IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natsus/v5y2022i12d10.1038_s41893-022-00970-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Protected area personnel and ranger numbers are insufficient to deliver global expectations

Author

Listed:
  • Michael R. Appleton

    (Re:wild
    IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas)

  • Alexandre Courtiol

    (Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research)

  • Lucy Emerton

    (Environment Management Group)

  • James L. Slade

    (Re:wild)

  • Andrew Tilker

    (Re:wild
    Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research)

  • Lauren C. Warr

    (Re:wild)

  • Mónica Álvarez Malvido

    (International Ranger Federation)

  • James R. Barborak

    (Colorado State University)

  • Louise Bruin

    (Game Rangers Association of Africa)

  • Rosalie Chapple

    (Blue Mountains World Heritage Institute)

  • Jennifer C. Daltry

    (Re:wild
    Fauna & Flora International)

  • Nina P. Hadley

    (Re:wild)

  • Christopher A. Jordan

    (Re:wild)

  • François Rousset

    (University of Montpellier, CNRS, EPHE, IRD)

  • Rohit Singh

    (World Wildlife Fund)

  • Eleanor J. Sterling

    (University of Hawaii)

  • Erin G. Wessling

    (Harvard University)

  • Barney Long

    (Re:wild)

Abstract

The 2020 global spatial targets for protected areas set by the Convention on Biological Diversity have almost been achieved, but management effectiveness remains deficient. Personnel shortages are widely cited as major contributing factors but have not previously been quantified. Using data from 176 countries and territories, we estimate a current maximum of 555,000 terrestrial protected area personnel worldwide (one per 37 km2), including 286,000 rangers (one per 72 km2), far short of published guidance on required densities. Expansion by 2030 to 30% coverage of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures is widely agreed as a minimum for safeguarding biodiversity and ecosystem services. We project that effective management of this expanded system will require approximately 3 million personnel (one per 13 km2), including more than 1.5 million rangers or equivalents (one per 26 km2). Parallel improvements in resourcing, working conditions and capacity are required for effective, equitable and sustainable management.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael R. Appleton & Alexandre Courtiol & Lucy Emerton & James L. Slade & Andrew Tilker & Lauren C. Warr & Mónica Álvarez Malvido & James R. Barborak & Louise Bruin & Rosalie Chapple & Jennifer C. Da, 2022. "Protected area personnel and ranger numbers are insufficient to deliver global expectations," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(12), pages 1100-1110, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natsus:v:5:y:2022:i:12:d:10.1038_s41893-022-00970-0
    DOI: 10.1038/s41893-022-00970-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-022-00970-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41893-022-00970-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James E. M. Watson & Nigel Dudley & Daniel B. Segan & Marc Hockings, 2014. "The performance and potential of protected areas," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7525), pages 67-73, November.
    2. Gérard Biau & Erwan Scornet, 2016. "A random forest guided tour," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(2), pages 197-227, June.
    3. Sean L. Maxwell & Victor Cazalis & Nigel Dudley & Michael Hoffmann & Ana S. L. Rodrigues & Sue Stolton & Piero Visconti & Stephen Woodley & Naomi Kingston & Edward Lewis & Martine Maron & Bernardo B. , 2020. "Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century," Nature, Nature, vol. 586(7828), pages 217-227, October.
    4. Georgina G. Gurney & Emily S. Darling & Gabby N. Ahmadia & Vera N. Agostini & Natalie C. Ban & Jessica Blythe & Joachim Claudet & Graham Epstein & Estradivari & Amber Himes-Cornell & Harry D. Jonas & , 2021. "Biodiversity needs every tool in the box: use OECMs," Nature, Nature, vol. 595(7869), pages 646-649, July.
    5. David A. Gill & Michael B. Mascia & Gabby N. Ahmadia & Louise Glew & Sarah E. Lester & Megan Barnes & Ian Craigie & Emily S. Darling & Christopher M. Free & Jonas Geldmann & Susie Holst & Olaf P. Jens, 2017. "Capacity shortfalls hinder the performance of marine protected areas globally," Nature, Nature, vol. 543(7647), pages 665-669, March.
    6. De Bruecker, Philippe & Van den Bergh, Jorne & Beliën, Jeroen & Demeulemeester, Erik, 2015. "Workforce planning incorporating skills: State of the art," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 1-16.
