Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas

Autores
Baldi, Germán; Texeira González, Marcos Alexis; Martín, Osvaldo Antonio; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel
Año de publicación
2017
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Background. Protected areas, regarded today as a cornerstone of nature conservation, result from an array of multiple motivations and opportunities. We explored at global and regional levels the current distribution of protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological gradients, and assessed to what extent protection has pursued (i) a balanced representation of biophysical environments, (ii) a set of preferred conditions (biological, spiritual, economic, or geopolitical), or (iii) existing opportunities for conservation regardless of any representation or preference criteria. Methods. We used histograms to describe the distribution of terrestrial protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological independent gradients and linear and nonlinear regression and correlation analyses to describe the sign, shape, and strength of the relationships. We used a random forest analysis to rank the importance of different variables related to conservation preferences and opportunity drivers, and an evenness metric to quantify representativeness. Results. Wefind that protection at a global level is primarily driven by the opportunities provided by isolation and a low population density (variable importance D 34.6 and 19.9, respectively). Preferences play a secondary role, with a bias towards tourism attractiveness and proximity to international borders (variable importance D 12.7 and 3.4, respectively). Opportunities shape protection strongly in "North America & Australia-NZ" and "Latin America & Caribbean," while the importance of the representativeness of biophysical environments is higher in "Sub-Saharan Africa" (1.3 times the average of other regions). Discussion. Environmental representativeness and biodiversity protection are top priorities in land conservation agendas. However, our results suggest that they have been minor players driving current protection at both global and regional levels. Attempts to increase their relevance will necessarily have to recognize the predominant opportunistic nature that the establishment of protected areas has had until present times.
Fil: Baldi, Germán. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; Argentina
Fil: Texeira González, Marcos Alexis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina
Fil: Martín, Osvaldo Antonio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; Argentina
Fil: Grau, Hector Ricardo. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; Argentina
Fil: Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; Argentina
Materia
CONSERVATION PARADIGMS
NATIONAL PARKS
OPPORTUNITY
PREFERENTIALITY
PROTECTED AREAS
REPRESENTATIVENESS
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/66418
Acceder
id CONICETDig_a0f1f7fe23d71e4cf9f9c857de13a937
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/66418
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areasBaldi, GermánTexeira González, Marcos AlexisMartín, Osvaldo AntonioGrau, Hector RicardoJobbagy Gampel, Esteban GabrielCONSERVATION PARADIGMSNATIONAL PARKSOPPORTUNITYPREFERENTIALITYPROTECTED AREASREPRESENTATIVENESShttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1Background. Protected areas, regarded today as a cornerstone of nature conservation, result from an array of multiple motivations and opportunities. We explored at global and regional levels the current distribution of protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological gradients, and assessed to what extent protection has pursued (i) a balanced representation of biophysical environments, (ii) a set of preferred conditions (biological, spiritual, economic, or geopolitical), or (iii) existing opportunities for conservation regardless of any representation or preference criteria. Methods. We used histograms to describe the distribution of terrestrial protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological independent gradients and linear and nonlinear regression and correlation analyses to describe the sign, shape, and strength of the relationships. We used a random forest analysis to rank the importance of different variables related to conservation preferences and opportunity drivers, and an evenness metric to quantify representativeness. Results. Wefind that protection at a global level is primarily driven by the opportunities provided by isolation and a low population density (variable importance D 34.6 and 19.9, respectively). Preferences play a secondary role, with a bias towards tourism attractiveness and proximity to international borders (variable importance D 12.7 and 3.4, respectively). Opportunities shape protection strongly in "North America & Australia-NZ" and "Latin America & Caribbean," while the importance of the representativeness of biophysical environments is higher in "Sub-Saharan Africa" (1.3 times the average of other regions). Discussion. Environmental representativeness and biodiversity protection are top priorities in land conservation agendas. However, our results suggest that they have been minor players driving current protection at both global and regional levels. Attempts to increase their relevance will necessarily have to recognize the predominant opportunistic nature that the establishment of protected areas has had until present times.Fil: Baldi, Germán. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; ArgentinaFil: Texeira González, Marcos Alexis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía; ArgentinaFil: Martín, Osvaldo Antonio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; ArgentinaFil: Grau, Hector Ricardo. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; ArgentinaFil: Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; ArgentinaPeerJ Inc2017-02-15info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/66418Baldi, Germán; Texeira González, Marcos Alexis; Martín, Osvaldo Antonio; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel; Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas; PeerJ Inc; PeerJ; 2017; 2; 15-2-2017; 1-242167-8359CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.7717/peerj.2989info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://peerj.com/articles/2989/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:08:27Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/66418instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:08:28.198CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
title Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
spellingShingle Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
Baldi, Germán
CONSERVATION PARADIGMS
NATIONAL PARKS
OPPORTUNITY
PREFERENTIALITY
PROTECTED AREAS
REPRESENTATIVENESS
title_short Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
