ArticlePDF Available

Protected area targets post-2020

  • April 2019
  • Science 364(6437):eaav6886
DOI:10.1126/science.aav6886
Authors:
Piero Visconti at International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis
Piero Visconti
Stuart H. M. Butchart
Stuart H. M. Butchart
Stuart H. M. Butchart
  • This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.
Thomas Brooks at International Union for Conservation of Nature
Thomas Brooks
Penny F. Langhammer
Penny F. Langhammer
Penny F. Langhammer
  • This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.
Show all 8 authorsHide
Download full-text PDF
Read full-text
Download citation

Abstract

Outcome-based targets are needed to achieve biodiversity goals.
Content uploaded by Daniel Marnewick
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Daniel Marnewick on May 07, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Cite as: P. Visconti et al., Science
10.1126/science.aav6886 (2019).
First release: 11 April 2019 www.sciencemag.org (Page numbers not final at time of first release) 1
on April 11, 2019 http://science.sciencemag.org/Downloaded from
First release: 11 April 2019 www.sciencemag.org (Page numbers not final at time of first release) 2
on April 11, 2019 http://science.sciencemag.org/Downloaded from
First release: 11 April 2019 www.sciencemag.org (Page numbers not final at time of first release) 3
on April 11, 2019 http://science.sciencemag.org/Downloaded from
First release: 11 April 2019 www.sciencemag.org (Page numbers not final at time of first release) 4
on April 11, 2019 http://science.sciencemag.org/Downloaded from
First release: 11 April 2019 www.sciencemag.org (Page numbers not final at time of first release) 5
on April 11, 2019 http://science.sciencemag.org/Downloaded from
Protected area targets post-2020
Yanosky and James E. M. Watson
Piero Visconti, Stuart H. M. Butchart, Thomas M. Brooks, Penny F. Langhammer, Daniel Marnewick, Sheila Vergara, Alberto
published online April 11, 2019
ARTICLE TOOLS http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2019/04/10/science.aav6886
REFERENCES http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2019/04/10/science.aav6886#BIBL
This article cites 12 articles, 1 of which you can access for free
PERMISSIONS http://www.sciencemag.org/help/reprints-and-permissions
Terms of ServiceUse of this article is subject to the
registered trademark of AAAS. is aScienceAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. The title
Science, 1200 New York Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20005. 2017 © The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee
(print ISSN 0036-8075; online ISSN 1095-9203) is published by the American Association for the Advancement ofScience
on April 11, 2019 http://science.sciencemag.org/Downloaded from
... Bien qu'un objectif quantitatif tel que celui de 17 % de la surface terrestre protégée soit nécessaire et ait permis la création de nombreuses nouvelles aires protégées (Stokstad, 2020), il est également important de maximiser leur efficacité en matière de préservation des enjeux de biodiversité dans le processus de désignation (Carroll and Noss, 2022). Il est ainsi préférable de créer de nouvelles aires protégées en priorité dans des sites d'importance pour la biodiversité ou à enjeux de conservation, tels que les Zones Clés pour la Biodiversité (Key Biodiversity Areas, KBAs) (Eken et al., 2004;IUCN, 2016, Visconti et al., 2019, les sites maximisant la représentation d'écorégions ou d'espèces au sein du réseau d'aires protégées Kukkala et al., 2016;Pimm et al., 2018;Rodrigues et al., 2004b) et notamment d'espèces menacées d'extinction (Dinerstein et al., 2020;Venter et al., 2018;), ou encore les sites très peu influencés par les activités humaines (wilderness areas) (Allan et al., 2017;Watson and Venter, 2017). Malheureusement, ces sites-là ont trop peu fait l'objet d'implémentation de mesures de protection dans les dernières décennies en comparaison avec les sites peu accessibles (i.e., en altitude, éloignés des routes et des villes, avec des pentes raides) (Joppa and Pfaff, 2009) ou minimisant le conflit avec l'agriculture (Venter et al., 2018), et un grand nombre d'entre eux ne font pas encore l'objet de mesures de protection Kukkala et al., 2016;Maxwell et al., 2020;Ricketts et al., 2005;UNEP-WCMC & IUCN, 2021;Venter et al., 2018). ...
