Very Large Protected Areas and Their Contribution to Terrestrial Biological Conservation

Cantú‐Salazar, Lisette; Gaston, Kevin J.

doi:10.1525/bio.2010.60.10.7

Cited by 82 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is quite understandable, as PAs have been established for purposes other than the maintenance of ecosystem services. Not even exceptionally large PAs represent an optimum solution (Mittermeier et al 2003;Olson and Dinerstein 2002), even though they usually encompass wilderness little affected by humans and more resistant to disruptive anthropogenic influences than PAs of a small extent (Cantú-Salazar and Gaston 2010). Similarly, regional studies of the Natura 2000 network show that territorial overlaps of sites with significant biodiversity (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Natura 2000 system for habitat types protection: A case study from the Czech Republic

Pechanec¹,

Machar²,

Pohanka³

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In conservation biology, there is a general consensus that protected areas (PAs) are one of the most effective tools for biodiversity protection. Worldwide, the area of PAs is continually increasing. But is the effectiveness of biodiversity protection improving with it? Since many PAs only exist as "paper parks" (i.e. they exist on maps and in legislation but offer little actual protection), the answer is uncertain. Moreover, it has long been known that, not only an increase in the extent of PAs, but also the efficiency of their management is fundamentally important for effective nature conservation. Therefore, there is a wide-ranging discussion about the actual effectiveness of PAs and factors that influence it.In the course of the EU pre-accession phase, a comprehensive field mapping of natural habitats took place in the Czech Republic in years 2001−2004. The mapping results were used to designate Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) as part of the Natura 2000 network.In this study, the aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of this newly created system of SACs for protection of biodiversity represented by the mapped natural habitats. The NCEI index (Nature Conservation Effectiveness Index) was applied, calculated as the total area of a particular habitat type in all SACs RESEARCH ARTICLE Launched to accelerate biodiversity conservation A peer-reviewed open-access journalVilém Pechanec et al. / Nature Conservation 24: 21-41 (2018) 22 in the Czech Republic divided by the total area of that same natural habitat in the entire Czech Republic. Habitat protection in the Czech Republic is focused primarily on the smallest types of rare habitats, many of which are classified as critically endangered. The Czech national system of SACs provides protection to a total of 4,491.68 km 2 of natural habitats. Based on these results, it can be concluded that the overall effectiveness of the SAC system in the Czech Republic, which is specifically aimed at protecting natural habitats, is low (NCEI = 0.36). Nevertheless, the critically endangered habitats receive maximum protection (NCEI = 1).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Natura 2000 system for habitat types protection: A case study from the Czech Republic

Pechanec¹,

Machar²,

Pohanka³

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among the most important questions in this context are whether, and how, PAs may contribute to desirable regional resilience (e.g., Plumptre et al 2007, Slotow and Hunter 2009, Cantu´-Salazar and Gaston 2010, Laurance 2013, Sjo¨stedt 2013; and conversely, how regional resilience may influence the resilience of individual PAs (Gonza´lez et al 2008, Jones et al 2013). …”

Section: Fig 4 the Depiction Bymentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding protected area resilience: a multi‐scale, social‐ecological approach

Cumming

Allen

Ban

et al. 2015

Ecological Applications

209

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Protected areas (PAs) remain central to the conservation of biodiversity. Classical PAs were conceived as areas that would be set aside to maintain a natural state with minimal human influence. However, global environmental change and growing cross-scale anthropogenic influences mean that PAs can no longer be thought of as ecological islands that function independently of the broader social-ecological system in which they are located. For PAs to be resilient (and to contribute to broader social-ecological resilience), they must be able to adapt to changing social and ecological conditions over time in a way that supports the long-term persistence of populations, communities, and ecosystems of conservation concern. We extend Ostrom's social-ecological systems framework to consider the long-term persistence of PAs, as a form of land use embedded in social-ecological systems, with important crossscale feedbacks. Most notably, we highlight the cross-scale influences and feedbacks on PAs that exist from the local to the global scale, contextualizing PAs within multi-scale socialecological functional landscapes. Such functional landscapes are integral to understand and manage individual PAs for long-term sustainability. We illustrate our conceptual contribution with three case studies that highlight cross-scale feedbacks and social-ecological interactions in the functioning of PAs and in relation to regional resilience. Our analysis suggests that while ecological, economic, and social processes are often directly relevant to PAs at finer scales, at broader scales, the dominant processes that shape and alter PA resilience are primarily social and economic.

show abstract

“…The diversity of vested parties makes protected areas a complicated tool for the management and protection of exploited species (Creel and Creel 1997;Packer et al 2011). For example, Cantu-Salazar and Gaston (2010) showed that many national or international terrestrial protected areas conflicted with regional conservation priorities (see also Gaston et al 2008). Moreover, it is often difficult to establish realistic spatial scales in which to protect species with extensive ranges (e.g., Schwartz 1999;Bauer and Iongh 2005;Cantu-Salazar and Gaston 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Cantu-Salazar and Gaston (2010) showed that many national or international terrestrial protected areas conflicted with regional conservation priorities (see also Gaston et al 2008). Moreover, it is often difficult to establish realistic spatial scales in which to protect species with extensive ranges (e.g., Schwartz 1999;Bauer and Iongh 2005;Cantu-Salazar and Gaston 2010). Similarly, marine protected areas have lacked implementation on large, ecosystem-based scales (e.g., Allison et al 1998;Sale et al 2005;Barrett et al 2009;Halpern et al 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considering a species-loss domino-effect before endangered species legislation and protected area implementation

Hintz

Garvey

2012

Biodivers Conserv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regulatory legislation by governments is essential for facilitating the recovery of endangered or threatened species. Protecting commercially exploited species, in particular, requires painstaking cooperation among vested parties. However, rules protecting one species may be detrimental to others. If an exploited species is only protected in a portion of its range, exploitative efforts may divert to unprotected portions or similarly valuable species. As a result, the good intentions of protecting species in a limited fashion may manifest a species-loss domino-effect. We illustrate a species-loss domino-effect using a current example from the Mississippi River basin of the United States, where roe fisheries (for caviar) have cascaded because of strict regulations and collapses of sturgeon stocks in Europe and Asia. In the Mississippi River basin the limited protection of a commercially important sturgeon species may increase exploitation in unprotected river reaches and threaten other economically important fishes. Although a species-loss dominoeffect is delineated herein using an example from a freshwater fishery in the central United States, the concept should be considered and applied to terrestrial and marine species worldwide.

show abstract

Very Large Protected Areas and Their Contribution to Terrestrial Biological Conservation

Cited by 82 publications

References 42 publications

Effectiveness of Natura 2000 system for habitat types protection: A case study from the Czech Republic

Effectiveness of Natura 2000 system for habitat types protection: A case study from the Czech Republic

Understanding protected area resilience: a multi‐scale, social‐ecological approach

Considering a species-loss domino-effect before endangered species legislation and protected area implementation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About