English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Canada's Species at Risk Act (SARA) and the US Endangered Species Act (ESA) have adopted different approaches to achieve overlapping goals. We compare the ESA and SARA, focusing on the roles of science and policy in determining which species warrant legal protection. Our analysis suggests that each act could benefit from mimicking the strengths of the other, and both could be strengthened by greater clarity and transparency of listing determinations. A particular strength of SARA is that all evaluations of species' status are conducted by a single national scientific body. The ESA does not involve a comparable national body but has more stringent legal deadlines for listing actions, and listing decisions cannot by law consider socioeconomic factors (as can occur under SARA). The conservation of biodiversity would be enhanced if both acts were complemented by additional programs focused on broader efforts that protect more species before individual intervention is needed.

A Tale of Two Acts: Endangered Species Listing Practices in Canada and the United States