Search

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 on Biological Diversity to target protected areas in places of 'importance to biodiversity,' perhaps they may now be. We analyzed location biases in PAs globally over historic (pre-2004) and recent periods. Specifically, we examined whether the location of protected areas are more closely associated with high concentrations of threatened vertebrate species or with areas of low agricultural opportunity costs. We found that both old and new protected areas did not target places with high concentrations of threatened vertebrate species. Instead, they appeared to be established in locations that minimize conflict with agriculturally suitable lands. This entrenchment of past trends has substantial implications for the contributions these protected areas are making to international commitments to conserve biodiversity. If protected-area growth from 2004 to 2014 had strategically targeted unrepresented threatened vertebrates, >30 times more species (3086 or 2553 potential vs. 85 actual new species represented) would have been protected for the same area or the same cost as the actual expansion. 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Range maps represent the geographic distribution of species, and they are commonly used to determine species coverage within protected areas and to find additional places needing protection. However, range maps are characterized by commission errors, where species are thought to be present in locations where they are not. When available, habitat suitability models can reduce commission errors in range maps, but these models are not always available. Adopting a coarse spatial resolution is often seen as an alternative approach for reducing the effect of commission errors, but this comes with poorly explored conservation trade-offs., Here, we characterize these trade-offs by identifying scenarios of protected area expansion for the world's threatened terrestrial mammals under different resolutions (10-200 km) and distribution data deriving from range maps and habitat suitability models., We found that planning new protected areas using range maps results in an overestimation of the species protection level when compared with habitat suitability models (which are more closely related to species presence). This overestimation increases when more area is selected for protection and is higher when higher spatial resolutions are employed., Adopting coarse resolutions reduced the overestimation of species protection and also halved the spatial incongruence between protected areas prioritized from range maps or habitat suitability models. However, this came at a very high cost, with an area of up to four times greater (12 M km2 vs. 3 M km2) needed to adequately protect all species., Synthesis and applications. Our findings demonstrate that adopting coarse resolutions in protected area planning results in unsustainable increases in costs, with limited benefits in terms of reducing the effect of commission errors in species range maps. We recommend that, if some level of uncertainty is acceptable to practitioners, using range maps at resolutions of 20-30 km is the best compromise for reducing the effect of commission errors while maintaining cost-efficiency in conservation analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anthropogenic conversion of natural habitats is the greatest threat to biodiversity and one of the primary reasons for establishing protected areas (PAs). Here, we show that PA establishment outpaced habitat conversion between 1993 and 2009 across all biomes and the majority ( n = 567, 71.4%) of ecoregions globally. However, high historic rates of conversion meant that 447 (56.2%) ecoregions still exhibit a high ratio of conversion to protection, and of these, 127 (15.9%) experienced further increases in this ratio between 1993 and 2009. We identify 41 'crisis ecoregions' in 45 countries where recent habitat conversion is severe and PA coverage remains extremely low. While the recent growth in PAs is a notable conservation achievement, international conventions and associated finance mechanisms should prioritize areas where habitat is being lost rapidly relative to protection, such as the crisis ecoregions identified here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

When protected areas reduce threats within their boundaries, they often displace a portion of these threats into adjacent areas through a process known as ‘leakage’, undermining conservation objectives. Using theoretical models and a case study of terrestrial mammals in Indonesia, we develop the first theoretical explanation of how leakage impacts conservation actions, and highlight conservation strategies that mitigate these impacts. Although leakage is a socio-economic process, we demonstrate that its negative impacts are also affected by the distribution of species, with leakage having larger impacts in landscapes with homogeneous distribution of species richness. Moreover, leakage has a greater negative effect when conservation strategies are implemented opportunistically, even creating the potential for perversely negative consequences from protected area establishment. Leakage thereby increases the relative benefits of systematic conservation planning over opportunism, especially in areas with high leakage and