... Les Zones Clés pour la Biodiversité sont « des sites qui contribuent de manière significative à la persistance de la biodiversité mondiale » définis à partir de critères quantitatifs, par exemple de vulnérabilité ou d'irremplaçabilité (IUCN, 2016). A ce titre, les Zones Clés pour la Biodiversité devraient faire l'objet de mesures de conservation et notamment de protection (CBD, 2010;Eken et al., 2004;Margules and Pressey, 2000;Smith et al., 2019a;Visconti et al. 2019), d'autant plus que la création d'aires protégées dans ces sites est un outil de conservation de la biodiversité efficace (Butchart et al., 2012). Cependant, peu d'articles les ont hiérarchisées afin d'orienter la création d'aires protégées (voir toutefois Rogers et al., 2010). ...
... S'il est difficile de remettre en question un objectif quantitatif aussi ambitieux, bien qu'au passage certains en préconisent un qui l'est encore plus (Crist et al., 2021;Watson and Venter, 2017;Wilson, 2016), il me semble légitime de s'interroger sur sa mise en oeuvre. En effet, alors que les moyens financiers et humains de gestion d'aires protégées sont déjà insuffisants (Appleton et al., 2022;Coad et al., 2019;Geldmann et al., 2018), cet objectif pourrait entraîner la création de paper parks, des aires protégées avec peu ou pas de mesures de conservation mises en oeuvre et donc inefficaces (Di Minin and Toivonen, 2015 ;Visconti et al., 2019). C'est par exemple le cas de la côte méditerranéenne française où certaines aires marines protégées ne sont pas financées et n'impliquent aucune réglementation (Lauret, 2021) mais où la surface en protection forte devrait passer de moins de 1 % actuellement à 10 % d'ici 2030 (Macron, 2021). ...
Les apports des méthodes d’évaluation de l’exposition aux changements climatiques et d’usage des sols à la planification des aires protégées – Le cas des oiseaux d’eau hivernant en Méditerranée
Thesis
  • Apr 2023
Climate change and land-use changes are major direct drivers of biodiversity loss, whose future impact must be anticipated. Mediterranean wetlands, which host an outstanding biodiversity, are highly vulnerable to these drivers but are not sufficiently targeted by conservation measures. The designation of new protected areas in these habitats can locally reduce the impact of climate and land-use changes on biodiversity, and especially on waterbird communities. It is necessary to identify wetlands of importance for biodiversity conservation for which the future changes are expected to be most severe in order to make the most of the effectiveness of protected areas. Assessing the exposure of Mediterranean wetlands to these drivers can help anticipate future variations of intensity and distribution of climate and land-use changes under several pathways of our societies. In this thesis, I aimed to assess whether existing protected areas cover the wetlands of importance for conservation most exposed to future climate and land-use changes in the Mediterranean region, and to identify where to designate new protected areas in order to lessen the future impact of these two drivers on waterbird communities. To this end, I computed various metrics of exposure to these drivers, derived from late 21st century projections under four future scenarios used by the IPCC. These metrics were intersected with winter abundance data of 151 waterbird species collected over 25 years at 5891 sites (25 countries) as part of the International Waterbird Census. First, I highlighted the high exposure to climate and land-use changes of Key Biodiversity Areas - sites of importance for biodiversity conservation - in the Mediterranean region, especially in countries where the protection of this network is low. In order to complement our knowledge on sites of importance for waterbirds, I subsequently applied three criteria of identification of wetlands of international importance to winter count data. As a result, I identified 161 sites of international importance for waterbirds whose status is not officially acknowledged, of which 95 are not protected. Then, I assessed the potential thermal adjustment limitations of waterbird communities to future temperature changes by combining their thermal specialization with their exposure to climate warming and natural habitat conversion. I thereby demonstrated the relevance of the location of existing protected areas that should overall be able to facilitate the future thermal adjustment of waterbird communities. However, I also identified 490 non-protected wetlands at risk, including 32 of international importance for waterbirds. Finally, assessing the exposure of coastal wetlands to sea-level rise highlighted the high threats to these sites, especially those protected and of international importance for waterbirds. Taken together, these exposure assessments to climate and land-use changes highlighted the overall relevance of the location of existing protected areas network in the Mediterranean region. However, these methods also identified important protection gaps of highly exposed wetlands of importance for waterbird conservation, especially in Maghreb countries. The results of this thesis could help guide the implementation of protection measures in Mediterranean wetlands and thereby improve the conservation of waterbird communities.
