Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26064645›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2015

Efficient expansion of global protected areas requires simultaneous planning for species and ecosystems.

Tal Polak, James E M Watson, Richard A Fuller, Liana N Joseph, Tara G Martin, Hugh P Possingham, Oscar Venter, Josie Carwardine

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Relating characteristics of global biodiversity targets to reported progress.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2019
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Tal PolakSchool of Biological Sciences , University of Queensland , St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia.
James E M WatsonSchool of Geography, Planning and Environmental Management , University of Queensland , St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia ; Global Conservation Program , Wildlife Conservation Society , Bronx, NY 10460, USA.
Richard A FullerSchool of Biological Sciences , University of Queensland , St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia.
Liana N JosephSchool of Biological Sciences , University of Queensland , St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia ; Global Conservation Program , Wildlife Conservation Society , Bronx, NY 10460, USA.
Tara G MartinSchool of Biological Sciences , University of Queensland , St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia ; CSIRO Land and Water , PO Box 2583, Brisbane, Queensland 4001, Australia.
Hugh P PossinghamSchool of Biological Sciences , University of Queensland , St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia ; Department of Life Sciences , Imperial College London , Silwood Park, Ascot SL5 7PY, Berkshire, UK.
Oscar VenterSchool of Biological Sciences , University of Queensland , St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia ; Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science , James Cook University , Cairns, Queensland 4878, Australia.
Josie CarwardineCSIRO Land and Water , PO Box 2583, Brisbane, Queensland 4001, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)'s strategic plan advocates the use of environmental surrogates, such as ecosystems, as a basis for planning where new protected areas should be placed. However, the efficiency and effectiveness of this ecosystem-based planning approach to adequately capture threatened species in protected area networks is unknown. We tested the application of this approach in Australia according to the nation's CBD-inspired goals for expansion of the national protected area system. We set targets for ecosystems (10% of the extent of each ecosystem) and threatened species (variable extents based on persistence requirements for each species) and then measured the total land area required and opportunity cost of meeting those targets independently, sequentially and simultaneously. We discover that an ecosystem-based approach will not ensure the adequate representation of threatened species in protected areas. Planning simultaneously for species and ecosystem targets delivered the most efficient outcomes for both sets of targets, while planning first for ecosystems and then filling the gaps to meet species targets was the most inefficient conservation strategy. Our analysis highlights the pitfalls of pursuing goals for species and ecosystems non-cooperatively and has significant implications for nations aiming to meet their CBD mandated protected area obligations.

Indexed as

adequacyCBD Aichi targetsecosystem-based targetsgeographical range sizerepresentationspatial prioritizationsurrogacy

Identifiers

PMID26064645
PMCPMC4448872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.