Priorities for protected area expansion so nations can meet their Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework commitments

Abstract

As part of the Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (K‐M GBF), signatory nations of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aim to protect at least 30% of the planet by 2030 (Target 3). This bold ambition has been widely celebrated and its implementation seen as pivotal for the overall success of K‐M GBF. However, given that many CBD signatory nations prioritised quantity (e.g., area) over quality (e.g., important areas for biodiversity) when attempting to meet their 2010 CBD Aichi protected area commitments, it is critical that nations focus on protecting those terrestrial, inland waters and marine areas that have the best chance of halting and reversing biodiversity loss and thus contribute to Goal A of the K‐M GBF. Here we provide a review on the type of areas that nations need to prioritise when implementing Target 3 that relates to area ‘quality’: areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are effectively conserved and managed through ecologically representative, well‐connected and equitably governed systems. We show that data is available for 12 distinct biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service elements that can be mapped and, if conserved, will (with appropriate management) help meet the broad intention of Target 3. We highlight examples of the planning methods available that can be utilized so these areas can be targeted for protection. We discuss issues related to trade‐offs regarding how to prioritise amongst them as well as to operationalise some of the vaguer concepts like ‘representation’ and ‘ecosystem functions and services’ so that they achieve the best outcomes for biodiversity.

Scaling up area-based conservation to implement the Global Biodiversity Framework’s 30x30 target: The role of Nature’s Strongholds

“…OECMs might also be included and contribute to the 30x30 target [ 14 , 36 ]. OECMs, in contrast to traditional protected areas, are governed by many different authorities, from national governments to private entities and civil society, to indigenous peoples and local communities, and might include indigenous and traditional territories (ITTs).…”

“…This enthusiasm has also translated into increased funding: In addition to commitments made at COP15, the “Protecting our Planet Challenge” was launched at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow and represents a $5 billion commitment to support the protection of at least 30% of the planet in the most important areas for biodiversity by 2030 [ 13 ]; and in June 2023, the Council of the Global Environmental Facility approved plans to establish the Global Biodiversity Fund to support implementation of the GBF. The efficacy for biodiversity conservation of the 30x30 target depends on where protected areas are located, and how they are configured and managed [ 14 ].…”

Effectively Incorporating Small Reserves into National Systems of Protected and Conserved Areas

“…Although the numerical target has caveats relating, amongst others, to effectiveness, representation, equity, and connectivity, signatory nations will be under significant pressure to achieve the areal component and this means finding more and larger spaces for nature, often with less consideration of the biodiversity that needs to be protected. There is, consequently, concern that governments will prioritize the quantity rather than quality of protected areas [23] and seek to identify large sites not placed strategically for effective conservation outcomes [24,25], rather than focusing on the most effective options for conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services [26].…”

Untitled

“…A global biodiversity crisis is looming, and a significant driver is habitat loss and fragmentation (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2020). One of the significant instruments in managing this crisis is area-based conservation with protected areas being recognised as a key tool in aiding conservation (IPBES, 2019;Watson et al, 2023;Woodley et al, 2019). Effectively managed protected areas have been proven to halt the decline of threatened or endemic species and provide a place for evolution and future ecological adaptation, including adapting to climate change, protection and delivery of ecosystem services, preservation of cultural values and cultural practices, and supporting local and regional economies Lopoukhine & de Souza Dias, 2012;Woodley et al, 2019).…”

“…Setting both quantity and quality targets is required to achieve biodiversity conservation (Green et al, 2019;Woodley et al, 2019). Well designed, governed and managed areas should recognise the rights of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, be established on areas of key biodiversity, support ecological networks, and be well designed, governed and managed (Watson et al, 2023;Woodley et al, 2021).…”