View
... This is despite it having been recently identified as an urgent priority for the long-term success of area-based conservation . Under the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, attention is increasingly focusing beyond quantity (total PA coverage) and including the quality of PAs (Visconti et al. 2019), providing targets that are often more important for species occurrence and persistence. ...
Protected area coverage has a positive effect on koala occurrence in Eastern Australia
Article
Full-text available
Protected areas (PAs) are crucial conservation tools implemented worldwide to conserve biodiversity. Although PAs can positively impact wildlife populations, their ecological outcomes vary substantially depending on PA management and governance. Recent calls have highlighted the need to better assess the role of area-based conservation in preventing biodiversity loss. This is crucial to improve PA effectiveness in order to meet global biodiversity goals. Here we take advantage of a unique dataset composed of 2230 surveys conducted with koala detection dogs across Eastern Australia, to assess how protection status affected the occurrence of a threatened specialist folivore. We assessed if coverage of protected forest influenced koala presence or absence at two spatial scales (1 and 3 km), for (i) strictly and (ii) all protected areas. We also investigated if PA effects were explained by differences in habitat composition (percentage of secondary forest) between protected and unprotected areas. Taking confounding factors into account, we showed that forest protection (all IUCN categories) had a significant positive effect on koala occurrence, which increased by ~ 10% along the forest protection gradient. Contrarily, koala occurrence was not affected by strictly protected areas. In addition, adding the percentage of secondary forests in our models did not modify the statistical effect of PAs on koala occurrence, suggesting that forest composition is not the driver of the observed difference along the protection gradient. Our results contribute to a broader understanding of the effects of PAs on a threatened marsupial and call for further attention to assessments of PA effectiveness in Eastern Australia, a global biodiversity hotspot.
View
... In addition to ambiguities in biodiversity response, there are other factors that make it difficult to draw firm conclusions about whether a particular PA is meeting conservation expectations. Often, no explicit conservation targets or indicators to assess progress have been identified or the identification process was not sufficiently precise (e.g., SMARTspecific, measurable, ambitious, realistic, and time-bound) to allow for a meaningful evaluation (Green et al. 2019;Visconti et al. 2019). Because monitoring the effectiveness of PA management is critical to conserving biodiversity , there has been a recent call to track progress in a more highly structured and defensible manner . ...
Forested wetlands in a protected area and the adjacent working landscape provide complementary biodiversity value based on breeding birds: A case study from Nova Scotia, Canada
Article
Full-text available
  • Jan 2023
Protected areas (PAs) are a key component of most conservation strategies because they are thought to enhance biodiversity value relative to similar habitats in working landscapes. To examine whether PAs in Nova Scotia are functioning to enhance the biodiversity value of the landscapes in which they are embedded, we surveyed breeding bird communities in forested wetlands inside and outside of a large PA during 2018 and 2019. We found significantly higher species richness and diversity at sites in the working landscape relative to those inside the PA. Bird communities from different wetland types inside the PA were distinct from each other and those outside the PA, whereas bird communities at outside sites were homogenized and comprised of more early-successional species. There were numerous species of conservation concern at both inside and outside sites, indicating that both types of sites are playing important conservation roles. Abundances of these key species were driven by a combination of local (e.g., water table depth, herb, and shrub cover) and landscape scale factors (e.g., edge density and human disturbance). The higher abundance of long-distance migrants and insectivores at inside sites suggests PAs are providing critical additional support to key guilds that are in steep decline.
View
... Protected Areas (PAs) are very important indicators for meeting global biodiversity targets which are threatened by unsustainable resources used by humans all over the world (Visconti et al., 2019). Conservation strategies must be followed by certain regulations for effective management (Rashid et al., 2017). ...
