) .
Vy vy
‘NLAY

UNEP WCMC

Coverage of protected areas

Guidance for national and regional use

Version 1.2

Zao Biodiversity
4 |Ndicators
4 Partnership

This guidance document is one of a series produced with the
support of the 2010 Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (2010
BIP) to assist Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD) to track their progress towards the 2010 Biodiversity
Target. Coverage of Protected Areas has been selected as one
of the indicators suitable for assessing progress towards and
communicating the 2010 Target at the global level. The aim of
this document is to provide guidance to support the
calculation and interpretation of the Coverage of Protected
Areas indicator at the national and regional scales.

The 2010 Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (2010 BIP)
intends this guidance to be a ‘living document’. Updated
versions will be produced based on users’ feedback, and will
include lessons learned and new examples of the indicators in
use. Please send requests for advice and feedback on this
guidance to: protectedareas@unep-wemc.org

2

This guidance document has been co-authored by staff and
advisors of UNEP-WCMC, including:

Philip Bubb;

Lucy Fish;

Val Kapos.

Version 1.2
January 2009

For information on other indicator guidance documents and
the 2010 BIP please see www.twentyten.net or contact
info@twentyten.net

The 2010 BIP has been established with major support from
the Global Environment Facility (GEF).

28606

Coverage of protected areas

PURPOSE Protected Areas and thematic programmes of work on: Marine and
The Coverage of Protected Areas indicator represents the degree —_ coastal biodiversity; Inland waters; Forest biodiversity; Mountains;
to which components of biodiversity are formally protected. It | Dry and sub-humid lands and Island biodiversity. It also addresses
can show the changes in extent of protected areas, including marine _ targets within the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC).
protected areas, in relation to geographical and political units and
to different measures of distribution of the components of bio- Specific variants of protected areas coverage can be used to track
diversity, such as priority areas, ecosystem or habitat maps and _ progress under the Ramsar Convention and the Convention on
species distributions. Migratory Species (and its subsidiary agreements). At a regional
scale it has also been adopted as an indicator within Europe under
Overall, depending on the data, technical skills and equipment — the SEBI-2010 process.
available, and the approach taken, this indicator can be used to:

* assess overall progress of total area protected as a measure ‘Proportion of terrestrial and marine areas protected’ is also
of political will to protect biodiversity Indicator 7.6 for reporting on progress towards the UN Millennium

* track changes in protection of key ecosystems and habitats; Development Goal 7 on environmental sustainability and its Target

+ help assess the adequacy of protection of particular species or 7.B: ‘Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 2010, a significant
taxonomic groups of interest; reduction in the rate of loss’.

track changes in the degree to which areas of key importance

for biodiversity around the world are protected;

help identify ecologically distinct priority areas for KEY TERMS USED IN THIS DOCUMENT

conservation. Geographical Information System (GIS): a system of computer
hardware and software used for storage, retrieval, mapping, and

However it cannot be used to:
* indicate how well managed these protected areas are;
* act as confirmation that the biodiversity within them is
effectively protected;
* provide an indication of areas that are not formally protected
but still may be important for conserving biodiversity.

PLACE IN THE 2010 BIODIVERSITY TARGET FRAMEWORK
Coverage of protected areas is both a headline indicator and an
indicator adopted by the CBD for immediate testing, under the 2010
Target focal area Status and trends of the components of biological
diversity. As a headline indicator it includes both the coverage of
areas of key importance for biodiversity and management effect-
iveness of protected areas. These two indicators are complementary
because formal designation of protected area status is not in itself
sufficient to ensure conservation of that biodiversity contained
within it.

Coverage of protected areas also directly complements several other
headline indicators within this focal area:

1 trends in extent of selected biomes, ecosystems, and habitats;

2 trends in abundance and distribution of selected species;

3 change in the status of threatened species.

Protected areas may play a key role in retaining habitat cover and
therefore in helping to maintain species populations. Protection also
plays a role in the conservation status of species and is therefore
closely linked to assessment of changes in that status.

In addition to the 2010 Target, Coverage of Protected Areas is
relevant to a number of other CBD targets under specific
programmes of work. These include the Programme of Work on

analysis of geographic data that is referenced to a map projection
in an earth coordinate system.

Projection: a method of representing the surface of a sphere (globe)
ona flat plane. All projections distort the surface in some fashion;
therefore selection of the appropriate projection depends on the
purpose of the map.

Equal area projection: quadrilaterals formed by meridians and
parallels have an area on the map proportional to their area on the
globe (real-world).

Attribute: a specification that defines a property of an object, feature
or file. It usually consists of a name and a value.

Polygon: a feature used to represent areas. It is defined by lines that
make up its boundary and have attributes that describe the feature
they represent.

Point: GIS data that has no dimensions. A point represents the
location of a feature but not its area and has attributes that
describe the feature represented.

Protected Area: A clearly defined geographical space, recognized,
dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means,
to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated
ecosystem services and cultural values.

Designated: protected area site that is recognized, supported and
declared by a national legislation and/or authority.

Establishment year: year that a protected area was formally
established/designated.

Spatial coverage: total extent of protection referenced in geo-
graphical space and containing no overlaps in protection of sites.
This is managed and analysed within a GIS.

Statistical coverage: total area of protection generated from tabular
data. No spatial relationship is maintained between features, and
is therefore unable to account for overlaps in protection of sites.

National and regional use

NATIONAL RELEVANCE

At national scale, coverage of protected areas is highly relevant for
reporting progress towards international policy targets under the
CBD, Ramsar, CMS and other relevant Conventions and processes.
It also has been shown to support national policy and decision
making in conservation and many other sectors affecting use of land
and other natural resources. Furthermore CBD guidance suggests
that a national gap analysis of protected areas coverage should form
part of the NBSAP process, and national coverage analyses are also
called for under the Programme of Work on Protected Areas. Most
decisions with respect to protected area designation are taken at
national level, and these decisions need to be informed by relevant
information and analysis.

National implementation of a protected areas coverage indicator can

take several approaches, depending on the components of bio-

diversity that are of interest and the data that are available. Measures

of protected area coverage that might be of interest at this scale are:
* proportion protected nationally and by sub-national

administrative unit of terrestrial or marine area or territorial

area (terrestrial and marine combined);

protected areas coverage of climatic zones or potential

vegetation types;

protected areas coverage of current vegetation, habitat or

ecosystem Cover;

protected areas coverage of distributions and/or

concentrations of key species (e.g. threatened species or

endemics);

protected areas coverage of priority areas.

Ideally, national coverage assessment should be developed from
country-specific data sets but can potentially be disaggregated from
a global assessment depending on the data quality.

IMPLEMENTATION

There are two main approaches to calculate the coverage of
protected areas indicator, depending on the analysis required and
the type of data, technical skills and equipment available. This
section of the guidance document explains and illustrates these two
approaches with examples from the global scale, as they have been
developed by UNEP-WCMC. Subsequent sections discuss potential
data sources suitable for national use and detail the methods for
calculating the indicator.

The two main approaches to measurement of the coverage or extent

of land and/or sea under formal protection are: (Table 1)

1 statistical, using tabular data of the cumulative number and area
of protected sites per year;

2 spatial, using analysis of protected area site data ina GIS within
a current year.

It is likely that at a minimum the statistical approach can be
undertaken by the majority of national users, with the spatial

4

Measurement

Statistical

Spatial

Trends in protection
over time.

Spatially resolved
coverage in current
year.

possible.

Data Tabular data Spatial layer of
of the cumulative protected coverage
number and area in current year
of protected sites (with overlaps in
per year (including protection of sites
overlaps in protection accounted for).
of sites).
Definition Total area of Total extent of
protection generated protection
from tabular data. referenced in
No spatial relationship geographical space
is maintained between and containing no
features, and is overlaps in
therefore unable to protection.
account for overlaps This is managed
in protection of sites. and analysed
within a GIS.
Analysis Further analysis with Further analysis with
other biodiversity other spatial
components is not biodiversity

components is

possible.

