Where should new protected areas go?
Most threatened vertebrates are inadequately protected; expanding reserves by cost or ecoregions alone poorly covers imperiled species.
Source
Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity
What they did
Mapped global protected-area coverage against threatened vertebrate adequacy targets and compared expansion strategies toward Aichi goals.
What they found
17% of threatened vertebrates are in zero protected areas and 85% lack adequate coverage; cheap-land/ecoregion strategies are inefficient versus species-targeted expansion.
The limits
What it doesn't show
Does not itself create reserves or resolve all socio-political constraints of implementation.
Key terms
- Protected area
- Land set aside for biodiversity conservation.
- Aichi targets
- CBD goals including expanding terrestrial protection to 17% by 2020.
- Adequacy target
- Coverage level judged sufficient for a threatened species.
- Spatial prioritization
- Choosing locations to maximize conservation return.
Flashcards
Want these cards to stick?
Save the deck to NoteFren and study it with spaced repetition.
Quiz yourself
Threatened vertebrates with zero PA:
Common questions
How many threatened vertebrates lack any PA?
17%.
How many lack adequate coverage?
85%.
Is cheapest land efficient?
No—poor for threatened species coverage.
Policy frame?
Aichi target 11 expansion.
More on Biodiversity