heterogeneously distributed species. Although leakage has the potential to undermine conservation actions, conservation planning can minimize this risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Meeting international targets for expanding protected areas could simultaneously contribute to species conservation, but only if the distribution of threatened species informs the future establishment of protected areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Land free of direct anthropogenic disturbance is considered essential for achieving biodiversity conservation outcomes but is rapidly eroding. In response, many nations are increasing their protected area (PA) estates, but little consideration is given to the context of the surrounding landscape. This is despite the fact that structural connectivity between PAs is critical in a changing climate and mandated by international conservation targets. Using a high-resolution assessment of human pressure, we show that while ~40% of the terrestrial planet is intact, only 9.7% of Earth's terrestrial protected network can be considered structurally connected. On average, 11% of each country or territory's PA estate can be considered connected. As the global community commits to bolder action on abating biodiversity loss, placement of future PAs will be critical, as will an increased focus on landscape-scale habitat retention and restoration efforts to ensure those important areas set aside for conservation outcomes will remain (or become) connected. The effectiveness of protected areas depends not only on whether they are intact, but also on whether they are mutually connected. Here the authors examine the structural connectivity of terrestrial protected areas globally, finding that less than 10% of the protected network can be considered connected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With much of Earth's surface already heavily impacted by humans, there is a need to understand where restoration is required to achieve global conservation goals. Here, we show that at least 1.9 million km2 of land, spanning 190 (27%) terrestrial ecoregions and 114 countries, needs restoration to achieve the current 17% global protected area target (Aichi Target 11). Restoration targeted on lightly modified land could recover up to two‐thirds of the shortfall, which would have an opportunity cost impact on agriculture of at least $205 million per annum (average of $159/km2). However, 64 (9%) ecoregions, located predominately in Southeast Asia, will require the challenging task of restoring areas that are already heavily modified. These results highlight the need for global conservation strategies to recognize the current level of anthropogenic degradation across many ecoregions and balance bigger protected area targets with more specific restoration goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• SDG15 indicators of forest extent are complemented with those of forest quality. • Indicators include naturalness, forest structure, fragmentation, and connectivity. • High quality forests were lost faster than forest extent during 2002–2021. • Indicators of forest quality improve SDG15 reporting. The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goal 15, termed Life on Land, is monitored by indicators and sub-indicators that largely deal with forest extent. In countries with structurally complex and species-rich forests, indicators and sub-indicators of forest quality are also needed to effectively monitor and sustain ecological integrity. The goal of the paper is to demonstrate the use of complementary sub-indicators of forest quality for SDG15 reporting and conservation planning. Our objective is to apply these sub-indicators within Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru and evaluate spatial patterns and trends over time as a basis for revealing how the results complement the official indicators of forest extent and forest extent in protected areas in informing conservation. The sub-indicators of forest quality quantify naturalness, riparian forest, forest structure and integrity, forest fragmentation, and forest connectivity. We quantified change during 2000–2021 in these metrics and highlighted insights gained from the complementary sub-indicators of forest quality relative to the official sub-indicators based on forest extent, Forests covered about 60–70% of the forested ecoregions in each country in 2000 and this proportion declined in all three countries by approximately 4% by 2021. Only a subset of the forested area was of high forest quality. Natural forests represented about 40% of forests in Colombian and Ecuador in 2000 and 50% in Peru. Those proportions declined: by 6.3% in Colombia, 6.5% in Ecuador, and 3.4% in Peru. Even less of the forested area was Core Forest in 2013; less than 28% among countries. During 2013–2021, the proportion of forest that was Core decreased by 2.3% in Colombia, 4.5% in Ecuador, and 6.7% in Peru. Connected Forests were about 17–22% of forests among the countries in 2013 and declined 10.4% in Colombia, 1.6% in Ecuador, and 3.8% in Peru by 2021. Forests high in forest structure were 10–18% of forests in 2012 among the countries and increased by 1.1–2% by 2021. Forests of high integrity were 7–13% of forests in 2012 and increased by1.4–2% by 2021. Riparian forests represented less than about 