Table 1: Two main approaches to producing the coverage of
protected areas indicator

approach being desirable if there is suitable technical capacity and
spatial data. The spatial approach requires an IT/computer system
capable of running GIS software (e.g. ESRI ArcGIS!) and a user with
the technical understanding to run the analysis processes. The success
of the spatial approach is also dependent on the availability of spatial
(GIS) protected area boundary data (polygons). The main advantage
of using spatial analysis is that you can remove any overlaps in
protection of sites. This allows the production of an overall figure of
‘spatial coverage protected’ and a spatial GIS layer that can be used
to calculate the level of protection of other biodiversity components,
such as ecosystems, habitats, species or priority areas.

A basic requirement for both approaches is the availability of
protected areas data with suitable attributes (information). The
minimum attributes for the statistical approach are name of
protected area, designation, legal status, total area, and year of
establishment. The availability of geographic location (latitude/
longitude), spatial boundary data, [UCN Protected Area Manage-
ment category, and marine area, increases the likelihood of the user
being able to carry out more advanced analysis, including possible
breakdowns such as by [UCN management category.

Meee

1; ESRI ArcGIS software was used by UNEP-WCMC in developing and applying this method.

Figure 1: Growth of nationally designated protected areas, 1872-2007 (number and area)

cumulative number of protected areas
with known year of establishment

@ cumulative number of protected areas
including those with no known year
of establishment

= cumulative area of terrestrial protected

80 areas with known year of establishment

= cumulative area of terrestrial protected
areas including those with no known year
of establishment

= cumulative area of marine protected
areas with known year of establishment
= cumulative area of marine protected
areas including those with no known year
of establishment

Number of sites (000)

1900

1937

Global application of the statistical approach

The statistical approach is used for reporting the growth in protected
areas for the UN Millennium Development Goal Indicator 7.6,
‘Proportion of terrestrial and marine areas protected’. As this
approach is solely based on tabular data its success is dependent on
good quality attribute data, especially total/marine area and
establishment year. The UN MDG indicator requires summary
tables to be produced of the cumulative number and area protected
per establishment year at global, national, and MDG region level. An
example of an output from this process is show in Figure 1: a
graphical representation of the global growth in number and area of
designated protected areas from 1872 — 2008. It is important to note
that if an establishment year is unavailable for a designated protected
area it cannot be included within the time series, but if it is known
that a protected area had been designated by a certain year, it may
be possible to include it within the time series (with qualification
and caveats as necessary).

The UN MDG Goal 7 also calls for indicator 7.6 to be expressed as
the proportion of surface area protected. This requires tabular data
of protected areas, with an indication of whether the site is within the
marine and/or terrestrial environment along with the equivalent area
protected. In addition tabular data on the total land area and
territorial waters (out to 12 nautical miles) per country are also
required. Using the tabular information a simple statistic of the
proportion protected (e.g. total terrestrial area protected divided by
total terrestrial land) can be produced. By using the available tabular
data it is possible to produce a time series analysis of proportion
protected. However this is unable to account for overlaps in

25

20

10

Area (million km2)

protection, such as multiple protection categories for the same site
or overlaps in boundaries of neighbouring sites. Therefore, the
proportion protected will always be inherently overestimated and is
directly affected by the availability of up-to-date information.

Another significant limitation of the statistical approach is that it
does not show how much biological diversity is protected, for which
a spatial approach is required.

Global application of the spatial approach

The uneven distribution of biological diversity means there is not a
straightforward relationship between the proportion of a territory
that is protected and the proportion of biological! diversity in that
area. Therefore, it is more meaningful to consider area protected in
relation to the distribution of components of biological diversity. An
example of such a spatial approach is the work of UNEP-WCMC to
analyse the proportion of biodiversity protected as represented by
terrestrial ecoregions. This spatial approach can also be repeated
with other spatial biodiversity datasets such as species, key bio-
diversity areas, habitats, etc. This approach accounts for overlaps in
protection, but it is difficult to perform the analysis as a time series.
This is due to the large amount of data processing required along
with the limited availability of boundary data and establishment year
or date of change information for protected areas. Consequently this
type of spatial analysis is usually performed with a spatial layer of
designated protected areas from the current year and displayed in
mapped form, as shown in Figure 2.

Ina few cases, it may be possible to draw meaningful conclusions

5

Percentage ecoregion protection | under 10

baal
Palaearctic
a ie aa Fe

MS 10-25

MBB 25-50 MM 50-100

Figure 2: Percentage protection within terrestrial ecoregions. 2008.

about this protected areas coverage based purely on statistical data
of the occurrence of key biodiversity elements within protected
areas. However a further complication is that not all protected areas
afford equal protection to the biodiversity within them. This
variation is due both to differences in the type of management for
which the area is designated, and the effectiveness with which the
designated management is applied.

Protected areas are established under a huge range of legislative
regimes and with many different purposes in mind. There may be

no legislative or management requirement to maintain all the
components of biological diversity that they hold and in some
cases, particularly in IUCN management categories V and VI,
maintenance of biological diversity may not be a major function of
the protected area. For this reason, it may be useful to incorporate
a breakdown of the indicator by IUCN category, where such data
are available. In addition, a separate and complementary indicator
under development within the 2010 Target framework is protected
area management effectiveness.

_———

Data sources

This section outlines potential sources of global spatial data on
protected areas and biodiversity components that can be used with
this indicator.

PROTECTED AREAS

In the majority of cases the most accurate and current data for
determining protected areas coverage for a country will be available
from the relevant protected areas agency or national equivalent. In
some cases international non-governmental organizations may also
have suitable data of value, including improved spatial (GIS) data on
protected area boundaries.

In some circumstances the data available internationally may be the
best source, as held by the World Database on Protected Areas
(WDPA). The WDPA is a joint project of UNEP and IUCN, hosted
and managed by UNEP-WCMC, with support from the IUCN
World Commission on Protected Areas (IUCN-WCPA), and
working with governments and collaborating NGOs.

The WDPA uses the IUCN definition of a Protected Area, which
following its revision in October 2008 now closely reflects the CBD
definition:

“A clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated
and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve
the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem
services and cultural values” (Dudley, 2008).

The Convention on Biological Diversity defines protected areas as:
“A geographically defined area which is designated or
regulated and managed to achieve specific conservation
objectives”.

Information in the database is provided principally by ministries of
the environment and other government agencies that are responsible
for the designation and maintenance of protected areas. However
information from NGOs and academic institutions, international
environmental conventions, and others may also be included. Data
are currently available for over 120,000 protected areas worldwide.
The WDPA is updated as new information is made available. The
WDPA, including spatial (GIS) and other attribute data on all the
world’s protected areas, is freely available for non-commercial use
and is accessible via the internet at www.wdpa.org.

Ideally the areas included in the WDPA are assigned to one of the
six protected area management categories defined by IUCN,
opposite (Dudley, 2008).

In practice a substantial number of areas listed in the WDPA
database have not as yet been assigned a specific category. In
October 2008 new guidelines for applying IUCN Protected Areas
Management Categories were published — see http://data.1ucn.org/
dbtw-wpd/edocs/PAPS-016.pdf.

IUCN MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES AND DEFINITIONS

la

Vi

Strictly protected areas set aside to protect biodiversity and
also possibly geological/geomorphological features, where
human visitation, use and impacts are strictly controlled and
limited to ensure protection of the conservation values. Such
protected areas can serve as indispensable reference areasfor
scientific research and monitoring (|.e. Strict Nature Reserve)

Protected areas that are usually large unmodified or slightly
modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence,
without permanent or significant human habitation, which are
protected and managed so as to preserve their natural
condition (i.e. Wilderness Area)

Protected areas that are large natural or near natural areas set
aside to protect large-scale ecological processes, along with
the complement of species and ecosystems characteristic of
the area, which also provide a foundation for environmentally
and culturally compatible spiritual, scientific, educational,
recreational and visitor opportunities (i.e. National Park).

