Recommended approach. It is recommended that thorough assessments of environmental drivers are undertaken periodically, and ideally following the completion of comprehensive assessments such as those described above (thereby accessing verified datasets). These assessments should be resourced and drafted centrally, with adequate time and resources for consultation with national experts, who may undertake further consultation with site managers etc. The draft assessments would ideally be prepared and available online in a system that accommodates interaction and feedback. It is recommended that these assessments draw on information gathered as part of the two centralized assessments described above. However, there are substantial differences between the two threat classification schemes described above (IUCN compared with Article 12). Comparison at the top level (Figure 4.1) shows that many of the Article 12 threats cut across more than one of the IUCN threats, and vice versa. Unfortunately, this means that by choosing any one scheme, it is not possible to automatically translate possible results from the other. Figure 4.1: Comparison of the threat classification schemes adopted by the IUCN and that used in Article 12
Appears in 3 contracts
Sources: Agreement on the Conservation of African Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds, Agreement on the Conservation of African Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds, Agreement on the Conservation of African Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds