Protected areas in Chile: are we managing them?

IF 1.3 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Ignacio J. Petit, Ana N. Campoy, Maria-Jose Hevia, Carlos F. Gaymer, Francisco A. Squeo
{"title":"Protected areas in Chile: are we managing them?","authors":"Ignacio J. Petit, Ana N. Campoy, Maria-Jose Hevia, Carlos F. Gaymer, Francisco A. Squeo","doi":"10.1186/s40693-018-0071-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundHuman population growth since the mid-1900s has been accompanied by an unsustainable use of natural resources and a corresponding impact on terrestrial and marine biota. In response, most states have established protected areas as tools to decrease biodiversity loss, being Chile one of the signatories of international conservation agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the 2010 Aichi Targets. This study reviews the Chilean protected areas that have been created to date, with an emphasis on the existence and effectiveness of management plans for all terrestrial and marine protected areas.Effectiveness was individually evaluated using two filters: 1) the age of the management plan and 2) the first four steps of the Protected Areas Management Effectiveness (PAME) methodology recommended by the IUCN.ResultsWe show that 84 out of a total of 145 protected areas (PAs), and only five out of a total of 20 marine protected areas (MPAs), have management plans. Only 12% (N = 16) of PAs are effectively managed; while in the marine realm, no MPA has an effective plan.ConclusionsOur results show the lack of both the effectiveness of and updates to the management plans for the vast majority of the national territory and raise the following question: is it sustainable to continue adding protected areas to the national system even though it is clear that the existing support is insufficient to meet the minimum requirements for full implementation?","PeriodicalId":21247,"journal":{"name":"Revista Chilena de Historia Natural","volume":"41 2","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Chilena de Historia Natural","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40693-018-0071-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

BackgroundHuman population growth since the mid-1900s has been accompanied by an unsustainable use of natural resources and a corresponding impact on terrestrial and marine biota. In response, most states have established protected areas as tools to decrease biodiversity loss, being Chile one of the signatories of international conservation agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the 2010 Aichi Targets. This study reviews the Chilean protected areas that have been created to date, with an emphasis on the existence and effectiveness of management plans for all terrestrial and marine protected areas.Effectiveness was individually evaluated using two filters: 1) the age of the management plan and 2) the first four steps of the Protected Areas Management Effectiveness (PAME) methodology recommended by the IUCN.ResultsWe show that 84 out of a total of 145 protected areas (PAs), and only five out of a total of 20 marine protected areas (MPAs), have management plans. Only 12% (N = 16) of PAs are effectively managed; while in the marine realm, no MPA has an effective plan.ConclusionsOur results show the lack of both the effectiveness of and updates to the management plans for the vast majority of the national territory and raise the following question: is it sustainable to continue adding protected areas to the national system even though it is clear that the existing support is insufficient to meet the minimum requirements for full implementation?
智利的保护区:我们在管理它们吗?
自20世纪中期以来,伴随着人口增长的是对自然资源的不可持续利用,以及对陆地和海洋生物群的相应影响。作为回应,大多数国家都建立了保护区,作为减少生物多样性丧失的工具,智利是《生物多样性公约》(CBD)和2010年爱知目标等国际保护协议的签署国之一。这项研究审查了智利迄今为止建立的保护区,重点是所有陆地和海洋保护区的管理计划的存在和有效性。使用两个过滤器单独评估有效性:1)管理计划的年龄和2)世界自然保护联盟推荐的保护区管理有效性(PAME)方法的前四个步骤。结果145个保护区中有84个有管理计划,20个海洋保护区中只有5个有管理计划。只有12% (N = 16)的PAs得到有效管理;而在海洋领域,没有一个保护区有一个有效的计划。结论我们的结果表明,绝大多数国家领土的管理计划既缺乏有效性,也缺乏更新,并提出了以下问题:即使现有的支持不足以满足全面实施的最低要求,继续在国家系统中增加保护区是否可持续?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Revista Chilena de Historia Natural
Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
18.20%
发文量
9
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Revista Chilena de Historia Natural (RCHN) publishes original research dealing with past and present phenomena from organismic to higher levels of biological organization, considering both empirical and theoretical studies on all kinds of taxa and environments. The major areas covered by RCHN are: botany and zoology; physiological and behavioral ecology; population biology; community and ecosystem ecology; systematics, biogeography and evolution.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信