Temporal comparison of land-use changes and biodiversity in differential IUCN protected-area categories of Bangladesh in the context of co-management
Article
Full-text available
  • Apr 2023
Protected areas (PA) have been considered as biodiversity conservation hub across the globe. The conventional “top-down” management approach has been failed to ensure resource sustainability in many PA. Therefore, co-management was introduced to secure the PA of Bangladesh and started with legal framework in 2008 (IPAC Project) until 2018 (CREL Project). Thus, land-use and biodiversity change analysis from a decade before and after 2008 has generated comparison of previous and after scenario of co-management. Hence for evaluating effects of co-management on temporal biodiversity and land-use change in Bangladesh, two PA, Chunati Wildlife Sanctuary (CWS) under IUCN Protected Area Category IV and Lawachara National Park (LNP) under IUCN Protected Area Category II, were selected. Community structure of both vascular plants and avifauna species was used to determine current biodiversity variations with habitat influence. Land-use change analysis revealed deforestation and settlements expansion in CWS but decrease in LNP. Trend analysis forecasted good future of LNP in terms of forest cover till 2038. Biodiversity analysis revealed that CWS is slightly more diverse and even than LNP. Comparative analysis recognized prominent loss of biodiversity before co-management period. Therefore, co-management system can be employed in the rest of reserve-forest areas of Bangladesh for conservation betterment.
View
Conclusions, Lessons Learnt and Implications for the Future
Chapter
  • May 2023
European ecosystems and species remain under pressure from intensive agriculture and forestry, fishing, pollution, urban sprawl, invasive species and climate change. This book provides a detailed description and critical analysis of nature conservation responses, achievements and failures, motivated by the concerning state of nature and missed biodiversity targets. It summarises Europe's nature and the impact of human activities, and then gives an overview of relevant international biodiversity treaties and the EU nature conservation policy and legislative framework. The core of the book comprises chapters written by national experts, which cover the UK and twenty-five EU Member States, providing comparative case studies from which valuable lessons are drawn. Covering wide-ranging topics such as biodiversity pressures, legislation and governance, biodiversity strategies, species protection, protected areas, habitat management, and funding, this book is of interest to a wide audience, including academics and professionals involved in nature conservation and related environmental fields.
View
Policies and Socioenvironmental Dynamics for Ecosystem Management
Article
  • Apr 2023
The continuous loss of biodiversity has extended the Convention on Biological Diversity's target towards safeguarding 30% of the planet by 2030 with some form of protected area management. This is a challenge, considering the poor compliance of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets reported in several assessments, and that 37% of the remaining unprotected natural areas are inhabited by indigenous and local communities. Modern conservation policies tend to convert areas destined for protection into complex socioecological landscapes, so it is critical to develop policies capable of establishing long-term harmonious relations between local societies and their environments. Despite the fundamental importance of defining this interrelation, methodologies for evaluating it are still unclear. We propose a method for assessing the outcome of policies in socioenvironmental practices based on a historical-political ecology analysis of a region, the construction of socioenvironmental scenarios, and comparing populations scattered through the study area. Each “scenario” is a relation between nature and society after a shift in public policies. Conservation scientists, environmental managers, and policymakers can use this methodology to assess old policies, design new ones, or map the socioenvironmental dynamics in their area of interest. Here, we detail this approach and illustrate its application in the coastal wetlands of Mexico. The method can be outlined as follows: • Deduce socioenvironmental epochs for a region by analysing its historical political ecology. • Analyse the socioenvironmental dynamics in selected case studies scattered through the region. • Use the resulting scenarios as conceptual bridges between internal policies and current socioenvironmental dynamics.
