Search

Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) are sites outside of protected areas that deliver the effective, long-term conservation of biodiversity. Both protected areas and OECMs contribute to the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework's Target 3, which calls for the conservation of 30% of marine, terrestrial and inland water areas by 2030. This paper provides the first global assessment of the contribution of OECMs to GBF Target 3. Between 2019 and 2023, 820 sites in nine countries and territories were reported to the World Database on OECMs, covering 1.9 million km2 of the Earth's surface and, in the terrestrial realm, contributing over 1% to the 30% coverage target. Notably, over 50% of reported OECMs are under governance by governments and less than 2% are governed by Indigenous peoples and local communities. In countries and territories that have reported OECMs, a far greater proportion of OECMs than protected areas are under shared governance (40.9% compared to 2.5%), and collaborative governance is the most common governance sub-type among reported OECMs. This paper finds that almost 30% of the 820 reported OECMs overlap with identified Key Biodiversity Areas, which are one global classification of areas of particular importance for biodiversity. With Target 3's pressing deadline of 2030, there is an urgent need to scale up understanding and local to national engagement with the OECM framework, ensuring that it fulfills its potential to recognize diverse forms of equitable governance and effective conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) have been a feature of global biodiversity targets since 2010 (Aichi Targets, Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework), although the concept has only relatively recently been formally defined. Although uptake has been limited to date, there is much interest in identifying OECMs to contribute to the target of protecting at least 30% of terrestrial, freshwater and ocean areas by 2030, in conjunction with protected areas. Australia has a long history of protected area development across public, private and Indigenous lands, but consideration of OECMs in policy has recently begun in that country. We review principles proposed by the Australian Government for OECMs in Australia and highlight where these deviate from global guidance or established Australian area-based policy. We examined various land use categories and conservation mechanisms to determine the likelihood of these categories/mechanisms meeting the OECM definition, with a particular focus on longevity of the mechanism to sustain biodiversity. We identified that the number of categories/mechanisms that would meet the OECM definition is relatively small. A number of potentially perverse outcomes in classifying an area as an OECM are highlighted in order to guide proactive policy and program design to prevent such outcomes occurring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) are sites outside of protected areas that deliver the effective, long-term conservation of biodiversity. Both protected areas and OECMs contribute to the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework’s Target 3, which calls for the conservation of 30% of marine, terrestrial and inland water areas by 2030. This paper provides the first global assessment of the contribution of OECMs to GBF Target 3. Between 2019 and 2023, 820 sites in nine countries and territories were reported to the World Database on OECMs, covering 1.9 million km2 of the Earth’s surface and, in the terrestrial realm, contributing over 1% to the 30% coverage target. Notably, over 50% of reported OECMs are under governance by governments and less than 2% are governed by Indigenous peoples and local communities. In countries and territories that have reported OECMs, a far greater proportion of OECMs than protected areas are under shared governance (40.9% compared to 2.5%), and collaborative governance is the most common governance sub-type among reported OECMs. This paper finds that almost 30% of the 820 reported OECMs overlap with identified Key Biodiversity Areas, which are one global classification of areas of particular importance for biodiversity. With Target 3’s pressing deadline of 2030, there is an urgent need to scale up understanding and local to national engagement with the OECM framework, ensuring that it fulfills its potential to recognize diverse forms of equitable governance and effective conservation.

Area-based conservation is a widely used approach for maintaining biodiversity, and there are ongoing discussions over what is an appropriate global conservation area coverage target. To inform such debates, it is necessary to know the extent and ecological representativeness of the current conservation area network, but this is hampered by gaps in existing global datasets. In particular, although data on privately and community-governed protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures are often available at the national level, it can take many years to incorporate these into official datasets. This suggests a complementary approach is needed based on selecting a sample of countries and using their national-scale datasets to produce more accurate metrics. However, every country added to the sample increases the costs of data collection, collation and analysis. To address this, here we present a data collection framework underpinned by a spatial prioritization algorithm, which identifies a minimum set of countries that are also representative of 10 factors that influence conservation area establishment and biodiversity patterns. We then illustrate this approach by identifying a representative set of sampling units that cover 10% of the terrestrial realm, which included areas in only 25 countries. In contrast, selecting 10% of the terrestrial realm at random included areas across a mean of 162 countries. These sampling units could be the focus of future data collation on different types of conservation area. Analysing these data could produce more rapid and accurate estimates of global conservation area coverage and ecological representativeness, complementing existing international reporting systems.