Protected areas that are set aside to protect a specific natural
monument, which can be a landform, seamount, submarine
cavern, geological feature such as a cave or even a living
feature such as an ancient grove. They are generally quite
small protected areas and often have high visitor value (i.e.
Natural Monument or Feature).

Protected areas that aim to protect particular species or
habitats and management reflects this priority. Many category
IV protected areas will need regular, active interventions to
address the requirements of particular species or to maintain
habitats, but this is not a requirement of the category (i.e.
Habitat/ Species Management Area)A protected area where
the interaction of people and nature over time has produced
an area of distinct character with significant ecological,
biological, cultural and scenic value: and where safeguarding
the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and
sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and
other values (i.e. Protected Landscape/Seascape).

Protected areas that conserve ecosystems and habitats,
together with associated cultural values and traditional
natural resource management systems. They are generally
large, with most of the area in a natural condition, where a
proportion is under sustainable natural resource manage-
ment and where low-level non-industrial use of natural
resources compatible with nature conservation is seen as
one of the main aims of the area (i.e. Protected area with
sustainable use of natural resources).

DATA ON BIODIVERSITY DISTRIBUTION - ECOSYSTEMS
AND ECOREGIONS

Data on biodiversity distribution may be drawn from internationally
accepted ecoregional classifications as a useful first approximation,
but many countries may have their own ecoregional classification
systems or other measures of biodiversity distribution and priority
that are more meaningful at national scale.

For global and regional scale reporting, the terrestrial ecoregions
defined by World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) are frequently
employed. In this context an ecoregion is defined as a large area of
land or water that contains a geographically distinct assemblage of
natural communities that:

a share a large majority of their species and ecological

dynamics;

b share similar environmental conditions, and;

¢ interact ecologically in ways that are critical for their long-

term persistence.

The boundaries of an ecoregion approximate the original extent of
natural communities prior to major land-use change. The database
currently delineates 825 terrestrial ecoregions; in May 2008 WWF
and TNC published a map of freshwater ecoregions of the world,
with 426 units (FEOW, 2008). The ecological regions described in
the recent Marine Ecoregionalization of the World (MEOW;
Spalding, M. et al, 2006) or Large Marine Ecosystems (NOAA
2001) can be used to address marine systems.

The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) recognizes three caveats
to its definition of ecoregions, which are appropriate for all bio-
geographic mapping approaches:

* No single biogeographic framework is optimal for all
taxonomic groups. Ecoregions reflect the best compromise
for as many taxonomic groups as possible.

Ecoregion boundaries rarely form abrupt edges; rather,
ecotones and mosaic habitats form gradual transitions
between habitat types.

Most ecoregions contain habitats that differ from their
assigned biome. For example, rainforest ecoregions in
Amazonia often contain small edaphic savannas, and a recent
analysis (Schmidt et al 2008) has shown that many ecoregions
contain several distinct forest types.

Large Marine Ecosystems are not universally accepted to be
biogeographical units and do not cover all of the worlds coastlines
(countries in the south west Pacific and many oceanic islands are
not included). However they are frequently used in many
international processes and are useful in many respects. The Marine
Ecoregions of the World (MEOW )utilise a tiered approach enabling
analysis at progressively higher spatial resolutions (realms,
provinces and ecoregions).

Many countries have their own national ecoregional or other

8

ecological or vegetation classifications that can form the basis for
protected area coverage analysis. These will often be far more
detailed at country scale than the global ecoregion classifications.
Examples of such national analyses include:

* an analysis of the protection of vegetation zones in Brazilian
Amazonia by state based on a national vegetation map
(Fearnside & Ferraz 1995);

a protected areas coverage analysis of the Cape Floristic
region in South A frica, which assessed protection of 88 broad
habitat units defined based on topography, geology and
vegetation (Rouget et al. 2003);

national level ecoregional assessment in Mexico, which
assessed 56 marine and 75 terrestrial ecoregions (CCA, In
Press and CONABIO, 2006).

Increasingly it is becoming possible to base assessments of
protection on remotely sensed data on current vegetation cover
within ecoregions or other (bio)geographical units. This approach
has the advantage of addressing the vegetation that is actually
present within protected areas, rather than simply the zone in which
they occur. However, results from these types of assessment need
to be presented very carefully, so that protection is not falsely
represented as increasing as a result of decreasing area of natural
vegetation (see below on calculation and presentation). It also
presents a number of challenges, including how to deal with the
crude vegetation classifications usually produced by remote sensing
and frequent changes in methods between remote sensing
assessments, which reduce their comparability through time. Strand
et al. (2007) cover many of the issues in using remote sensing data
for biodiversity indicators, including protected area coverage.

DATA ON SPECIES DISTRIBUTION

Protected areas coverage of species can be assessed from detailed
inventories of the protected areas themselves or from data on species
distributions. The former approach is feasible only for some groups
and gives information about representation of species within
protected areas, but not about what fraction of their total extent of
occurrence or population is protected. In the few cases where such
inventory data are available across protected areas, they can be used
to express the proportion of species in the inventoried group that are
represented in the protected areas.

Only a few countries have detailed national data on the distribution
of species within their borders. Where such data are available, how-
ever, they form a valuable basis for protected areas coverage
analysis. Especially for large countries, global and regional data on
species distributions can be valuable. Examples include the Global
Amphibian Assessment (http://www.global amphibians.org/); Bird-
Life International’ data zone (http://www. birdlife.org/datazone/
index.html); and the assessments of mammals and birds of the
western hemisphere which can be obtained in digital form at:
http://www.natureserve.org/get Data/animalData.jsp. In many cases
it will be appropriate to focus on the distributions of only a few

priority species or species of conservation concern. In one such
example, Deguise and Kerr (2006) assessed the degree to which the
distributions of threatened terrestrial species of Canada were covered
by protected areas. In general, it is recommended that as many
species as possible are included within the coverage analysis,
excluding any species marginal to the region. Data collection efforts
should be focused on better representation of endemic species, as
these are the closest identified approximation to indicator species.
As new species are added to the indicator, the analysis should be
repeated for earlier points in time, so that coverage comparisons
between years are possible.

DATA ON AREAS OF IMPORTANCE TO BIODIVERSITY

Areas of importance for biodiversity are often defined upon the
basis of the vulnerability and uniqueness of the biodiversity
contained within them (e.g. Eken et al. 2004a, b). Many countries
have developed their own approaches for identifying biodiversity
priority areas. Data sets on the distribution of such areas may be
held by national authorities. They are also commonly developed and
maintained by national and international conservation-focused non-
governmental organizations. Countries, non-governmental
organizations and international agreements all take different
approaches to defining these key areas. However, there is some
recent convergence.

Where national data sets of this type do not exist, it may be
appropriate to make use of global or regional data on biodiversity
areas, though these are often too coarse to be useful for small
countries. Among these data sets, those at relatively fine
resolution include:

¢ Important Bird Areas (IBAs) — Birdlife International’s
data zone (http://www. birdlife.org/datazone/index.html).

¢ Important Plant Areas (IPAs) — Plantlife International
http://www. plantlife.org.uk/international/plantlife-
ipas.html.

These areas are defined based on criteria encompassing issues of
species rarity, threat status, endemicity and richness. Essential sites
for migratory species are also included.

The selection methodology has been generalized to provide the
concept of ‘Key Biodiversity Areas’ (Eken et al. 2004a, b). The
intention is that these relatively small areas are nested within the
larger scale definition of priority ecoregions or hotspots. Key
Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) provide an important basis for
protected areas coverage analysis. These are sites of global
significance for biodiversity conservation, identified using
globally standard criteria and thresholds, based on the occurrence
of species requiring safeguards at site scale (Langhammer et al
2007). KBAs have so far been comprehensively identified in only
a few countries (e.g. Turkey), but for other countries (e.g. Sri
Lanka) preliminary identification of KBAs has been done. Many
but not all KBAs correspond to IBAs or IPAs. Where they exist,
they are an excellent basis for assessing protected areas coverage
in relation to site scale priorities for species conservation; their
species focus means that they may not be as effective a basis for
assessing coverage in relation to ecosystems.

