1. Supporting information IUCN Red List assessments

2. Components of an IUCN Red List assessment
Red List category and criteria
Purple Skimmer Libellula jesseana
Vulnerable A2a;B2ab(iii)
Documentation supporting the category and criteria
Population size, trend and status; range; threats; conservation measures; etc.
Map of species’ distribution
As you now know, a Red List assessment is not just the species’ name and the category and criteria under which it is listed – full documentation is an essential part of a Red List assessment.

3. Purposes of supporting information:
Support and justify each Red List assessment.
Permit basic analysis of Red List status across species (including calculating the Red List Index).
Allow the Red List website to function properly (allow users to search and find information on the website).
The detailed supporting information provided with each Red List assessment fulfils three main purposes:
The supporting information is displayed on the Red List website and provides Red List users with a clear explanation of why the species qualifies for the assigned category and criteria, through detailing the available knowledge, data, and information sources used to lead the assessor to that conclusion. This includes a written summary of what is currently known about the species’ range, population size and trends, habitat requirements, and threats.
The data recorded in the supporting information enables users of the Red List website to perform basic searches, allowing them to quickly find lists of species in particular taxonomic groups, Red List Categories, habitats, countries, or those that are affected by particular threats, etc.
Red List data from the supporting information provided with assessments are used for scientific analyses, such as those presented in various scientific papers and Red List publications. This allows us to see the proportion of species within different taxonomic groups that are threatened, their geographic distribution, the nature of the threats impacting biodiversity, etc. Such analyses underpin communications and advocacy materials to advance conservation of these species.
Within SIS, there are many data fields available to record a whole suite of information: some of these are essential to support the Red List assessment, and some are there to capture additional information for analyses and communication purposes. IUCN has developed a list of required, recommended and optional supporting information to include in a Red List assessment, which you will receive.

4. Full documentation is an essential part of a Red List assessment
The Red List is a scientific publication, regularly used and cited all around the world.
Scientific paper standards (stand-alone pdf versions of each assessment) require documentation standards be maintained.
The Red List informs conservation decisions: these must be based on well-documented information.
There are many reasons why maintaining high documentation standards for Red List assessments is important:
The IUCN Red List is a scientific publication that is widely cited as a respected data source. As with any data source, it is important to maintain the scientific rigour of the data and provide supporting evidence for the assessments – this rigour is one reason the IUCN Red List is accepted and used in so many different ways, and why it is considered the “gold standard” for information on conservation status of species.
In the future, each assessment on the IUCN Red List may be published as a scientific article (available as a stand-alone PDF with its own DOI), so we must maintain scientific publication standards, and also consistency between assessments.
The IUCN Red List informs important conservation decisions at local, national and global levels, and helps to guide conservation priorities and resource allocation. These decisions have a major impact and must be based on well-founded and well-documented information.
Red List assessments shouldn’t be done just once; IUCN recommends species be reassessed every 5-10 years. When doing reassessments, it’s important to know what information was considered and how decisions were made during the previous assessment; this information is captured in the documentation.
Essentially, without proper documentation the Red List is just a list of names and categories – the real data is contained in the supporting documentation, and this is what is most useful for informing conservation.
Proper documentation allows for informed reassessments.
Without proper documentation, the Red List is just a list – the documentation contains the useful information.

5. Red List Documentation
All species in the Red List have supporting documentation.
Justifies the selected category and criteria.
Allows analysis of Red List data (information coded using standard Classification Schemes).
Taxonomy including authority details.
Common names
Red List Category and Criteria
Countries of occurrence
Map of distribution
Rationale for the assessment (supporting the criteria used)
Habitat preferences (text & codes)
Major Threats (text and codes)
Conservation Measures in place & needed (text and codes)
Citations list
Reasons for any category changes
Names of assessors
All assessments submitted for inclusion in the IUCN Red List have supporting documentation, which justifies the selected category and criteria. This documentation is in the form of text (which gives background information about the species and justifies the assessment), and Classification Scheme codes (which allow the Red List data to be analysed and gives us an idea of the status of biodiversity). The basic information included in Red List documentation includes:
Taxonomic information and common names
Red List Category and Criteria
Countries where the species is found
Distribution map
Rationale for the assessment
Habitat, threat and conservation information
Bibliography
Reasons for changes in the assessment
Names of the assessors

6. The Documentation Standard and Consistency Checks outline all of the documentation requirements and formatting and style guidelines that should be followed for Red List assessments. Be sure to read this, and follow it when entering data into SIS (or another data-entry system, if not using SIS).

