Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Critically endangered

Critically endangered is the most severe threat category on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, assigned to taxa facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild based on quantitative criteria evaluating population declines, geographic ranges, habitat fragmentation, small population sizes, or modeled extinction probabilities exceeding 50% within 10 years or three generations, whichever is longer.^[1]^[2] The criteria, structured as five independent tests (A through E), include thresholds such as an observed, estimated, or inferred reduction in population of at least 90% over the specified timeframe for Criterion A, or a severely fragmented extent of occurrence under 100 square kilometers with continuing decline for Criterion B.^[3] As of mid-2025, approximately 10,443 species across animals, plants, and fungi have been classified as critically endangered out of over 172,000 assessed taxa, representing a subset of the roughly 48,000 total threatened species and underscoring the urgency for targeted interventions amid ongoing habitat loss, overexploitation, and other pressures.^[4]^[5] These assessments, while grounded in empirical data and peer-reviewed methodologies, can underestimate risks for data-poor groups due to reliance on incomplete surveys, potentially missing additional species already extinct or nearing that threshold.^[6]^[7]

Definition and Classification

IUCN Quantitative Criteria

The IUCN Red List classifies a taxon as Critically Endangered when the best available evidence indicates it meets any one of five quantitative criteria (A–E), which evaluate extinction risk through thresholds grounded in population ecology and modeling. These criteria apply to taxa in the wild and require verifiable data such as field surveys, population censuses, habitat mapping, genetic analyses, or probabilistic models projecting future declines; assessments must demonstrate that declines are ongoing or irreversible unless evidence shows otherwise.^[1]^[8] Criterion A assesses observed, estimated, inferred, or suspected reductions in population size. A taxon qualifies under this criterion with a ≥90% decline over the longer of 10 years or three generations (whichever is longer, up to a maximum of 100 years), where the causes of reduction either have not ceased, are not understood, or are not reversible; alternatively, there is a continuing decline of ≥90%, or ≥90% post-decline with ongoing issues. Subcriteria specify measurement methods, including direct observation of wild individuals, indices of abundance from surveys or traps, declines in area of occupancy (AOO), extent of occurrence (EOO), or habitat quality via remote sensing or ground truthing, and explicit quantitative analyses like population viability models.^[8]^[1] Criterion B evaluates restricted geographic range in the face of decline. Qualification requires an EOO estimated to be <100 km² or AOO <10 km², combined with at least two of the following: (a) severe fragmentation or number of locations ≤1; (b) continuing observed, estimated, inferred, or projected decline in any of EOO, AOO, population size, habitat extent/quality, or number of mature individuals/subpopulations; or (c) extreme fluctuations in any of EOO, AOO, population size, or number of subpopulations. Geographic metrics derive from GIS-based mapping of verified occurrence records, excluding vagrant or introduced populations.^[8]^[1] Criterion C targets very small or restricted populations with structured risks. A population of <250 mature individuals qualifies if accompanied by at least one of: an estimated continuing decline with ≥90–100% individuals in one subpopulation, extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals, or ≥95% individuals in one subpopulation with ongoing decline or extreme fluctuations. Maturity estimates often stem from demographic studies, capture-recapture data, or age-structured modeling.^[8] Criterion D applies to extremely small populations, requiring <50 mature individuals; a separate subthreshold (D2) for restricted AOO <20 km² or ≤5 locations is insufficient alone for Critically Endangered but may contribute under other criteria. Counts rely on comprehensive censuses or extrapolations from sample plots.^[8] Criterion E relies on quantitative analysis, such as population viability analysis or extrapolative modeling, indicating ≥50% probability of extinction in the wild over the longer of 10 years or three generations (up to 100 years). Models incorporate parameters like fecundity rates from field data, stochastic events, and environmental covariates, validated against historical trends where possible.^[8]^[1]

Comparison to Other Threat Categories

The Critically Endangered (CR) category represents the highest degree of extinction risk among the IUCN Red List's three threatened classifications—CR, Endangered (EN), and Vulnerable (VU)—positioned immediately below Extinct in the Wild (EW) to indicate taxa facing an extremely high probability of extinction in the wild without intervention.^[9] This hierarchy ensures that CR status captures scenarios of acute peril, where threats have advanced to thresholds far more stringent than those for EN or VU, emphasizing rapid deterioration rather than gradual decline.^[10] Quantitative criteria for CR demand evidence of more severe impacts; for example, under Criterion A (reduction in population size), CR requires an observed, estimated, projected, or inferred decline of ≥90% over the last 10 years or three generations (whichever longer), exceeding the ≥70% threshold for EN and ≥50% for VU.^[9] Under Criterion C (small population size and decline), CR applies to populations with fewer than 250 mature individuals coupled with continuing decline and extreme fluctuations, in contrast to <2,500 for EN and <10,000 for VU.^[9] Criterion D further distinguishes CR with very small populations of <50 mature individuals (or restricted area of occupancy <10 km²), versus <250 individuals (or <100 km²) for EN and <1,000 (or <1,000 km²) for VU, highlighting the category's focus on populations verging on non-viability.^[9] Category transitions illustrate escalating risks, with species often reassessed upward from VU or EN to CR as new data reveal intensified declines or habitat loss; for instance, avian trajectory models from 1988 to 2018 show that progression through threatened categories, including to CR, aligns with failure to reverse declines, though effective conservation can halt or reverse such shifts in approximately 10-20% of cases.^[11] Reassessments occur every 5-10 years depending on threat severity, enabling detection of these movements, but CR placement signals that remaining time to extinction may span mere years rather than decades afforded lower categories.^[12] In conservation prioritization, CR status elevates taxa for immediate, resource-intensive actions such as captive breeding or emergency habitat protection, distinguishing it from EN (which may involve targeted threat mitigation) or VU (often suiting preventive monitoring and policy advocacy), thereby guiding allocation of limited funds toward averting the most proximate extinctions.^[10] This differentiation avoids diluting urgency across categories, ensuring CR focuses efforts where causal pressures have already precipitated near-collapse, without presuming irreversibility.

Historical Context

Origins of the IUCN Red List

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), established in 1948 to address post-World War II biodiversity concerns, initiated the Red List of Threatened Species in 1964 as a foundational tool for global conservation. This early effort produced a preliminary inventory of rare mammals and birds, compiled by the IUCN's Survival Service Commission in collaboration with the International Council for Bird Preservation, marking the first systematic attempt to catalog species facing extinction risks.^[13]^[14] The concept originated with Sir Peter Scott, who, as chairman of the Survival Service Commission in 1963, advocated for a "Red Data Book" series to compile and publicize data on endangered species, thereby raising awareness and mobilizing action. Scott's vision drew from heightened recognition of rapid biodiversity loss, exemplified by 20th-century extinctions such as the passenger pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius), which vanished in 1914 after once numbering in the billions due to overhunting and habitat destruction, underscoring the urgency for proactive monitoring.^[15]^[16]^[17] Initial Red Lists focused predominantly on vertebrates, with dedicated volumes on mammals and birds published in 1966, but assessments depended heavily on subjective expert evaluations without standardized quantitative thresholds. This approach, while instrumental in highlighting threats amid sparse data, was limited by reliance on qualitative judgments, prompting later methodological advancements to enhance rigor and comparability.^[18]^[19]

Evolution of the Critically Endangered Category

The IUCN introduced quantitative criteria for the Red List categories, including Critically Endangered, in 1994 to supplant prior qualitative judgments, thereby increasing objectivity and transparency in extinction risk assessments across taxa.^[20]^[21] These criteria established specific thresholds based on population size, decline rates, geographic range, and extinction probability estimates, applicable to all species groups.^[1] Version 3.1 of the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria, adopted in 2001, refined these thresholds and clarified definitions, such as adjustments to subpopulation sizes and continuing decline interpretations, to enhance applicability to plants, invertebrates, and other non-vertebrate taxa previously underrepresented in assessments.^[22]^[23] The 2012 second edition retained the core framework while providing additional guidance on implementation, without substantive changes to the criteria themselves.^[8] Evolving guidelines have integrated spatial analysis through Criterion B, which evaluates reductions in extent of occurrence and area of occupancy, and Criterion E, incorporating population viability analyses that can factor in genetic diversity and inbreeding risks for long-term persistence.^[3] Updated protocols, including those addressing climate change as a threatening process, enable assessors to project future impacts on population dynamics and habitat suitability under Criteria A and D.^[3] Early applications of the Critically Endangered category emphasized vertebrates, particularly charismatic mammals and birds, reflecting data availability biases; subsequent expansions have broadened coverage to fungi, plants, and invertebrates, with over 1,000 fungal species assessed by 2025, approximately one-third of which are threatened.^[24] This progression mitigates prior focal imbalances, fostering more rigorous, taxa-inclusive evaluations of extinction risks.^[25]

Causal Factors

Anthropogenic Drivers

Habitat loss and degradation, primarily through deforestation, agricultural expansion, and urbanization, constitute the dominant anthropogenic driver of critically endangered status across taxa, affecting over 85% of threatened species according to assessments linking land-use change to biodiversity declines.^[26] ^[27] This causal chain operates via conversion of natural ecosystems into human-dominated landscapes, fragmenting populations and reducing available resources; for instance, tropical deforestation has driven sharp declines in primate and amphibian species listed as critically endangered.^[28] Overexploitation, encompassing hunting, fishing, and illegal wildlife trade, exacerbates extinction risk for approximately 27% of threatened species, with direct impacts most acute in marine and large vertebrate groups.^[29] In chondrichthyans (sharks and rays), overfishing alone threatens 37.5% of assessed species, often interacting with low reproductive rates to precipitate rapid population crashes.^[30] Terrestrial examples include bushmeat hunting, which has contributed to the critically endangered status of multiple primate species in Central Africa.^[28] Human-facilitated introduction of invasive alien species impacts 25.5% of IUCN-assessed threatened species, with heightened effects on islands where they threaten 28% of critically endangered terrestrial vertebrates through predation, competition, and habitat alteration.^[31] ^[32] Pollution, including chemical contaminants and plastic waste, and direct persecution (e.g., retaliatory killing) further compound risks, though less ubiquitously than habitat conversion or exploitation.^[33] While climate change amplifies vulnerabilities by altering habitats and phenology, empirical analyses indicate it ranks secondary to land-use intensification as a primary driver for most critically endangered taxa.^[27] Human population density correlates positively with elevated extinction risk, as denser settlements intensify habitat encroachment and resource extraction pressures on species with slow life histories.^[34] Variability persists across groups, with marine species more prone to overexploitation and terrestrial ones to habitat loss.^[33]

Natural and Stochastic Contributors

Natural processes contributing to species endangerment and extinction include biotic interactions such as interspecific competition for resources, predation by native species, and outbreaks of endemic pathogens.^[35] For instance, shifts in predator-prey dynamics or competitive exclusion can drive local population crashes without external perturbations, as observed in fossil records of prehistoric faunas where dominant species displaced others through resource monopolization.^[36] Disease epidemics, exemplified by the chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis affecting amphibians, operate as density-dependent regulators in natural ecosystems, causing mortality spikes in susceptible populations prior to widespread human-mediated spread.^[37] Stochastic factors amplify extinction risks particularly in small or fragmented populations, where random demographic events—such as fluctuations in birth and death rates, skewed sex ratios, or chance failures in reproduction—can lead to quasi-extinction thresholds.^[38] Demographic stochasticity arises from the probabilistic nature of individual-level processes, increasing variance in population trajectories and elevating the probability of fixation of deleterious alleles via genetic drift.^[39] In populations below effective sizes of 50-100 individuals, these variances compound with environmental stochasticity, such as unpredictable weather variability, to heighten overall peril independent of deterministic declines.^[40] Paleontological analyses estimate natural background extinction rates at 0.1 to 1 extinctions per million species-years (E/MSY), reflecting ongoing turnover from such processes across geological timescales.^[41] These baselines derive from fossil turnover in marine invertebrates and vertebrates, where incomplete preservation biases—favoring durable taxa over soft-bodied ones—may underestimate true historical diversity and thus inflate perceptions of rarity in modern comparisons.^[42] Debates persist on whether anthropogenic acceleration claims overstate deviations, as gaps in the fossil record obscure the full spectrum of past stochastic losses.^[43] Island-endemic species exemplify inherent vulnerabilities to abrupt natural perturbations, with small ranges and low genetic diversity rendering them prone to total habitat loss from volcanic eruptions or cyclones.^[44] For example, eruptions can sterilize entire insular ecosystems, as seen in historical events obliterating flora and fauna on remote archipelagos, while cyclones induce demographic bottlenecks through flood-induced drownings or wind-dispersed dispersal failures.^[45] Over 2,000 terrestrial vertebrates globally face elevated extinction probabilities from such hazards, underscoring how geographic isolation inherently couples population persistence to infrequent but catastrophic events.^[46]

Current Status and Trends

Global Assessments and Statistics

As of the October 2025 update (version 2025-2), the IUCN Red List assesses the conservation status of 172,620 species, with 48,646 classified as threatened (Critically Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable).^[47] Of these, 10,443 species—spanning animals, plants, and fungi—are categorized as Critically Endangered, representing the highest extinction risk tier under IUCN criteria.^[7] This figure underscores the acute vulnerability of assessed taxa, though plants dominate CR listings (comprising the majority of such cases due to recent assessment surges in trees and other flora).^[48] Assessment coverage reveals substantial taxonomic biases: vertebrates, particularly mammals (25% threatened) and amphibians (41% threatened), are disproportionately represented relative to their biodiversity share, while invertebrates, fungi, and many marine and freshwater species remain critically under-evaluated.^[49] Fewer than 3% of the estimated 2 million described species worldwide have undergone complete IUCN assessments, with even lower rates for hyperdiverse groups like insects (<1% assessed).^[50] These gaps imply that the documented CR tally likely underestimates the global scale of imminent extinctions, as unassessed species—predominantly in underrepresented taxa—may harbor additional crises undisclosed by current data.^[49] Trends in CR listings show gradual increases over recent decades, but these are primarily driven by expanded assessments rather than uniform declines in species status.^[51] The Red List Index (RLI), which isolates genuine shifts in extinction risk by controlling for assessment artifacts, indicates relative stability or modest deteriorations in well-monitored groups like birds and mammals, cautioning against interpreting raw counts as direct proxies for biodiversity collapse.^[52] For instance, while CR numbers rose with inclusion of previously overlooked fungi and plants in 2025 updates, RLI trajectories for assessed vertebrates reflect ongoing pressures without exponential worsening.^[24] This methodological nuance highlights the need for epistemic restraint in extrapolating from partial datasets to planetary-scale narratives.

Recent Developments (Post-2020)

In the October 2025 IUCN Red List update, three Arctic seal species—ribbon seal (Histriophoca fasciata), spotted seal (Phoca largha), and ringed seal (Pusa hispida)—were reassessed as facing heightened extinction risks, shifting closer to Critically Endangered status due to accelerating sea ice loss from climate change, which disrupts breeding and foraging habitats.^[53] This update, released during the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Abu Dhabi, expanded the total assessed species to 172,620, with 48,646 classified as threatened, underscoring persistent global biodiversity erosion.^[53] The same assessment revealed declines in over half of evaluated bird species worldwide, driven by habitat fragmentation and agricultural intensification, while introducing assessments for more than 1,000 fungi species, many newly listed as Critically Endangered owing to deforestation and fungal habitat destruction in tropical regions.^[53] ^[54] Conversely, conservation successes were documented in 20 animal species downlisted from higher threat categories, including the land snail Idiomela subplicata, reclassified from Critically Endangered to Vulnerable following habitat restoration and reduced collection pressures in its restricted range.^[55] Among these, 12 bird species, such as the Rodrigues warbler (Acrocephalus rodericanus), improved due to targeted predator control and habitat management on islands.^[55] IUCN Congress 2025 discussions emphasized island ecosystems' disproportionate vulnerability, with invasive species posing 28% higher extinction threats there than on continents, prompting calls for enhanced biosecurity measures.^[56] Data enhancements included rapid assessments of 892 tree species in early 2025, identifying new hotspots in Southeast Asia and revealing that over one-third of evaluated trees face extinction risks from logging and climate shifts, informing updated national policies.^[57] These developments reflect improved monitoring technologies and collaborative assessments, though experts caution that under-assessed taxa, like invertebrates, likely conceal additional Critically Endangered cases.^[53]

Representative Examples

High-Profile Animal Cases

The Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus), a small felid endemic to the Iberian Peninsula, illustrates successful application of conservation measures to avert extinction from critically low populations. In 2002, the global population stood at approximately 94 mature individuals across fragmented habitats in Spain and Portugal, prompting its classification as critically endangered by the IUCN due to habitat loss, poaching, and low genetic diversity.^[58] Intensive interventions, including captive breeding programs that produced over 1,000 individuals for reintroduction, habitat connectivity enhancements via rabbit population restoration (its primary prey), and legal protections, increased the breeding population to 871 by 2023.^[54] This rebound led to a downlisting from endangered in 2015 to vulnerable in 2024, with over 2,000 individuals estimated in the wild, though ongoing threats like road mortality and disease persist.^[54] In stark contrast, the vaquita (Phocoena sinus), the world's smallest cetacean confined to Mexico's northern Gulf of California, exemplifies functional extinction risks despite regulatory efforts. Acoustic and visual surveys estimated fewer than 20 individuals by 2018, declining to 6-8 detected in May 2024 expeditions, confirming its critically endangered status driven by incidental entanglement in illegal totoaba gillnets targeting swim bladders for black-market trade.^[59] Despite a 2017 gillnet ban and totoaba fishery enforcement, bycatch rates exceed reproduction—yielding perhaps one calf annually— with no captive breeding success to date due to acoustic stress sensitivities.^[60] Genetic analyses indicate inbreeding depression, rendering the remnant population vulnerable to stochastic events like vessel strikes.^[59] The Yangtze giant softshell turtle (Rafetus swinhoei), one of the largest freshwater turtles reaching 1 meter in carapace length, underscores genetic and demographic bottlenecks in critically endangered reptiles. As of 2024, only two known males persist—one in China's Suzhou Zoo and one in a Hoan Kiem Lake, Vietnam—following the 2023 death of the last wild female from a boat propeller injury, reducing the functional population to near zero reproductively viable adults.^[61] Habitat degradation from damming and pollution in the Yangtze River, combined with historical overexploitation for food and medicine, has confined survivors to isolated sites, with no confirmed natural nesting since 2008 despite artificial insemination attempts yielding non-viable eggs.^[62] IUCN assessments highlight possibly extinct subpopulations in Vietnam and Cambodia, emphasizing the species' reliance on uncertain future pairings or cloning technologies.