Area-based conservation is a widely used approach for maintaining biodiversity, and there are ongoing discussions over what is an appropriate global conservation area coverage target. To inform such debates, it is necessary to know the extent and ecological representativeness of the current conservation area network, but this is hampered by gaps in existing global datasets. In particular, although data on privately and community-governed protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures are often available at the national level, it can take many years to incorporate these into official datasets. This suggests a complementary approach is needed based on selecting a sample of countries and using their national-scale datasets to produce more accurate metrics. However, every country added to the sample increases the costs of data collection, collation and analysis. To address this, here we present a data collection framework underpinned by a spatial prioritization algorithm, which identifies a minimum set of countries that are also representative of 10 factors that influence conservation area establishment and biodiversity patterns. We then illustrate this approach by identifying a representative set of sampling units that cover 10% of the terrestrial realm, which included areas in only 25 countries. In contrast, selecting 10% of the terrestrial realm at random included areas across a mean of 162 countries. These sampling units could be the focus of future data collation on different types of conservation area. Analysing these data could produce more rapid and accurate estimates of global conservation area coverage and ecological representativeness, complementing existing international reporting systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In line with Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the European Union (EU) aims to protect 30% of its land and sea by 2030 (known as 30x30). Germany has been a vocal supporter of this goal in the international arena but has yet to achieve sufficient protected area coverage domestically. We estimate that Germany needs to report an additional 4.65 million hectares of protected land to achieve 30x30. This article examines the potential of privately protected areas (PPAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) to contribute to this goal. We explore the German Federal Nature Conservation Act and identify the legal hurdles for the designation and recognition of PPAs. Furthermore, we argue that OECMs have the potential to contribute significantly to 30x30 in Germany. We estimate that close to one million hectares of land could be classified as OECMs and outline potentially qualifying sites. In conclusion, we discuss the prerequisites for upscaling private land conservation in Germany, focusing on required conditions for establishing OECMs and incentivising conservation easements and long-term conservation leases through national funding programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Understanding the relative effectiveness and enabling conditions of different area‐based management tools is essential for supporting efforts that achieve positive biodiversity outcomes as area‐based conservation coverage increases to meet newly set international targets. We used data from a coastal social–ecological monitoring program in 6 Indo‐Pacific countries to analyze whether social, ecological, and economic objectives and specific management rules (temporal closures, fishing gear‐specific, species‐specific restrictions) were associated with coral reef fish biomass above sustainable yield levels across different types of area‐based management tools (i.e., comparing those designated as marine protected areas [MPAs] with other types of area‐based management). All categories of objectives, multiple combinations of rules, and all types of area‐based management had some sites that were able to sustain high levels of reef fish biomass—a key measure for coral reef functioning—compared with reference sites with no area‐based management. Yet, the same management types also had sites with low biomass. As governments advance their commitments to the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the target to conserve 30% of the planet's land and oceans by 2030, we found that although different types of management can be effective, most of the managed areas in our study regions did not meet criteria for effectiveness. These findings underscore the importance of strong management and governance of managed areas and the need to measure the ecological impact of area‐based management rather than counting areas because of their designation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In line with Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the European Union (EU) aims to protect 30% of its land and sea by 2030 (known as 30x30). Germany has been a vocal supporter of this goal in the international arena but has yet to achieve sufficient protected area coverage domestically. We estimate that Germany needs to report an additional 4.65 million hectares of protected land to achieve 30x30. This article examines the potential of privately protected areas (PPAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) to contribute to this goal. We explore the German Federal Nature Conservation Act and identify the legal hurdles for the designation and recognition of PPAs. Furthermore, we argue that OECMs have the potential to contribute significantly to 30x30 in Germany. We estimate that close to one million hectares of land could be classified as OECMs and outline potentially qualifying sites. In conclusion, we discuss the prerequisites for upscaling private land conservation in Germany, focusing on required conditions for establishing OECMs and incentivising conservation easements and long-term conservation leases through national funding programmes.

