The first time I became aware of the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) was in April 1987, when it had convened in Caracas, Venezuela, for its 62nd meeting (Lucas, Reference Lucas1987). Nearly 38 years later, I am about to conclude my second and final term as SSC Chair. Since that first impactful meeting, the Commission has grown from 60 groups and hundreds of members to a massive, powerful, prestigious and influential scientific enterprise, with 193 groups and over 10,000 members, working in almost every country and jurisdiction. In recognition of its uniqueness, in May 2024 the SSC was certified by Guinness World Records as the largest volunteer conservation-science network.

At the beginning of my first term, I wrote on these pages about my team's vision for what lay ahead and how the SSC could contribute to improving the conservation status of species worldwide (Rodríguez, Reference Rodríguez2017). We have since systematically documented annual progress towards that vision (e.g. in reports such as IUCN SSC & Secretariat, 2024) and plan to present an analysis of these data in the near future. Here, I would like to look back at the last 8 years to examine the major lessons we have learnt and the future opportunities and challenges, specifically the nature of the network, volunteerism and the evolving roles of members.

Between 2017 and 2024, SSC membership increased by 39%, with much of the growth among fungi, invertebrate and cross-cutting groups (the latter includes disciplinary and national species specialist groups). We focused proactively on filling gaps in the network to address the conservation needs of species. Recurring questions are whether unlimited growth is sustainable and how much growth is enough. But nevertheless, the magnitude of the task is clear: available human and financial resources do not match the places in the world where biodiversity is highest (Rodríguez et al., Reference Rodríguez, Sucre, Mileham, Sánchez-Mercado, De Andrade, Bezeng and S.B.2022). Despite our growth, expertise on fishes, fungi, invertebrates and plants remains underrepresented within the network, and membership diversity needs to improve further in terms of age, gender, institutional setting and geographical location of SSC experts. Continuing to build the network and explore innovative financial and management models (e.g. SSC Centers for Species Survival: Kessler et al., Reference Kessler, Böhm, Griese, Pollom, Canteiro and Henriques2021; Rocha et al., Reference Rocha, Cordero-Schmidt, Subirá, Croukamp, Jerusalinsky and Marchini2021; Alvarez-Clare et al., Reference Alvarez-Clare, Mileham, Rodríguez and Knapp2023) to support an expanding membership and strengthen human capacity therefore remains imperative.

One of the SSC's most important assets is that members are volunteers. On the one hand, this ensures the independence and autonomy of the SSC with respect to the other components of IUCN (member organizations, National and Regional Committees, Council, Secretariat and Commissions). As volunteers, SSC members join as expert individuals who represent themselves rather than their employers. Involvement in the SSC thus comes with the commitment to provide the scientific data that underpin assessment, planning and action, and not to advocate for a specific institutional agenda. This is the basis of our credibility, objectivity and evidence-based advice to conservation organizations, government agencies and other IUCN members, and in support of the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements.

There are, however, some concerns regarding volunteerism. All SSC members, and especially SSC Group Leaders, have multiple demands on their time. Some question whether it is realistic to maintain the quantity, quality and increasing level of dedication needed for implementing the Species Conservation Cycle (Assess–Plan–Act–Network–Communicate; Rodríguez et al., Reference Rodríguez, Sucre, Mileham, Sánchez-Mercado, De Andrade, Bezeng and S.B.2022) based on the work of volunteers. I believe the legitimacy of a volunteer body of experts greatly outweighs any potential disadvantages, but we should focus on addressing work overload. Possibilities include sharing and delegating responsibilities with other Group members, and explicitly focusing on leadership succession and capacity building. Although there are notable exceptions, SSC Groups tend to be organized with a top-down approach, with most of the responsibility falling on Chairs and a few close collaborators. Sharing leadership and planning for succession not only distributes the burden, but can also foster greater diversity among emerging talent. This is possibly the biggest transformational change needed in the culture of the SSC.

Between 2018 and 2024, the emphasis of SSC Groups shifted towards conservation action, and activities in the Act component of the Species Conservation Cycle doubled, although the primary emphasis of the network continues to be assessments for the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN SSC & Secretariat, 2024). Assessments of extinction risk are the foundation for conservation plans and for informing implementation. They drive our membership and create knowledge for dissemination (Rodríguez et al., Reference Rodríguez, Sucre, Mileham, Sánchez-Mercado, De Andrade, Bezeng and S.B.2022; Rodríguez & Fisher, Reference Rodríguez and Fisher2023). But with the advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), I can easily imagine many of the tasks of species assessments no longer performed directly by people. It does not take much to envision an open-access, real-time online IUCN Knowledge Facility that instantly delivers a report on the status of species or ecosystems and the proportion included in protected areas and key biodiversity areas, at spatial scales from municipalities to the planet, thus informing decision-making at all relevant political, sea- and landscape scales (Cooper et al., Reference Cooper, Mumba, Dhyani, Shen, Ma and Wynberg2023). In this IUCN Knowledge Facility, the Red Lists of Threatened Species and Ecosystems would no longer be static but rather evolve towards providing real-time status. Quality control would still be a key role for SSC members, Secretariat staff and IUCN partners, verifying a random selection of assessments for training and improving AI, and reserving the detailed focus of assessors for species groups where knowledge is unavailable on the internet or limited to unpublished expert knowledge.

As the use of AI expands throughout conservation, including in species and ecosystem risk assessment (e.g. Cazalis et al., Reference Cazalis, Di Marco, Zizka, Butchart, González-Suárez and Böhm2024; Reynolds et al., Reference Reynolds, Beery, Burgess, Burgman, Butchart and Cooke2025), the time and effort saved would allow SSC members to shift their attention to planning and action, directly addressing the drivers of extinction risk. With growing demands from nations for documenting progress towards their commitments under the Kunming–Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework and a trend towards deglobalization and decolonization of biodiversity monitoring data (CBD, 2022), implementation of IUCN knowledge products at the national level is likely to increase as well. Anticipating these shifts, we need to build on the competitive advantages of the SSC and increase the capacity of its members to respond to these evolving demands, as illustrated by the establishment of the first National Species Specialist Groups (e.g. Sheherazade et al., Reference Sheherazade, Kusrini, Sunarto, Oktaviani, Hadiprakarsa and Felicity2023; Xie & Rodríguez, Reference Xie and Rodríguez2023; Cano-Alonso et al., Reference Cano-Alonso, Acedo, Almunia, Bellido, Calmaestra and Tellería2024; Ivande et al., Reference Ivande, Egbe, Onoja and Manu2024).

The greatest strengths of the SSC are the scientific excellence of its members and the flexible, decentralized and independent nature of its governance. Group Leaders create structures that are tailored to the challenges they need to address for their taxon or cross-cutting issue and to their capacity to take them forward. There is no typical SSC Group, nor any ideal governance style, and it would be a mistake to standardize them. Leading the SSC has been deeply rewarding professionally and personally, and I am sure that the next Chair will feel the same way. I look forward to seeing the network continue to evolve and innovate in species conservation.

The SSC volunteers provide an in-kind contribution estimated to be in the order of USD 50–100 million per year—IUCN is grateful for their passion and dedication. Likewise, c. 85% of the funds used to support the network and staff, and cover the cost of communications, travel and administration, are generously provided by our partners and donors (IUCN SSC & Secretariat, 2024). We are especially indebted to Environmental Agency–Abu Dhabi for their continuous strategic support over decades, and to Re:wild for acting as our fiscal sponsor at no overhead cost to the SSC. This issue includes five articles published in partnership with the SSC (Rodríguez & Fisher, Reference Rodríguez and Fisher2023).