ArticlePLoS biology2014
Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity.
Article in PLoS biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
96 citing papers in PubMed.
- A framework for maximizing the benefit from retaining regrowth on private land.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Freshwater Conservation Priority Areas Are Threatened by Global Mining Activities.Global change biology · 2026Article
- Enhanced forest carbon gains from stronger protection in China's protected areas.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Underrepresentation of bats in Africa's protected areas.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Role of protected areas in mitigating range loss and local extinctions of terrestrial mammals.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- Biodiversity and Conservation of Marine Mollusks in the Indo-Pacific Convergence Zone.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- A nature-based conservation framework that aligns opportunities for bird biodiversity, climate mitigation, and human equity.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Important Shark and Ray Areas can inform conservation planning in the Mediterranean and Black Seas.iScience · 2025Article
- Ability of new protected areas to counteract losses from downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- Social vulnerability: A driving force in amplifying the overall vulnerability of protected areas to natural hazards.Heliyon · 2025Article
- Expanding protected area coverage for migratory birds could improve long-term population trends.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Global prioritization schemes vary in their impact on the placement of protected areas.PloS one · 2025Article
- An Assessment of the Diversity and Seasonal Dynamics of Small- and Medium-Sized Mammals in Pittachhara Forest, Bangladesh, Using a Camera Trap Survey.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Assessment of Changes in the Composition and Distribution of Large and Medium-Sized Mammals in Xishuangbanna, Southwest China.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Microreserves are an important tool for amphibian conservation.Communications biology · 2024Review
- Article
- Predicting undetected native vascular plant diversity at a global scale.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Article
- The future of endemic and threatened birds of the Amazon in the face of global climate change.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Avoiding an unjust transition to sustainability: An equity metric for spatial conservation planning.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Governments have agreed to expand the global protected area network from 13% to 17% of the world's land surface by 2020 (Aichi target 11) and to prevent the further loss of known threatened species (Aichi target 12). These targets are interdependent, as protected areas can stem biodiversity loss when strategically located and effectively managed. However, the global protected area estate is currently biased toward locations that are cheap to protect and away from important areas for biodiversity. Here we use data on the distribution of protected areas and threatened terrestrial birds, mammals, and amphibians to assess current and possible future coverage of these species under the convention. We discover that 17% of the 4,118 threatened vertebrates are not found in a single protected area and that fully 85% are not adequately covered (i.e., to a level consistent with their likely persistence). Using systematic conservation planning, we show that expanding protected areas to reach 17% coverage by protecting the cheapest land, even if ecoregionally representative, would increase the number of threatened vertebrates covered by only 6%. However, the nonlinear relationship between the cost of acquiring land and species coverage means that fivefold more threatened vertebrates could be adequately covered for only 1.5 times the cost of the cheapest solution, if cost efficiency and threatened vertebrates are both incorporated into protected area decision making. These results are robust to known errors in the vertebrate range maps. The Convention on Biological Diversity targets may stimulate major expansion of the global protected area estate. If this expansion is to secure a future for imperiled species, new protected areas must be sited more strategically than is presently the case.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.