7. Regional Red List Documentation
Note to Trainers: Hide this slide if not giving a regional Red Listing workshop
For regional Red Lists, the regional Red List authorities are free to follow whichever documentation standards they prefer. However, IUCN recommends several elements be included in a regional Red List (e.g. regional and global Categories and Criteria, % of global population in the region, common name, summary of supporting documentation). These recommendations are outlined in the “Regional Guidelines” and should be consulted by regional Red List authorities before publishing their regional Red List.

8. How can Red List Assessors ensure assessments are high quality?
Understand the Categories & Criteria and apply them properly
Justify the assessments with thorough supporting data
Follow the documentation standards
Provide relevant references
Submit a good map
Double check for consistency and for errors
Work with other relevant groups doing Red List assessments
If you’ll remember back to Day 1, one of the first things we told you was what Red List assessors can do to ensure the assessments they submit are high quality. Providing the right kind of documentation plays a role in more than half of these steps.

9. Documentation on the Red List website
Lyre Head Lizard (Lyriocephalus scutatus)
Let’s take another look at an assessment from the Red List website, to see what information is reported.

10. Lyre Head Lizard Lyriocephalus scutatus
This is an assessment as visible on the Red List website. These accounts are read by the public, who might not read any other information about the species, so it’s important that the assessment be written using familiar language (not be too scientific) and that each assessment stand alone as a story about the current status of the species.
The taxonomic information is reported at the top of the page, including any common names and/or synonyms. This is followed by the assessment information, including the date of the assessment; names of the assessors, reviewers and contributors; and a justification – or rationale – that summarizes and supports the category and criteria given.
If we take a closer look at the rationale, we can see that it explains why the species has been listed as NT. In this case, EOO is 17,400 km² and there are several threats, including ongoing deforestation and habitat loss, and collecting for the pet trade. However, it’s not severely fragmented and occurs in more than 10 locations, which is why it doesn’t qualify for Vulnerable. A summary of other relevant information (conservation actions, etc.) is also given here.

11. Lyre Head Lizard Lyriocephalus scutatus
Next it shows the geographic range, including countries where the species occurs, population information including the population trend, and habitat and ecology information, including summary text and the coded habitats that are entered into SIS, our online data management system. All of the information visible on the Red List website comes directly from SIS, which is why its important to enter the data correctly into SIS – whatever is entered and published will be publicly visible. Clicking on the map will bring up a more detailed range map.

12. Lyre Head Lizard Lyriocephalus scutatus
Scrolling further down we see the documentation text and coded fields for threats and conservation actions…

13. Lyre Head Lizard Lyriocephalus scutatus
…and finally the bibliography and citation for the assessment.

14. Supporting information
text fields in SIS
The Documentation Standard and Consistency Checks explain what should be included in each text field, so right now we’ll discuss briefly what kind of information to report. Please be sure to read the Documentation Standard and Consistency Checks for a full outline of what information to include in each text field.

15. Taxonomic Notes: Distribution: Population:
Described recent taxonomic changes.
Summarize current taxonomic doubts or debates about the validity or identity of the taxon.
Undescribed species: provide details of who is working on a description and where the type specimens are held.
Distribution:
Summarize current global range & describe known historic range.
Population:
Summarize data available for population size estimate and information to indicate current population trend (including subpopulations and specific parts of the range).
If no quantitative information: record if species is common, abundant, rare, etc.

16. Habitats & Ecology: Use & Trade:
Describe habitats & ecological requirements the species needs to survive.
Behavioural or life cycle factors that make the species particularly vulnerable to specific threats.
Does not need to be extensive – behaviour, diet, etc. not required unless relevant to Red List assessment (e.g., it has a particular life cycle, growth pattern or behaviour that makes it vulnerable to specific threats).
Use & Trade:
If applicable, summarize how used (e.g. killing individuals, harvesting parts without affecting the living individual) and what for (e.g. food, fibre).
Indicate if this use is a threat or is sustainable.

17. Threats:
Describe threats affecting the global population and how these affect individuals (converting habitat, degrading habitat, killing individuals, removing individuals from the wild, etc.).
If no threats, state this.
If threats are unknown, state this and give the reason why (data have not been sought out, species and its specific requirements are not well known, human activities are occurring in the area but the effects of these on the species are not known, etc.)
Do not list all human activities occurring in the area without referring to how this affects (or is likely to affect) the species.