title_full Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
title_fullStr Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
title_full_unstemmed Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
title_sort Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Baldi, Germán
Texeira González, Marcos Alexis
Martín, Osvaldo Antonio
Grau, Hector Ricardo
Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel
author Baldi, Germán
author_facet Baldi, Germán
Texeira González, Marcos Alexis
Martín, Osvaldo Antonio
Grau, Hector Ricardo
Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel
author_role author
author2 Texeira González, Marcos Alexis
Martín, Osvaldo Antonio
Grau, Hector Ricardo
Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv CONSERVATION PARADIGMS
NATIONAL PARKS
OPPORTUNITY
PREFERENTIALITY
PROTECTED AREAS
REPRESENTATIVENESS
topic CONSERVATION PARADIGMS
NATIONAL PARKS
OPPORTUNITY
PREFERENTIALITY
PROTECTED AREAS
REPRESENTATIVENESS
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1.6
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/1
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Background. Protected areas, regarded today as a cornerstone of nature conservation, result from an array of multiple motivations and opportunities. We explored at global and regional levels the current distribution of protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological gradients, and assessed to what extent protection has pursued (i) a balanced representation of biophysical environments, (ii) a set of preferred conditions (biological, spiritual, economic, or geopolitical), or (iii) existing opportunities for conservation regardless of any representation or preference criteria. Methods. We used histograms to describe the distribution of terrestrial protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological independent gradients and linear and nonlinear regression and correlation analyses to describe the sign, shape, and strength of the relationships. We used a random forest analysis to rank the importance of different variables related to conservation preferences and opportunity drivers, and an evenness metric to quantify representativeness. Results. Wefind that protection at a global level is primarily driven by the opportunities provided by isolation and a low population density (variable importance D 34.6 and 19.9, respectively). Preferences play a secondary role, with a bias towards tourism attractiveness and proximity to international borders (variable importance D 12.7 and 3.4, respectively). Opportunities shape protection strongly in "North America & Australia-NZ" and "Latin America & Caribbean," while the importance of the representativeness of biophysical environments is higher in "Sub-Saharan Africa" (1.3 times the average of other regions). Discussion. Environmental representativeness and biodiversity protection are top priorities in land conservation agendas. However, our results suggest that they have been minor players driving current protection at both global and regional levels. Attempts to increase their relevance will necessarily have to recognize the predominant opportunistic nature that the establishment of protected areas has had until present times.
Fil: Baldi, Germán. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; Argentina
Fil: Texeira González, Marcos Alexis. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina
Fil: Martín, Osvaldo Antonio. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; Argentina
Fil: Grau, Hector Ricardo. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Tucumán. Instituto de Ecología Regional; Argentina
Fil: Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi". Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico, Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto de Matemática Aplicada de San Luis "Prof. Ezio Marchi"; Argentina
description Background. Protected areas, regarded today as a cornerstone of nature conservation, result from an array of multiple motivations and opportunities. We explored at global and regional levels the current distribution of protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological gradients, and assessed to what extent protection has pursued (i) a balanced representation of biophysical environments, (ii) a set of preferred conditions (biological, spiritual, economic, or geopolitical), or (iii) existing opportunities for conservation regardless of any representation or preference criteria. Methods. We used histograms to describe the distribution of terrestrial protected areas along biophysical, human, and biological independent gradients and linear and nonlinear regression and correlation analyses to describe the sign, shape, and strength of the relationships. We used a random forest analysis to rank the importance of different variables related to conservation preferences and opportunity drivers, and an evenness metric to quantify representativeness. Results. Wefind that protection at a global level is primarily driven by the opportunities provided by isolation and a low population density (variable importance D 34.6 and 19.9, respectively). Preferences play a secondary role, with a bias towards tourism attractiveness and proximity to international borders (variable importance D 12.7 and 3.4, respectively). Opportunities shape protection strongly in "North America & Australia-NZ" and "Latin America & Caribbean," while the importance of the representativeness of biophysical environments is higher in "Sub-Saharan Africa" (1.3 times the average of other regions). Discussion. Environmental representativeness and biodiversity protection are top priorities in land conservation agendas. However, our results suggest that they have been minor players driving current protection at both global and regional levels. Attempts to increase their relevance will necessarily have to recognize the predominant opportunistic nature that the establishment of protected areas has had until present times.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-02-15
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/66418
Baldi, Germán; Texeira González, Marcos Alexis; Martín, Osvaldo Antonio; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel; Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas; PeerJ Inc; PeerJ; 2017; 2; 15-2-2017; 1-24
2167-8359
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/66418
identifier_str_mv Baldi, Germán; Texeira González, Marcos Alexis; Martín, Osvaldo Antonio; Grau, Hector Ricardo; Jobbagy Gampel, Esteban Gabriel; Opportunities drive the global distribution of protected areas; PeerJ Inc; PeerJ; 2017; 2; 15-2-2017; 1-24
2167-8359
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.7717/peerj.2989
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://peerj.com/articles/2989/
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv PeerJ Inc
publisher.none.fl_str_mv PeerJ Inc
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844613952316637184
score 13.070432

Publicaciones similares