View
View
Ongoing over-exploitation and delayed responses to environmental change highlight the urgency for action to promote vertebrate recoveries by 2030
Article
To safeguard nature, we must understand the drivers of biodiversity loss. Time-delayed biodiversity responses to environmental changes (ecological lags) are often absent from models of biodiversity change, despite their well-documented existence. We quantify how lagged responses to climate and land-use change have influenced mammal and bird populations around the world, while incorporating effects of direct exploitation and conservation interventions. Ecological lag duration varies between drivers, vertebrate classes and body size groupings-e.g. lags linked to climate-change impacts are 13 years for small birds, rising to 40 years for larger species. Past warming and land conversion generally combine to predict population declines; however, such conditions are associated with population increases for small mammals. Positive effects of management (>+4% annually for large mammals) and protected areas (>+6% annually for large birds) on population trends contrast with the negative impact of exploitation (<-7% annually for birds), highlighting the need to promote sustainable use. Model projections suggest a future with winners (e.g. large birds) and losers (e.g. medium-sized birds), with current/recent environmental change substantially influencing abundance trends to 2050. Without urgent action, including effective conservation interventions and promoting sustainable use, ambitious targets to stop declines by 2030 may already be slipping out of reach.
View
Les aires marines protégées en Afrique de l’Ouest : bilan et perspectives vis-à-vis des engagements internationaux
Article
Full-text available
  • Dec 2022
Following long debates, the new global biodiversity framework aims for the legal protection of 30% of the global environment by 2030. This objective follows, among others, Aichi target 11 and Sustainable Development (SDG) 14.5, both of which called for the protection of 10% of the world’s marine surface area. This article presents and explains the differential between the data contained in the world database WDPA, used to measure the progress of countries towards such international commitments, and those that are derived from a comprehensive survey carried out with the administrations of seven West African countries. These countries are far from the goal of 10% marine protected areas, and many priority areas are not covered. In addition to these sites, large offshore marine protected areas are essential to catch up towards international commitments. Nevertheless, the establishment of such MPAs in high seas raises the question of feasibility and equity, in countries where financial, human and technical resources are limited for conservation. Finally, the ‘post-Aichi’ period which freshly began is discussed.
View
View
Relating characteristics of global biodiversity targets to reported progress
Article
Full-text available
  • Apr 2019
To inform governmental discussions on the nature of a revised Strategic Plan on Biodiversity of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), we reviewed the relevant literature and assessed the framing of the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets in the current Strategic Plan. We asked international experts from non‐governmental organizations, academia, government agencies, international organizations, research institutes and the CBD to score the Aichi Targets and their constituent elements against a set of ‘SMART’‐based criteria: Specific, Measurable, Ambitious, Realistic, Unambiguous, Scalable and Comprehensive (excluding ‘Time‐bound’ as all targets are bound to 2015 or 2020). We then investigated the relationship between these expert scores and reported progress towards the target elements using the findings from two global progress assessments (Global Biodiversity Outlook and the Intergovernmental science‐policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services). We analysed the data using ordinal logistic regressions and found significant positive relationships (p <0.05) between progress and the extent to which the target elements were perceived to be measurable, realistic, unambiguous and scalable. We found some evidence of a relationship between progress and specificity of the target elements, but no relationship between progress and ambition. Our study is the first to show evidence of associations between progress and the extent to which the Aichi Targets meet certain ‘SMART’ criteria. As negotiations around the post‐2020 biodiversity framework proceed, decision‐makers should strive to ensure that any new or revised targets are effectively structured and clearly worded to allow the translation of targets into actionable policies that are successfully implemented nationally, regionally and globally. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved
View
One-third of global protected land is under intense human pressure
Article
Full-text available
  • May 2018
In an era of massive biodiversity loss, the greatest conservation success story has been the growth of protected land globally. Protected areas are the primary defense against biodiversity loss, but extensive human activity within their boundaries can undermine this. Using the most comprehensive global map of human pressure, we show that 6 million square kilometers (32.8%) of protected land is under intense human pressure. For protected areas designated before the Convention on Biological Diversity was ratified in 1992, 55% have since experienced human pressure increases. These increases were lowest in large, strict protected areas, showing that they are potentially effective, at least in some nations. Transparent reporting on human pressure within protected areas is now critical, as are global targets aimed at efforts required to halt biodiversity loss.