7–9% among the countries and declined by 0.6–1.3% by 2021. Thus, the area of highly quality forest across the countries was substantially less than full forest extent and high-quality forest declined at a higher rate than forest extent during 2000–2021. Forest structure and integrity did increase slightly over this time period. Our results for trends in forest naturalness, riparian association, within stand structure, fragmentation, and connectivity demonstrate how consideration of forest quality provides a much stronger basis for evaluating success in meeting SDG15 targets than consideration of forest extent alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Earth's wilderness areas are reservoirs of genetic information and carbon storage systems, and are vital to reducing extinction risks. Retaining the conservation value of these areas is fundamental to achieving global biodiversity conservation goals; however, climate and land-use risk can undermine their ability to provide these functions. The extent to which wilderness areas are likely to be impacted by these drivers has not previously been quantified. Using climate and land-use change during baseline (1971–2005) and future (2016–2050) periods, we estimate that these stressors within wilderness areas will increase by ca. 60% and 39%, respectively, under a scenario of high emission and land-use change (SSP5-RCP8.5). Nearly half (49%) of all wilderness areas could experience substantial climate change by 2050 under this scenario, potentially limiting their capacity to shelter biodiversity. Notable climate (>5 km year−1) and land-use (>0.25 km year−1) changes are expected to occur more rapidly in the unprotected wilderness, including the edges of the Amazonian wilderness, Northern Russia, and Central Africa, which support unique assemblages of species and are critical for the preservation of biodiversity. However, an alternative scenario of sustainable development (SSP1-RCP2.6) would attenuate the projected climate velocity and land-use instability by 54% and 6%, respectively. Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and preserving the remaining intact natural ecosystems can help fortify these bastions of biodiversity. • Wilderness areas are the only continuous areas free from industrial-scale impacts • Land-use and climate changes could affect nearly half of wilderness areas by 2050 • Land-use and climate impacts will limit their ability to preserve biodiversity • By 2050, global emissions and socioeconomic trends may reverse or accelerate impacts Achieving future conservation goals, including zero biodiversity loss by 2030, depends on wilderness areas remaining intact. Asamoah et al. predict that land-use and climate changes combined will negatively impact nearly half of wilderness areas, which will reduce their capacity to protect biodiversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Establishing Protected areas (PAs) could displace or cause 'leakage' of deforestation into adjacent areas. Such leakage would potentially offset PAs' conservation effort by jeopardizing forest conservation goals and impeding financial mechanisms such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation - REDD+. Here we investigate forest loss inside PAs' borders and whether leakage occurred following the establishment of new PAs (n = 425) within the Amazon and the Atlantic forests in Brazil between 2004 and 2017. We applied a Before-After-Control-Intervention statistical design with a matching approach to evaluate deforestation leakage from PAs' establishment using a spatial (inside and outside PAs)– temporal (before and after PA establishment) measure of deforestation rates. We also used "Random Forest" to investigate the drivers of the effect of PAs' establishment on their surrounding areas. We found that when PAs' establishment led to reducing deforestation inside their boundaries, their surrounding also experienced a reduction in deforestation ("blockage"). Similarly, when PAs' establishment could not reduce deforestation inside their boundaries, their surroundings also experienced increased deforestation. Such a pattern was most common for Indigenous territories, especially in the deforestation arch in the Amazon. However, we did not find significant evidence for leakage as PAs' surroundings with a significant increase in deforestation were associated with PAs unable to significantly reduce deforestation within their boundaries. Therefore, "leakage" should not limit the establishment of new PAs. Instead, greater investments into reinforcement are needed for existing PAs, with high priority given to Indigenous Territories. • Using a Before-After-Control-Intervention approach, we assessed spatio-temporal deforestation leakage from 425 Brazilian protected areas (PAs). • Brazilian PAs established from 2004 to 2017 showed no significant evidence of deforestation leakage. • Evidence for 'blockage' was found in all PAs types (Strict protection, Sustainable use, and Indigenous territories) in both Biomes. • Most of the PAs with the highest priority for reinforcement are the Indigenous territories in the Amazon and Atlantic Forest. • Multi-level governance efforts are required to support PAs and reinforce their role in biodiversity conservation and multiple ecosystem services provision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]