Guidance for National Users of 2010 Biodiversity Target Indicators

Calculating Protected Areas Coverage

This section outlines the key stages that comprise the statistical
and spatial approaches to calculating protected areas coverage. For
more information on preparing or calculating protected areas
coverage using the methods outlined below please contact the
UNEP-WCMC Protected Areas Programme at protectedareas@
unep-wemce.org.

STATISTICAL APPROACH

The simplest calculation of protected areas coverage is using the
statistical approach to produce tables/graphs of the cumulative
number and area of protected areas per year and the proportion of
surface area protected. However this approach is completely
dependent on the quality of protected areas information available,
especially in the completeness of certain attributes such as
designation, legal status, and total/marine area and establishment
year. The main limitation of this approach is that it is unable to
account for overlaps in protection as well the proportion protected
of other biodiversity components such as ecoregions as it is based
on non-spatial tabular data.

Below is a list of the main items required in order to carry out this
analysis along with an overview and description of the stages/
processes involved.

Items required:

* table of protected areas with required attributes in digital
format (e.g. MS Excel or MS Access);

* computer capable of running a basic statistical programme
(e.g. MS Excel and/or MS Access);

* table of total land area (including inland waters), territorial
waters (out to 12 nautical miles), exclusive economic zone
(out to 200 nautical miles).

Overview of the Spatial Approach:

Stage 1 >

Stage 1: Collation of tabular data on protected areas with
required attribute information

Create a table of protected areas data that has the key information
fields (attributes) of protected area name, designation, legal status,
country (state/province), IUCN management category, total area,
marine area and year of establishment. The minimum fields
needed to perform this analysis are legal status, total/marine area
and establishment year. Include a terrestrial area field in the table,
the data for this may be approximated (if necessary) by subtracting
the marine area from the total area. A field for country is necessary
for a multi-national analysis, or a state/province field for a sub-
national analysis.

The table must be in a digital form, such as an MS Excel or MS
Access (.dbf) file. It is important to ensure that area fields have the
same units (e.g. hectares or square kilometres). One table row for
every unique protected area is required. If the protected areas have
a unique identification code (e.g. site_code in the WDPA) this
should be included in the table, otherwise add a new field called
‘ID’ and add a unique number for every site (row).

If an analysis of the indicator by marine and terrestrial protected
areas is desired then total area and marine area for each site is
required. If there is a field that indicates whether the site is within
marine and/or terrestrial environment this will aid the selection and
calculation process.

Stage 2: Selection of formally designated protected areas

Make a copy of the table created in Stage 1. Using the copied table,
select all protected areas that are formally or legally declared (i.e.
designated) by the national legislation and/or authority, and remove
all other sites.

Collation of tabular data on protected

areas with required attribute information

Stage 2 >

Stage 3 >

Stage 4 >
Stage 5v

Proportion of territorial area protected
(land and territorial waters) per year
and total

10

alculation of cumulative summary by
terrestrial and marine protected areas
‘where information is available

Proportion of terrestrial land protected
per year and total

Selection of formally designated
protected areas

Cumulative summary of number and area
of protected areas per year

Proportion of marine area (territorial
waters) protected per year and total

Coverage of protected areas

Stage 3: Cumulative summary of number and area of protected
areas per year

Using the designated protected areas table created in Stage 2 you
will be able to produce some basic summary tables. UNEP-
WCMC used MS Access to produce the summary tables and
then MS Excel to produce the final cumulative tables and graphs.
You can also use ESRI ArcGIS to produce the summary tables
if required.

Summary table 1: number and area of protected areas

per year

The first table to be produced is a summary of the number and
area of protected areas per establishment year (see example A).
This can be performed using MS Access, creating a query that
groups the data by establishment year, sums the number of sites
per year from the unique ID field, and sums the corresponding
area and marine area fields. This may also result in sites being
included without an establishment year, but the year in this field
will remain blank (null).

Example A: Summary table of number and area of protected
areas per year

Total Total
Total area marine
number (sum) area (sum)

Year of sites km? km?
1960 56 12,300 230
1975 2 60 0
1990 23 903 456
No year 45 1,500 560

Summary table 2: total number and area of protected areas

The second table to be produced is a summary of the total
number and area of protected areas (see example B). In MS
Access a simple query can count the number of sites from the
unique ID field and sum the total area and marine area fields.

Example B: Summary table oftotal number and area of
protected areas

Total Total
Total area marine
number (sum) area (sum)
of sites km? km?
126 14,763 1,246

Summary table 3: breakdowns of main summary tables

If a more detailed analysis or breakdown of the indicator to
a sub-national level is required, the procedure is to reproduce
both tables as above with the addition of the state/province
field into the query. Further breakdowns can be calculated
with the addition of the appropriate field to the query.
Depending on the level of breakdown required it may be
necessary to further define the query to select only certain

classes from the field being used to group the data (see
example C). For example, to produce one output summary
table per IUCN management category first group the data by
IUCN category and then select or set the criteria for this field
as ‘Ia’ to produce the table. This query can then be reused
with the category changed to e.g. ‘Ib’ to produce a new table,
and so on.

Example C: summary table of total number and area of
protected areas per IUCN category

Total Total
Total area marine
IUCN number (sum) area (sum)
category of sites km? km?
la 20 9,000 186
1b 50 1,056 23

Cumulative summary table 1: growth in number and area of
protected areas per year

Export the summary table of number and area of protected
areas per year (summary table 1) into MS Excel. Add three
new number (double) fields called “cumulative number of
sites’, ‘cumulative total area’ and ‘cumulative marine area’.
Ensure the row containing the totals for sites with no
establishment year is located after the latest year (see example
D). In cumulative number of sites field create a sum to add
the previous year’s total on to the subsequent year’s total, once
completed this field will show a cumulative increase in the
number of protected areas per year. Repeat this process for
the total area and marine area fields.

Example D: cumulative growth in number of number and area
of protected areas per year

Total Cum. Cum.

Total area number total

number (sum) of area

Year of sites km?2 sites km?
1960 56 12,300 56 12,300
1975 2 60 58 12,360
1990 23 903 81 13,263
No year 45 1,500 126 14,763
Total 126 14,763 126 14,763

A check can be made of whether the cumulative field totals
are correct by comparing the cumulative total of the last row
to the sum of total number of sites or area fields - they should
match (see example D). This cumulative table can be used to
produce graphs of the growth in protection (number and area)
over time as shown in Figure | on page 5.

The same process as described above can be used on the
breakdown tables to produce cumulative growth tables and
graphs for certain classes or groups.

11

Guidance for National Users of 2010 Biodiversity Target Indicators

Total Total Total Number of
Actual number number number marine and
number of marine of terrestrial of sites terrestrial
Year of sites sites sites (marine+ terrestrial) protected areas
1960 56 35 27 62 62-56=6

Example E: Total number of sites disaggregated by marine and terrestrial protection

Stage 4: Calculation of cumulative summary by terrestrial and
marine protected areas (where information is available)

A successful calculation of marine and terrestrial protected areas
coverage depends on the availability of area information for both
marine and terrestrial environments for each protected area, as well
as its total area. Where terrestrial area is not available it is possible
to calculate an approximation of terrestrial area by:

Total Area — Marine Area = Terrestrial Area (approx)

The process described in Stage 3 can be used to create summary
tables of the number and area of protected areas disaggregated into
marine and terrestrial protection. It is recommended that separate
marine and terrestrial summary tables are created. Probably there
will be protected areas that are both marine and terrestrial, and so
they will be counted in the total number of sites in both tables. The
number of these sites should be recorded in order to explain why
the total number of marine and terrestrial sites is greater than the
actual number of sites for that particular year (e.g. see Example E).

