118
The shaping of the global protected area estate
1 possesses a population of one or more species Red
Listed (See Box 4.1) as vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered;
2 provides an important site contributing signifi cantly
to the conservation of restricted - range species (i.e.
those of ranges < 50,000 km
2 );
3 assists in meeting the target of having adequate representation in a network of all species restricted to a
particular biome;
4 represents a key site for congregating species,
including waterbirds, some seabirds and migratory
species. (See cited publications for more detail.)
As pointed out by Eken et al . (2004) , the fi rst of these
criteria addresses the issue of vulnerability, while the
other three fall under the other key consideration of
planning protected area networks, i.e. the irreplaceability of the attribute (see Chapter 6 for further discussion of these concepts).
The IBA criteria allow the nesting of additional criteria to enable the importance of sites to be identifi ed
of quantifi able site - selection criteria which were published, together with an accompanying site inventory,
as Important Bird Areas of Europe (Grimmett & Jones,
1989 ; Heath et al ., 2000 ).
Projects were subsequently launched to identify
IBAs in other regions and to develop a network of sites
for the protection of the world ’ s avifauna (Table 5.7 ).
The criteria developed to identify European IBAs were
adapted, developed and standardized into criteria for
application worldwide (Bennun & Fishpool, 2000 ;
Heath et al ., 2000 ; Fishpool & Evans, 2001 ). This
approach complements the Endemic Bird Areas
approach by focusing on sites rather than larger areas,
and by its focus on three additional criteria. The ICBP
was renamed BirdLife International in 1993, and
details of both schemes can be found on their website
( www.birdlife.org/ ).
The four principal criteria (level ‘ A ’ criteria) for a site
to qualify in the IBA programme may be crudely summarized as follows:
Table 5.7 Properties of the Important Bird Areas (IBA) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA) schemes (key reference:
Eken et al. , 2004 ; and see www.birdlife.org/action/science/sites/index.html ) .
Organization
Birdlife International (formerly, International Council for Bird Preservation), now in alliance
with Conservation International and others.
Lead authors
e.g. Grimmett & Jones (1989) , Heath et al. (2000) .
General goal
Identify sites critical for the persistence of a valued natural attribute or attributes.
Purpose
Identify, protect and manage a suite of sites that are important for the long - term viability of
natural occurring populations of species across the range of those species for which a
site - based approach is appropriate.
Key design
consideration
Construct a set of criteria that capture key dimensions of the spatial distribution of species
and that are relevant to conservation action (endangerment, restricted - range,
characteristic, assemblage and concentrations) and that can be applied using quantitative
measures of species presence. Through the development, application and adoption of
such criteria, create a common international standard for identifying important sites for the
conservation of biodiversity.
Scale
As of 2009, nearly 11,000 sites in some 200 countries and territories had been identifi ed as
Important Bird Areas. Site sizes can vary from the occasional very large area ( > 1 million ha)
to tiny ( < 10 ha) sites, each of which qualifi es by one of the four level A criteria (see text).
Explicitness and
reproducibility
Good: the IBA and KBA schemes each provide four main criteria, with Fishpool & Evans
(2001) and Eken et al. (2004) providing helpful commentary on choice of thresholds in the
KBA version, and data sheets published in support of each designated site. In the case of
IBAs, the basis of site selection and details of criteria application have been made publicly
available at www.birdlife.org/datazone . The selection of sites from an array of potential ones
is conducted by self - appointed groups of experts with limited external review or critique.
The shaping of the global protected area estate
1 possesses a population of one or more species Red
Listed (See Box 4.1) as vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered;
2 provides an important site contributing signifi cantly
to the conservation of restricted - range species (i.e.
those of ranges < 50,000 km
2 );
3 assists in meeting the target of having adequate representation in a network of all species restricted to a
particular biome;
4 represents a key site for congregating species,
including waterbirds, some seabirds and migratory
species. (See cited publications for more detail.)
As pointed out by Eken et al . (2004) , the fi rst of these
criteria addresses the issue of vulnerability, while the
other three fall under the other key consideration of
planning protected area networks, i.e. the irreplaceability of the attribute (see Chapter 6 for further discussion of these concepts).
The IBA criteria allow the nesting of additional criteria to enable the importance of sites to be identifi ed
of quantifi able site - selection criteria which were published, together with an accompanying site inventory,
as Important Bird Areas of Europe (Grimmett & Jones,
1989 ; Heath et al ., 2000 ).
Projects were subsequently launched to identify
IBAs in other regions and to develop a network of sites
for the protection of the world ’ s avifauna (Table 5.7 ).
The criteria developed to identify European IBAs were
adapted, developed and standardized into criteria for
application worldwide (Bennun & Fishpool, 2000 ;
Heath et al ., 2000 ; Fishpool & Evans, 2001 ). This
approach complements the Endemic Bird Areas
approach by focusing on sites rather than larger areas,
and by its focus on three additional criteria. The ICBP
was renamed BirdLife International in 1993, and
details of both schemes can be found on their website
( www.birdlife.org/ ).
The four principal criteria (level ‘ A ’ criteria) for a site
to qualify in the IBA programme may be crudely summarized as follows:
Table 5.7 Properties of the Important Bird Areas (IBA) and Key Biodiversity Areas (KBA) schemes (key reference:
Eken et al. , 2004 ; and see www.birdlife.org/action/science/sites/index.html ) .
Organization
Birdlife International (formerly, International Council for Bird Preservation), now in alliance
with Conservation International and others.
Lead authors
e.g. Grimmett & Jones (1989) , Heath et al. (2000) .
General goal
Identify sites critical for the persistence of a valued natural attribute or attributes.
Purpose
Identify, protect and manage a suite of sites that are important for the long - term viability of
natural occurring populations of species across the range of those species for which a
site - based approach is appropriate.
Key design
consideration
Construct a set of criteria that capture key dimensions of the spatial distribution of species
and that are relevant to conservation action (endangerment, restricted - range,
characteristic, assemblage and concentrations) and that can be applied using quantitative
measures of species presence. Through the development, application and adoption of
such criteria, create a common international standard for identifying important sites for the
conservation of biodiversity.
Scale
As of 2009, nearly 11,000 sites in some 200 countries and territories had been identifi ed as
Important Bird Areas. Site sizes can vary from the occasional very large area ( > 1 million ha)
to tiny ( < 10 ha) sites, each of which qualifi es by one of the four level A criteria (see text).
Explicitness and
reproducibility
Good: the IBA and KBA schemes each provide four main criteria, with Fishpool & Evans
(2001) and Eken et al. (2004) providing helpful commentary on choice of thresholds in the
KBA version, and data sheets published in support of each designated site. In the case of
IBAs, the basis of site selection and details of criteria application have been made publicly
available at www.birdlife.org/datazone . The selection of sites from an array of potential ones
is conducted by self - appointed groups of experts with limited external review or critique.