Local scale comparisons of biodiversity as a test for global protected area ecological performance : a meta-analysis

dc.contributor.authorCoetzee, Bernard W. T.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorGaston, Kevin J.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorChown, Steven L.en_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2015-03-24T11:08:08Z
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-27T09:56:41Z
dc.date.available2015-03-24T11:08:08Z
dc.date.available2021-08-27T09:56:41Z
dc.date.issued2014-08-27
dc.descriptionCITATION: Coetzee, B. W. T., Gaston, K. J. & Chown, S. L. 2014. Local scale comparisons of biodiversity as a test for global protected area ecological performance : a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 9(8):e105824, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105824.
dc.descriptionThe original publication is available at https://journals.plos.org/plosone
dc.description.abstractTerrestrial protected areas (PAs) are cornerstones of global biodiversity conservation. Their efficacy in terms of maintaining biodiversity is, however, much debated. Studies to date have been unable to provide a general answer as to PA conservation efficacy because of their typically restricted geographic and/or taxonomic focus, or qualitative approaches focusing on proxies for biodiversity, such as deforestation. Given the rarity of historical data to enable comparisons of biodiversity before/after PA establishment, many smaller scale studies over the past 30 years have directly compared biodiversity inside PAs to that of surrounding areas, which provides one measure of PA ecological performance. Here we use a meta-analysis of such studies (N = 86) to test if PAs contain higher biodiversity values than surrounding areas, and so assess their contribution to determining PA efficacy. We find that PAs generally have higher abundances of individual species, higher assemblage abundances, and higher species richness values compared with alternative land uses. Local scale studies in combination thus show that PAs retain more biodiversity than alternative land use areas. Nonetheless, much variation is present in the effect sizes, which underscores the context-specificity of PA efficacy.en_ZA
dc.description.versionPublisher's version
dc.format.extent11 pages : illustrations (some color), mapsen_ZA
dc.identifier.citationCoetzee, B. W. T., Gaston, K. J. & Chown, S. L. 2014. Local scale comparisons of biodiversity as a test for global protected area ecological performance : a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 9(8):e105824, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105824.en
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203 (online)
dc.identifier.otherdoi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105824
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/120000
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen
dc.rights.holderAuthors retain copyright
dc.subjectBiodiversity conservationen_ZA
dc.subjectProtected areas -- Managementen_ZA
dc.subjectMeta-analysisen_ZA
dc.subjectEcological regionsen_ZA
dc.titleLocal scale comparisons of biodiversity as a test for global protected area ecological performance : a meta-analysisen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Coetzee_PlosOne_2014.pdf
Size:
768.55 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download article
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
164 B
Format:
Plain Text
Description: