Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?

Most evaluations of the effectiveness of PAs have relied on indirect estimates based on comparisons between protected and unprotected areas. Such methods can be biased when protection is not randomly assigned. We add to the growing literature on the impact of PAs by answering the following research...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rodrigo A Arriagada, Cristian M Echeverria, Danisa E Moya
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4743991?pdf=render
id doaj-11581b14438d42c5a4c3ba7ae82ff19e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-11581b14438d42c5a4c3ba7ae82ff19e2020-11-24T21:37:03ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032016-01-01112e014809410.1371/journal.pone.0148094Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?Rodrigo A ArriagadaCristian M EcheverriaDanisa E MoyaMost evaluations of the effectiveness of PAs have relied on indirect estimates based on comparisons between protected and unprotected areas. Such methods can be biased when protection is not randomly assigned. We add to the growing literature on the impact of PAs by answering the following research questions: What is the impact of Chilean PAs on deforestation which occurred between 1986 and 2011? How do estimates of the impact of PAs vary when using only public land as control units? We show that the characteristics of the areas in which protected and unprotected lands are located differ significantly. To satisfactorily estimate the effects of PAs, we use matching methods to define adequate control groups, but not as in previous research. We construct control groups using separately non-protected private areas and non-protected public lands. We find that PAs avoid deforestation when using unprotected private lands as valid controls, however results show no impact when the control group is based only on unprotected public land. Different land management regimes, and higher levels of enforcement inside public lands may reduce the opportunity to add additional conservation benefits when the national systems for PAs are based on the protection of previously unprotected public lands. Given that not all PAs are established to avoid deforestation, results also admit the potential for future studies to include other outcomes including forest degradation (not just deforestation), biodiversity, wildlife, primary forests (not forests in general), among others.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4743991?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Rodrigo A Arriagada
Cristian M Echeverria
Danisa E Moya
spellingShingle Rodrigo A Arriagada
Cristian M Echeverria
Danisa E Moya
Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?
PLoS ONE
author_facet Rodrigo A Arriagada
Cristian M Echeverria
Danisa E Moya
author_sort Rodrigo A Arriagada
title Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?
title_short Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?
title_full Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?
title_fullStr Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?
title_full_unstemmed Creating Protected Areas on Public Lands: Is There Room for Additional Conservation?
title_sort creating protected areas on public lands: is there room for additional conservation?
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2016-01-01
description Most evaluations of the effectiveness of PAs have relied on indirect estimates based on comparisons between protected and unprotected areas. Such methods can be biased when protection is not randomly assigned. We add to the growing literature on the impact of PAs by answering the following research questions: What is the impact of Chilean PAs on deforestation which occurred between 1986 and 2011? How do estimates of the impact of PAs vary when using only public land as control units? We show that the characteristics of the areas in which protected and unprotected lands are located differ significantly. To satisfactorily estimate the effects of PAs, we use matching methods to define adequate control groups, but not as in previous research. We construct control groups using separately non-protected private areas and non-protected public lands. We find that PAs avoid deforestation when using unprotected private lands as valid controls, however results show no impact when the control group is based only on unprotected public land. Different land management regimes, and higher levels of enforcement inside public lands may reduce the opportunity to add additional conservation benefits when the national systems for PAs are based on the protection of previously unprotected public lands. Given that not all PAs are established to avoid deforestation, results also admit the potential for future studies to include other outcomes including forest degradation (not just deforestation), biodiversity, wildlife, primary forests (not forests in general), among others.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4743991?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT rodrigoaarriagada creatingprotectedareasonpubliclandsisthereroomforadditionalconservation
AT cristianmecheverria creatingprotectedareasonpubliclandsisthereroomforadditionalconservation
AT danisaemoya creatingprotectedareasonpubliclandsisthereroomforadditionalconservation
_version_ 1725938544153722880