The total area of sites should be equal to the marine plus terrestrial
area (e.g. see Example F). This approach has a number of
limitations, including the assumption of a site being marine based
upon the presence of a marine area. The presence or absence of a
marine and total area has direct implications in the calculations
performed in Stage 5.

Example F: total area of sites disaggregated by marine and
terrestrial protection

Total Total Total
area km? area area
(marine + km? km?
Year terrestrial marine terrestrial
1960 12,300 230 12,070

Stage 5: Proportion of surface area (territorial, marine and
terrestrial) protected

Using the cumulative summary tables produced in Stages 3 and 4 it
is possible to estimate the proportion of territorial, marine or
terrestrial area protected at a national level by using the following
calculations. Within the summary tables (Stage 3 — cumulative
Summary table 1, Stage 4) add three additional number columns
and populate with total land area and territorial waters. The total
territorial area can be calculated by adding total land area to the area
recorded for territorial waters. For countries that are landlocked or

12

the territorial waters extent is unavailable, the territorial waters
column will equal zero, Next add an additional number column that
will contain the following calculations:

a to calculate total territorial area, the total land area (including
inland waters) + territorial waters (out to 12 nm), that is
protected:

(Total area protected/total territorial area) x 100;

b to calculate total marine area, the area from the high water
line out to 12 nautical miles, that is protected:
(Total marine area protected/total area of territorial waters) x
100;

c to calculate total terrestrial area, the land area including
inland waters, that is protected:
(Total terrestrial area protected/total land area) x 100.

These calculations can be performed for every year within the
cumulative time series, providing a graphical estimation of the
growth in protection in relation to total surface area. However this
approach is dependent on the availability and quality of data on the
total land area, territorial waters and protected areas. For example,
you may find that the extent of territorial waters is unavailable but
marine protected areas are present, or the total area under marine
and/or terrestrial protection is greater than the terrestrial land area
or waters recorded. Both of these issues, including overlaps in
protection, cannot be easily resolved using non-spatial data.

In addition an estimate of proportion protected of other biodiversity
components such as ecoregions or species is not possible through
this approach, as the relationship between protected areas and these
components is not maintained.

SPATIAL APPROACH

A spatial approach for calculating protected areas coverage enables
the user to estimate the degree to which particular components of
biodiversity, or a nation’s total surface area, are within designated
protected areas.

This approach is completely dependent on the quality of spatial
(GIS) protected areas boundary information available, especially
in the completeness of certain attributes such as designation, legal
status, and total/marine area and establishment year. Advantages of
the spatial approach are that it is able to account for overlaps in
protection of sites, as well as calculate the proportion protected of

Coverage of protected areas

Overview of the Spatial Approach:

Preparation of a spatially delineated

Stage 1 > boundary (polygon) dataset of protected
areas

Preparation of spatial boundary (buffered
SEEDERS point) dataset of protected areas
Stage 3 > Set all spatial datasets to an appropriate

equal area projection
Prepare spatial dataset of formally
Stage 4.>, designated protected areas
Remove overlaps in protection within
St 5
miter protected areas dataset

Stage 6 > ; Prepare summary tables of

biodiversity/political components

Overlay analysis of protected areas and Overlay analysis of protected areas

plese 7 > political datasets and biodiversity components
Froportion of total : ; Proportion of
= apis territorial area Proportion of total Proportion of total biodiversity
ge protected (land terrestrial land marine area components
and territorial protected at (territorial waters) protected at
waters) at current current year at current year current year
ear
Proportion of political and biodiversity
Stage 9 > components protected per year,
IUCN category etc.
other biodiversity components. However it is difficult to produce * Spatial (GIS) data of terrestrial land area (including inland
this analysis as a time series (per year) and it is reliant on staff waters), territorial waters (out to 12 nautical miles),
with technical GIS skills and IT equipment capable of running exclusive economic zone (out to 200 nautical miles) (e.g.
GIS software. shapefile, E00, coverage, file/personal geodatabase)
* Spatial (GIS) data of biodiversity components such as
Below is a list of main items required in order to carry out this species, habitats, ecoregions, climate (e.g. shapefile, E00,
analysis, along with an overview and description of the stages/ coverage, file/personal geodatabase)

processes involved. Items required:
+ Spatial (GIS) data of protected areas with required attributes The spatial approach used by UNEP-WCMC involves nine stages

(e.g. shapefile, E00, coverage, file/personal geodatabase) to prepare the data for analysis. The GIS processes described were
* Computer capable of running GIS software (e.g. ArcGIS employed using ESRI ArcGIS (ArcMap) and ArcInfo Workstation
[ArcMap] v9.2 and above, ArcInfo Workstation) (v9.2) software.

a

13

Stage 1: Preparation of a spatially delineated boundary
(polygon) dataset of protected areas

This spatial boundary dataset should comprise of protected areas
whose boundary/physical extent has been delineated or mapped
in the real-world and represented digitally as a series of connected
lines and nodes forming a feature. This feature will have been geo-
referenced so its location and extent should match that sites’
boundary in physical space (the ‘real-world’). This digital repres-
entation of the protected area boundary will be held within a GIS
and has an associated table that contains attributes/fields con-
taining information specific to that site. A spatial dataset or layer
can hold multiple protected area boundaries, with the attribute data
being stored within subsequent rows in the associated table.

Ensure this attribute table includes key fields such as areaname,
designation, status, country, IUCN category, total area, marine area
and year of establishment. Add an additional text field called
‘TYPE’ and in this field enter ‘poly’ for every record.

Stage 2: Preparation of spatial boundary (buffered point)
dataset of protected areas

Where no delineated spatial boundary (polygon) exists for a protected
area but a geographic location (latitude and longitude) is recorded
(point) along with total area and/or marine area it is possible to
produce a polygon dataset through the ‘buffer’ process. This process
also requires the point dataset to be projected to an equal area
projection (such as Mollweide?) to define a numerical distance
(meters or kilometres). Use the buffer process to produce a circular
area to the numerical extent specified in the total area field around a
central location (point). Ensure the attribute table includes key fields
such as area name, designation, status, country, IUCN category, total
area, marine area and year of establishment. Add an additional text
field called ‘TYPE’, in this field enter ‘buffpnt’ for every record.

The advantage of this process is that this enables sites which
would have normally been excluded from this analysis to be included.
However the circular features do not truly reflect the ‘delineated extent”
of that site in the real-world, leading to potential over or under
estimation of biodiversity components or surface area under protection.

Stage 3: Set all spatial datasets to an appropriate equal area
projection

It is very important that all spatial datasets (protected areas,
biodiversity components, land area, etc.) have the same geographical
reference system/projection. Otherwise it is not possible to
effectively calculate the degree of protection of the elements.

For global analysis UNEP-WCMC often uses the Mollweide
projection to calculate the total area and coverage from the spatial
(GIS) datasets in meters or kilometres squared. However this is often
not suitable for analysis at a national scale. In ArcGIS (Arc-Map)
the projection of the datasets from the original projection (where
defined) can be changed using the ‘PROJECT’ command.

Guidance for National Users of 2010 Biodiversity Target Indicators

Stage 4: Prepare spatial dataset of formally designated
protected areas

Using the spatial protected areas datasets from Stages 1-3, select
out all protected areas that have a formally/legally declared (e.g.
designated) in the legal status field. These are sites that have been
formally recognized, supported, and designated by national
legislation and/or authority. Remove all other sites that have NOT
been formally/legally declared from the datasets.

Combine the ‘buffered point’ dataset (Stage 2) with the delineated
spatial boundary dataset (Stage 1). In ArcMap datasets with the same
attributes can be combined using the ‘*MERGE’ command. Ensure
the combined dataset has maintained the equal area projection chosen
for the area country or region being analysed (Stage 3).

Stage 5: Remove overlaps in protection within protected areas
dataset

In the protected areas dataset (Stage 4) there will be overlaps
between the polygon features. To reduce these overlaps in protection
(therefore reducing the over-estimation of protected area coverage
figure) it will be necessary to perform a GIS process that aggregates
all the overlapping features into a single continuous feature. In
ArcGIS, this process is known as ‘DISSOLVE’.