View
A global analysis of management capacity and ecological outcomes in terrestrial protected areas
Article
Full-text available
  • Feb 2018
Protecting important sites is a key strategy for halting the loss of biodiversity. However, our understanding of the relationship between management inputs and biodiversity outcomes in protected areas (PAs) remains weak. Here, we examine biodiversity outcomes using species population trends in PAs derived from the Living Planet Database in relation to management data derived from the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) database for 217 population time-series from 73 PAs. We found a positive relationship between our METT-based scores for Capacity and Resources and changes in vertebrate abundance, consistent with the hypothesis that PAs require adequate resourcing to halt biodiversity loss. Additionally, PA age was negatively correlated with trends for the mammal subsets and PA size negatively correlated with population trends in the global subset. Our study highlights the paucity of appropriate data for rigorous testing of the role of management in maintaining species populations across multiple sites, and describes ways to improve our understanding of PA performance.
View
Equitable Representation of Ecoregions is Slowly Improving Despite Strategic Planning Shortfalls
Article
Full-text available
  • Sep 2016
Representing all ecosystem types in protected areas (PAs) is central to international conservation agreements (i.e. Aichi Target 11) and ensuring the persistence of biodiversity. In response to these agreements we have seen rapid growth of PA networks but we do not know how this affects ecosystem representation. We explored this question by investigating drivers and trends of representation during periods of rapid land acquisition using the Protection Equality metric. We found that 90.9% of studied countries have improved protection equality through time. Periods of rapid area expansion resulted in greater increases in protection equality, particularly through multiple, smaller PAs as opposed to fewer, larger PAs. However, observed increases may not be due to strategic planning as protection equality from random PA allocation was statistically similar to observed values within six country-level simulations. Future international agreements should hold countries accountable to meeting multiple objectives and prioritize conservation outcomes over individual targets. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved
View
Making parks make a difference: poor alignment of policy, planning and management with protected-area impact, and ways forward
Article
Full-text available
  • Nov 2015
Policy and practice around protected areas are poorly aligned with the basic purpose of protection, which is to make a difference. The difference made by protected areas is their impact, defined in program evaluation as the outcomes arising from protection relative to the counterfactual of no protection or a different form of protection. Although impact evaluation of programs is well established in fields such as medicine, education and development aid, it is rare in nature conservation. We show that the present weak alignment with impact of policy targets and operational objectives for protected areas involves a great risk: targets and objectives can be achieved while making little difference to the conservation of biodiversity. We also review potential ways of increasing the difference made by protected areas, finding a poor evidence base for the use of planning and management ‘levers’ to better achieve impact. We propose a dual strategy for making protected areas more effective in their basic role of saving nature, outlining ways of developing targets and objectives focused on impact while also improving the evidence for effective planning and management.
View
Why do we lose protected areas? Factors influencing protected area downgrading, downsizing and degazettment (PADDD) in the tropics and sub-tropics
Article
Full-text available
Protected areas (PAs) are an essential tool for the conservation of biodiversity globally. Previous studies have focussed on the effectiveness of PAs and the design of optimal PA networks. However, not all PAs remain intact permanently; many PAs undergo downgrading, downsizing and/or degazettement (PADDD), a fact largely ignored until recently. The drivers of enacted PADDD events and the factors influencing its spatial occurrence are poorly understood, potentially undermining the efficacy of PAs and PA networks. Here we examine the spatial relationship between PADDD and economic, demographic, and structural variables, using a 110 year dataset of 342 enacted PADDD events across 44 countries in the tropics and sub tropics. We find that the probability of an enacted PADDD event increases with the size of the PA and through a synergistic interaction between PA size and local population densities. Our results are robust to the under-reporting of enacted PADDD events that occur among smaller PAs and in regions with lower population density. We find an economic motive for PADDD events, given that the opportunity costs associated with larger PAs are higher, on average, than smaller PAs. Our findings suggest a need for conservation practitioners to better consider PA characteristics, as well as the social, economic, and political context in which PAs are situated, to aid the creation of more efficient and sustainable PA networks. In particular, the dynamics of enacted PADDD events highlight the need to explicitly consider PA robustness as a core component of systematic conservation planning for PA networks.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
