Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,400

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantification of Extinction Risk: IUCN's System for Classifying Threatened Species

MACE, GEORGINA M., COLLAR, NIGEL J., GASTON, KEVIN J., HILTON‐TAYLOR, CRAIG, AKÇAKAYA, H. RESIT, LEADER‐WILLIAMS, NIGEL, MILNER‐GULLAND, E.J., STUART, SIMON N.·2008·Conservation Biology

Abstract

Abstract: The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species was increasingly used during the 1980s to assess the conservation status of species for policy and planning purposes. This use stimulated the development of a new set of quantitative criteria for listing species in the categories of threat: critically endangered, endangered, and vulnerable. These criteria, which were intended to be applicable to all species except microorganisms, were part of a broader system for classifying threatened species and were fully implemented by IUCN in 2000. The system and the criteria have been widely used by conservation practitioners and scientists and now underpin one indicator being used to assess the Convention on Biological Diversity 2010 biodiversity target. We describe the process and the technical background to the IUCN Red List system. The criteria refer to fundamental biological processes underlying population decline and extinction. But given major differences between species, the threatening processes affecting them, and the paucity of knowledge relating to most species, the IUCN system had to be both broad and flexible to be applicable to the majority of described species. The system was designed to measure the symptoms of extinction risk, and uses 5 independent criteria relating to aspects of population loss and decline of range size. A species is assigned to a threat category if it meets the quantitative threshold for at least one criterion. The criteria and the accompanying rules and guidelines used by IUCN are intended to increase the consistency, transparency, and validity of its categorization system, but it necessitates some compromises that affect the applicability of the system and the species lists that result. In particular, choices were made over the assessment of uncertainty, poorly known species, depleted species, population decline, restricted ranges, and rarity; all of these affect the way red lists should be viewed and used. Processes related to priority setting and the development of national red lists need to take account of some assumptions in the formulation of the criteria.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01044.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,400

Metadata

Authors
MACE, G. M., COLLAR, N. J., GASTON, K. J., HILTON‐TAYLOR, C., AKÇAKAYA, H. R., LEADER‐WILLIAMS, N., MILNER‐GULLAND, E. J., & STUART, S. N.
Venue
Conservation Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-12
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
1424-1442
ISSN
  • 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-1739
OpenAlex
W2041344751
Cited by
1,400
References
2
FWCI
38.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantification of Extinction Risk: IUCN's System for Classifying Threatened Species. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01044.x
The paper
MACE, G. M., COLLAR, N. J., GASTON, K. J., HILTON‐TAYLOR, C., AKÇAKAYA, H. R., LEADER‐WILLIAMS, N., MILNER‐GULLAND, E. J., & STUART, S. N. (2008). Quantification of Extinction Risk: IUCN's System for Classifying Threatened Species. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01044.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.