ArticleNature communications2026
Social implications of the 30×30 global conservation target.
Article in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework aims to increase global protected and conserved area coverage to at least 30% by 2030. The impact on people, whether positive or negative, will depend on the social context of additional areas and how they are governed and managed. Here, we show that Target 3 could affect large and socially diverse populations under different implementation scenarios. Nearly half the human population lives within 10 km of areas included in a scenario maximising biodiversity representation. Four percent live near areas included in an Indigenous and traditional territories-based scenario, including many in areas with low Human Development Index scores (74%) and high participation in wild harvesting (91%). A scenario prioritising nature's contributions to people is intermediate on all measures. Our results demonstrate that Target 3 is a highly ambitious social as well as ecological target, requiring an equally ambitious commitment to development funding and support for local residents.
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.