Key indicator facts
Indicator type
State
Applicable for national use
Yes (find out more)
Indicator classification
Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators
Last update
2017
Coverage
Global
Availability
Partners
![]() |
NatureServe View website > |
![]() |
Kew Gardens View website > |
![]() |
IUCN View website > |
![]() |
Zoological Society of London View website > |
![]() |
BirdLife International View website > |
Contact point
Stuart Butchart: Stuart.Butchart@birdlife.org
Indicator disaggregations
Red List Index (pollinating species)
Red List Index (impacts of utilisation)
Red List Index (impacts of fisheries)
Red List Index (impacts of pollution)
Red List Index (species used for food and medicine)
Indicator description
The Red List Index (RLI) shows trends in the extinction risk of sets of species. It requires data from repeated assessments of species using the Red List categories and criteria, which are far more commonly available than detailed reliable time-series of population abundance data. Because such data are generally available for entire suites of species (e.g. all regularly occurring species in a country for a particular taxonomic group) they produce less-biased indicators than those based on a sample selected better-studied species.
Related Aichi Targets
Primary target

Target 12:
By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.
Secondary targets
Target 4:
By 2020, at the latest, Governments, business and stakeholders at all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented plans for sustainable production and consumption and have kept the impacts of use of natural resources well within safe ecological limits.
Target 5:
By 2020, the rate of loss of all natural habitats, including forests, is at least halved and where feasible brought close to zero, and degradation and fragmentation is significantly reduced.
Target 6:
By 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested sustainably, legally and applying ecosystem based approaches, so that overfishing is avoided, recovery plans and measures are in place for all depleted species, fisheries have no significant adverse impacts on threatened species and vulnerable ecosystems and the impacts of fisheries on stocks, species and ecosystems are within safe ecological limits.
Target 7:
By 2020 areas under agriculture, aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably, ensuring conservation of biodiversity.
Target 8:
By 2020, pollution, including from excess nutrients, has been brought to levels that are not detrimental to ecosystem function and biodiversity.
Target 9:
By 2020, invasive alien species and pathways are identified and prioritized, priority species are controlled or eradicated, and measures are in place to manage pathways to prevent their introduction and establishment.
Target 10:
By 2015, the multiple anthropogenic pressures on coral reefs, and other vulnerable ecosystems impacted by climate change or ocean acidification are minimized, so as to maintain their integrity and functioning.
Target 11:
By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.
Target 14:
By 2020, ecosystems that provide essential services, including services related to water, and contribute to health, livelihoods and well-being, are restored and safeguarded, taking into account the needs of women, indigenous and local communities, and the poor and vulnerable.
Primary target

Target 12:
By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.










Related SDGs
![]() |
GOAL 2 - End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture.
|
![]() |
GOAL 11 - Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.
|
![]() |
GOAL 12 - Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns.
|
![]() |
GOAL 14 - Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.
|
![]() |
GOAL 15 - Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.
|
![]() |
GOAL 2 - End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. |
![]() |
GOAL 11 - Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. |
![]() |
GOAL 12 - Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. |
![]() |
GOAL 14 - Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development. |
![]() |
GOAL 15 - Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss. |





Other related MEAs and processes
![]() |
CITES
|
![]() |
CMS
|
![]() |
IPBES Global Assessment Chapters
|
![]() |
IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters
|
![]() |
Ramsar
|
![]() |
UNCCD
|
![]() |
CITES |
![]() |
CMS |
![]() |
IPBES Global Assessment Chapters |
![]() |
IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters |
![]() |
Ramsar |
![]() |
UNCCD |






