保护区保护水平和治理对森林覆盖损益的影响

IF 5.2 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Natasha Stoudmann, Jason Byrne, Vanessa Adams
{"title":"保护区保护水平和治理对森林覆盖损益的影响","authors":"Natasha Stoudmann, Jason Byrne, Vanessa Adams","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Terrestrial protected areas are essential for biodiversity conservation, yet it is not fully understood when and how different types of protected areas are most effective in achieving specific conservation objectives. We assessed the impact of reserves on tree cover loss and gain through a case study in Tasmania, Australia. We considered varying protection levels (strict, where human activities are restricted, and multiple use) and governance types (public and private). We used a counterfactual matching approach to compare tree cover loss and gain between reserves and matched unprotected areas from 2004 to 2021. We accounted for forest policy changes, environmental covariates, and human pressures to reduce placement bias. We also characterized reserves by size, governance, management, and vegetation and compared covariates inside and outside reserves to define baseline conditions. Reserves established from 2004 to 2016 were overall 75.4% less likely to have lost tree cover and 16.0% more likely to have had tree cover gain compared with controls. Patterns of loss and gain varied by protection level and governance type. Multiple-use reserves were as effective as reserves in which human activities were more restricted. Privately managed reserves contributed to tree cover growth, and public reserves helped avoid loss. This highlights reserves' distinct contributions to conservation targets, with private reserves allowing for growth and restoration and public reserves acting as stable anchor points. Our results emphasize the importance of having a diverse array of protected areas to enhance the resilience of reserve networks. We advocate for adaptive regional measures and robust monitoring to achieve global ecological targets.</p>","PeriodicalId":10689,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Biology","volume":" ","pages":"e14449"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of reserve protection level and governance on tree cover loss and gain.\",\"authors\":\"Natasha Stoudmann, Jason Byrne, Vanessa Adams\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cobi.14449\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Terrestrial protected areas are essential for biodiversity conservation, yet it is not fully understood when and how different types of protected areas are most effective in achieving specific conservation objectives. We assessed the impact of reserves on tree cover loss and gain through a case study in Tasmania, Australia. We considered varying protection levels (strict, where human activities are restricted, and multiple use) and governance types (public and private). We used a counterfactual matching approach to compare tree cover loss and gain between reserves and matched unprotected areas from 2004 to 2021. We accounted for forest policy changes, environmental covariates, and human pressures to reduce placement bias. We also characterized reserves by size, governance, management, and vegetation and compared covariates inside and outside reserves to define baseline conditions. Reserves established from 2004 to 2016 were overall 75.4% less likely to have lost tree cover and 16.0% more likely to have had tree cover gain compared with controls. Patterns of loss and gain varied by protection level and governance type. Multiple-use reserves were as effective as reserves in which human activities were more restricted. Privately managed reserves contributed to tree cover growth, and public reserves helped avoid loss. This highlights reserves' distinct contributions to conservation targets, with private reserves allowing for growth and restoration and public reserves acting as stable anchor points. Our results emphasize the importance of having a diverse array of protected areas to enhance the resilience of reserve networks. We advocate for adaptive regional measures and robust monitoring to achieve global ecological targets.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e14449\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14449\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Biology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14449","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

陆地保护区对生物多样性保护至关重要,然而,人们并不完全了解不同类型的保护区何时以及如何最有效地实现特定的保护目标。我们通过对澳大利亚塔斯马尼亚州的一个案例研究,评估了保护区对树木覆盖损失和收益的影响。我们考虑了不同的保护级别(严格的,人类活动受到限制的地方,以及多种用途)和治理类型(公共和私人)。我们使用了一种反事实匹配方法来比较2004年至2021年保护区和匹配的未受保护地区之间的树木覆盖损失和增加。我们考虑了森林政策变化、环境协变量和人类减少安置偏差的压力。我们还通过规模、治理、管理和植被来描述保护区的特征,并比较了保护区内外的协变量,以确定基线条件。与对照组相比,2004年至2016年建立的保护区总体上减少了75.4%的树木覆盖面积,增加了16.0%的树木覆盖面积。损失和收益的模式因保护级别和治理类型而异。多用途保护区与人类活动更受限制的保护区一样有效。私人管理的保护区有助于树木覆盖的增长,而公共保护区有助于避免损失。这突出了保护区对保护目标的独特贡献,私人保护区允许增长和恢复,公共保护区作为稳定的锚点。我们的研究结果强调了拥有多样化的保护区对于增强保护区网络的弹性的重要性。我们主张采取适应性的区域措施和强有力的监测,以实现全球生态目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of reserve protection level and governance on tree cover loss and gain.

Terrestrial protected areas are essential for biodiversity conservation, yet it is not fully understood when and how different types of protected areas are most effective in achieving specific conservation objectives. We assessed the impact of reserves on tree cover loss and gain through a case study in Tasmania, Australia. We considered varying protection levels (strict, where human activities are restricted, and multiple use) and governance types (public and private). We used a counterfactual matching approach to compare tree cover loss and gain between reserves and matched unprotected areas from 2004 to 2021. We accounted for forest policy changes, environmental covariates, and human pressures to reduce placement bias. We also characterized reserves by size, governance, management, and vegetation and compared covariates inside and outside reserves to define baseline conditions. Reserves established from 2004 to 2016 were overall 75.4% less likely to have lost tree cover and 16.0% more likely to have had tree cover gain compared with controls. Patterns of loss and gain varied by protection level and governance type. Multiple-use reserves were as effective as reserves in which human activities were more restricted. Privately managed reserves contributed to tree cover growth, and public reserves helped avoid loss. This highlights reserves' distinct contributions to conservation targets, with private reserves allowing for growth and restoration and public reserves acting as stable anchor points. Our results emphasize the importance of having a diverse array of protected areas to enhance the resilience of reserve networks. We advocate for adaptive regional measures and robust monitoring to achieve global ecological targets.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Biology
Conservation Biology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.20%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Conservation Biology welcomes submissions that address the science and practice of conserving Earth's biological diversity. We encourage submissions that emphasize issues germane to any of Earth''s ecosystems or geographic regions and that apply diverse approaches to analyses and problem solving. Nevertheless, manuscripts with relevance to conservation that transcend the particular ecosystem, species, or situation described will be prioritized for publication.
×
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