Add a new integer field called ‘DISS’ to the dataset and in this
field enter 1 for every record. Run the dissolve process and ensure
that the ‘DISS’ field is selected as the ‘dissolve field’. If the
protected areas dataset spans multiple countries, to calculate
statistics at a national level another dissolve field (attribute)
common to every record in each country, e.g. COUNTRY, must
be used. Due to the size or complexity of the dataset it may not be
possible to dissolve the whole layer in one process. You may need
to dissolve subsets, then combine ((MERGE’) the dissolved
subsets and re-dissolve.

Stage 6: Prepare summary tables of biodiversity/political
components

All spatial biodiversity and political datasets (land area, territorial
waters) should have the same spatial projection as the protected
areas dataset (Stage 3).

Where a country/region has a coastline it is necessary to have a
spatial boundary dataset of the terrestrial (land) area and territorial
waters (from coastline out to 12 nautical miles). Whilst ensuring
that key attributes for both datasets are maintained, create a new
dataset that combines territorial waters with terrestrial land dataset
((MERGE’ command in ArcMap).

As all datasets share a common equal area projection it is possible
to calculate the area of all features (polygons). Depending on the
GIS software and map projection used it may be necessary to check
that the map units are defined correctly, as these determine the units
of the calculated area e.g. map units in meters equals calculated area

14 2: The Mollweide equal area projection is primarily used where accurate representation of area takes precedence over shape.

in square meters. In ArcMap set the map units to meters under the
General Data Frame Properties.

Calculate the area of all features in the spatial biodiversity and
political datasets. In ArcMap, this process is performed using the
“CALCULATE AREAS’ command. The calculated area field will
be automatically added for the datasets attribute table. Using the
attribute table it is possible to group the data in common
groups/classes and sum the total calculated area for all features in the
common class. This process can be performed through MS Access,
by exporting and importing the attribute table in DBF format, or
within ArcMap by using the “SUMMARY STATISTICS’ command.
These common summary tables will be needed for later stages.

Stage 7: Overlay analysis of protected areas and
political/biodiversity component datasets

The overlay analysis is performed using the dissolved protected
areas dataset (Stage 5) and the territorial (combined territorial waters
and terrestrial land — Stage 6) dataset. The ‘overlay analysis’ results
in a new output dataset that contains the protected areas (input) that
have intersected/overlapped with the other layer. In ArcMap, this
process is performed using the ‘INTERSECT’ command which
allows only the parts of both datasets that overlap each other to be
retained in the new output dataset. Alternatively, the ‘IDENTITY’
command can be used. This would enable calculation of the total
area protected within terrestrial land and territorial waters as well as
the area protected outside this zone. A thorough understanding of
GIS spatial analysis techniques is required to use this command.

From this dataset it is possible to calculate the area of the protected
area features that fall into territorial waters and/or terrestrial land.
Using the attribute table and the attributes common to both protected
areas and territorial waters, select all features where they have inter-
sected (‘overlapped’). Export these features to create a new dataset
of protected areas within territorial waters. Repeat the selection
process for where terrestrial land and protected areas features have
intersected, export to a dataset. Ensure that the equal area projection
and map units have been maintained in these new datasets.

Use the ‘calculate areas’ command (see Stage 6 for details) on the
dataset of protected areas within territorial waters to calculate the
total area protected within territorial waters. Repeat this process using
the dataset of protected areas within terrestrial land. Finally, produce
output summary tables on the total area protected area within
territorial waters and/or terrestrial land (see Stage 6 for details).

This overlay process can be repeated with other biodiversity
components, such as ecoregions, habitats, Important Bird Areas, etc.
For each analysis process, create a new dataset that contains the
protected areas within each biodiversity component, then use the
‘calculate areas’ command to find the total area protected. By using
the attribute tables, summary statistics can be produced of the total
area protected per group, class, species etc.

Coverage of protected areas

Stage 8: Proportion of political and biodiversity
components protected
The output tables produced from the overlay analysis (Stage 7) and
the calculated total area summaries (Stage 6) can be used to find
the proportion of protection for a particular ecoregion, habitat class,
terrestrial land or territorial waters.
For common classes/groups you will now have the total area
protected (Stage 7) and the total calculated area for this class/group
(Stage 6). Using these two figures you can calculate the proportion
of protection per common class/group using the following
calculations:
a to calculate total territorial area that is protected:
(Total area protected within territorial extent [terrestrial land +
territorial waters |/ total calculated territorial area) x 100;
b to calculate total marine area that is protected:
(Total territorial waters protected/total calculated area of
territorial waters) x 100;
c to calculate total terrestrial area that is protected:
(Total terrestrial land protected/total calculated terrestrial land
area) x 100;
d to calculate the proportion of the biodiversity component (e.g.
ecoregion, habitats, species) that is protected:
(Total area protected within biodiversity component/total
calculated area of biodiversity component) x 100.

Although this approach accounts for overlaps in protection it is not
without its limitations. It is dependent on the availability and quality
of spatial data for protected areas and biodiversity/political
component datasets. In addition the level of GIS processing required
increases, if the user wishes to create a time series analysis, or a
breakdown by IUCN category or biodiversity component type/class
(see Stage 9). However the main advantage is that it enables
estimation of the proportion protected of other biodiversity
components, as the spatial relationship between protected areas and
these components is maintained.

Stage 9: Proportion of political and biodiversity components
protected per year, IUCN category etc

UNEP-WCMC has not yet performed an analysis of global spatial
protected area coverage over time due to the level of computing
power and processing time required as well as relatively low levels
of delineated boundary (GIS) data for certain years, particularly
where protected areas have themselves changed in extent over time.
However we anticipate that in the near future the increase in
availability of delineated boundary data and improvements in GIS
software capabilities will enable this analysis to be performed.

For a country with a high proportion (>85%) of protected areas with
delineated boundary data and an establishment year in their
database, as well as the necessary capabilities (technical, time and
IT), it may be desirable to generate a time series coverage analysis.
For this analysis, first repeat Stage 5 to create a dissolved protected
area layer per establishment year. Second, following the completion

15

of Stage 6, perform an overlay analysis for every layer created in
Stage 5 with their chosen political or biodiversity component layer
(Stage 7). The results of each overlay analysis can then be
summarized (Stage 7) and the proportion of protection calculated as
in Stage 8. Using these summary tables of protected area coverage
and proportion protected per year it is possible to create a graph
showing the growth in coverage/proportion over time.

National users who wish to perform an analysis of global protected
area coverage over time broken down by IUCN management
category will need to ensure that a high proportion (>85%) of
protected areas with delineated boundaries (GIS) and IUCN
categories is available. They will then need to repeat the stages
described above, creating a protected areas layer per IUCN
category and repeating the overlay analysis with each layer.

THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN CALCULATING
PROPORTION OF BIODIVERSITY PROTECTED

If the results are to be expressed as a proportion or percentage, as is
the case for addressing most existing policy targets, then it is
important that (a) the coverage of a baseline quantity of the
biodiversity units is being considered, rather than (b) the proportion
of the current amount (Mulongoy & Chape 2004). Method (a)
provides a constant unit for comparison, and avoids the potential
issues that the target could be achieved through biodiversity loss
rather than through increased representation, or that the indicator
could be affected in either direction through taxonomic inflation
(Isaac et al. 2004).

There is some interest in calculating absolute amounts of
biodiversity protected, especially in the case of ecosystems that can
be assessed from remotely sensed data, and which may not occupy
the full area included in the baseline. For example, protected areas
in forest zones may not be fully forested.

