Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDorji, Tshering
dc.contributor.authorSheldon, Fran
dc.contributor.authorLinke, Simon
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-06T04:46:50Z
dc.date.available2022-05-06T04:46:50Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn1617-1381
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jnc.2020.125894
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/414363
dc.description.abstractThe 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.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom125894
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal for Nature Conservation
dc.relation.ispartofvolume58
dc.subject.fieldofresearchEnvironmental sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode41
dc.subject.keywordsScience & Technology
dc.subject.keywordsLife Sciences & Biomedicine
dc.subject.keywordsBiodiversity Conservation
dc.subject.keywordsEcology
dc.subject.keywordsBiodiversity & Conservation
dc.titleFulfilling Nature Needs Half through terrestrial-focused protected areas and their adequacy for freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity protection: A case from Bhutan
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dcterms.bibliographicCitationDorji, T; Sheldon, F; Linke, S, Fulfilling Nature Needs Half through terrestrial-focused protected areas and their adequacy for freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity protection: A case from Bhutan, Journal for Nature Conservation, 2020, 58, pp. 125894
dc.date.updated2022-05-06T04:10:34Z
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorSheldon, Fran


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record