Fulfilling Nature Needs Half through terrestrial-focused protected areas and their adequacy for freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity protection: A case from Bhutan
Author(s)
Dorji, Tshering
Sheldon, Fran
Linke, Simon
Year published
2020
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
The Nature Needs Half (NNH) movement aims to protect 50 % of the earth. That said protected area designation usually neglects freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity. We assessed protection of the surface area of lakes, length of river reaches, habitat area of fish and odonate species within the terrestrial-focused protected areas of Bhutan that meets NNH target. We categorised percentage protection into four progressive levels: (i) Below Aichi (≤16.9 %), (ii) Aichi and above (17–34.9 %), (iii) Near NNH (35–49.9 %) and (iv) NNH and above (≥50 %). Overall, we found both freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity were well represented ...
View more >The Nature Needs Half (NNH) movement aims to protect 50 % of the earth. That said protected area designation usually neglects freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity. We assessed protection of the surface area of lakes, length of river reaches, habitat area of fish and odonate species within the terrestrial-focused protected areas of Bhutan that meets NNH target. We categorised percentage protection into four progressive levels: (i) Below Aichi (≤16.9 %), (ii) Aichi and above (17–34.9 %), (iii) Near NNH (35–49.9 %) and (iv) NNH and above (≥50 %). Overall, we found both freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity were well represented within PAs of Bhutan. 1080 out of 1181 lakes had ‘NNH and above’ percentage surface area protection against only 99 with ‘below Aichi’ protection. Further, 1388 out of 3418 river reaches also had ‘NNH and above’ percentage river length protection, but this number was smaller than the number of reaches with ‘below Aichi’ protection (n = 1926). No fish or odonate species had ‘below Aichi’ percentage habitat area protection, but only one fish and no odonate species had ‘NNH and above’ protection. However, lakes and river reaches when considered by agro-ecological zone and river reach types respectively had no equitable and adequate protection. 14 of the 19 lakes within the five lower elevation agro-ecological zones had ‘below Aichi’ protection, while 1075 of the 1162 lakes inside alpine zone had ‘NNH and above’ protection. Similarly, the rarer river reach types had a greater number of the reaches with ‘below Aichi’ protection. More importantly, only 5 lakes within the five lower elevation agro-ecological zones had their whole surface area protected – in contrast to 1068 lakes within the alpine zone. Further, river reaches with shorter reach length and odonate species with smaller habitat area had lower percentage protection. Our findings imply a need for a priori consideration of freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity in PA designation even within NNH paradigm.
View less >
View more >The Nature Needs Half (NNH) movement aims to protect 50 % of the earth. That said protected area designation usually neglects freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity. We assessed protection of the surface area of lakes, length of river reaches, habitat area of fish and odonate species within the terrestrial-focused protected areas of Bhutan that meets NNH target. We categorised percentage protection into four progressive levels: (i) Below Aichi (≤16.9 %), (ii) Aichi and above (17–34.9 %), (iii) Near NNH (35–49.9 %) and (iv) NNH and above (≥50 %). Overall, we found both freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity were well represented within PAs of Bhutan. 1080 out of 1181 lakes had ‘NNH and above’ percentage surface area protection against only 99 with ‘below Aichi’ protection. Further, 1388 out of 3418 river reaches also had ‘NNH and above’ percentage river length protection, but this number was smaller than the number of reaches with ‘below Aichi’ protection (n = 1926). No fish or odonate species had ‘below Aichi’ percentage habitat area protection, but only one fish and no odonate species had ‘NNH and above’ protection. However, lakes and river reaches when considered by agro-ecological zone and river reach types respectively had no equitable and adequate protection. 14 of the 19 lakes within the five lower elevation agro-ecological zones had ‘below Aichi’ protection, while 1075 of the 1162 lakes inside alpine zone had ‘NNH and above’ protection. Similarly, the rarer river reach types had a greater number of the reaches with ‘below Aichi’ protection. More importantly, only 5 lakes within the five lower elevation agro-ecological zones had their whole surface area protected – in contrast to 1068 lakes within the alpine zone. Further, river reaches with shorter reach length and odonate species with smaller habitat area had lower percentage protection. Our findings imply a need for a priori consideration of freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity in PA designation even within NNH paradigm.
View less >
Journal Title
Journal for Nature Conservation
Volume
58
Subject
Environmental sciences
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Biodiversity Conservation
Ecology
Biodiversity & Conservation