A further complication in the calculation of protected areas coverage
is the limited availability of detailed boundary data for many
protected areas. For example, for the WDPA in 2008 polygon inform-
ation was absent for around 40% of sites. Whilst there are ongoing
efforts to improve this situation, it is not expected to be resolved in
the near future. In some cases, nationally available data may be more
detailed. Jn such cases it is important to try to ensure that these data
are contributed to the WDPA so that the quality of global analyses is
improved. Otherwise, there is a need to make the best use of overlay
analysis using the WDPA. Over 20% of sites without polygons do
include geographic location with an associated area value. By
generating a circular area to the numerical extent specified in the
total area or marine area field around a central location (‘buffering’),
it is possible to include these additional sites in spatial overlays,
thereby including about 80% of all protected areas in the analysis.
These buffer-based coverage estimates are of lower certainty than
estimates based upon delineated protected area boundaries, and the
resulting indicators should be presented in a way that make this clear

16

Guidance for National Users of 2010 Biodiversity Target Indicators

(see Use and Interpretation). A note of the number of protected areas
that have been excluded as a result of missing locational data, non-
designated protected areas, or lack of establishment year, should also
accompany the indicator, to demonstrate the extent to which the
indicator represents the full set of areas.

THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN CALCULATING PROPORTION
OF SPECIES PROTECTION

Where the indicator is to be based on species distributions, it will be
necessary to make choices about which species are included. One
option is to include every species known to occur in the region.
Depending on the geographic unit that the indicator is employed
within, this can lead to unwanted influence of individual species on
the results (Rodrigues & Gaston 2002) — for example, the
representation of globally common species marginal to the area
would carry as strong an influence as the representation of rare
endemics. A second option is to explicitly avoid inclusion of species
that are marginal within the region but common outside it. It is also
desirable to exclude unwanted non-natives. Another option is to
include only species endemic to the region. At any given scale, this
means that the indicator only considers species that can only be
represented within that area. National analyses would usually
consider national endemics. Assessing coverage of species classified
as threatened under the IUCN Red List criteria is another useful
approach, but there is complexity associated with tracking his type
of assessment through time as the listings change. Finally, the
analysis may focus on flagship, umbrella or indicator species as they
relate to specific conservation targets.

Ideally, species maps would be filtered so that only viable popul-
ations were included in coverage analyses; but this is not yet
possible for most species, and is subject to change through time.
An ideal dataset would be regularly updated, and specify the date
of observation of individual records, but this is in no way standard.
There is therefore a risk of errors of commission (i.e. false
inclusion of the species) in species coverage indicators, which is
magnified when distribution maps include generalized polygons of
the species’ overall range, rather than of populations within its
occupied range. If the extent of occurrence is used, the number of
protected areas in which the species is assumed to occur may be
many times greater than if only known populations are used. This
is particularly problematic for widespread but sparsely distributed
species. However, in a species-rich, under-recorded area like Latin
America, it is unlikely that the species is absent from all the gaps
in the recorded distribution. Assigning certainty levels to the
occurrence of species in individual protected areas can help clarify
the species coverage indicator, distinguishing polygons or points
representing known occupancy (high certainty) from polygons
representing the generalized extent of occurrence (medium to low
certainty). Similarly, points or polygons could be categorized by
estimated population viability, or by modelled probability of
presence, where this information is available.

Coverage of protected areas

Presentation and interpretation

PRESENTATION

Protected areas coverage can be presented in mapped, graphical or
statistical form. To track changes over time it is preferable to use the
growth in number and area of protection in statistical form. This is
due to frequent difficulties in obtaining the establishment year for
protected areas together with equivalent spatial boundaries.
Additionally, the amount of complex data processing that would be
required to produce the statistics is another limiting factor. The main
disadvantage of the statistical approach is that it does not account for
overlaps in protection. Maps showing the overlay of protected areas
with the biodiversity data of interest or political units can make it
easier to visualize the degree of protection, and can make it possible
for the user to understand the errors and uncertainties associated
with the coverage estimates, Figure 3 shows the proportion of
terrestrial protection per country produced using a spatial approach
and displayed in map form.

It can also be useful to combine presentation of assessments of
coverage of different subsets of biodiversity, so that for example
protected area coverage of endemic birds and endemic mammals, or
of several different biomes over time might be presented on a single
graph. Consideration should also be given to separate presentation
of coverage data for each protected area management category,
whilst noting there may well be overlaps in protection and categories
for some sites.

It is important to represent the uncertainty associated with the
estimates in any presentation. Thus for example, when some protected

Figure 3: Percentage terrestrial protection by country

Figure 4: A hypothetical protected area coverage estimate,
generated by overlay, and distinguishing spatial data sources
of high certainty and low certainty

16 B® High certainty
® Low certainty

12

(0)

S XN Vo wm
NS MY ey Ae) oO) AAG. SIN ND NES OSS
SPF Wo Wok oe oF he

areas are represented by buffered points, these should be shown on
maps and the biodiversity coverage they comprise should be
represented distinctly on maps (e.g. low certainty in Figure 4). Where
possible, uncertainties associated with species or other biodiversity
distributions should also be expressed in the presentation.

Percentage terrestrial protection [| under 10 {MMMM 10 - 25 MMMM 25 - 50 MMM 50 - 100

17

NARRATIVES (AND RELATION TO OTHER INDICATORS)
Presentation of national scale protected area coverage data should
be part of a wider narrative examining trends in biodiversity
according to several different measures or indicators. Changes in
coverage should be related to observed trends in the extent of
selected ecosystems and biomes and trends in species populations.
Where the coverage indicator addresses threatened species it can
also usefully be related to an appropriate IUCN Red List index or
related measure of trends in threatened species. It is also important
to relate this indicator to available information on the effectiveness
with which protected areas are managed.

MEANING AND CAUSES OF TRENDS

It is important to present trends in protected areas coverage
with sufficient contextual information to enable users to interpret
them. This will of course include the relevant policy targets
and recommendations regarding protected areas coverage, so that
trends in the indicator can be used to track progress towards
their achievement.

However, it is also important to recognize that increasing
protected areas coverage in itself does not necessarily ensure
the survival of those elements of biodiversity for which coverage
has increased.

Increasing protection coverage of a baseline quantity of the
biodiversity elements being considered is likely to mean that their
future is more secure, as long as they actually persist within the
protected areas. Therefore, wherever possible, protection coverage
trends should be interpreted in the context of trends in abundance or
extent of the biodiversity elements in the coverage indicator. It is
especially useful to consider the extent of ecosystems actually
remaining within the protected areas. Improvement in conservation

18

Guidance for National Users of 2010 Biodiversity Target Indicators

of biodiversity is likely to be (but not necessarily) greater when the
increase in proportion protected is due to added protected areas in
higher management categories.

The degree to which improved protected area coverage ensures
continued survival of the elements of biodiversity assessed also
depends on the viability of the populations or extent of the eco-
system protected, and on the effectiveness of the management of the
protected areas.

Implications for policy and management

Where protected areas targets already exist within national policy,
the implications of trends in protected areas coverage are clear.
Where national targets do not exist, there are still clear
implications both for global and regional targets and for the
development of an effective and representative system of protected
areas as recommended under the CBD Programme of Work on
Protected Areas.

Limitations

This indicator provides information only about the extent of
protected areas and their relationship within the current
understanding of the distribution of some elements of biodiversity.
Because it does not include information on the effectiveness of the
management of the protected areas, it provides only limited
information on the likelihood that protection is helping to secure the
elements of biodiversity under consideration.

Further limitations arise from the constraints on the accuracy
and certainty of the data on distribution of protected areas and
the biodiversity elements and the techniques employed in order to
measure them. Errors also arise from mismatches between the
resolutions of the datasets being compared (Rodrigues et al. 2004a).

a Coverage of protected areas

Elements of good practice

Collaboration and engagement/building support and
sustainability

It is important to engage fully with the national agencies responsible
for protected areas designation and management to ensure that the
protected areas data are as current as possible. Similarly, national
and international non-governmental organizations are important
stakeholders who may have key inputs to make regarding the distrib-
ution of elements of biodiversity or the definition of priority areas.