    7. Gérard Biau & Erwan Scornet, 2016. "Rejoinder on: A random forest guided tour," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 25(2), pages 264-268, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hou, Lei & Elsworth, Derek & Zhang, Fengshou & Wang, Zhiyuan & Zhang, Jianbo, 2023. "Evaluation of proppant injection based on a data-driven approach integrating numerical and ensemble learning models," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    2. Ma, Zhikai & Huo, Qian & Wang, Wei & Zhang, Tao, 2023. "Voltage-temperature aware thermal runaway alarming framework for electric vehicles via deep learning with attention mechanism in time-frequency domain," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    3. Patrick Krennmair & Timo Schmid, 2022. "Flexible domain prediction using mixed effects random forests," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(5), pages 1865-1894, November.
    4. Manuel J. García Rodríguez & Vicente Rodríguez Montequín & Francisco Ortega Fernández & Joaquín M. Villanueva Balsera, 2019. "Public Procurement Announcements in Spain: Regulations, Data Analysis, and Award Price Estimator Using Machine Learning," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-20, November.
    5. Sachin Kumar & Zairu Nisha & Jagvinder Singh & Anuj Kumar Sharma, 2022. "Sensor network driven novel hybrid model based on feature selection and SVR to predict indoor temperature for energy consumption optimisation in smart buildings," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 13(6), pages 3048-3061, December.
    6. Escribano, Álvaro & Wang, Dandan, 2021. "Mixed random forest, cointegration, and forecasting gasoline prices," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1442-1462.
    7. Yigit Aydede & Jan Ditzen, 2022. "Identifying the regional drivers of influenza-like illness in Nova Scotia with dominance analysis," Papers 2212.06684, arXiv.org.
    8. Siyoon Kwon & Hyoseob Noh & Il Won Seo & Sung Hyun Jung & Donghae Baek, 2021. "Identification Framework of Contaminant Spill in Rivers Using Machine Learning with Breakthrough Curve Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-26, January.
    9. Yan, Ran & Wang, Shuaian & Du, Yuquan, 2020. "Development of a two-stage ship fuel consumption prediction and reduction model for a dry bulk ship," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    10. Yi Cao & Xue Li, 2022. "Multi-Model Attention Fusion Multilayer Perceptron Prediction Method for Subway OD Passenger Flow under COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, November.
    11. Filmer,Deon P. & Nahata,Vatsal & Sabarwal,Shwetlena, 2021. "Preparation, Practice, and Beliefs : A Machine Learning Approach to Understanding Teacher Effectiveness," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9847, The World Bank.
    12. Daniel Boller & Michael Lechner & Gabriel Okasa, 2021. "The Effect of Sport in Online Dating: Evidence from Causal Machine Learning," Papers 2104.04601, arXiv.org.
    13. Jorge Antunes & Peter Wanke & Thiago Fonseca & Yong Tan, 2023. "Do ESG Risk Scores Influence Financial Distress? Evidence from a Dynamic NDEA Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-32, May.
    14. Erik Aschenbrand & Thomas Michler, 2021. "Why Do UNESCO Biosphere Reserves Get Less Recognition than National Parks? A Landscape Research Perspective on Protected Area Narratives in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Lyudmyla Kirichenko & Tamara Radivilova & Vitalii Bulakh, 2018. "Machine Learning in Classification Time Series with Fractal Properties," Data, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, December.
    16. Ivan Brandić & Lato Pezo & Nikola Bilandžija & Anamarija Peter & Jona Šurić & Neven Voća, 2023. "Comparison of Different Machine Learning Models for Modelling the Higher Heating Value of Biomass," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-14, April.
    17. Raphael Seguin & David Mouillot & Joshua E. Cinner & Rick D. Stuart Smith & Eva Maire & Nicholas A. J. Graham & Matthew McLean & Laurent Vigliola & Nicolas Loiseau, 2023. "Towards process-oriented management of tropical reefs in the anthropocene," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(2), pages 148-157, February.
    18. José A. Ferreira, 2022. "Models under which random forests perform badly; consequences for applications," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 1839-1854, September.
    19. Villacis, Alexis & Badruddoza, Syed & Mayorga, Joaquin & Mishra, Ashok K., 2022. "Using Machine Learning to Test the Consistency of Food Insecurity Measures," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322472, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Valeria D’Amato & Rita D’Ecclesia & Susanna Levantesi, 2022. "ESG score prediction through random forest algorithm," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 347-373, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natsus:v:5:y:2022:i:12:d:10.1038_s41893-022-00970-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.