30×30 biodiversity gains rely on national coordination.

Global commitments to protect 30% of land by 2030 present an opportunity to combat the biodiversity crisis, but reducing extinction risk will depend on where countries expand protection. Here, we explore a range of 30×30 conservation scenarios that vary what dimension of biodiversity is prioritized (taxonomic groups, species-at-risk, biodiversity facets) and how protection is coordinated (transnational, national, or regional approaches) to test which decisions influence our ability to capture biodiversity in spatial planning. Using Canada as a model nation, we evaluate how well each scenario captures biodiversity using scalable indicators while accounting for climate change, data bias, and uncertainty. We find that only 15% of all terrestrial vertebrates, plants, and butterflies (representing only 6.6% of species-at-risk) are adequately represented in existing protected land. However, a nationally coordinated approach to 30×30 could protect 65% of all species representing 40% of all species-at-risk. How protection is coordinated has the largest impact, with regional approaches protecting up to 38% fewer species and 65% fewer species-at-risk, while the choice of biodiversity incurs much smaller trade-offs. These results demonstrate the potential of 30×30 while highlighting the critical importance of biodiversity-informed national strategies. Expanding protected areas to meet conservation goals requires careful consideration of potential trade-offs. Here, by simulating conservation scenarios for Canada, the authors report that 30×30 outcomes for biodiversity depend more on how protection is coordinated at different spatial scales than on which biodiversity metrics are prioritized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]