LogoLogo
Savimbo homepageBuy creditsSpanish
  • Executive summary
  • Front Material
    • Contents
    • Index of figures
    • Index of tables
    • Acronyms and abbreviations
    • Terms and definitions
  • Getting started
  • Introduction
    • The urgency of targeted biodiversity conservation
    • Simplicity, complexity theory, and biodiversity
    • Inclusion of Indigenous Peoples and local communities by design
    • Biodiversity methodology benefits
  • Overall description
    • Objectives
    • Scope
    • Limitations
  • Project description
    • Principles
      • Principles of working with IP
    • Eligibility criteria
      • Land ownership and law
    • Additionality
    • Project boundaries
      • Spatial limits of the BCP
      • Temporal limits of the BCP
      • Grouped projects
    • Implementation plan
      • Measurement approaches
      • Indicator species observations
      • Risks and uncertainty
    • Effective participation
      • Community involvement
      • Capacity for action
      • Financial transparency
      • Safeguards checklist
  • Calculation
    • Unit calculations
    • Area calculations
    • Time calculations
    • Integrity calculations
    • Value calculations
  • Baseline assessment
    • Baseline ecosystem categorization
    • Analysis of agents and drivers of biodiversity loss
    • Baseline biodiversity (optional)
    • Baseline risk of biodiversity loss
    • Indicator species selection
    • Indicator species integrity score
  • SDG contributions
  • Monitoring plan
    • Monitoring report
    • Additional monitoring requirements
  • Authors
  • References
  • Appendices
    • Appendix A: Biodiversity methodologies comparison table
    • Appendix B: Sample legal proof of land control
    • Appendix C: Sample baseline ecosystem categorization
    • Appendix D: Species categorization of richness
    • Appendix E: Sample selection of indicator species
    • Appendix F: Sample indicator-species observations
    • Appendix G: Sample open-source code and calculation
    • Appendix H: Indigenous authors
    • Appendix I: Letters of support
      • Fernando Ayerbe, Ornithology
      • Ned Hording, Biodiversity
      • Olber Llanos, Zoologist
      • Mike McColm, Ethnology
      • Peter Thomas, Anthropologist
      • Jesús Argente, Marine biology
      • Sara Andreotti, Marine Biologist
      • Carolina Romero, Lawyer.
      • Daniel Urbano, Herpetologist
      • Ramesh Boonratana PhD, Primatologist
      • Theodore Schmitt, Conservationists
      • Anja Hutschenreiter, Ecologist and Tropical Conservationist
      • Miguel Chindoy, Indigenous leader
    • Appendix J: Sample uses of biodiversity unit
    • Appendix K: How to do FPIC
    • Appendix L: Independent Expert Panel Checklist
    • Appendix M: How to calculate a biodiversity credit by hand
    • Appendix N: How to calculate home ranges
    • Appendix O: How to calculate integrity scores
  • Document history
  • Disclaimer
Powered by GitBook
LogoLogo

Follow us

  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • TikTok
  • LinkedIn

About Savimbo

  • Science
  • Buy credits
  • About us
  • Donate

Indigenous authors

  • Jhony Lopez
  • Fernando Lezama
  • Blog

© 2023 Savimbo Inc. All rights reserved.

On this page

Was this helpful?

  1. Baseline assessment

Indicator species integrity score

The ability of indicator species to represent an intact ecosystem

PreviousIndicator species selectionNextSDG contributions

Last updated 1 year ago

Was this helpful?

An indicator species integrity score is intrinsic to the species, and its evolved niche in, sensitivity to, and fragility without, its natural ecosystem. It is generated from public data and/or traditional ecological knowledge.

The ISBM is designed to represent intact ecosystems, however, some easily-monitored indicator species may fail to adequately represent the ecosystem they are found in. Species that can live in contaminated systems will have a lower integrity score. Spotting one of those species gives only partial credit because the species could occur in an ecosystem that is not fully intact. However, species that are more representative may be difficult to monitor. To democratize the methodology for IP and LC which may be inexpert, or under-resourced monitors we have introduced an indicator species integrity score which allows for non-idealized observations in lieu of perfected data.

For instance, many IP may find a tapir easier to locate than a jaguar, and in many Indigenous nations across the Amazon, it is a totemic animal. However, it is not fully representative of an intact ecosystem, so it would have an integrity score of 0.5.

After generating a list of , they must also be ranked by their ability to represent the ecosystem with an integrity score between 0-1.0 where 1.0 indicates the full capability of representing the ecosystem. These scores will be used in and must be supported by public data if available, and expert opinion when not, and will be reviewed by the VVB assigned to the project.

A sample species list with external data for ratings is provided in .

Figure 12a: Indicator species integrity score example for Colombia

available Indicator species
Integrity calculation
Appendix E
Figure 6a. Indicator species selection for Colombia
Example of indicator species selection table for Colombia.