Relating Country-Level Governance and Tree Cover Loss in Sub-Saharan African Protected Areas: Identifying Knowledge Gaps and a More Nuanced Perspective

Naira Dehmel,Alison Beresford,Terence P Dawson,Graeme Buchanan,Kate Schreckenberg,Phil Franks

doi:10.3389/ffgc.2022.807214

Abstract

‘Good governance’ is highlighted by many as being essential for improving protected area (PA) management and conservation outcomes, with a growing body of evidence based on site-level governance data. Yet how exactly governance at other levels supports or hinders successful PA implementation, and how this should be considered in conservation planning and practice, remains insufficiently understood. We conducted an exploratory analysis of the relationship between the quality of country-level governance and trends in tree cover loss within sub-Saharan African PAs. For the period 2008–2017, we correlated annual governance scores from the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) with the annual rate of tree cover loss in the total terrestrial area of PAs in 33 forested sub-Saharan African countries. Overall governance was not correlated with tree cover loss in a simple model, but there was evidence that overall governance was positively correlated with tree cover loss in PAs when the interaction with environmental governance was included. The interaction indicated that the rate of tree cover loss decreased for a given level of overall governance as environmental governance increased. Human development was negatively correlated with forest loss. Thus, the relationship between country-level ‘good governance’ and conservation success is more complex than a direct and positive cause and effect. Yet, uncertainty remains about the many possible and likely confounding pathways: whilst the quality of overall governance may be mirrored at the site-level, it may also contribute to increased anthropogenic pressures on natural resources. Through this research we found significant limitations in data quality and availability both to evaluate the effectiveness of protection beyond tree cover, as well as less conventional governance aspects, such as environmental policy and regulation or site-level governance. With an expected increase in area-based protection and conservation financing in the coming decades, such data will be vital to monitor the effectiveness of our efforts and ensure financial accountability.

Highlights

The rate of forest loss is greater in Africa than anywhere else in the world (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2020b; Wolf et al, 2021)
All of the countries in our sample apart from Seychelles and São Tomé Príncipe experienced some level of tree cover loss within their protected area (PA) (Figure 2)
While tree cover loss was correlated with overall governance across countries after considering environmental governance, the lack of a strong wider correlation could mean that country-level governance in the conventional terms measured by the Index of African Governance (IIAG) is not overall a strong determinant of tree cover loss in PAs

Summary

Introduction

The rate of forest loss is greater in Africa than anywhere else in the world (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2020b; Wolf et al, 2021). From 2010 to 2020, the African continent experienced a net forest loss of 3.9 million ha per year – compared to 2.6 in South America, 0.1 in North and Central America and a slight increase in forest cover in Asia, Europe and Oceania (Food and Agriculture Organization [FAO], 2020b). Protected Areas (PAs) are one instrument to protect forests as vital biodiversity habitats, global carbon stocks and providers of various ecosystem services (Miller and Nakamura, 2018; Wade et al, 2020; Wolf et al, 2021). Prominent in the current draft is the so-called ‘30 by 30’ target to increase the global network of PAs and other effective area-based conservation measures to 30% of the world’s terrestrial and marine surface by 2030 (ibid)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion