Cost-effective priorities for the expansion of global terrestrial protected areas: Setting post-2020 global and national targets.

Rui Yang,Le Yu,Yue Cao,Shuyu Hou,Ian Convery,Han Liu,Keping Ma,Steve Carver,Sheng Li,Xiaoli Shen,Qinyi Peng,Fangyi Wang,Xiaoshan Wang,Peng Gong,Zhicong Zhao,Yaomin Zheng,Tz-Hsuan Tseng

doi:10.1126/sciadv.abc3436

Abstract

Biodiversity loss is a social and ecological emergency, and calls have been made for the global expansion of protected areas (PAs) to tackle this crisis. It is unclear, however, where best to locate new PAs to protect biodiversity cost-effectively. To answer this question, we conducted a spatial meta-analysis by overlaying seven global biodiversity templates to identify conservation priority zones. These are then combined with low human impact areas to identify cost-effective zones (CEZs) for PA designation. CEZs cover around 38% of global terrestrial area, of which only 24% is currently covered by existing PAs. To protect more CEZs, we propose three scenarios with conservative, moderate, and ambitious targets, which aim to protect 19, 26, and 43% of global terrestrial area, respectively. These three targets are set for each Convention on Biological Diversity party with spatially explicit CEZs identified, providing valuable decision support for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework.

Highlights

Global biodiversity is declining faster than at any time in human history [1,2,3], with potentially dire consequences for human society [4]
In 2010, parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) proposed 20 Aichi targets to prevent biodiversity loss, with Target 11 calling for Protected areas (PAs) to be increased and improved [by 2020, at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water and 10% of coastal and marine areas are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of PAs and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs)]
cost-effective zones (CEZs) are sites of particular importance for biodiversity and feasible areas for designation of PAs; protecting CEZs could help achieve the goals and targets proposed in the post-2020 framework

Summary

Introduction

Global biodiversity is declining faster than at any time in human history [1,2,3], with potentially dire consequences for human society [4]. Several studies have identified the priority areas for biodiversity conservation, including Crisis Ecoregions (CEs) [11], Biodiversity Hotspots (BHs) [12], Endemic Bird Areas (EBAs) [13], Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) [14], Centers of Plant Diversity (CPDs) [15], Global 200 Ecoregions (G200s) [16], and Intact Forest Landscapes (IFLs) [17]. These templates of global biodiversity conservation prioritization are widely recognized and represent several important facets of biodiversity conservation. The identified regions invariably include areas with high human impact (e.g., cities and farmland), which makes designating PAs much more difficult

Methods

Results

Conclusion