Shortfalls and Solutions for Meeting National and Global Conservation Area Targets

Conservation Letters

Stuart H.M. Butchart⁹  Martin Clarke⁹  Robert J. Smith³  Rachel E. Sykes³  Jörn P.W. Scharlemann¹  Mike Harfoot¹⁴  Graeme M. Buchanan⁴  Ariadne Angulo²  Andrew Balmford¹⁶  Bastian Bertzky¹⁴  Thomas M. Brooks²  Kent E. Carpenter⁷  Mia T. Comeros-Raynal⁷  John Cornell⁹  G. Francesco Ficetola¹¹  Lincoln D.C. Fishpool⁹  Richard A. Fuller^9,12  Jonas Geldmann^9,18  Heather Harwell⁷  Craig Hilton-Taylor^8,9  Michael Hoffmann¹⁴  Ackbar Joolia^8,9  Lucas Joppa^5,9  Naomi Kingston¹⁴  Ian May⁹  Amy Milam¹⁴  Beth Polidoro⁷  Gina Ralph⁷  Nadia Richman^9,17  Carlo Rondinini^9,10  Daniel B. Segan^9,15  Benjamin Skolnik^6,9  Mark D. Spalding^9,13  Simon N. Stuart¹⁴  Andy Symes⁹  Joseph Taylor⁹  Piero Visconti^5,9  James E.M. Watson^9,15  Louisa Wood¹⁴ 

[1] School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK;International Union for Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland;Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, School of Anthropology and Conservation, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK;RSPB Centre for Conservation Science, RSPB Scotland, Edinburgh, UK;Microsoft Research Computational Science Laboratory, Cambridge, UK;American Bird Conservancy, The Plains, VA, USA;IUCN Marine Biodiversity Unit, Department of Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA;International Union for Conservation of Nature, Cambridge, UK;BirdLife International, Wellbrook Court, Cambridge, UK;Global Mammal Assessment Program, Department of Biology and Biotechnologies, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma, Italy;Laboratoire d'Ecologie Alpine (LECA), Université Grenoble-Alpes, Grenoble, France;School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, Australia;The Nature Conservancy and Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK;United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK;Global Conservation Program, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY, USA;Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK;Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regent's Park, London, UK;Center for Macroecology, Evolution, and Climate, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen E, Denmark

关键词: Aichi Targets;    Alliance for Zero Extinction;    Convention on Biological Diversity;    Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas;    IUCN Red List;    Key Biodiversity Areas;    protected areas;   

DOI  :  10.1111/conl.12158

来源: Wiley

【 摘 要 】

Abstract

Governments have committed to conserving ≥17% of terrestrial and ≥10% of marine environments globally, especially “areas of particular importance for biodiversity” through “ecologically representative” Protected Area (PA) systems or other “area-based conservation measures”, while individual countries have committed to conserve 3–50% of their land area. We estimate that PAs currently cover 14.6% of terrestrial and 2.8% of marine extent, but 59–68% of ecoregions, 77–78% of important sites for biodiversity, and 57% of 25,380 species have inadequate coverage. The existing 19.7 million km² terrestrial PA network needs only 3.3 million km² to be added to achieve 17% terrestrial coverage. However, it would require nearly doubling to achieve, cost-efficiently, coverage targets for all countries, ecoregions, important sites, and species. Poorer countries have the largest relative shortfalls. Such extensive and rapid expansion of formal PAs is unlikely to be achievable. Greater focus is therefore needed on alternative approaches, including community- and privately managed sites and other effective area-based conservation measures.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
Copyright and Photocopying: © 2015 The Authors. Conservation Letters published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.