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.
Context
Conflict over land use is endemic to natural resource management given the limited availability of resources and multiple stakeholders’ interests, but there has been limited research to ...examine conflict from an integrative social-ecological perspective.
Objectives
We sought to determine how the potential for land use conflict—a social construct—was related (or not) to ecological systems of landscapes.
Methods
Using participatory mapping data from a regional case study in Australia, we identified the potential for land use conflict using a model that combines spatially-explicit place values with preferences for specific land uses related to development and conservation. Multiple proxies of biodiversity were used to evaluate the landscape’s ecological systems at ecosystems and species levels. Range maps were used to identify areas of high species diversity value using the conservation planning software Zonation.
Results
We spatially intersected conflict areas with landscape attributes and found the potential for conflict over conservation to be higher in coastal areas than inland areas, more likely to be located in areas with moderate vegetation cover, more concentrated in ecosystems classified as ‘No Concern’ with moderate to high native vegetation. Potential conflict over conservation was disproportionately higher in areas with higher species diversity derived from conservation modelling.
Conclusions
The social-ecological associations in conflict analysis can inform impact assessment of land use plans on biodiversity, assist development of effective approaches to reconcile conservation and other land uses, support conservation planning by identifying priorities for conflict negotiation and understanding underlying factors for conflict.
•We conducted a systematic review looking at the effectiveness of protected areas.•The search was divided into two outcomes (1) population trends and (2) habitat change.•Studies on populations were ...small case studies focusing in intrinsic drivers.•Studies on habitat change focused on large scale patterns.•Few studies successfully tested protection against comparable counterfactual scenarios.
Protected Areas (PAs) are a critical tool for maintaining habitat integrity and species diversity, and now cover more than 12.7% of the planet’s land surface area. However, there is considerable debate on the extent to which PAs deliver conservation outcomes in terms of habitat and species protection. A systematic review approach is applied to investigate the evidence from peer reviewed and grey literature on the effectiveness of PAs focusing on two outcomes: (a) habitat cover and (b) species populations. We only include studies that causally link conservation inputs to outcomes against appropriate counterfactuals. From 2599 publications we found 76 studies from 51 papers that evaluated impacts on habitat cover, and 42 studies from 35 papers on species populations. Three conclusions emerged: first, there is good evidence that PAs have conserved forest habitat; second, evidence remains inconclusive that PAs have been effective at maintaining species populations, although more positive than negative results are reported in the literature; third, causal connections between management inputs and conservation outcomes in PAs are rarely evaluated in the literature. Overall, available evidence suggests that PAs deliver positive outcomes, but there remains a limited evidence base, and weak understanding of the conditions under which PAs succeed or fail to deliver conservation outcomes.
Protected areas (PAs) are a key tool in efforts to safeguard biodiversity against increasing anthropogenic threats. As signatories to the 2011–2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, 196 nations ...pledged support for expansion in the extent of the global PA estate and the quality of PA management. While this has resulted in substantial increases in PA designations, many sites lack the resources needed to guarantee effective biodiversity conservation. Using management reports from 2167 PAs (with an area representing 23% of the global terrestrial PA estate), we demonstrate that less than a quarter of these PAs report having adequate resources in terms of staffing and budget. Using data on the geographic ranges of the 11,919 terrestrial vertebrate species overlapping our sample of PAs, we estimate that only 4–9% of terrestrial amphibians, birds, and mammals are sufficiently represented within the existing global PA estate, when only adequately resourced PAs are considered. While continued expansion of the world’s PAs is necessary, a shift in emphasis from quantity to quality is critical to effectively respond to the current biodiversity crisis.
We compiled details of over 8000 assessments of protected area management effectiveness across the world and developed a method for analyzing results across diverse assessment methodologies and ...indicators. Data was compiled and analyzed for over 4000 of these sites. Management of these protected areas varied from weak to effective, with about 40% showing major deficiencies. About 14% of the surveyed areas showed significant deficiencies across many management effectiveness indicators and hence lacked basic requirements to operate effectively. Strongest management factors recorded on average related to establishment of protected areas (legal establishment, design, legislation and boundary marking) and to effectiveness of governance; while the weakest aspects of management included community benefit programs, resourcing (funding reliability and adequacy, staff numbers and facility and equipment maintenance) and management effectiveness evaluation. Estimations of management outcomes, including both environmental values conservation and impact on communities, were positive. We conclude that in spite of inadequate funding and management process, there are indications that protected areas are contributing to biodiversity conservation and community well-being.
Protected areas (PAs) represent a cornerstone of efforts to safeguard biodiversity, and if effective should reduce threats to biodiversity. We present the most comprehensive assessment of threats to ...terrestrial PAs, based on in situ data from 1,961 PAs across 149 countries, assessed by PA managers and local stakeholders. Unsustainable hunting was the most commonly reported threat and occurred in 61% of all PAs, followed by disturbance from recreational activities occurring in 55%, and natural system modifications from fire or its suppression in 49%. The number of reported threats was lower in PAs with greater remoteness, higher control of corruption, and lower human development scores. The main reported threats in developing countries were linked to overexploitation for resource extraction, while negative impacts from recreational activities dominated in developed countries. Our results show that many of the most serious threats to PAs are difficult to monitor with remote sensing, and highlight the importance of in situ threat data to inform the implementation of more effective biodiversity conservation in the global protected area estate.
