Global protected‐area coverage and human pressure on tidal flats

Biodiversity hotspots are rich in endemic species and threatened by anthropogenic influences and, thus, considered priorities for conservation. In this study, conservation achievements in 36 global biodiversity hotspots (25 identified in 1988, 10 added in 2011, and one in 2016) were evaluated in relation to changes in human population density and protected area coverage between 1995 and 2015. Population densities were compared against 1995 global averages, and percentages of protected area coverage were compared against area-based targets outlined in Aichi target 11 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (17% by 2020) and calls for half Earth (50%). The two factors (average population density and percent protected area coverage) for each hotspot were then plotted to evaluate relative levels of threat to biodiversity conservation. Average population densities in biodiversity hotspots increased by 36% over the 20-year period, and were double the global average. The protected area target of 17% is achieved in 19 of the 36 hotspots; the 17 hotspots where this target has not been met are economically disadvantaged areas as defined by Gross Domestic Product. In 2015, there are seven fewer hotspots (22 in 1995; 15 in 2015) in the highest threat category (i.e., population density exceeding global average, and protected area coverage less than 17%). In the lowest threat category (i.e., population density below the global average, and a protected area coverage of 17% or more), there are two additional hotspots in 2015 as compared to 1995, attributable to gains in protected area. Only two hotspots achieve a target of 50% protection. Although conservation progress has been made in most global biodiversity hotspots, additional efforts are needed to slow and/or reduce population density and achieve protected area targets. Such conservation efforts are likely to require more coordinated and collaborative initiatives, attention to biodiversity objectives beyond protected areas, and support from the global community.

Download Full-text

Global correlates of terrestrial and marine coverage by protected areas on islands

Nature Communications ◽

10.1038/s41467-020-18293-z ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

David Mouillot ◽

Laure Velez ◽

Eva Maire ◽

Alizée Masson ◽

Christina C. Hicks ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Protected Areas ◽

Protected Area ◽

Human Population ◽

Marine Protected Area ◽

Habitat Diversity ◽

Area Coverage ◽

Biodiversity Hotspots ◽

Human Footprint ◽

Cultural Connections ◽

Resource Capacity

Abstract Many islands are biodiversity hotspots but also extinction epicenters. In addition to strong cultural connections to nature, islanders derive a significant part of their economy and broader wellbeing from this biodiversity. Islands are thus considered as the socio-ecosystems most vulnerable to species and habitat loss. Yet, the extent and key correlates of protected area coverage on islands is still unknown. Here we assess the relative influence of climate, geography, habitat diversity, culture, resource capacity, and human footprint on terrestrial and marine protected area coverage across 2323 inhabited islands globally. We show that, on average, 22% of terrestrial and 13% of marine island areas are under protection status, but that half of all islands have no protected areas. Climate, diversity of languages, human population density and development are strongly associated with differences observed in protected area coverage among islands. Our study suggests that economic development and population growth may critically limit the amount of protection on islands.

Download Full-text

Evaluating official marine protected area coverage for Aichi Target 11: appraising the data and methods that define our progress

Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems ◽

10.1002/aqc.2511 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 24 (S2) ◽

pp. 8-23 ◽

Cited By ~ 39

Author(s):

Hannah L Thomas ◽

Brian Macsharry ◽

Lance Morgan ◽

Naomi Kingston ◽

Russell Moffitt ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Protected Area ◽

Marine Protected Area ◽

Area Coverage

Download Full-text

Protected area coverage of threatened vertebrates and ecoregions in Peru: Comparison of communal, private and state reserves

Journal of Environmental Management ◽

10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.07.023 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 202 ◽

pp. 12-20 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Sam Shanee ◽

Noga Shanee ◽

Bruno Monteferri ◽

Nestor Allgas ◽

Alejandro Alarcon Pardo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Protected Area ◽

Area Coverage

Download Full-text

The nature and extent of terrestrial protected area coverage on the UK's Overseas Territories

Environmental Conservation ◽

10.1017/s0376892917000145 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 44 (4) ◽

pp. 397-404

Author(s):

NICHOLAS I. WILKINSON ◽

JONATHAN G. HALL ◽

JULIET A. VICKERY ◽

GRAEME M. BUCHANAN

Keyword(s):

