Author:
Cook Carly N,Rao Madhu,Clyne Peter J,Rathbone Vanessa,Barrientos Christian,Boveda Antonio,Diment Alex,Parra Jorge,Falabella Valeria,Linkie Matthew,Kujirakwinja Deo,Ostrowski Stephane,Olson Kirk,Patankar Vardhan,Rasolofomanan Lovy,Grantham Hedley S
Abstract
ABSTRACTOther effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) have expanded area-based conservation to recognize sites that deliver effective biodiversity outcomes even if not managed for conservation. Yet our ability to identify sites likely to qualify as OECMs remains limited. To address this gap, we established and tested a set of indicators to judge whether sites meet the essential criteria to be considered OECMs, evaluating a large, global sample of 173 important conservation areas: 81 potential OECMs and 92 nearby protected areas. We found that most potential OECMs were largely in good condition with the potential to achieve conservation outcomes, but none currently met all the OECM criteria. Formally designated protected areas in our dataset performed better but the majority also failed the criteria. With so many important conservation areas unable to deliver effective conservation outcomes, our findings raise important questions about how to ensure area-based conservation promotes positive and sustained outcomes for biodiversity.
Publisher
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Reference41 articles.
1. The performance and potential of protected areas
2. Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century
3. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (2010). Strategic plan for biodiversity 2011–2020 and the Aichi targets. Report of the Tenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
4. Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) (2019). Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.
5. An Ecoregion-Based Approach to Protecting Half the Terrestrial Realm