View
Changes in protected area management effectiveness over time: A global analysis
Article
Full-text available
Protected area coverage has reached over 15% of the global land area. However, the quality of management of the vast majority of reserves remains unknown, and many are suspected to be “paper parks”.Moreover, the degree to which management can be enhanced through targeted conservation projects remains broadly speculative. Proven links between improved reserve management and the delivery of conservation outcomes are even more elusive. In this paper we present results on how management effectiveness scores change in protected areas receiving conservation investment, using a globally expanded database of protected area management effectiveness, focusing on the “management effectiveness tracking tool” (METT). Of 1934 protected areas with METT data, 722 sites have at least two assessments. MeanMETT scores increased in 69.5% of siteswhile 25.1% experienced decreases and 5.4% experienced no change over project periods (median 4 years). Low initial METT scores and longer implementation time were both found to positively correlate with larger increases in management effectiveness. Performance metrics related to planning and context aswell as monitoring and enforcement systems increased the most while protected area outcomes showed least improvement. Using a general linear mixed model we tested the correlation between change in METT scores and matrices of 1) landscape and protected area properties (i.e. topography and size), 2) human threats (i.e. road and human population density), and 3) socio-economics (i.e. infant mortality rate). Protected areas under greater threat and larger protected areas showed greatest improvements in METT. Our results suggest that when funding and resources are targeted at protected areas under greater threat they have a greater impact, potentially including slowing the loss of biodiversity.
View
Shortfalls and Solutions for Meeting National and Global Conservation Area Targets
Article
Full-text available
  • Feb 2015
Governments have committed to conserving ≥17% of terrestrial and ≥10% of marine environments globally, especially “areas of particular importance for biodiversity” through “ecologically representative” Protected Area (PA) systems or other “area-based conservation measures,” while individual countries have committed to conserve 3–50% of their land area. We estimate that PAs currently cover 14.6% of terrestrial and 2.8% of marine extent, but 59–68% of ecoregions, 77–78% of important sites for biodiversity, and 57% of 25,380 species have inadequate coverage. The existing 19.7 million km2 terrestrial PA network needs only 3.3 million km2 to be added to achieve 17% terrestrial coverage. However, it would require nearly doubling to achieve, cost-efficiently, coverage targets for all countries, ecoregions, important sites, and species. Poorer countries have the largest relative shortfalls. Such extensive and rapid expansion of formal PAs is unlikely to be achievable. Greater focus is therefore needed on alternative approaches, including community- and privately managed sites and other effective area-based conservation measures.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
View
The performance and potential of protected areas
Article
Full-text available
  • Nov 2014
Originally conceived to conserve iconic landscapes and wildlife, protected areas are now expected to achieve an increasingly diverse set of conservation, social and economic objectives. The amount of land and sea designated as formally protected has markedly increased over the past century, but there is still a major shortfall in political commitments to enhance the coverage and effectiveness of protected areas. Financial support for protected areas is dwarfed by the benefits that they provide, but these returns depend on effective management. A step change involving increased recognition, funding, planning and enforcement is urgently needed if protected areas are going to fulfil their potential.
View
Bias in protected-area location and its effects on long-term aspirations of biodiversity conventions
Article
To contribute to the aspirations of recent international biodiversity conventions, protected areas (PAs) must be strategically located, and not simply established on economically marginal lands as they have in the past. With refined international commitments under the Convention of Biodiversity to target protected areas in places of 'importance to biodiversity', this may now be the case. Here we analyze location biases in PAs globally over both historic (pre-2004) and recent time periods. Discouragingly, we find that both old and new protected areas are not targeting places with high concentration of threatened vertebrate species. Instead, they appear to be established in locations that minimize conflict with agriculturally suitable lands. This entrenchment of past trends has significant implications for the contributions these protected areas are making to international commitments to conserve biodiversity. We discover that if protected area growth between 2004 and 2014 had strategically targeted unrepresented threatened vertebrates, it would have been possible to protect >30 times more species (3086 or 2553 potential vs 85 actual new species represented) for the same area or the same cost as the actual expansion that occurred. With the land available for conservation declining, nations must urgently focus new protection on places that provide for the conservation outcomes outlined in international treaties. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
View