Cargando…

Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests

In East Africa, human population growth and demands for natural resources cause forest loss contributing to increased carbon emissions and reduced biodiversity. Protected Areas (PAs) are intended to conserve habitats and species. Variability in PA effectiveness and ‘leakage’ (here defined as displac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pfeifer, Marion, Burgess, Neil D., Swetnam, Ruth D., Platts, Philip J., Willcock, Simon, Marchant, Robert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3387152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22768074
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039337
_version_ 1782237062286540800
author Pfeifer, Marion
Burgess, Neil D.
Swetnam, Ruth D.
Platts, Philip J.
Willcock, Simon
Marchant, Robert
author_facet Pfeifer, Marion
Burgess, Neil D.
Swetnam, Ruth D.
Platts, Philip J.
Willcock, Simon
Marchant, Robert
author_sort Pfeifer, Marion
collection PubMed
description In East Africa, human population growth and demands for natural resources cause forest loss contributing to increased carbon emissions and reduced biodiversity. Protected Areas (PAs) are intended to conserve habitats and species. Variability in PA effectiveness and ‘leakage’ (here defined as displacement of deforestation) may lead to different trends in forest loss within, and adjacent to, existing PAs. Here, we quantify spatial variation in trends of evergreen forest coverage in East Africa between 2001 and 2009, and test for correlations with forest accessibility and environmental drivers. We investigate PA effectiveness at local, landscape and national scales, comparing rates of deforestation within park boundaries with those detected in park buffer zones and in unprotected land more generally. Background forest loss (BFL) was estimated at −9.3% (17,167 km(2)), but varied between countries (range: −0.9% to −85.7%; note: no BFL in South Sudan). We document high variability in PA effectiveness within and between PA categories. The most successful PAs were National Parks, although only 26 out of 48 parks increased or maintained their forest area (i.e. Effective parks). Forest Reserves (Ineffective parks, i.e. parks that lose forest from within boundaries: 204 out of 337), Nature Reserves (six out of 12) and Game Parks (24 out of 26) were more likely to lose forest cover. Forest loss in buffer zones around PAs exceeded background forest loss, in some areas indicating leakage driven by Effective National Parks. Human pressure, forest accessibility, protection status, distance to fires and long-term annual rainfall were highly significant drivers of forest loss in East Africa. Some of these factors can be addressed by adjusting park management. However, addressing close links between livelihoods, natural capital and poverty remains a fundamental challenge in East Africa’s forest conservation efforts.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3387152
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33871522012-07-05 Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests Pfeifer, Marion Burgess, Neil D. Swetnam, Ruth D. Platts, Philip J. Willcock, Simon Marchant, Robert PLoS One Research Article In East Africa, human population growth and demands for natural resources cause forest loss contributing to increased carbon emissions and reduced biodiversity. Protected Areas (PAs) are intended to conserve habitats and species. Variability in PA effectiveness and ‘leakage’ (here defined as displacement of deforestation) may lead to different trends in forest loss within, and adjacent to, existing PAs. Here, we quantify spatial variation in trends of evergreen forest coverage in East Africa between 2001 and 2009, and test for correlations with forest accessibility and environmental drivers. We investigate PA effectiveness at local, landscape and national scales, comparing rates of deforestation within park boundaries with those detected in park buffer zones and in unprotected land more generally. Background forest loss (BFL) was estimated at −9.3% (17,167 km(2)), but varied between countries (range: −0.9% to −85.7%; note: no BFL in South Sudan). We document high variability in PA effectiveness within and between PA categories. The most successful PAs were National Parks, although only 26 out of 48 parks increased or maintained their forest area (i.e. Effective parks). Forest Reserves (Ineffective parks, i.e. parks that lose forest from within boundaries: 204 out of 337), Nature Reserves (six out of 12) and Game Parks (24 out of 26) were more likely to lose forest cover. Forest loss in buffer zones around PAs exceeded background forest loss, in some areas indicating leakage driven by Effective National Parks. Human pressure, forest accessibility, protection status, distance to fires and long-term annual rainfall were highly significant drivers of forest loss in East Africa. Some of these factors can be addressed by adjusting park management. However, addressing close links between livelihoods, natural capital and poverty remains a fundamental challenge in East Africa’s forest conservation efforts. Public Library of Science 2012-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC3387152/ /pubmed/22768074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039337 Text en Pfeifer et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pfeifer, Marion
Burgess, Neil D.
Swetnam, Ruth D.
Platts, Philip J.
Willcock, Simon
Marchant, Robert
Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests
title Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests
title_full Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests
title_fullStr Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests
title_full_unstemmed Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests
title_short Protected Areas: Mixed Success in Conserving East Africa’s Evergreen Forests
title_sort protected areas: mixed success in conserving east africa’s evergreen forests
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3387152/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22768074
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0039337
work_keys_str_mv AT pfeifermarion protectedareasmixedsuccessinconservingeastafricasevergreenforests
AT burgessneild protectedareasmixedsuccessinconservingeastafricasevergreenforests
AT swetnamruthd protectedareasmixedsuccessinconservingeastafricasevergreenforests
AT plattsphilipj protectedareasmixedsuccessinconservingeastafricasevergreenforests
AT willcocksimon protectedareasmixedsuccessinconservingeastafricasevergreenforests
AT marchantrobert protectedareasmixedsuccessinconservingeastafricasevergreenforests