Data quality standards

Assessments of national or regional extinction risk should if at all
possible be based on the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria and
meet the appropriate documentation standards (see www.iucn
redlist.org). The guidelines on the application of IUCN Protected
Area Management Categories (Dudley, 2008) and the revised IUCN
definition of a protected area should be used by governmental and
non-governmental agencies during data provision and in reviewing
their PA systems.

Metadata

It is vital to document thoroughly the versions and sources of each
data set used for the analysis and that a common standard of meta-
data is used to enable easy cross comparison and data management.

Methodological documentation and consistency (cross-
calibration)

Full details should be documented of how the analysis is performed;
including any proxy data such as buffered points in place of
delineated protected area boundaries as well what data was excluded
from or included in the analysis. It is critical to ensure that when
improved data become available, previous assessments are updated
to take account of them, thus ensuring that any trend line is accurate
and consistent. Similarly, improvements to data on distribution of

biodiversity elements will also need to be incorporated and for
species-based indicators, the analysis should be repeated for earlier
points in time as new species are added to the indicator, so that
coverage comparisons between years are possible.

Frequency of updating

A primary constraint on updating estimates of protected areas
coverage is the frequency of updating of the data on protected
areas distribution. A new version of the WDPA is produced
annually, incorporating updates based on the availability of
improved data on protected areas boundaries, designation of new
protected areas and changes to the management categories and
other key attributes of existing ones. Whilst new on-line reporting
mechanisms are reducing the time lags between such changes in
a country and their incorporation into the WDPA, national sources
should also be checked.

Data on biodiversity priority areas are updated infrequently, but the
results of new surveys may lead to significant changes, especially
with respect to species distributions, and these may eventually be
incorporated into biodiversity priority area sets.

New survey efforts can improve knowledge about species presence
in protected areas, and when this happens the historical values of
the indicator must also be revised to take this into account. This
entails determining whether the species’ presence or absence in the
protected area is a recent occurrence or long-term. Otherwise, the
indicator would not distinguish change in knowledge about species
distributions from change in the distributions themselves.

Finally, where coverage is based on land cover data, more frequent
updates are likely to be available from remote sensing programmes.

19

References

Buckland, S.T., Magurran, A.E., Green, R.E., and Fewster,
R.M. 2005. Monitoring change in biodiversity through
composite indices. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society of London B 360:243-254.

Bibby, C.J., Collar, N.J., Crosby, M.J., Heath, M.F., Imboden,
Ch., Johnson, T.H., Long, A.J., Stattersfield, A.J.,
Thirgood, S.J. 1992. Putting Biodiversity on the Map:
Priority Areas for Global Conservation. International
Council for Bird Preservation.

CCA. Ecorregiones marinas de América del Norte. (in press).

Chape, S., Harrison, J., Spalding, M., Lysenko, I. 2005.
Measuring the extent and effectiveness of protected areas
as an indicator for meeting global biodiversity targets.
Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 360
(1454): 443-455.

CONABIO. Capital natural y bienestar social. Comisién
Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad,
México (2006). http://www.conabio.gob.mx/2ep/images
/c/c5/capital _natural_1-pdf.

Davis, S.D., Heywood, V.H., Hamilton, A.C. (eds) 1994. Centres of
Plant Diversity: A Guide and Strategy for Their
Conservation. Volume I: Europe, Africa, South West Asia
and the Middle East. World Conservation Union,
Cambridge, UK.

Davis, S.D., Heywood, V.H. (eds) 1995. Centres of Plant Diversity:
A Guide and Strategy for Their Conservation. Volume 2:
Asia, Australasia and the Pacific Ocean. World
Conservation Union, Cambridge, UK.

Davis, S., Heywood, V.H., Herrera-MacBride, O., Villa-Lobos,
J., Hamilton, A.C. (eds) 1997. Centres of plant diversity:
a guide and strategy for their conservation. Volume 3: The
Americas. World Conservation Union, Cambridge, UK.

Deguise, LE., Kerr, J.T. 2006. Protected Areas and Prospects
for Endangered Species Conservation in Canada.
Conservation Biology 20(1):48-55.

Dudley, N. (ed.) 2008. Guidelines for Applying Protected Area
Management Categories. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. x +
86pp.

Eken, G., Bennun, L., Boyd, C. 2004a. Protected areas design and
systems planning: Key requirements for successful
planning, site selection and establishment of protected
areas. In: Convention on Biological Diversity 2004.
Biodiversity Issues for Consideration in the Planning,

20

Establishment and Management of Protected Area Sites.
Pp. 37-44

Eken, G., Bennun, L., Brooks, T.M., Darwall, W., Fishpool,
L.D.C., Foster, M., Knox, D., Langhammer, P., Matiku,
P., Radford, E., Salaman, P., Sechrest, W., Smith, M.L.,
Spector, S., Tordoff, A. 2004. Key Biodiversity Areas as
Site Conservation Targets. BioScience 54(12):1110-1118.

Fearnside, P.M., Ferraz, J. 1995. A Conservation Gap Analysis of
Brazil’s Amazonian Vegetation. Conservation Biology
9(5):1134-1147.

FEOW. 2008. Freshwater Ecoregions of the World. http://www.
eow.org/background.php?PHPSESSID=28d9e29afca52e5
124512e1054eb4e7e.

Duellman, W.E. (ed) 1999. Patterns of distribution of amphibians:
a global perspective. John Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore, USA.

Isaac, N.J.B., Mallet, J., Mace, G.A. 2004. Taxonomic inflation: its
influence on macroecology and conservation. Trends in
Ecology and Evolution 19(9):464-469.

Mulongoy, K.J., Chape, S. 2004. Protected areas and biodiversity.
An overview of key issues. UNEP-WCMC Biodiversity
Series 21. CBD Secretariat, Montreal, Canada and UNEP-
WCMC, Cambridge, UK.

Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca,
G.A., Kent, J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for con-
servation priorities. Nature 403(6772):853-858.

Olson, D.M., Dinerstein, E. 2002. The Global 200: priority
ecoregions for global conservation. Annals of the Missouri
Botanical Garden 89(2): 199-224.

Olson, D.M., Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E.D., Burgess,
N.D., Powell, G.V., Underwood, E.C., D’Amico, J.A.,
Itoua, I., Strand, H.E., Morrison, J.C., Loucks, C.J.,
Allnutt, T.F., Ricketts, T.H., Kura, Y., Lamoreux, J.F.,
Wettengel, W.W., Hedao, P., Kassem, K.R. 2001.
Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on
Earth. BioScience 51(11): 933-938.

Patterson, B.D., Ceballos, G., Sechrest, W., Tognelli, M.F.,
Brooks, T., Luna, L., Ortega, P., Salazar, I. and
Young, B.E., 2007. Digital Distribution Maps of the
Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 3.0.
NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Ridgely, R.S., Allnutt, T.F., Brooks, T., McNicol, D.K.,

Mehlman, D.W., Young, B.E. and Zook, J.R. 2007. Floristic Region, South Africa - reservation bias
Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western and representation of biodiversity patterns and
Hemisphere, version 3.0. NatureServe, Arlington, processes. Biological Conservation 112(1-2):129-
Virginia, USA. 145.

Rodrigues, A.S., Gaston, K.J. 2002. Rarity and conservation Strand, H., H6ft, R., Strittholt, J., Miles, L., Horning, N.,
planning across geopolitical units. Conservation Fosnight, E. (eds.). 2007. Sourcebook on Remote
Biology 16(3):674-682. Sensing and Biodiversity Indicators. Secretariat of

the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal,

Rouget, M., Richardson, D.M., Cowling, R.M. 2003. The Technical Series no. 32, 201 pages.
current configuration of protected areas in the Cape

— ooo

Cover photo UNEP/Topham

21

am
UNEP WCMC

2010 BIP Secretariat
(UNEP-WCMC)

217 Huntingdon Road
Cambridge CB3 ODL
United Kingdom

Tel +44 1223 277314
Fax +44 1223 277316

info@twentyten.net
www.twentyten.net

Zee Biodiversity
4 |NCicators
4 Parinershio