Plant and Invertebrate Cases

Plants constitute the largest taxonomic group among critically endangered species on the IUCN Red List, with over 27,000 flowering plant species classified as threatened as of 2024, comprising more than half of all globally threatened plants assessed.^[63] Many such plants exhibit extreme habitat specificity, rendering them highly susceptible to localized disturbances like agricultural conversion and deforestation. For instance, the North Rothbury Persoonia (Persoonia pauciflora), a prostrate shrub endemic to a fragmented area spanning less than 10 square kilometers in New South Wales, Australia, qualifies as critically endangered under IUCN criteria due to its restricted extent of occurrence and severe fragmentation from urban encroachment and mining activities.^[64] ^[65] Rare orchids, including slipper orchids in the genus Paphiopedilum, frequently attain CR status from combined pressures of habitat loss to palm oil plantations and overcollection for horticulture, with multiple species assessed as facing imminent extinction risks.^[66] The March 2025 IUCN Red List update incorporated assessments for 892 additional tree species, elevating the number of critically endangered trees and underscoring persistent threats from agricultural expansion in biodiversity hotspots.^[48] Invertebrates, while underrepresented with only about 2% of described species evaluated as of 2020, account for notable CR cases where small population sizes and narrow ranges exacerbate vulnerability to stochastic events such as invasive species introductions.^[67] Polynesian tree snails of the genus Partula, for example, include over 70 species reassessed as critically endangered in 2009 due to predation by the invasive rosy wolf snail (Euglandina rosea) and habitat degradation, with many populations reduced to fewer than 100 individuals.^[68] Similarly, Madeiran endemic snails like Discula lyelliana are listed as CR from habitat alteration and introduced predators, confined to remnant forest patches.^[69] Assessments for both plants and invertebrates suffer from elevated data deficiencies, with 66% of invertebrate listings lacking population trend information and persistent gaps in monitoring for understudied taxa, leading to higher uncertainty in CR designations.^[70] ^[49]

Conservation Responses

Strategies and Interventions

Protected areas represent a primary intervention for safeguarding habitats of critically endangered species, encompassing land and water protection measures that restrict human encroachment and resource extraction. These designations, as classified by the IUCN, form the basis of in situ conservation by maintaining ecological integrity and connectivity essential for species persistence.^[71] Anti-poaching initiatives, including ranger patrols and enforcement technologies, target illegal harvesting, which drives declines in many taxa; systematic reviews indicate that detection and enforcement actions reduce poaching rates and support population stability within protected zones.^[72] Captive breeding and reintroduction programs provide ex situ support by propagating individuals in controlled environments for supplementation into wild habitats. These efforts have demonstrated capacity for short-term population augmentation through high survival rates in initial releases, though sustained success depends on minimizing genetic bottlenecks via diverse founder stocks.^[73] The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), signed on March 3, 1973, and effective from July 1, 1975, complements these by regulating cross-border commerce in over 38,000 species, ensuring trade does not exacerbate extinction risks through quotas and bans on Appendix I listings.^[74]^[75] Habitat restoration initiatives focus on reversing degradation by replanting native vegetation and reconnecting fragmented landscapes, directly countering anthropogenic habitat loss. Control of invasive species, which imperil 14% of critically endangered terrestrial vertebrates worldwide (28% on islands), employs methods like targeted eradication to restore competitive balances and trophic structures favoring endemics.^[32]^[76] Economic incentives such as payments for ecosystem services (PES) align landowner behaviors with conservation by compensating for forgone opportunities in habitat maintenance, operating as conditional transfers that yield measurable biodiversity gains through reduced deforestation and sustained land stewardship.^[77] Monitoring protocols integrate camera traps for non-invasive detection of elusive species and genetic sampling for population viability assessments, providing data on abundance, movement, and threats. Community-based involvement in these systems enhances coverage and compliance, with camera trap deployments in participatory frameworks yielding reliable occurrence records that inform adaptive interventions.^[78]^[79] Empirical syntheses confirm that such multifaceted, evidence-guided actions collectively attenuate decline rates across intervened populations.^[80]

Documented Recoveries and Failures

The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) exemplifies a successful recovery among critically endangered birds, with nesting pairs in the contiguous United States dropping to 417 by 1963 due to DDT-induced eggshell thinning, followed by a rebound after the pesticide's ban in 1972 and protections under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, leading to delisting in 2007 as populations exceeded recovery thresholds.^[81]^[82] Similarly, the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) benefited from a 1995 genetic rescue program that translocated eight female pumas from Texas to south Florida, addressing severe inbreeding depression in a remnant population of 20-30 individuals; this intervention increased genetic diversity, reduced congenital defects, and expanded the population to approximately 120-230 by the 2020s, though the subspecies remains endangered.^[83]^[84] The Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) represents a mammalian success, with free-ranging individuals rising from fewer than 100 in the early 2000s to over 2,000 by 2024 through captive breeding, reintroductions, and habitat restoration in Spain and Portugal, prompting an IUCN Red List downlisting from Endangered to Vulnerable in June 2024.^[85] In contrast, the baiji or Yangtze River dolphin (Lipotes vexillifer), listed as Critically Endangered in 1996, was declared functionally extinct in 2007 after a comprehensive 2006 survey yielded no confirmed sightings, with the last verified observation in 2002; primary causes included bycatch in fisheries and habitat degradation from damming and shipping, underscoring failures in timely enforcement despite awareness since the 1970s.^[86]^[87] The vaquita (Phocoena sinus), the world's most endangered cetacean, persists at an estimated 10 or fewer individuals as of 2023 despite international efforts like gillnet bans since 2015 and monitoring programs, with ongoing illegal totoaba fishing in Mexico's Gulf of California evading enforcement due to corruption and insufficient patrols, preventing population stabilization.^[88]^[89] Empirical data indicate low overall recovery rates for critically endangered species, with only about 3% of species listed under frameworks like the U.S. Endangered Species Act achieving full recovery and delisting since 1973, while many remain stalled due to chronic underfunding—global conservation budgets averaging less than $1 million annually per threatened mammal species—and enforcement gaps that allow persistent threats like poaching and habitat loss to prevail.^[90] These outcomes highlight that while targeted interventions can yield verifiable gains in select cases, systemic limitations often result in prolonged critically endangered status rather than widespread delistings, countering narratives of routine success.^[91]

