ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2022
Does leakage exist in China's typical protected areas? Evidence from 13 national nature reserves.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatiotemporal Characteristics of the Coupled Coordination Degree of Ecosystem Services Supply and Demand in Chinese National Nature Reserves.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Revival of sun-and-beach tourism through the lens of regulatory and risk dimensions of environmental sustainability.Heliyon · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is profound interest in knowing the degree to which the effectiveness of China's nature reserves, and whether leakage is common around the reserves, in the face of the most drastic conflicts between conservation and development in the world. To answer these questions, we employed the Landsat-derived Global Forest Change Dataset with 30-m resolution to examine forest change patterns during 2001 and 2017 both inside and outside of 13 typically national nature reserves in China. The average forest loss rates inside the reserves were significantly lower than those of outside the reserves (i.e., both in buffer and landscape zones), suggesting the success in protecting forest of these reserves in China. We found that the protection practice reduced approximately 10% of deforestation. Protection efficiency may be substantially overestimated (about 13-43%) if failing to control the related variables, such as altitude, climate, and human interference. The forest loss rates in the buffer zones were not significantly higher than those in the broader landscape zones, suggesting that leakage is not a frequent occurrence in the buffer zones of the reserves. However, the forest loss rates showed a slightly increasing tendency from 2001 to 2017, the loss rates increased gradually from inside to their outside buffer zones, and leakage was observed in certain zones of some years for most of the reserves. The conversions of forest to grassland and cultivated land were the primary trajectories of forest loss both inside and outside of the reserves. Though the leakage is not universal in the reserves across the country, forest loss rates are much higher in the buffer zones than those inside the reserves, resulting in increased insulation of the reserves that could undermine the provisioning of ecosystem services and the biodiversity conservation efficiency.
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.