Prioritization of species populations for Action plans The first step in the AEWA action planning process is a prioritization of which species/populations are most urgently in need of an international conservation and/or management framework. The AEWA Technical Committee is charged with the prioritization of species/populations for the development of Species Action Plans under the Agreement, as requested by MOP5 in Resolution 5.8. As outlined in the Resolution, the Technical Committee is to revise the priority list for Action Plans at its first meeting after each Meeting of the Parties to reflect possible changes to Table 1 of the Action Plan. As agreed at the Technical Committee’s 11th meeting, the following criteria are applied for the selection and prioritization of populations for action planning (to be applied consecutively):
Prioritization of species populations for Action plans The first step in the AEWA action planning process is a prioritization of which species/populations are most urgently in need of an international conservation and/or management framework. The AEWA Technical Committee is charged with the prioritization of species/populations for the development of Species Action Plans under the Agreement, as requested by MOP5 in Resolution 5.8. As outlined in the Resolution, the Technical Committee is to revise the priority list for Action Plans at its first meeting after each Meeting of the Parties to reflect possible changes to Table 1 of the Action Plan. As agreed at the Technical Committee’s 11th meeting, the following criteria are applied for the selection and prioritization of populations for action planning (to be applied consecutively): IUCN Red List status – in descending order: Critically Endangered (CR), Endangered (EN), Vulnerable (VU), Near-threatened (NT) and Least Concern (LC); Population size estimate – in descending order from lowest to highest estimate. The estimates are to be taken from the latest Conservation Status Review (CSR). Where the population size estimate has been given by a range (e.g. 1-10,000) the geometrical mean has been used for the ranking (i.e. 5,000). Populations with exact size estimates (e.g. 5,000) have been ranked higher than populations whose size estimates are presented by a range and the geometrical mean is equal to the size of the populations with an exact estimate (e.g. 5,000 as an exact population estimate is ranked higher than 5,000 as a geometrical mean of the estimate from 1-10,000). When two or more populations have the same population estimate, those belonging to less numerous species within the Agreement area have been ranked higher. Population trend estimate – in descending order: Declining, Fluctuating, Unknown, Stable and Increasing, and with estimates taken from the latest Conservation Status Report. Vulnerability to climate change - classified as high, moderate or low, according to the report on the effects of climate change on migratory waterbirds within the African-Eurasian flyways presented to MOP4 (AEWA/MOP 4.27). In future, there is a need for the Technical Committee to also prioritize populations for management planning. MOP6 is subsequently expected to request the Technical Committee to develop and adopt criteria for the prioritization of species/populations for the development of management plans and to undertake such a prioritiz...
