Home

Setting targets for addressing major planetary concerns is an essential prerequisite for concerted global action (both inside and outside multilateral environmental agreements) and is necessarily a societal and political process, requiring negotiation and convergence among oftenconflicting interests. There is no such thing as a ‘scientific target’ applied in policy or business—operational targets are socio-political choices. However, this is not to say that targets cannot be ‘science-based’.

This guidance document aims to build awareness, knowledge, and capacity internationally on how to best undertake economic evaluations of tourism in protected areas, and thereby contribute towards a globally acknowledged standard methodology. We believe that it will serve as a key resource for protected area managers, site managers and their respective natural and cultural heritage agencies, practitioners, academia and consultancies, as well as international stakeholders and donor agencies.

This brief seeks to bring clarity to the question of what could count toward the 30% global minimum target. within the context of recognized area-based conservation measures and their ability to deliver positive long-term conservation outcomes. It is based on guidance from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and other published sources, and is consistent with decisions of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

This publication has been developed as a contribution to Phase II of the Two-phase Strategy on Protected Areas of the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and prepared pursuant to various paragraphs of COP decision XIII/2 on protected areas, in particular paragraph 5(a-e), and paragraph 10 of decision XI/24.

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a“Green List of Species” (now the IUCN Green Status of Species).

Substantial efforts and investments are being made to increase the scale and improve the effectiveness of marine conservation globally. Though it is mandated by international law and central to conservation policy, less attention has been given to how to operationalize social equity in and through the pursuit of marine conservation. In this article, we aim to bring greater attention to this topic through reviewing how social equity can be better integrated in marine conservation policy and practice.

Global support is growing for the 30 × 30 movement — a goal to conserve 30% of the planet by 2030. In May, the G7 group of wealthy nations endorsed the commitment to this target that had been made by more than 50 countries in January. It is likely to be the headline goal when parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) meet to discuss the latest global conservation agreement in May 2022 in Kunming, China. So where do the sacred forests of Estonia or shipwrecks in North America’s Great Lakes come in?

More than 15% of global terrestrial area is under some form of protection and there is a growing impetus to increase this coverage to 30% by 2030. But not all protection is effective and the reasons some countries’ protected areas (PAs) are more effective than others’ are poorly understood. We evaluate the effectiveness of national PA networks established between 2000 and 2012 globally in avoiding forest loss, taking into account underlying deforestation threats using a combination of matching methods and cross-sectional regressions.

Day 3 session of the

Day 1 session of the