18. Conservation Actions:
Document conservation and research actions currently in place for the species (record specific protected areas, international conventions, or national legislation, etc. that affect the species).
Document essential and realistic conservation and research actions required to improve the species’ status.
Assessment Rationale:
Justify the category and criteria used for the assessment.
Use key issues highlighted elsewhere in the account to summarize why the species qualifies for the category assigned to it.
Do not simply repeat the criteria thresholds Report actual estimates used for data (e.g. EOO, AOO, population size).

19. In general, please…
Enter text in all documentation fields
Use “normal” language
No one word answers
Complete sentences please!
Be specific (e.g. EOO = 4600 km² not EOO < 5000 km²)
Enter references properly (check SIS before doing so!)
Follow citation standards
Follow IUCN style guidelines and Red List terminology
Use consistency checklist

20. Classification Schemes
In addition to the text fields, an assessment includes codes for several kinds of data: habitat, threats to the species, research needed and conservation actions that must be taken to protect the species. These fields are coded according to standardized classification schemes, which standardizes data across taxa and allows us to conduct analyses of the Red List data. This is a screen shot from the coded habitat field in SIS (our online data management system). These codes and their definitions are also available in documents that you will get during or after the workshop.

21. Coded Threats & Conservation Actions
Research Needed
Conservation Actions Needed
In addition to coding the habitats the species uses, we also code the major threats affecting the species, and the most realistic research and conservation actions that need to be taken to protect the species. Again, these codes are available in SIS and in documents that you will be given.

22. Range map tools and guidance
Mapping Wiki:

23. Taxonomic concepts and the IUCN Red List
There are a few points related to taxonomy that must be kept in mind when doing a Red List assessment.

24. Taxonomy is a complicated world!
All Red List taxa should be validly published using the appropriate international nomenclatural codes:
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN)
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (IBZN)
General standard world checklists used for nomenclature on the Red List (with some deviations by SGs)
See “Information Sources & Quality” page on Red List website for a full list.
Taxonomy is obviously very complicated, with new species being described all the time and taxonomic authorities not always in agreement about the correct classification of a species. For this reason, we have set taxonomic standards we follow for species listed on the Red List. All taxa assessed for the Red List (expect for undescribed taxa) must be validly published following the appropriate international nomenclature codes, and should have currently accepted scientific names. We follow standard world species checklists wherever possible (for example, we follow Wilson and Reeder for mammal taxonomy and Eschmeyer for fish taxonomy), though we do sometimes deviate from these when necessary. You can find a list of the checklists we follow on the Red List website.
It’s important to note that the taxonomy used on the IUCN Red List can only be modified through the IUCN Red List Unit. If you disagree with the taxonomy we follow and recommend another, contact the Red List Unit and we can discuss whether to change the taxonomy to follow a different source from the standard.

25. = CHANGING TAXONOMIC CONCEPTS
Another taxonomist’s trip to the greengrocer
One taxonomist’s bag of apples
It’s also important to think about what you’re assessing at any given time, especially in groups where the taxonomy is rapidly changing. Some taxonomists will lump similar organisms under one taxonomic concept; for example, here all of these subpopulations or morphological variants are all considered to be apples. Others will separate these into many different species or subspecies; what is considered an apple here is much different than what the “lumper” considers an apple. This can make a huge difference in the final assessment. =

26. CHANGING TAXONOMIC CONCEPTS
For example, say we assess the apple in 2005, when all of these slightly different organisms are lumped together under one species concept. We determine that the apple is Least Concern. However, soon taxonomists decide that in fact, each of these different subpopulations or morphological variants are different species, so that when we go to assess the apple in 2010, we are only looking at one tiny part of what we assessed in We assess this smaller concept of the apple as Endangered. So, it looks like the apple has undergone a significant decline between 2005 and 2010, when in fact all that has changed is our idea of what the apple is.
This is just one example of why it is important that we consider what taxonomic concept we are assessing when we do a Red List assessment, especially if we are reassessing a species whose taxonomy has changed or a taxonomic group whose taxonomy is under debate. If a taxonomic concept changes, we would almost always remove the old assessment from the Red List and reassess the new taxonomic concept.
2005: Species = LC
2010: Species = EN
The taxonomic concept has changed since 2005, so the 2010 assessment should not include the 2005 assessment as part of its assessment history.