This scoping review (ScR) protocol aims to establish the methodological approach for identifying and mapping the evidence regarding the actual contribution of Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs) to spatial conservation targets. Emphasis will be placed on examining the research conducted, including the methodologies applied. OECMs, introduced by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2010, refer to areas outside of protected areas, such as fisheries restricted areas, archaeological sites, and military areas, that effectively conserve biodiversity in-situ over the long term. OECMs are recognized rather than designated. Many countries currently endeavor to identify, recognize and report OECMs to the CBD for formal acceptance to support the implementation of spatial conservation targets. Studies that assess the contribution of OECMs to spatial conservation targets will be considered. Potential OECMs with primary, secondary or ancillary conservation objectives established by all sectors in the terrestrial, freshwater and marine realm worldwide will be considered. Peer-reviewed and grey literature will be considered without imposing limitations based on publication year, stage, subject area and source type. Both experimental and observational studies in English, French, German, Greek, Italian, and Spanish will be reviewed. The ScR will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. The protocol will be guided by the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) extension for scoping reviews. The search will encompass bibliographic databases such as Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Grey literature sources will include databases, pre-print archives and organizational websites. The Covidence platform will be utilized for data management and extraction.

This scoping review (ScR) protocol aims to establish the methodological approach for identifying and mapping the evidence regarding the actual contribution of Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs) to spatial conservation targets. Emphasis will be placed on examining the research conducted, including the methodologies applied. OECMs, introduced by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2010, refer to areas outside of protected areas, such as fisheries restricted areas, archaeological sites, and military areas, that effectively conserve biodiversity in-situ over the long term. OECMs are recognized rather than designated. Many countries currently endeavor to identify, recognize and report OECMs to the CBD for formal acceptance to support the implementation of spatial conservation targets. Studies that assess the contribution of OECMs to spatial conservation targets will be considered. Potential OECMs with primary, secondary or ancillary conservation objectives established by all sectors in the terrestrial, freshwater and marine realm worldwide will be considered. Peer-reviewed and grey literature will be considered without imposing limitations based on publication year, stage, subject area and source type. Both experimental and observational studies in English, French, German, Greek, Italian, and Spanish will be reviewed. The ScR will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. The protocol will be guided by the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) extension for scoping reviews. The search will encompass bibliographic databases such as Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Grey literature sources will include databases, pre-print archives and organizational websites. The Covidence platform will be utilized for data management and extraction.

Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) promotes the sustainable human activities development and uses in the marine space, playing a role in their effective management. The enhancement of connectivity is crucial for the conservation of biodiversity and landscape planning. Ecological Corridors (ECs) are an important type of connectivity for biodiversity conservation in fragmented habitats. The EU Biodiversity Strategy 2030 includes ECs into the network of protected areas and allows for the creation of additional protected areas. MSP studies considering ECs remain still lacking, especially for the design of networks between Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs). In this paper, knowledge, and tools for investigating marine ECs were reviewed, with a systematic bibliometric analysis to summarize the current scientific research. Previous studies integrating ecological connectivity into planning for marine conservation have focused on models of larval dispersal, adult movements, and dispersal of single species by using benthic habitat proxies. Few studies were found on ECs in marine environments: in the coral Caribbean reef systems in the Gulf of Mexico; within benthic habitats along the Pacific coast of Canada; between MPAs in British Columbia (Canada); and by analyzing migratory species in the Yangtze estuary (China). Commonly used approaches to project and map ECs in marine environments are least-cost and circuit theories allowing to incorporate movement with cost or resistance to movement, depending on species and preferred habitats. The systematic bibliometric analysis returned 25 studies, most of which were from North America (40%) and European countries (36%) and the largest share of papers (68%) from 2018 to 2022. This review pinpointed the need of integrating different disciplines to investigate connectivity and the need by policymakers and practitioners to recognize the importance of ecological connectivity, even there are significant challenges for integrating connectivity into policies, planning, and conservation.

This scoping review (ScR) protocol aims to establish the methodological approach for identifying and mapping the evidence regarding the actual contribution of Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs) to spatial conservation targets. Emphasis will be placed on examining the research conducted, including the methodologies applied, and analyzing both good practices and acknowledged failures. OECMs, introduced by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2010, refer to areas outside of protected areas, such as fisheries restricted areas, archaeological sites, and military areas, that effectively conserve biodiversity in-situ over the long term. OECMs are recognized rather than designated. Many countries currently endeavor to identify, recognize and report OECMs to the CBD for formal acceptance to support the implementation of spatial conservation targets. Studies that assess the contribution of OECMs to spatial conservation targets will be considered. Potential OECMs with primary, secondary or ancillary conservation objectives established by all sectors in the terrestrial, freshwater and marine realm worldwide will be considered. Peer-reviewed and grey literature will be considered without imposing limitations based on publication year, stage, subject area and source type. Both experimental and observational studies in English, French, Greek, Italian, and Spanish will be reviewed. The ScR will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology. The protocol will be guided by the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) extension for scoping reviews. The search will encompass bibliographic databases such as Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Grey literature sources will include databases, pre-print archives and organizational websites. The Covidence platform will be utilized for data management and extraction.

Area-based approaches are a central component of global efforts to conserve biodiversity. While the focus of many countries has been mainly on protected areas, other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMS) have been accorded global recognition in the past decade as a vital complementary approach to protected areas. This recognition has been reemphasised in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted by parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in December 2022, with its Target 3 ratchetting up area-based coverage targets to 30 per cent by 2030. A growing focus and reliance on OECMs to contribute towards achieving this target is anticipated. The international community has in the past few years introduced some guidance to identify, secure, manage, monitor and verify the anticipated long-term biodiversity conservation outcomes of OECMs. Some commentators have argued for domestic legal intervention to complement this general international guidance. The South African Government has recognised the potential contribution of OECMs towards the achievement of domestic and global area-based biodiversity targets in its National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy (2018) but has alluded to the need for legal intervention to ensure that they achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in situ conservation of biodiversity. Some domestic commentators have highlighted the strong link between biodiversity stewardship (particularly conservation areas) and OECMs, advocating that these conservation areas should form the priority focus of domestic efforts to identify OECMs. This article scopes this potential link and specifically considers whether the current domestic legal and policy framework applicable to these conservation areas is sufficiently robust to ensure that only appropriate areas are identified as OECMs and that once recognised, they are governed and effectively managed in the long term. It highlights several frailties of the existing framework and drawing from anticipated legal reform in the Western Cape relating to biodiversity stewardship, it proposes a possible model for future national legislation regulating OECMs.

The biodiversity crisis necessitates a global implementation of effective, equitable, and feasible conservation strategies. Public land acquisitions (PLAs) for watershed protection can produce co‐benefits for basic human needs and biodiversity, but there are concerns that acquiring land is not scalable or may not protect threatened biodiversity. PLA programs are rare, allowing for limited opportunities to assess these concerns. We investigate a unique policy that has legally mandated PLAs in the Colombian Andes, a tropical biodiversity hotspot, since 1993. Using a novel dataset of >7000 PLAs, along with surveys and in‐person interviews, we study the scale, spatial allocation, and constraints on PLA implementation, and examine its potential conservation benefits. More than 300,000 ha were acquired through PLAs, but economic and institutional factors such as land cost, government income, and land tenure informality were main drivers in the degree of PLA implementation. Acquisitions were thus directed mostly toward cheaper, less threatened ecosystems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the Earth’s changing climate has deepened into a climate crisis, the Arctic region has emerged as one of the clearest indicators of the scale and pace of that change. As the ice melts, opportunities are expanding to exploit the Arctic’s oil and gas reserves, precious metals, fish stocks and maritime routes. Increased access and development will inevitably generate “system-wide environmental impacts” and will pose novel management challenges for the Arctic states. In the quest to find an effective balance between competing ocean activities and actors, marine protected areas (MPAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) have emerged as indispensable tools to achieve ocean health, including in the Arctic. After first introducing these concepts, this article will discuss the Canadian and Russian domestic regimes for the establishment of MPAs and OECMs. The conclusion will then offer some insights into the key challenges confronting both states in the creation of effective networks of MPAs and OECMs in their Arctic regions.