Criticisms and Debates

Methodological and Scientific Critiques

The IUCN Red List criteria, while quantitative, exhibit biases favoring vertebrates, particularly mammals, over plants and invertebrates, as the thresholds for population decline and range reduction are more readily applicable to mobile, well-studied taxa with longitudinal data, whereas sessile or cryptic species often lack comparable metrics, leading to underassessment or reliance on qualitative inferences.^[92]^[93] This vertebrate-centric design stems from the criteria's development prioritizing empirical data from birds and mammals, resulting in disproportionate representation: vertebrates comprise a higher fraction of assessments despite plants and invertebrates forming the majority of biodiversity.^[94] A common misconception confounds the Red List's purpose as a measure of extinction risk with indicators of population recovery or "green status," prompting critiques that assessments are misused to imply broader ecological health rather than narrowly focused probabilistic threats, as clarified in analyses of criteria application errors.^[95] For instance, criterion A (population reduction) is sometimes misapplied by incorporating habitat suitability models without sufficient validation against observed declines, inflating perceived risks for data-poor species, as noted in responses to studies employing novel but uncalibrated metrics. Incomplete or outdated assessments exacerbate overestimation of threats, as partial data on distribution or trends—often decades old—trigger precautionary listings under criteria B or C without accounting for uncertainties, particularly for inconspicuous taxa where true extinction risks may be lower than inferred.^[96] Despite invasive species constituting 14% of threats to critically endangered terrestrial vertebrates globally (rising to 28% on islands), their role is underemphasized in some listings due to inconsistent threat coding or prioritization of habitat loss, overlooking causal chains where invasives drive secondary declines not fully quantified in assessments.^[97]^[31]

Socioeconomic and Policy Controversies

Conservation efforts for critically endangered species often impose substantial economic costs, including direct expenditures and foregone opportunities from land restrictions. In the United States, federal and state agencies reported spending over $1.26 billion on endangered species-related activities in fiscal year 2020, encompassing habitat protection and recovery programs. ^[98] These costs frequently manifest as opportunity expenses, such as the agricultural revenue lost when land is set aside for conservation; one analysis estimated these foregone values as a key component of total conservation outlays in forested regions. ^[99] In developing nations, such measures can exacerbate poverty by limiting land use for farming or infrastructure, where immediate human needs compete directly with species preservation. ^[100] Policy debates highlight tensions between anthropocentric priorities and strict species protection, particularly in low-income countries where economic development drives habitat conversion but also lifts populations out of subsistence living. Critics argue that rigid conservation mandates overlook natural extinction dynamics, as background rates persist independently of human intervention, and overemphasize crisis narratives that undervalue ecosystems' resilience to periodic losses. ^[101] For instance, enforcing habitat set-asides has been linked to depressed land values and delayed development under laws like the U.S. Endangered Species Act, imposing uncompensated burdens on private owners without guaranteed species recovery. ^[102] Proponents of balanced approaches contend that unconstrained economic growth, rather than climate factors alone, correlates more strongly with habitat loss—the primary threat to biodiversity—suggesting policies should target land-use incentives over broad regulatory prohibitions. ^[103] ^[104] Alternative frameworks emphasizing property rights have demonstrated efficacy in aligning conservation with human incentives. Habitat conservation plans under the Endangered Species Act, which permit flexible land use on private property, have reduced extinction risks and supported population recoveries more effectively than blanket restrictions. ^[105] Securing ownership rights encourages stewardship, as landowners invest in species habitats when perceiving long-term value, contrasting with state-led approaches that often provoke resistance and inefficiency. ^[106] This model underscores causal links between secure tenure and sustained biodiversity outcomes, challenging policies that prioritize centralized control amid evidence of their socioeconomic trade-offs. ^[107]

References

[1]
IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria
The IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria are intended to be an easily and widely understood system for classifying species at high risk of global extinction.
[2]
Red List Criteria Summary Sheet
This quick-reference sheet presents all of the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria in one page. This document is available in English, French and Spanish.Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
[3]
[PDF] Guidelines for Using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria
Summary of the five criteria (A-E) used to evaluate if a taxon belongs in a threatened category (Critically. Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable). Page 17. Red ...
[4]
More than 10000 species on brink of extinction need urgent action
Jul 30, 2025 · The study published in Nature Reviews Biodiversity found that 10,443 species are critically endangered, the worst threat category before extinct ...
[5]
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
A taxon is Critically Endangered (CR) when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the criteria A to E for Critically Endangered, and it is ...3.1 · Advanced · About · Frequently Asked Questions
[6]
IUCN Red List criteria fail to recognise most threatened and extinct ...
A species needs >50 % probability of becoming extinct in the wild in the next ten years or three generations to qualify as Critically Endangered under Criterion ...
[7]
Close to extinction: the status of Critically Endangered species
Jul 4, 2025 · No fewer than 10,443 species of animal, plant and fungi found on Earth are so close to the brink of extinction that they are classified as ...
[8]
IUCN Red List categories and criteria, version 3.1, second edition
Jan 1, 2012 · The IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria are intended to be an easily and widely understood system for classifying species at high risk of global extinction.
[9]
[PDF] IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria
Feb 9, 2000 · A taxon is Critically Endangered when the best available evidence indicates that it meets any of the following criteria (A to E), and it is ...
[10]
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
The IUCN Red List is crucial not only for helping to identify those species in need of targeted recovery efforts, but also for focusing the conservation agenda ...Frequently Asked Questions · How the Red List is Used · Citing The IUCN Red List
[11]
The dynamics underlying avian extinction trajectories forecast ... - NIH
Dec 18, 2019 · We model observed trajectories through IUCN Red List extinction risk categories for all bird species globally over 28 years, and estimate an overall effective ...
[12]
Frequently Asked Questions - IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
The IUCN Red List does not include Not Evaluated species. Critically Endangered species may also be tagged as Possibly Extinct or Possibly Extinct in the Wild.What is The IUCN Red List of... · What are The IUCN Red List...
[13]
IUCN (1964) Red list of threatened species.
The 1964 IUCN list is a preliminary list of rare mammals and birds, created by the Survival Service Commission of IUCN and the International Council for Bird ...
[14]
Seventy five years of experience | IUCN
In 1964, IUCN established the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™, which has since evolved into the world's most comprehensive data source on the global ...
[15]
[PDF] THE lUCN MAMMAL RED DATA BOOK - IUCN Portals
... Sir Peter Scott, then Chairman of the. SSC, had the idea of publishing this information as a Red Data Book series aimed at drawing public attention to the ...
[16]
Sir Peter Markham Scott CH. 14 September 1909—29 August 1989
Jul 27, 2022 · In 1963, Scott was appointed chairman of the IUCN Survival Service Commission. He devised the Red list of threatened species as a means of ...
[17]
Present-day risk assessment would have predicted the extinction of ...
This study demonstrates that this risk-indicator may have been the sole means by which the risk to the passenger pigeon could have been detected early enough.
[18]
[PDF] In Focus The IUCN Red List - UNESCO World Heritage Centre
The concept of the Red Data Book ... nated with Sir Peter Scott in 1963, with the first two volumes (on mammals and birds) published in 1966. IUCN Red Data Books.
[19]
The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation - ScienceDirect.com
Beyond subjective expert opinion The first Red List assessments relied on the experience and common sense of experts, without following a protocol, as it was ...Missing: early | Show results with:early
[20]
Comparison between versions 2.3 (1994) and 3.1 ... - IUCN Red List
This document summarizes the differences between the two versions of the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria.
[21]
[PDF] 1994 lUCN Red List of - Threatened - IUCN Portals
BirdLife International have, as in previous editions, been responsible for the basic list of bird species considered threatened, and for their ...
[22]
IUCN Red List categories and criteria, version 3.1
Jan 1, 2001 · The IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria provide an easily and widely understood system for classifying species at high risk of global extinction.
[23]
[PDF] Comparison between versions 2.3 (1994) and 3.1 (2001)
The table below shows the difference between the two versions of the Red List Categories and. Criteria. IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. 2001 (ver. 3.1).
[24]
[PDF] IUCN RED LIST
Oct 3, 2025 · In March 2025, more than 47,000 species on the IUCN Red List are threatened with extinction (Figure 1). Recognising the importance of including ...
[25]
First 1000 fungi on IUCN Red List reveal growing threats
Gland, Switzerland, 27 March 2025 (IUCN) – The number of fungi species on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ has surpassed 1,000, confirming that ...Missing: shift | Show results with:shift
[26]
Five drivers of the nature crisis - UNEP
Sep 5, 2023 · IAS have devastating impacts on native plant and animal life, causing the decline or even extinction of native species and negatively affecting ...Missing: IUCN | Show results with:IUCN
[27]
The direct drivers of recent global anthropogenic biodiversity loss
Nov 9, 2022 · We show that land/sea use change has been the dominant direct driver of recent biodiversity loss worldwide.
[28]
Unsustainable fishing and hunting for bushmeat driving ... - IUCN
Jul 18, 2019 · Overfishing has pushed two families of rays to the brink of extinction, while hunting for bushmeat and habitat loss have led to the decline of seven primate ...
[29]
New Guidelines on Harvesting Threatened Species - IUCN
May 16, 2025 · Overexploitation of wild species is one of the key drivers of biodiversity loss, posing a threat to 27% of threatened species. Overfishing, for ...
[30]
Overfishing drives over one-third of all sharks andrays toward a ...
Overfishing is the universal threat affecting all 391 threatened species and is the sole threat for 67.3% of species and interacts with three other threats for ...Missing: hunting | Show results with:hunting
[31]
[PDF] The IUCN Red List and invasive alien species: an analysis of ...
IAS are driving many species to a higher level of extinction risk, impacting 25.5% of species assessed as threatened (i.e. Critically Endangered, Endangered, ...
[32]
The threat of invasive species to IUCN-listed critically endangered ...
This review reveals that, globally, invasive species threaten 14% (28% on islands) of critically endangered terrestrial vertebrate species (birds, mammals and ...
[33]
The greatest threats to species - Conservation Biology - Wiley
Mar 26, 2022 · Of the 20,784 species for which data were available, 88.3% were impacted by habitat destruction, 26.6% by overexploitation, 25% by invasives, ...
[34]
Human Population Density and Extinction Risk in the World's ...
Where people are more numerous, species may be threatened by direct persecution and exploitation as well as habitat loss. In such regions, species with slow ...
[35]
Why species become endangered (article) | Khan Academy
Species are as likely to go extinct from human impacts as they are from natural causes, including competition and selective pressures. (Choice C). Most species ...
