Conservation abandonment is a policy blind spot

Thomas Pienkowski, Matt Clark, Michael B. Mascia, María Ignacia Rivera-Hechem, Stefan Gelcich, Carly Cook, Cecylia M. Watrobska, Arundhati Jagadish and Morena Mills

No 49kbx_v1, SocArXiv from Center for Open Science

Abstract: This year marks the halfway point for multiple global environmental goals, including plans to nearly double the extent of area-based conservation to 30% of the world’s surface by 2030 (1). To date, this coordinated international effort has been inadequate to halt global biodiversity loss. A major but unaccounted-for cause of the shortfall between policy ambitions and real-world outcomes is the abandonment of conservation initiatives, including both informal abdication of resource management responsibilities and formal reversal of governing rules and boundaries (Fig. 1). The US$200 billion annually committed to conservation is spent on a wide diversity of conservation measures, increasingly beyond traditional national parks and other protected areas (PAs), including community-based conservation, eco-certification, and payments for ecosystem services (2). The scant monitoring of conservation abandonment, derived almost entirely from PAs, demonstrates widespread informal abandonment of management responsibilities (i.e., “paper parks” (e.g., 3, 4)) and formal abandonment through protected area downgrading, downsizing, and degazettement (PADDD) (e.g., 5, 6).

Date: 2025-06-03
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://osf.io/download/683ecf105ed380cc48a4db72/

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:osf:socarx:49kbx_v1

DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/49kbx_v1

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in SocArXiv from Center for Open Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by OSF ().