Assessing the effectiveness of a national protected area network for carnivore conservation

Abstract

Protected areas (PAs) are essential to prevent further biodiversity loss yet their effectiveness varies largely with governance and external threats. Although methodological advances have permitted assessments of PA effectiveness in mitigating deforestation, we still lack similar studies for the impact of PAs on wildlife populations. Here we use an innovative combination of matching methods and hurdle-mixed models with a large-scale and long-term dataset for Finland's large carnivore species. We show that the national PA network does not support higher densities than non-protected habitat for 3 of the 4 species investigated. For some species, PA effects interact with region or time, i.e., wolverine densities decreased inside PAs over the study period and lynx densities increased inside eastern PAs. We support the application of matching methods in combination of additional analytical frameworks for deeper understanding of conservation impacts on wildlife populations. These methodological advances are crucial for preparing ambitious PA targets post-2020.

A biogeographical study of red listed lichen species at temporal and spatial scales within protected and non-protected areas

“…At a large spatial scale, geomorphology and biogeographical regions and their associated abiotic parameters play an important role in determining the occurrence of lichen species across various habitats 13 . It is worth considering that even at higher altitudes in mountain areas, the anthropogenic pressure related to a weak efficacy of legislative systems has a negative impact on natural habitats 17 , which leads to many difficulties in biodiversity conservation 31 . PAs should be represented by a wide range of geomorphological features and the sustainable connectivity needed for the long-term conservation of biodiversity 32 .…”

A counterfactual approach to measure the impact of wet grassland conservation on U.K. breeding bird populations

“…Matching is increasingly being used in combination with regression techniques to assess the effect of conservation initiatives (Terraube et al., 2020). However, matching alone does not necessarily improve effect inferences and, because of reductions in sample size, may not have the same power to detect effects as regression techniques (Brazauskas & Logan, 2016).…”

Evaluating Impact Using Time-Series Data

“…Since most ecological time-series impact evaluation studies have focused on only one or a handful of time series [32][33][34][35][36][37], using only average change has not been a big problem, as each time series could be visually checked for indications of trends. However, risks increase when using large numbers of time series (e.g., counts of multiple bird species at multiple sites [38]), where checking individual series becomes impractical.…”