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Indicator type

State

Applicable for national use

Yes

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Last update

2016

Coverage

Global

Availability

Not freely available

Partners

Birdlife aug2013

BirdLife International

Iucn logo en

IUCN

Nslogocolortagtrans

NatureServe

Kew logo 2015 k

Kew Gardens

Zsl logo stacked cmyk

Zoological Society of London

Contact point