Partners





Key indicator facts
Indicator type
State
Applicable for national use
Yes (find out more)
Indicator classification
Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators
Last update
2017
Coverage
Global
Availability
Indicator description
The Red List Index (RLI) shows trends in the extinction risk of sets of species. It requires data from repeated assessments of species using the Red List categories and criteria, which are far more commonly available than detailed reliable time-series of population abundance data. Because such data are generally available for entire suites of species (e.g. all regularly occurring species in a country for a particular taxonomic group) they produce less-biased indicators than those based on a sample selected better-studied species.
Contact point
Stuart Butchart: Stuart.Butchart@birdlife.org
Graphs / Diagrams
Figure 1: Red List Index for the world’s mammals (1996-2008), birds (1988-2012), amphibians (1980-2004), corals (1998-2008) and cycads (2003-2015), with an aggregated Red List Index shown in blue. Source: BirdLife International and IUCN (2016).
The Red List Index results can also be viewed and explored on the BIP Dashboard, which includes downloadable graphs of trends. Further summary statistics and graphs are also available through the Red List.
Current storyline
The Red List Index shows that all species groups with known trends are deteriorating in status, as more species move towards extinction than away from it. Cycads are the most threatened group but corals are deteriorating in status fastest, owing to increased frequency of ‘bleaching events’ brought about by climate change. South-East Asia is the region in which mammals are most threatened while birds are most threatened in Oceania. The fungal disease chytridiomycosis is the major driver of declines in amphibians, while unsustainable exploitation and habitat loss are the major driver of cycad declines.
Baseline data-points are available for several other groups, such as reptiles, fishes, sharks, conifers, freshwater crabs and crayfish, dragonflies and various plant groups, several of which are based on a sampled approach given the large numbers of species in some of these groups. Among plants, gymnosperms are the most threatened group.
Underlying data come from the IUCN Red List, which is developed by IUCN and the Red List Partnership (Arizona State University, BirdLife International, Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Conservation International, NatureServe, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Sapienza University of Rome, Texas A&M University, and The Zoological Society of London).
Sampled Red List assessments for plants, which will in due course feed into the RLI, are coordinated by Royal Botanic Gardens Kew.
Individual logos shown are those for Red List Partners who are also BIP partners.
Data and methodology
Coverage:
Global time series (1980 onwards, varying by taxonomic group. Aggregate index from 1993).
Regional/National time series (time periods variable).
Global baseline (Multiple taxonomic groups have been comprehensively assessed).
Regional/National baseline (National RLIs based on assessments of extinction risk are available for a number of taxa and countries –see http://www.iucnredlist.org/about/publication/red-list-index, while many other countries have completed national red lists but not yet repeated these to produce an RLI: see www.nationalredlist.org. National RLIs for all countries, disaggregated from the global RLI and weighted by the proportion of each species’ distribution occurring within the country, are available in the Country Profiles at https://www.ibat-alliance.org/ibat-conservation).
Scale: Aggregated from species level data which may be collected nationally, regionally and/or globally.
Time series available: 1980 –2016.
Next planned update: Updates are released annually.
Possible disaggregations: By region, country, taxonomic group, threatening process (e.g. pollution, invasive alien species etc), ecosystem service (e.g. RLI for pollinators) etc.
Methodology: The RLI was initially designed and tested using data on all bird species (Butchart el al 2004) and then extended to amphibians (Butchart et al 2005). The methodology was revised and improved in 2007 (Butchart et al 2007), with methods for aggregating across taxonomic groups and for calculating confidence intervals published in 2010 (Butchart et al 2010). RLIs for additional groups have been added subsequently.
RLIs have been published showing the negative impacts of invasive species (McGeoch et al 2010) and trade (Butchart 2008), and the positive impacts of conservation action (Hoffmann et al 2010) and protected areas (Butchart et al 2012). An RLI to show the impact of a single conservation institution was published by Young et al (2014). The spatial distribution of the RLI was mapped by Rodrigues et al (2014). An RLI for pollinators was published by Regan et al (2015).
For poorly known, species-rich groups (e.g. insects, fungi, plants, etc), a sampled approach to Red Listing has been developed (Baillie et al 2008). Once the sample of species in these groups are reassessed, RLIs for will be calculated.
National use of indicator
Producing this indicator nationally: National Red List Indices (RLIs) can be calculated either by:
(1) Repeatedly assessing extinction risk at the national scale: examples of this approach have been published for an increasing number of countries and taxa.
(2) Disaggregating the global RLI: national RLIs are produced for all countries and updated each year for the UN SDGs.
These two approaches are described below.
More information about producing national RLIs can be found in Bubb et al. (2009), IUCN Red List Index – Guidance for National and Regional Use available here.
Use at the national level & examples of national use:
(1) RLIs based on repeatedly assessing extinction risk at the national scale.
National indices based on national assessments of extinction risk are available for an increasing number of taxa and countries. Many other countries have completed national red lists but not yet repeated these to produce an RLI. There are at least 515 national Red Lists for various taxonomic groups, covering at least 122 countries, of which Red Lists for 43 countries are available online at http://www.nationalredlist.org. Not all of these use the Guidelines for application of the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria at regional and national scales, so results may not be comparable between countries.
Such national RLIs may be more sensitive than globally downscaled RLIs. However, they come with the disadvantage that their trends may be driven by changes in status of species with a trivial proportion of their global population within a given country (Rodrigues et al., 2014). This is because national RLIs do not take into account the fact that different countries have different levels of global responsibility towards the conservation of the species they harbour.
For example, the return of the Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) to Denmark as a breeding species contributed to this country’s improving national RLI, but was inconsequential to the global RLI, because Denmark holds a tiny fraction of this widespread species’ population. In contrast, an improvement in the conservation status of Albert’s Lyrebird (Menura alberti) in Australia (from Vulnerable to Near Threatened) is globally significant, because this species is a national endemic. Thus, a country can have an improving national index while making a negative contribution to the global RLI, if improvements concern mainly species that are marginally represented within the country and deterioration in species for which the country is highly responsible (Rodrigues et al., 2014).
(2) RLIs based on disaggregating the global RLI.
To overcome the issue that national RLIs based on national red lists may be driven by changes in status of species with a trivial proportion of their global population within a given country, national RLIs (disaggregated from the global RLI for all birds, mammals, amphibians, cycads and corals) weighted by the proportion of each species’ global distribution within the country have been calculated for all countries worldwide, and this is one of the official adopted SDG indicators (UNSD 2016, 2017). The methods for this approach are described here.
The data for each country are available at https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/database/?indicator=15.5.1
The graphs for each country are available on the IBAT Country Profiles at https://www.ibat-alliance.org
Availability of global data for national use: To access the data, follow this link and search for the Red List Index in the search bar. Then click on 'Show table' or 'Download' to see the country level RLI for each year since 2000.
Contact person for supporting national use: stuart.butchart@birdlife.org or Thomas.brooks@iucn.org
Further resources
Publications and reports
Plants under pressure-a global assessment. IUCN Sampled Red List Index for Plants (RBG 2012).
State of Paraguay’s Birds (López 2011).
Estado de las Aves del Paraguay (López 2011).
A red list index for breeding birds in Denmark in the period 1991–2009 (Pihl and Flensted 2011).
Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines (Butchart et al. 2010).
IUCN Red List Index: Guidance for national and regional use (Bubb et al. 2009).
Toward monitoring global biodiversity (Baillie et al. 2008).
Improvements to the Red List Index (Butchart et al. 2007).
The value of the IUCN Red List for conservation (Rodrigues et al. 2006).