Protected Areas ◽

Protected Area ◽

Biological Diversity ◽

Area Coverage ◽

Convention On Biological Diversity ◽

Effective Protection ◽

Terrestrial Environment ◽

Overseas Territories ◽

The Uk

SUMMARYSignatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) agreed to the effective protection of at least 17% of the terrestrial environment by 2020 (Aichi Target 11). Here, we assess the coverage of terrestrial protected areas (land protected by legislation) on the UK's Overseas Territories. These 14 Territories are under the sovereignty of the UK, a signatory of the CBD, and are particularly biodiverse. Eight Territories have protected areas covering 17% or more of their land, but the extent of protection across these Territories as a whole is low, with only 4.8% of this land designated as protected. This protection covered 51% of sites already identified as of conservation importance (Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas), although only 8% of the area of these sites was protected. The expansion of effective protection to meet the 17% target provides an opportunity to capture the most important sites for conservation. Locally led designation will require an improvement in knowledge of the distribution and density of species. This, together with measures to ensure that the protection is enforced and effective, will require provision of resources. This should be seen as an investment in the UK meeting its obligations to Aichi Target 11.

Download Full-text

Towards reducing misrepresentation of national achievements in marine protected area targets

10.31230/osf.io/vyr82 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

patrick Smallhorn-West ◽

Hugh Govan

Keyword(s):

Environmental Sustainability ◽

Protected Area ◽

Large Scale ◽

Biological Diversity ◽

Marine Protected Area ◽

Area Coverage ◽

Convention On Biological Diversity ◽

International Database ◽

Online Databases ◽

Pacific Island Nations

Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted 20 targets, known as the Aichi Targets, to benchmark progress towards protecting biodiversity. These targets include Target 11 relating to Marine Protected Area coverage and the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) is the accepted international database for tracking national commitments to this target. However, measuring national progress towards conservation targets relies on sound data. This paper highlights the large-scale misrepresentation, by up to two orders of magnitude, of national marine protected area coverage from two Pacific Island nations in multiple online databases and subsequent reports, including conclusions regarding achievements of Aichi 11 commitments. It recommends that for the target driven approach to have value, users of the WDPA data should carefully consider its caveats before using their raw data and that countries should strive for a greater degree of accountability. Lastly it also concludes that protected area coverage may not be the best approach to environmental sustainability and that the remaining 19 targets should be considered to a greater extent.

Download Full-text

Improving protected area effectiveness through consideration of different human pressure baselines

Conservation Biology ◽

10.1111/cobi.13887 ◽

2022 ◽

Author(s):

Chun‐Ting Feng ◽

Ming Cao ◽

Fang‐Zheng Liu ◽

Yue Zhou ◽

Jin‐Hong Du ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Protected Area ◽

Human Pressure

Download Full-text

Reassessment of the conservation status and protected area coverage of Taiwanese birds: How distribution modelling can help species conservation

Bird Conservation International ◽

10.1017/s0959270913000336 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 24 (2) ◽

pp. 223-238 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

TSAI-YU WU ◽

BRUNO A. WALTHER ◽

YI-HSIU CHEN ◽

RUEY-SHING LIN ◽

PEI-FEN LEE

Keyword(s):

Protected Area ◽

Conservation Status ◽

Species Conservation ◽

Bird Species ◽

Area Coverage ◽

Area Network ◽

Multiple Discriminant Analysis ◽

Breeding Bird ◽

Entire Study ◽

Distribution Ranges

SummaryTaiwan has 145 breeding bird species, but so far no comprehensive attempt has been made to model their distributions. For the first time, we bring together various datasets to model the distributions of the 116 bird species with sufficient sampling coverage. We improved on previous limited modelling efforts by using ensemble modelling, based on five well-performing modelling approaches: multiple discriminant analysis, logistic regression, genetic algorithm for rule-set production, ecological niche factor analysis and maximum-entropy. We then used these ensemble models to improve our knowledge of the status of each bird species by (1) calculating each species’s coverage of Taiwan, (2) calculating each species’s coverage by Taiwan’s protected area network, and (3) comparing these two conservation-relevant measures with already established measures to highlight those species whose status may need to be reassessed. We categorised each species’s coverage of the entire study area as measured by their modelled distributions into four quartiles, thus establishing a new measure of rarity called ‘range quartile’ which we used to highlight the 22 species with a limited distribution on mainland Taiwan. We also calculated that overall, 29.8% of the distribution ranges of the 116 modelled species are covered by Taiwanese protected areas. We then identified those species whose status may need to be reassessed because of possible conflicts between the respective conservation-relevant measures. Thus we identified 10 species which are first-quartile species < 5% of whose distributions are protected, of which only five are considered threatened. We also identified another 12 species with limited distributions, 30 species with limited protection and 19 species whose status may need to be reassessed for various reasons. We recommend that range quartile and protected area coverage be incorporated into future assessments of the conservation status and protected area coverage of Taiwanese birds.

Download Full-text