Reconsideration of rare and endangered plant species in Korea based on the IUCN Red List Categories

Recently 64 species in Korea have been ranked as rare and endangered taxa by the Ministry of Environment using two categories, I and II. The original threat categories produced by the Ministry of Environment were developed to provide a standard for specifying animals and plants in danger of extinction and has been influential sources of information used in species conservation in Korea. However, the criteria by Ministry of Environment were applied to the whole taxa only by regional boundaries, especially in South Korea, rather than international context, and it also lacked an explicit framework that was necessary to ensure repeatability among taxa because of the absence of quantitative criteria to measure the likelihood of extinction. The World Conservation Union (IUCN) has developed quantitative criteria for assessing the conservation status of species. The threatened species categories, the 2000 IUCN Red List, proposed by SSC (Species Survival Commission) of IUCN have become widely recognized internationally. Details of threatened Korean plants, identified by applying the IUCN threat categories and definitions, were listed and analyzed. The number of species identified as threatened was only 34 out of 64 taxa (48.4%), while the rest of taxa were rejected from the original lists. Many of the species (51.6%, 33 taxa) excluded from the original list proposed by Ministry of Environment do not qualify as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable because these taxa were widely distributed either in Japan or in China/far eastern Russia and there is no evidence of substantial decline in these countries. An evaluation of taxa in Korea has been carried out only based on subjective views and qualitative data, rather than quantitative scientific data, such as rates of decline, distribution range size, population size, and risk of extinction. Therefore, the national lists undermine the credibility of threatened species lists and invite misuse, which have been raised by other cases, qualitative estimate of risk, political influence, uneven taxonomic or geographical coverage. The increasing emphasis on international responsibilities means that global scale is becoming more significant. The current listings by Environment of Ministry of Korea should be challenged, and the government should seek to facilitate the resolution of disagreements. Especially the list should be flexible enough to handle uncertainty and also incorporates detailed, quantitative data. It is suggested that the highest priorities for the Red List should be given to endemic species in Korea first. After setting up the list of endemic species to Korea, quantitative data on population size and structure, distributional range, rated of decline, and habitat fragmentation should be collected as one of long term projects for the Red list categories. Transparency and accountability are the most important key factors. Also, species assessors are named and data sources referenced are required for the future objective evaluations on Korean plant taxa.