Understanding local‐scale drivers of biodiversity outcomes in terrestrial protected areas

Barnes, Megan; Craigie, Ian D.; Dudley, Nigel; Hockings, Marc

doi:10.1111/nyas.13154

Cited by 50 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 177 publications

(323 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Protected area governance is also a key indicator to predict the success of protected areas (Barnes et al, 2016). Past COP decisions (e.g.…”

Section: Effective and Equitable Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

STATUS AND PROSPECTS FOR ACHIEVING AICHI BIODIVERSITY TARGET 11: Implications of National Commitments and Priority Actions

Gannon¹,

Seyoum‐Edjigu²,

Cooper³

et al. 2017

Parks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the current status of Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 at the global level. Although there remain gaps in the coverage of ecological regions and areas important for biodiversity and ecosystem services, 10 per cent coverage of coastal and marine areas under national jurisdiction has already been surpassed. The full implementation of agreed national priority actions and other commitments, including those in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans, will expand coverage of the global ocean beyond 10 per cent, and result in more than 17 per cent coverage of terrestrial and inland waters. These commitments will also lead to substantial progress in other elements of the Target. Appropriate recognition of other effective area-based conservation measures and governance types, inter alia, privately protected areas and territories and areas conserved by indigenous peoples and local communities, currently underreported in global assessments, would further improve the prospects for the achievement of Target 11. This will generate not only multiple benefits for the well-being of society by contributing solutions to the most important global challenges, but will also contribute to other Aichi Targets and globally agreed goals. Hence, concerted efforts by all stakeholders to facilitate the implementation of commitments towards achieving Target 11 will be a wise investment.

show abstract

“…Protected area governance is also a key indicator to predict the success of protected areas (Barnes et al, 2016). Past COP decisions (e.g.…”

Section: Effective and Equitable Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

STATUS AND PROSPECTS FOR ACHIEVING AICHI BIODIVERSITY TARGET 11: Implications of National Commitments and Priority Actions

Gannon¹,

Seyoum‐Edjigu²,

Cooper³

et al. 2017

Parks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to elements of the design of MPAs, effective management (6 th indicator) is a critical 155 variable in MPA success or failure (Barnes et al 2016; Gill et al 2017). Protected area management 156 effectiveness evaluations offer an opportunity to calculate a numerical indicator of effective 157 management, as proposed by Leverington et al (2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring progress in marine protection: A new set of metrics to evaluate the strength of marine protected area networks

Roberts

Valkan

Cook

2018

Biological Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

24Marine protected areas (MPAs) have proven to be a valuable tool for both promoting the 25 sustainable use of marine resources and long-term biodiversity conservation outcomes. Targets for 26 marine protection under the Convention on Biological Diversity have seen rapid growth in MPAs 27 globally, with progress judged using targets for total area protected rather than evaluating growth 28 based on the capacity to protect biodiversity. The value of a MPA network to biodiversity 29 conservation depends on a range of attributes of both individual MPAs and portfolios of MPAs, 30 which are not captured by simple area-based targets. Therefore, a clear and efficient set of metrics 31 are needed to effectively evaluate progress towards building MPA networks, considering the 32 representation and adequacy of protection for biodiversity. We developed a universally applicable 33 set of metrics that can evaluate network structure in relation to its capacity to conserve marine 34 biodiversity. These metrics combine properties of effective individual MPAs with metrics for their 35 capacity to function collectively as a network. To demonstrate the value of these metrics, we apply 36 them to the Australian MPA network, the largest in the world. Collectively, the indicators suggest 37 that while Australia has made significant progress in building a representative and well-structured 38 MPA network, the level of protection offered to marine biodiversity is generally low, with 39 insufficient coverage of no-take MPAs across many bioregions. The metrics reveal how the current 40 value of the MPA network could be greatly increased by reducing the prevalence of multi-use zones 41 that allow extractive activities known to negatively impact biodiversity. • Not all MPAs are equal, therefore total area is an inadequate indicator of progress. 48• Indicators of progress can draw on attributes of effective MPAs and MPA networks. 49• We developed a suite of metrics to evaluate MPA network structure and performance. 50• Strengths of the Australian MPA network: well-structured and representative. 51

show abstract

“…However, this is threatened by illegal wildlife trade (Mott 2006) and logging (Pham et al 2012;To et al 2016). Like many other countries in the world, biodiversity conservation is safeguarded by protected areas (PAs) and a National Park (NP) system in Vietnam; yet biodiversity continues to decline leading to questions and the need to enhance PA effectiveness (De Queiroz 2013;Coad et al 2015;Barnes et al 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, drivers that explain local participation remain unclear and few studies have attempted to understand the motivations behind involvement (or lack thereof) in different conservation initiatives or have considered the perspective of the local stakeholder (Méndez-López et al 2015). Three oft-cited major motivations that influence participation in environmental policies and payment for environmental services (PES) schemes in Vietnam are laws and policies, economic incentives, and social and cultural of motivations (Pham et al 2009;Barnes et al 2017). While many studies have analyzed the first two factors, few studies to date have adopted a psychological approach to understanding local motivational values to conservation in PAs, particularly in Vietnam.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Local perpectives on drivers of deforestation and degradation and effectiveness of financial incentive mechanisms in Bach Ma National Park

Pham¹,

Dao²,

Nguyen³

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding local‐scale drivers of biodiversity outcomes in terrestrial protected areas

Cited by 50 publications

References 177 publications

STATUS AND PROSPECTS FOR ACHIEVING AICHI BIODIVERSITY TARGET 11: Implications of National Commitments and Priority Actions

STATUS AND PROSPECTS FOR ACHIEVING AICHI BIODIVERSITY TARGET 11: Implications of National Commitments and Priority Actions

Measuring progress in marine protection: A new set of metrics to evaluate the strength of marine protected area networks

Local perpectives on drivers of deforestation and degradation and effectiveness of financial incentive mechanisms in Bach Ma National Park

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About