Shortfalls and Solutions for Meeting National and Global Conservation Area Targets

Butchart, Stuart H. M.; Clarke, Michael W.; Smith, Robert J.; Sykes, Rachel E.; Scharlemann, Jörn P. W.; Harfoot, Mike; Buchanan, Graeme M.; Angulo, Ariadne; Balmford, Andrew; Bertzky, Bastian; Brooks, Thomas M.; Carpenter, Kent E.; Comeros-Raynal, Mia T.; Cornell, John Bilheimer; Ficetola, Gentile Francesco; Fishpool, Lincoln; Fuller, Richard A.; Geldmann, Jonas; Harwell, Heather; Hilton‐Taylor, Craig; Hoffmann, Michael; Joolia, Ackbar; Joppa, Lucas; Kingston, Naomi; May, Ian; Milam, Amy; Polidoro, Beth; Ralph, Gina M.; Richman, Nadia I.; Rondinini, Carlo; Segan, Daniel B.; Skolnik, Benjamin; Spalding, Mark; Stuart, Simon N.; Symes, Andy; Taylor, Joseph M.; Visconti, Piero; Watson, James; Wood, Louisa; Burgess, Neil D.

doi:10.1111/conl.12158

Cited by 392 publications

(435 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

418

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Butchart et al, 2015;Larsen et al, 2011;Pollock et al, 2017;Venter et al, 2014), and these provide broad insights into the optimal locations for future protection at the international scale. However, as Aichi Target 11 is implemented at the national-level (CBD, 2010), and as this is the scale most relevant for land-use policy development and delivery, national-scale spatial conservation prioritisations are needed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing protected area networks that translate international conservation commitments into national action

Bicknell

Collins

Pickles

et al. 2017

Biological Conservation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most countries have committed to protect 17% of their terrestrial area by 2020 through Aichi Target 11 of the Convention on Biological Diversity, with a focus on protecting areas of particular importance for biodiversity. This means national-scale spatial conservation prioritisations are needed to help meet this target and guide broader conservation and land-use policy development. However, to ensure these assessments are adopted by policy makers, they must also consider national priorities. This situation is exemplified by Guyana, a corner of Amazonia that couples high biodiversity with low economic development. In recent years activities that threaten biodiversity conservation have increased, and consequently, protected areas are evermore critical to achieving the Aichi targets. Here we undertake a cost-effective approach to protected area planning in Guyana that accounts for in-country conditions. To do this we conducted a stakeholder-led spatial conservation prioritisation based on meeting targets for 17 vegetation types and 329 vertebrate species, while minimising opportunity costs for forestry, mining, agriculture and urbanisation. Our analysis identifies 3 million ha of priority areas for conservation, helping inform government plans to double the current protected area network from 8.5 to 17%. As part of this, we also develop a new technique to prioritise engagement with local communities whose lands are identified as important to conservation. Our study both provides a scientifically robust, politically acceptable protected area expansion strategy for Guyana, and illustrates the importance of conservation planning at the country-scale to translate international commitments into national action.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing protected area networks that translate international conservation commitments into national action

Bicknell

Collins

Pickles

et al. 2017

Biological Conservation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These two analyses represent different interpretations of the CBD target 11 [1,3,6]. Except for the country-specific area coverage targets, both sets of targets are 'globalized' in the sense that they were achieved without considering national borders.…”

Section: Methods (A) Protected Area Expansion By 2020mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These targets were set following Rodrigues et al [12] and replicate the analyses performed by Butchart et al [3] and Venter et al [6]. This involved scaling proportional representation of species ranges in PAs by species' range sizes.…”

Section: Methods (A) Protected Area Expansion By 2020mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At this pace, the global coverage of 17% of land is likely to be met by 2020, while the target of 10% protection of coastal and marine environments will not [5]. In addition, progress towards producing ecologically representative PA networks has been slow, with only 41% of terrestrial ecoregions and 32% of marine ecoregions achieving the designated targets [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Socio-economic and ecological impacts of global protected area expansion plans

Visconti

Bakkenes

Smith

et al. 2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recognition of these extensive benefits has resulted in many recent calls for a significant scaling up of the global protected areas estate (Wilson 2016, Dinerstein et al 2017, Butchart et al 2015, IUCN 2014, Noss et al 2012, CBD 2010. However, a global protected areas strategy must also include more large and intact areas of land and sea, including wilderness, before they vanish, and these areas should be interconnected to the extent possible (Wilson 2016, Watson et al 2016, Wuerthner et al 2015, Worboys et al 2010.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%