| Titre : | Ten-year Evaluation of the Implementation of the AEWA Eurasian Spoonbill International Action Plan |
| Auteurs : | Jelena Kralj, Auteur ; Csaba Pigniczki, Auteur ; Petra de Goeij, Auteur ; Jocelyn Champagnon, Auteur ; Jocelyn Champagnon, Auteur |
| Type de document : | Chapitre |
| Editeur : | Arles : IUCN-SSC Stork, Ibis and Spoonbill Specialist Group, 2019 |
| Collection : | Special Publication 2 |
| Format : | 12-18 |
| Langues: | Anglais |
| Mots-clés : | Platalea leucorodia ; TdV ; Politique publique ; Législation ; Espèce menacée |
| Mots-clés: | Action plan evaluation, Conservation, Legislation, Management, Research |
| Résumé : | The IXth meeting of Eurasian Spoonbill International Expert Group (ESIEG) took place in November 2018 at Djerba, Tunisia, ten years after the development of the International Action Plan for the Eurasian Spoonbill (Triplet et al. 2008). As a ten year implementation period for the action plans was foreseen, we have an opportunity to assess the implementation of the Action Plan and give a proposal for next steps. During the special session at the meeting, the assessment of implementation was done using the same approach as during the previous two meetings, held in the years 2012 and 2015. The degree of implementation of every action was evaluated, at the level of population. Each action was scored (using scores given in the Table 1) by all participants in the workshop divided in two groups (East Atlantic and Central European populations). Due to the lack of experts from regions of the other four populations concerned by the action plan (South eastern European and Western Asian populations of the nominate subspecies, Platalea leucorodia balsaci and P.l archeri), the level of implementation for these four populations could not be evaluated. Actions were grouped in Legislation, Management or Research in order to calculate the average scores and estimate which type of actions had been better implemented for any population. In the Action Plan, each action was also scored according to the priority (Table 2), however there were no actions foreseen for the East Atlantic and Central European populations being assessed as “Critical”. The implementation score was calculated for each priority group. |
| En ligne : | https://storkibisspoonbill.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Special_Publication_2_PROCEEDINGS_BOOK_IX_Workshop_Eurasian_Spoonbill_AEWA-International_Expert_Group.pdf |
| contenu dans : |



