The 2010 Norwegian Red List for Species
Geographical coverage
| Geographical scale of the assessment | National |
|---|---|
| Country or countries covered | Norway, Svalbard and Jan Mayen |
| Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name |
All Norwegian territories in the northern hemisphere, including marine areas. |
Geographical scale of the assessment
National
Country or countries covered
Norway, Svalbard and Jan Mayen
Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name
All Norwegian territories in the northern hemisphere, including marine areas.
Conceptual framework, methodology and scope
Assessment objectives
Risk assessment for all Norwegian species with adequate knowledge, including their habitats and impact factors.
Mandate for the assessment
NBIC has a national mandate for Red list assessements from the Government.
Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment
Other (please specify)
IUCN Red list methodology
URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted
http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/categories-and-criteria Both general methodology and guidelines for assessment on regional and national levels. http://www.artsdatabanken.no/Article/Article/133641 Norwegian adaption in specific publication on methodology in Norwegian.
System(s) assessed
- Marine
- Coastal
- Island
- Inland water
- Forest and woodland
- Cultivated/Agricultural land
- Grassland
- Mountain
- Dryland
- Polar
- Urban
Species groups assessed
21000 species assessed, covering all major taxonomic groups.
Ecosystem services/functions assessed
Provisioning
Regulating
Supporting Services/Functions
- Habitat maintenance
Cultural Services
Scope of assessment includes
Drivers of change in systems and services
Yes
Impacts of change in services on human well-being
No
Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed
No
Explicit consideration of the role of biodiversity in the systems and services covered by the assessment
Yes
Timing of the assessment
Year assessment started
2009
Year assessment finished
2010
If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish
Periodicity of assessment
Repeated
If repeated, how frequently
Every 4th to 5th year
Assessment outputs
Website(s)
http://www.artsdatabanken.no/Article/Article/133641
Text in both Norwegian and English See also www.biodiversity.no
Report(s)
Communication materials (e.g. brochure, presentations, posters, audio-visual media)
Journal publications
Training materials
Other documents/outputs
Tools and processes
Tools and approaches used in the assessment
- Modelling
- Geospatial analysis
Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component
Scientific assessment within an independent framework. Before the main assessment process information meetings has been held to discuss the knowledge basis and processes with important stakeholder groups.
Key stakeholder groups engaged
In Norway there has been a large debate on red list species in forests and forestry impact. In this perspective
The number of people directly involved in the assessment process
100-1000
Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge
- Scientific information only
Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment
http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/categories-and-criteria
Both general methodology and guidelines for assessment on regional and national levels.
A National database open for public developed and in use. Norwegian only.
Assessment reports peer reviewed
No
Data
Accessibility of data used in assessment
A National database open for public developed and in use. Norwegian only. Here experts provide relevant data used in the assessment and references.
Policy impact
Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions
Important decision-making tool for the Government. Used in other assessment, as indicators, into national objectives/targets etc.
Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment
No
Lessons learnt for future assessments from these reviews
Not relevant
Capacity building
Capacity building needs identified during the assessment
Some areas identified, such as habitat development and effects on species, also habitat quality regarding population developments.
Actions taken by the assessment to build capacity
Workshops, Developing/promoting and providing access to support tools, Formal training
How have gaps in capacity been communicated to the different stakeholders
In meetings and other communications.
Knowledge generation
Gaps in knowledge identified from the assessment
More data and knowledge needed for marine systems and species. Species habitat requirements and ecological connections and traits.
How gaps in knowledge have been communicated to the different stakeholders
In meetings and other communications. Also through the publications and articles in media.
Additional relevant information
New revsion planned in 2015.