Area-based approaches are a central component of global efforts to conserve biodiversity. While the focus of many countries has been mainly on protected areas, other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMS) have been accorded global recognition in the past decade as a vital complementary approach to protected areas. This recognition has been reemphasised in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted by parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in December 2022, with its Target 3 ratchetting up area-based coverage targets to 30 per cent by 2030. A growing focus and reliance on OECMs to contribute towards achieving this target is anticipated. The international community has in the past few years introduced some guidance to identify, secure, manage, monitor and verify the anticipated long-term biodiversity conservation outcomes of OECMs. Some commentators have argued for domestic legal intervention to complement this general international guidance. The South African Government has recognised the potential contribution of OECMs towards the achievement of domestic and global area-based biodiversity targets in its National Protected Areas Expansion Strategy (2018) but has alluded to the need for legal intervention to ensure that they achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in situ conservation of biodiversity. Some domestic commentators have highlighted the strong link between biodiversity stewardship (particularly conservation areas) and OECMs, advocating that these conservation areas should form the priority focus of domestic efforts to identify OECMs. This article scopes this potential link and specifically considers whether the current domestic legal and policy framework applicable to these conservation areas is sufficiently robust to ensure that only appropriate areas are identified as OECMs and that once recognised, they are governed and effectively managed in the long term. It highlights several frailties of the existing framework and drawing from anticipated legal reform in the Western Cape relating to biodiversity stewardship, it proposes a possible model for future national legislation regulating OECMs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sacred natural sites (SNSs) are examples of community‐level governance for sustainable management of natural resources, which can greatly benefit nature conservation. However, the lack of a comprehensive understanding of the role of SNSs in conservation has resulted in overly simplistic classifications of SNSs that challenge current SNS research and conservation practice. Here, we propose an SNS classification framework based on the types and levels of material and spiritual services that SNSs provide, and applied this framework in the Khawa Karpo, an important sacred area in the Tibetan region of China based on detailed field surveys conducted from 2000 to 2004 and 2015 to 2017 that addressed six types of SNSs, including sacred mountains, Ri Vgags, sacred lakes, sacred rocks, sacred caves, and sacred trees. We found that SNSs in this region played a crucial role in sustaining traditional cultures and providing material services. Adoption of our classification framework will assist with the development of management strategies and targeted conservation actions for individual SNSs, thus improving conservation levels particularly in the Tibetan region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Designating protected and conserved areas is a critical component of biodiversity conservation. The 10th Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2010 set global targets for the areal extent of protected areas (PAs) that were met partially in 2020, yet a new, more ambitious target is needed to halt ongoing global biodiversity loss. China recently introduced a national Ecological Conservation Redline policy, which aims to ensure no net change in land cover and no net loss of biodiversity or degradation of ecosystem services within areas that are critical for maintaining ecological safety and functions. Enacting this policy could achieve ancillary conservation outcomes even where conservation is not the primary objective, thus meeting CBD's definition of "other effective area‐based conservation measures" (OECM). By comparing the Ecological Conservation Redline boundaries with important coastal waterbird sites in China, we found that three times more sites could be conserved under the new redline policy compared to the national nature reserve system alone. This indicates that considering the redline policy approach as a form of OECM is a promising pathway to expand the areal coverage of PAs and conserve biodiversity outside currently designated PAs, providing a model that could be adopted around the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the Earth's changing climate has deepened into a climate crisis, the Arctic region has emerged as one of the clearest indicators of the scale and pace of that change. As the ice melts, opportunities are expanding to exploit the Arctic's oil and gas reserves, precious metals, fish stocks and maritime routes. Increased access and development will inevitably generate "system-wide environmental impacts" and will pose novel management challenges for the Arctic states. In the quest to find an effective balance between competing ocean activities and actors, marine protected areas (MPAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) have emerged as indispensable tools to achieve ocean health, including in the Arctic. After first introducing these concepts, this article will discuss the Canadian and Russian domestic regimes for the establishment of MPAs and OECMs. The conclusion will then offer some insights into the key challenges confronting both states in the creation of effective networks of MPAs and OECMs in their Arctic regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Work on the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework is now well advanced and will outline a vision, goals, and targets for the next decade of biodiversity conservation and beyond. For the effectiveness of Protected areas and Other Effective area‐based Conservation Measures, an indicator has been proposed for “areas meeting their documented ecological objectives.” However, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has not identified or agreed on what data should inform this indicator. Here we draw on experiences from the assessment of protected area effectiveness in the CBD's previous strategic plan to provide recommendations on the essential elements related to biodiversity outcomes and management that need to be captured in this updated indicator as well as how this could be done. Our proposed protected area effectiveness indicators include a combination of remotely derived products for all protected areas, combined with data from monitoring of both protected area management and trends in species and ecosystems based on field observations. Additionally, we highlight the need for creating a digital infrastructure to operationalize national‐level data‐capture. We believe these steps are critical and urge the adoption of suitable protected area effectiveness indicators before the post‐2020 framework is agreed in 2021.