[36]
Evolution: Library: The Current Mass Extinction - PBS
The background level of extinction known from the fossil record is about one species per million species per year, or between 10 and 100 species per year ...Missing: paleontological | Show results with:paleontological
[37]
Overview of chytrid emergence and impacts on amphibians - PMC
Chytridiomycosis is an emerging infectious disease of amphibians that affects over 700 species on all continents where amphibians occur.
[38]
Survival of small populations under demographic stochasticity
We find a strongly enhanced extinction risk if stochasticity in sex ratio and fluctuating population size act simultaneously as compared to the case where each ...
[39]
Demographic Stochasticity, Allee Effects, and Extinction
Demographic stochasticity has a substantial influence on the growth of small populations and consequently on their extinction risk. Mating system is one of ...
[40]
Impacts of demographic and environmental stochasticity on ...
Demographic stochasticity usually has a greater impact on small-scale populations, while environmental stochasticity can produce similar extinction probability ...
[41]
Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction - PubMed
Aug 26, 2014 · On the basis of these results, we concluded that typical rates of background extinction may be closer to 0.1 E/MSY.Missing: paleontological | Show results with:paleontological
[42]
Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction
Aug 26, 2014 · On the basis of these results, we concluded that typical rates of background extinction may be closer to 0.1 E/MSY.Missing: paleontological | Show results with:paleontological
[43]
Global Extinction Rates: Why Do Estimates Vary So Wildly?
Aug 17, 2015 · Only about 800 extinctions have been documented in the past 400 years, according to data held by the International Union for the Conservation of ...Missing: paleontological | Show results with:paleontological
[44]
A global map of species at risk of extinction due to natural hazards
Jun 17, 2024 · This study explores the global overlap between species distributions and the occurrences of earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, and volcanoes.
[45]
Scientists' warning – The outstanding biodiversity of islands is in peril
Volcanic activity may either destroy entire islands or sterilize large areas, and gravitational land-slides can displace significant portions of the island area ...Missing: eruptions | Show results with:eruptions
[46]
2,000 species at high risk of extinction from natural disasters, study ...
Jul 25, 2025 · More than 2,000 terrestrial vertebrate species face a high risk of extinction from natural hazards, including hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic ...Missing: cyclones | Show results with:cyclones
[47]
Arctic seals threatened by climate change, birds decline globally
Oct 10, 2025 · This IUCN Red List update includes reassessments of 1,360 bird species and completes the eighth comprehensive assessment of all bird species ...<|separator|>
[48]
First IUCN Red List Update of 2025
Apr 2, 2025 · The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species was updated last week (27th March) to include an additional 892 tree species, bringing the total ...
[49]
Barometer of Life - IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
Currently, the main gaps in coverage that IUCN and the Red List Partners are working on are plants, invertebrates, fungi, and freshwater and marine species. To ...The Goal: 260,000 Species · Progress So Far · Limitations Of The Current...
[50]
Summary Statistics - IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
The IUCN Red List is updated. For each Red List update, IUCN provides summaries of the numbers of species in each category, by taxonomic group and by country.
[51]
[PDF] IUCN Red List version 2023-1: Table 2
Dec 11, 2023 · Table 2 shows changes in threatened species (CR, EN, VU) from 1996-2023, but these numbers reflect increased assessment efforts, not ...
[52]
Red List Index (RLI) - IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
The Red List Index (RLI) shows trends in overall extinction risk for species, and is used by governments to track their progress towards targets for reducing ...
[53]
Arctic seals threatened by climate change, birds decline globally
Oct 10, 2025 · The IUCN Red List now includes 172,620 species of which 48,646 are threatened with extinction. “Today's Red List update, launched at the IUCN ...
[54]
News | IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
The 2022-2 IUCN Red List highlights a barrage of threats affecting marine species, including illegal and unsustainable fishing, pollution, climate change and ...<|separator|>
[55]
https://news.mongabay.com/short-article/20-animal-species-on-the-road-to-recovery-iucn-red-list-update/
[56]
https://iucn.org/story/202510/five-key-takeaways-conservation-action-iucn-congress-2025
[57]
Media Releases - IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
IUCN issues media releases for updates of the Red List. Recent releases include the first 1,000 fungi on the list and that over one in three tree species face ...<|separator|>
[58]
[PDF] IUCN RED LIST
Oct 3, 2025 · Revealed that the conservation status of the Iberian Lynx (Lynx pardinus) improved from. Endangered to Vulnerable, with the population ...
[59]
New Findings Reveal Vaquitas Outside Protected Areas Following ...
Dec 26, 2024 · IUCN – SSC Cetacean Specialist Group / Critically Endangered / New Findings Reveal Vaquitas Outside Protected Areas Following May 2024 ...
[60]
2024 Vaquita Survey - Sea Shepherd Conservation Society
Jun 11, 2024 · Survey data shows between 6-8 Vaquita were seen during the 2024 survey which is a decline from the 8 -13 Vaquita seen in 2023.Missing: IUCN | Show results with:IUCN
[61]
Yangtze giant softshell turtle - IGB Berlin
Females can lay over 50 eggs per clutch. Three to four clutches per year were observed. It is assessed as Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List.
[62]
Development and Application of a Portable Environmental DNA Test ...
Oct 3, 2024 · Swinhoe's (or Yangtze) giant softshell turtle (Rafetus swinhoei) is considered among the rarest species in the world. As of 2024, only two ...Introduction · Materials and Methods · Results · Discussion
[63]
https://www.statista.com/statistics/269910/red-list-endangered-animals-2010-and-2000/
[64]
Persoonia pauciflora P.H.Weston - World Flora Online
IUCN Red List Status. Critically Endangered · Critically Endangered. Provided by: [D].The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. cr. External Links. NCBI ...
[65]
[PDF] National Recovery Plan North Rothbury Persoonia ... - DCCEEW
Persoonia pauciflora is listed as critically endangered under both the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and the NSW ...
[66]
Quantifying anthropogenic threats to orchids using the IUCN Red List
Most orchids were at risk from more than one type of threat, with an average of three threats per species and only 170 species listed with a single major threat ...
[67]
Conservation of terrestrial invertebrates: a review of IUCN and ...
Apr 28, 2020 · Among all myriapods assessed (local lists and IUCN Red List), 24% are considered as threatened (Critically Endangered ( CR ), Endangered ( EN ) ...Introduction · Results · Discussion
[68]
[PDF] The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ 2009 update
72 species of partulid snails (Polynesian tree snails) were assessed for this year (most of these are reassessments of species that were already on the Red List) ...
[69]
An Expedition to Rescue Crictically Endangered Snails - Mossy Earth
All four species are deemed critically endangered according to IUCN criteria. The species in question are Discula lyelliana, Atlantica calathoides, Geomitra ...
[70]
A strategy for the next decade to address data deficiency in ...
Jul 12, 2020 · Of all species on the red list (51,357 species), 44% are coded as “population trend unknown,” whereas 66% for invertebrates are coded as such ( ...
[71]
Conservation Actions Classification Scheme (Version 2.0)
1. Land/water protection · 2. Land/water management · 3. Species management · 4. Education & awareness · 5. Law & policy · 6 Livelihood, economic & other incentives.
[72]
