Cargando…

A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas

Protected areas (PAs) have been established to conserve tropical forests, but their effectiveness at reducing deforestation is uncertain. To explore this issue, we combined high resolution data of global forest loss over the period 2000–2012 with data on PAs. For each PA we quantified forest loss wi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spracklen, B. D., Kalamandeen, M., Galbraith, D., Gloor, E., Spracklen, D. V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4669159/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26632842
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143886
_version_ 1782404073303048192
author Spracklen, B. D.
Kalamandeen, M.
Galbraith, D.
Gloor, E.
Spracklen, D. V.
author_facet Spracklen, B. D.
Kalamandeen, M.
Galbraith, D.
Gloor, E.
Spracklen, D. V.
author_sort Spracklen, B. D.
collection PubMed
description Protected areas (PAs) have been established to conserve tropical forests, but their effectiveness at reducing deforestation is uncertain. To explore this issue, we combined high resolution data of global forest loss over the period 2000–2012 with data on PAs. For each PA we quantified forest loss within the PA, in buffer zones 1, 5, 10 and 15 km outside the PA boundary as well as a 1 km buffer within the PA boundary. We analysed 3376 tropical and subtropical moist forest PAs in 56 countries over 4 continents. We found that 73% of PAs experienced substantial deforestation pressure, with >0.1% a(−1) forest loss in the outer 1 km buffer. Forest loss within PAs was greatest in Asia (0.25% a(−1)) compared to Africa (0.1% a(−1)), the Neotropics (0.1% a(−1)) and Australasia (Australia and Papua New Guinea; 0.03% a(−1)). We defined performance (P) of a PA as the ratio of forest loss in the inner 1 km buffer compared to the loss that would have occurred in the absence of the PA, calculated as the loss in the outer 1 km buffer corrected for any difference in deforestation pressure between the two buffers. To remove the potential bias due to terrain, we analysed a subset of PAs (n = 1804) where slope and elevation in inner and outer 1 km buffers were similar (within 1° and 100 m, respectively). We found 41% of PAs in this subset reduced forest loss in the inner buffer by at least 25% compared to the expected inner buffer forest loss (P<0.75). Median performance ([Image: see text] ) of subset reserves was 0.87, meaning a reduction in forest loss within the PA of 13%. We found PAs were most effective in Australasia ([Image: see text] ), moderately successful in the Neotropics ([Image: see text] ) and Africa ([Image: see text] ), but ineffective in Asia ([Image: see text] ). We found many countries have PAs that give little or no protection to forest loss, particularly in parts of Asia, west Africa and central America. Across the tropics, the median effectiveness of PAs at the national level improved with gross domestic product per capita. Whilst tropical and subtropical moist forest PAs do reduce forest loss, widely varying performance suggests substantial opportunities for improved protection, particularly in Asia.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4669159
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46691592015-12-10 A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas Spracklen, B. D. Kalamandeen, M. Galbraith, D. Gloor, E. Spracklen, D. V. PLoS One Research Article Protected areas (PAs) have been established to conserve tropical forests, but their effectiveness at reducing deforestation is uncertain. To explore this issue, we combined high resolution data of global forest loss over the period 2000–2012 with data on PAs. For each PA we quantified forest loss within the PA, in buffer zones 1, 5, 10 and 15 km outside the PA boundary as well as a 1 km buffer within the PA boundary. We analysed 3376 tropical and subtropical moist forest PAs in 56 countries over 4 continents. We found that 73% of PAs experienced substantial deforestation pressure, with >0.1% a(−1) forest loss in the outer 1 km buffer. Forest loss within PAs was greatest in Asia (0.25% a(−1)) compared to Africa (0.1% a(−1)), the Neotropics (0.1% a(−1)) and Australasia (Australia and Papua New Guinea; 0.03% a(−1)). We defined performance (P) of a PA as the ratio of forest loss in the inner 1 km buffer compared to the loss that would have occurred in the absence of the PA, calculated as the loss in the outer 1 km buffer corrected for any difference in deforestation pressure between the two buffers. To remove the potential bias due to terrain, we analysed a subset of PAs (n = 1804) where slope and elevation in inner and outer 1 km buffers were similar (within 1° and 100 m, respectively). We found 41% of PAs in this subset reduced forest loss in the inner buffer by at least 25% compared to the expected inner buffer forest loss (P<0.75). Median performance ([Image: see text] ) of subset reserves was 0.87, meaning a reduction in forest loss within the PA of 13%. We found PAs were most effective in Australasia ([Image: see text] ), moderately successful in the Neotropics ([Image: see text] ) and Africa ([Image: see text] ), but ineffective in Asia ([Image: see text] ). We found many countries have PAs that give little or no protection to forest loss, particularly in parts of Asia, west Africa and central America. Across the tropics, the median effectiveness of PAs at the national level improved with gross domestic product per capita. Whilst tropical and subtropical moist forest PAs do reduce forest loss, widely varying performance suggests substantial opportunities for improved protection, particularly in Asia. Public Library of Science 2015-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4669159/ /pubmed/26632842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143886 Text en © 2015 Spracklen 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
Spracklen, B. D.
Kalamandeen, M.
Galbraith, D.
Gloor, E.
Spracklen, D. V.
A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas
title A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas
title_full A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas
title_fullStr A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas
title_full_unstemmed A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas
title_short A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas
title_sort global analysis of deforestation in moist tropical forest protected areas
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4669159/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26632842
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143886
work_keys_str_mv AT spracklenbd aglobalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT kalamandeenm aglobalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT galbraithd aglobalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT gloore aglobalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT spracklendv aglobalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT spracklenbd globalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT kalamandeenm globalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT galbraithd globalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT gloore globalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas
AT spracklendv globalanalysisofdeforestationinmoisttropicalforestprotectedareas