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. Mean METT scores increased in 69.5% of sites while 25.1% experienced decreases and 5.4% experienced no change over project periods (median 4years). 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 as well 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.
•We collected the largest global database of change in management effectiveness.•Management effectiveness, on average improved in 722 protected areas from 74 countries.•Management elements related to planning increased the most followed by enforcement.•Measures on biological condition assessments did not improve over time.•Increased human population density predicted increases in management effectiveness.
Ensuring that protected areas (PAs) maintain the biodiversity within their boundaries is fundamental in achieving global conservation goals. Despite this objective, wildlife abundance changes in PAs ...are patchily documented and poorly understood. Here, we use linear mixed effect models to explore correlates of population change in 1,902 populations of birds and mammals from 447 PAs globally. On an average, we find PAs are maintaining populations of monitored birds and mammals within their boundaries. Wildlife population trends are more positive in PAs located in countries with higher development scores, and for larger-bodied species. These results suggest that active management can consistently overcome disadvantages of lower reproductive rates and more severe threats experienced by larger species of birds and mammals. The link between wildlife trends and national development shows that the social and economic conditions supporting PAs are critical for the successful maintenance of their wildlife populations.
The management requirements for protected areas are frequently complex and urgent; as a result, managers often need to act quickly and make decisions with limited supporting evidence at their ...disposal. Despite demands for high-quality information, it is unclear how much of this evidence conservation practitioners use to assist with their decision making. We investigated the information used to manage protected areas, based on the evidence reported by practitioners when evaluating their management performance. We examined the management of over 1000 protected areas run by two Australian conservation agencies - Parks Victoria and the New South Wales Department of Environment and Climate Change - an unprecedented scope for this type of study. We found that very few conservation practitioners use evidence-based knowledge to support their management. The evidence used varies with the management issue, reserve type, and reserve size. Around 60% of conservation management decisions rely on experience-based information, and many practitioners report having insufficient evidence to assess their management decisions. While experience plays an important role in conservation management, the apparent lack of evidence-based information to support decision making in the reserves has the potential to compromise outcomes and jeopardize the investment made in protected areas for conservation.
Recognizing that protected areas (PAs) are essential for effective biodiversity conservation action, the Convention on Biological Diversity established ambitious PA targets as part of the 2020 ...Strategic Plan for Biodiversity. Under the strategic goal to "improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species, and genetic diversity," Target 11 aims to put 17% of terrestrial and 10% of marine regions under PA status by 2020. Additionally and crucially, these areas are required to be of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative, and well-connected and to include "other effective area-based conservation measures" (OECMs). Whereas the area-based targets are explicit and measurable, the lack of guidance for what constitutes important and representative; effective; and OECMs is affecting how nations are implementing the target. There is a real risk that Target 11 may be achieved in terms of area while failing the overall strategic goal for which it is established because the areas are poorly located, inadequately managed, or based on unjustifiable inclusion of OECMs. We argue that the conservation science community can help establish ecologically sensible PA targets to help prioritize important biodiversity areas and achieve ecological representation; identify clear, comparable performance metrics of ecological effectiveness so progress toward these targets can be assessed; and identify metrics and report on the contribution OECMs make toward the target. By providing ecologically sensible targets and new performance metrics for measuring the effectiveness of both PAs and OECMs, the science community can actively ensure that the achievement of the required area in Target 11 is not simply an end in itself but generates genuine benefits for biodiversity. En reconocimiento de que las areas protegidas (APs) son esenciales para la acción efectiva de la conservación de la biodiversidad, la Convención Biológica sobre la Diversidad estableció objetivos ambiciosos de áreas protegidas como parte del Plan Estratégico para la Biodiversidad 2020. Bajo la meta estratégica de "mejorar el estado de la biodiversidad por medio de salvaguardar a los ecosistemas, las especies y la diversidad genética", el Objetivo 11 busca poner 17% de las regiones terrestres y 10% de las marinas en estado de AP para 2020. Además y de manera crucial, estas áreas necesitan ser de particular importancia para la biodiversidad y los servicios ambientales, estar manejadas efectiva y equitativamente, ser representativas ecológicamente, estar bien conectadas e incluir "otras medidas de conservación efectiva basadas en el área" (OMCE). Mientras que los objetivos basados en el área son explícitos y medibles, la falta de dirección para qué significan importante, representativo, efectivo y OMCE está afectando cómo las naciones están implementando el objetivo. Existe un riesgo real de que el Objetivo 11 se alcance en términos de área y falle en el objetivo estratégico general por el cual fue establecido ya que las áreas se encuentran mal ubicadas, manejadas inadecuadamente o basadas en una inclusión injustificada de las OMCE. Argumentamos que la comunidad de científicos de la conservación puede ayudar a establecer objetivos de APs ecológicamente sensibles para ayudar a priorizar áreas de biodiversidad importantes y alcanzar la representación ecológica; identificar medidas claras y comparables de la efectividad ecológica para poder evaluar el progreso hacia estos objetivos; e identificar medidas y reportar sobre la contribución que las OMCE aportan al objetivo. Si proporcionamos objetivos ecológicamente sensibles y nuevas medidas de desempeño para calcular la efectividad de las APs y las OMCE, la comunidad científica puede asegurar activamente que la obtención del área exigida en el Objetivo 11 no sea sólo un fin por sí misma, sino también que genere beneficios genuinos para la biodiversidad.