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted the Strategic Plan (SP) for Biodiversity 2011-2020 in Nagoya, Japan in October 2010. The SP comprises five strategic goals and 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets; these targets were agreed for implementation by the CBD signatory countries. The Aichi Biodiversity Target 6 states that by 2020 all fish and invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants are managed and harvested sustainably. Even though substantial progress has been made towards achieving this target, globally, a third of the marine fish stocks are overfished and many fisheries are causing unsustainable levels of bycatch of non-target species and are damaging marine habitats. The Global Biodiversity Outlook-5, 2020 (GBO-5) report says that the biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented rate and the pressures driving this decline are intensifying and none of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets is fully met. The present study has reviewed the implementation of the global Aichi Biodiversity Targets by India and other countries focusing on fisheries sector and has brought out good practices adopted by the countries in implementing these targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Work on the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework is now well advanced and will outline a vision, goals, and targets for the next decade of biodiversity conservation and beyond. For the effectiveness of Protected areas and Other Effective area‐based Conservation Measures, an indicator has been proposed for "areas meeting their documented ecological objectives." However, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has not identified or agreed on what data should inform this indicator. Here we draw on experiences from the assessment of protected area effectiveness in the CBD's previous strategic plan to provide recommendations on the essential elements related to biodiversity outcomes and management that need to be captured in this updated indicator as well as how this could be done. Our proposed protected area effectiveness indicators include a combination of remotely derived products for all protected areas, combined with data from monitoring of both protected area management and trends in species and ecosystems based on field observations. Additionally, we highlight the need for creating a digital infrastructure to operationalize national‐level data‐capture. We believe these steps are critical and urge the adoption of suitable protected area effectiveness indicators before the post‐2020 framework is agreed in 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Private land conservation areas (PLCAs) have become critical for achieving global conservation goals, but we lack understanding of how and when these areas respond to global pressures and opportunities. In southern Africa, where many PLCAs rely on trophy hunting as an income‐generating strategy, a potential ban on trophy hunting locally or abroad holds unknown consequences for the future conservation of these lands. In this study, we investigate the consequences of a potential trophy hunting ban in PLCAs in two biodiversity hotspots in South Africa's Eastern and Western Cape provinces. We used semistructured interviews with PLCA managers and owners to elicit perceived impacts of an internationally imposed trophy hunting ban on conservation activities in PLCAs, and to probe alternative viable land uses. The majority of interviewees believed that both the economic viability of their PLCA and biodiversity would be lost following a hunting ban. Owners would primarily consider transitioning to ecotourism or livestock farming, but these options were constrained by the social‐ecological context of their PLCA (e.g., competition with other PLCAs, ecological viability of farming). Our results suggest that a trophy hunting ban may have many unintended consequences for biodiversity conservation, national economies, and the livelihoods of PLCA owners and employees. Along with similar social‐ecological studies in other areas and contexts, our work can inform policy decisions around global trophy hunting regulation.

Private land conservation areas (PLCAs) have become critical for achieving global conservation goals, but we lack understanding of how and when these areas respond to global pressures and opportunities. In southern Africa, where many PLCAs rely on trophy hunting as an income‐generating strategy, a potential ban on trophy hunting locally or abroad holds unknown consequences for the future conservation of these lands. In this study, we investigate the consequences of a potential trophy hunting ban in PLCAs in two biodiversity hotspots in South Africa's Eastern and Western Cape provinces. We used semistructured interviews with PLCA managers and owners to elicit perceived impacts of an internationally imposed trophy hunting ban on conservation activities in PLCAs, and to probe alternative viable land uses. The majority of interviewees believed that both the economic viability of their PLCA and biodiversity would be lost following a hunting ban. Owners would primarily consider transitioning to ecotourism or livestock farming, but these options were constrained by the social‐ecological context of their PLCA (e.g., competition with other PLCAs, ecological viability of farming). Our results suggest that a trophy hunting ban may have many unintended consequences for biodiversity conservation, national economies, and the livelihoods of PLCA owners and employees. Along with similar social‐ecological studies in other areas and contexts, our work can inform policy decisions around global trophy hunting regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Protected areas (PAs) are considered as a globally accepted strategy for biodiversity conservation that demonstrates the difficulties in meeting the proposed objectives; therefore, different conservation schemes are promoted to integrate the design of interfaces that favor the exchange of knowledge among different sectors, systems and stakeholders. The objective of this study was to characterize challenges regarding the protection of natural protected areas and other biodiversity conservation schemes in Tamaulipas, Mexico. This paper analyzed 39 areas with some form of protection status in addition to the 70 national and international designations that are part of them. A document review and 13 semi-structured interviews were conducted with experts from the public, private, academic, and civil society sectors. The data were analyzed from a qualitative perspective using ATLAS.ti 9 software. The results show the overlapping of protection schemes in priority areas; the lack of policies and mechanisms that integrate the different schemes to facilitate the exchange between stakeholders; and regulatory, structural, governance, management, participation, and operational gaps, as well as the absence of comprehensive and long-term work. The importance of and challenges in articulating the different schemes and visions to achieve effective biodiversity conservation are evident. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]