The effectiveness of interventions to manage international wildlife ...
Sep 4, 2024 · Our systematic review examined four intervention types: “laws and regulations”, “detection and enforcement”, “efforts to reduce threats to ...
[73]
How well can captive breeding programs conserve biodiversity? A ...
First, many supplementation programs have achieved a measure of short-term success in terms of boosting overall numbers of fish, either through high ...
[74]
What is CITES?
On 20 December 2013, at its 68th session, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) proclaimed 3 March – the day of signature of the Convention on ...
[75]
[PDF] Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild ...
Sep 15, 2023 · The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) regulates trade in specimens of over 38,000 species ...
[76]
Habitat Restoration | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Their unwelcome presence can destroy ecosystems and cost millions of dollars. Learn more about invasive species control, dam removal, and culvert replacements.
[77]
Payments for Ecosystem Services - Ecosystem Marketplace
Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are economic arrangements rewarding conservation, often through direct public payments to landowners.
[78]
Using camera traps to enhance community‐based management of ...
May 30, 2025 · Community‐based management and monitoring of biodiversity has emerged as a cost‐effective strategy for providing credible data, informing ...
[79]
Community camera-trapping: an innovative way of empowering ...
Mar 2, 2022 · This initiative links the amount of community benefits directly to the number of wild animals recorded, incentivising conservation.Missing: genetics | Show results with:genetics
[80]
First-of-its-kind study shows conservation interventions are critical to ...
Apr 26, 2024 · This new analysis is the best evidence to date that conservation interventions make a difference, slowing the loss of species' populations and ...
[81]
Bald Eagle Decline & Recovery - American Eagle Foundation
By 1963, only 417 nesting pairs were found in the lower 48 states. DDT was banned from use in the United States in 1972 and in Canada in 1973, making it ...
[82]
Eagle Management | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Bald eagles were removed from the endangered species list in August 2007 because their populations recovered sufficiently, and their population has continued to ...Missing: numbers | Show results with:numbers
[83]
[PDF] Florida Panther and the Genetic Restoration Program
A decade after the program was first implemented, panther biologists believe the program to be a success. In 1995 when the program began, between 20-30 Florida ...
[84]
Researchers find interbreeding intervention for Florida panthers ...
Jul 30, 2025 · The findings highlight the success of the genetic rescue, but also that its effects might be transient and that continued management of the ...
[85]
Iberian lynx rebounding thanks to conservation action - IUCN Red List
Jun 20, 2024 · “There is still a lot of work to do to ensure that Iberian lynx populations survive and the species recovers throughout its indigenous range.
[86]
First human-caused extinction of a cetacean species? - PMC - NIH
We are forced to conclude that the baiji is now likely to be extinct, probably due to unsustainable by-catch in local fisheries.
[87]
Baiji - Whale & Dolphin Conservation USA
They were pronounced extinct in 2007 following the failure of a dedicated 6-week expedition in 2006 to find a single one. There have been no confirmed baiji ...Missing: date | Show results with:date
[88]
Vaquita - Marine Mammal Commission
The tiny vaquita porpoise is the world's most endangered marine mammal. Its numbers are decreasing with approximately 10 remaining.<|separator|>
[89]
USMCA Council to Investigate Mexico's Failure to Protect the ...
Jun 27, 2024 · Mexico has not enforced its own fishing and wildlife trade laws, and that failure is causing the near-extinction of the vaquita. Vaquita are ...
[90]
The Endangered Species Act at 50 | PERC
Oct 17, 2023 · Of these, 57 (3 percent of all listed species) have recovered, while 11 (1 percent) have gone extinct. Most listed species (73 percent) are ...Missing: IUCN | Show results with:IUCN
[91]
Tracking species recovery status to improve U.S. endangered ...
Jul 23, 2024 · We found that approximately 38% of species reviewed appeared to have no current path to full recovery and delisting under the ESA, meaning the ...
[92]
Changing trends and persisting biases in three decades of ...
This situation is consistent with the fact that vertebrate groups are proportionally more represented in the IUCN Red List than invertebrates or plants (with a ...Missing: critiques | Show results with:critiques
[93]
Taxonomic bias and international biodiversity conservation research
Jul 26, 2016 · We found extreme bias in conservation research effort on threatened vertebrates compared with lesser-studied invertebrates in both terrestrial and aquatic ...
[94]
Drivers of taxonomic bias in conservation research: a global ...
Apr 7, 2020 · The scientific capacity of the countries where a species is found is a strong driver of conservation research bias.Missing: critiques | Show results with:critiques
[95]
Clarifying misconceptions of extinction risk assessment with the ...
Apr 1, 2016 · The Red List criteria were established to measure the relative risk of extinction among a broad array of eukaryotic taxa. Species are allocated ...<|separator|>
[96]
What Scientific Data Are Being Used to Justify the Listing of ...
May 15, 2018 · Here, we provide an assessment of the type of evidence that is currently being used by assessors to justify species listings in the Class ...
[97]
The threat of invasive species to IUCN-listed critically endangered ...
Jan 21, 2021 · This review reveals that, globally, invasive species threaten 14% (28% on islands) of all critically endangered terrestrial vertebrate species (birds, mammals ...
[98]
ESA at 50: The Destructive Cost of the ESA | U.S. Fish & Wildlife ...
For FY 2020, Federal and State agencies identified domestic and foreign expenditures related to species and land totaled $1,264,141,486. This included the ...
[99]
Mapping the Economic Costs and Benefits of Conservation - PMC
Oct 31, 2006 · Opportunity costs of conservation were defined as the expected agricultural value of each forested parcel of land, because this was an estimate ...<|separator|>
[100]
Global justice and the opportunity costs of conservation
Sep 30, 2022 · Opportunity costs can represent a significant portion of the costs associated with conservation projects and frequently outstrip other kinds ...
[101]
Alarmist by bad design: Strongly popularized unsubstantiated claims ...
Mar 19, 2019 · In fact, many of the “extinctions” in the reviewed papers apparently represent losses of species from individual sites or regions, and it is ...
[102]
[PDF] THE LAND MARKET IMPACTS OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ...
Critics have raised concerns about costs imposed on private landowners, in terms of both lowering of property values and delaying development—resulting in ...
[103]
Climate change is not the principal driver of biodiversity loss
Jan 20, 2022 · The current perception that climate change is the principal threat to biodiversity is at best premature. Although highly relevant, it detracts focus and effort.
[104]
Economic growth, government efficiency, and biodiversity loss
Nov 4, 2023 · When the economic growth level reaches a certain threshold, increasing it reduces the intensity of the biodiversity loss. Government efficiency ...
[105]
Endangered species conservation on private land - ScienceDirect.com
Our results indicate that HCPs are effective in promoting the ESA's goals: species that have an HCP are less likely to become extinct or decline and more ...
[106]
To Protect Endangered Species, Secure Property Rights - PERC
Mar 2, 2017 · Property rights are an effective means for conserving and recovering endangered species. If someone owns these animals and sees some gain from ...
[107]
The Economics of Endangered Species - Resources Magazine
Oct 25, 2010 · Economics can provide important insights about better design of conservation incentives. By targeting areas based on opportunity costs of ...