Indicator Code: EFFCON
Objective: Ecosystem Vitality
Policy Category: Biodiversity and Habitat
Subcategory: Biodiversity and Habitat
Indicator Short Name: Effective Conservation
Indicator Full Name: Effective Protected Area Conservation by Biome

Indicator Description: This indicator measures the percentage habitat by biome that has been effectively conserved within each biome by country. The effective protected area conservation index gives a protected area value for each terrestrial biome within a country by spatially overlaying three 1 km global spatial datasets, the World Database on Protected Areas (2007), the Wildlife Conservation Society/CESIN Human Footprint (2007), and biomes from the WWF Ecoregions of the World dataset (Olson et al., 2001). By combining these measures the index provides a measure of how much habitat within protected areas is actually intact or relatively intact (i.e., has a low human footprint). The World Database on Protected Areas (2007) is a dataset on the location and distribution of protected areas. The CIESIN/Wildlife Conservation Society Human Footprint is a dataset on human impacts on land, measured by transportation networks (roads, railroads and rivers), population densities, and urban areas. The Human Footprint is used here to classify locations that are either under high or low threat/use by humans. Areas within a designated protected area that have a high human footprint(one which is incompatible with biodiversity) are deducted from the protected area, with the effect of lowering the area of specific biomes identified as protected within that country. This is a better measure of the amount of land under protection because it accounts for areas that are not fully protected because of land conversion, roads, and populated places that might exist within a protected area.

All three datasets are widely accepted and used, even though as all other global databases they do have limitations relative to the resolution of the data and problems with protected area delineations. The effective conservation target is 10% of each terrestrial biome within a country. In order to ensure that above target performance for one biome does not mask below target performance for another, performance is capped at 10% for each biome. This target is based upon the internationally agreed upon target set by the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Units: Percentage Territory
Country Coverage: 233
Reference Year: 2007
Target: 10 percent
Target Source: Convention on Biological
Short Source: The Conservation Strategies Division of The Nature Conservancy calculated this indicator based on third party source data.
Source: Calculations by Timothy Boucher of the Conservation Strategies Division, The Nature Conservancy, based on three data sets:

UNEP-WCMC (United Nations Environment Programme-World Conservation Monitoring Center). (2007). Global Protected Areas Data Set extracted from the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) in August 2007 by UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WDPA custodian) (www.unep-wcmc.org), Cambridge, UK.

CIESIN and Wildlife Conservation Society. (2007). Human Footprint v.2 (beta). Available from http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/wild_areas/

World Wildlife Fund. (2001). Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World. Avaialble from http://www.worldwildlife.org/science/ecoregions.cfm
Source URL: www.unep-wcmc.org http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/wild_areas/

Methodology: The Effective protected area conservation value per country-biome is based on three 1 km global spatial datasets: World Database on Protected Areas (2007), which gives us the protected vs. non-protected areas; (b) the CIESIN and Wildlife Conservation Society Human Footprint (2007) which, by using statistic natural breaks and calibrated with known areas, was reclassified into high or low threat/use by humans; and© biomes from the WWF Ecoregions of the World dataset (Olson et al., 2001). The following specific steps were taken.

The World Database on Protected Areas (2007) was processed as follows:
(1) only National PAs were used (no international PAs);
(2) PAs were removed that had the following Status: “proposed”, “voluntary” or “recommended”;
(3) only PA points that did not have polygons and did not have a status according to #2 were buffered according to their defined area (using a Mollweide Projection);
(4) the buffered points and polygons datasets were merged for the final WDPA dataset; and
(5) an Arcinfo GRID with a 1km resolution was created from the final protected areas mask, with a value of 0 for unprotected and 1 for protected.

By using statistic natural breaks and calibrated with known areas, the CIESIN and Wildlife Conservation Society Human Footprint(2007) was reclassified into high or low threat/use by humans. TNC classified the continuous index data of the Human Influence Index according to frequency distribution and variance using Jenk’s Natural Breaks. The 0-24 range of values was identified as a surrogate for the least threatened and human-impacted areas. This class not only encompasses the “Last of the Wild” (Sanderson et al. 2002) areas, but also includes areas with low levels of human population that are distant from human access points, such as roads. Index values equal or above the 25 mark were identified as moderately to heavily impacted. This class includes all human-disturbed areas – those within and nearby roads, populated places, and agriculture. The reclassified HII was reclassified using the following values: a 1 for low and a 0 for high.

Multiplying the two datasets (using the Spatial Analysis Tool in Arcinfo) produced a final GRID with areas that are (a) protected and have a low threat/use have a value of 1, and (b) other areas (those with high threat/use or unprotected) resulted in a value of 0. The zonal mean was calculated using the final GRID for the Country-Biome dataset. Calculating the Zonal Mean of the GRID by Country-Biome (pixel value 0 or 1) results in a value that can be used a percentage.

The effective protected area conservation target is 10% of land by biome conserved within a country. Protection by biome is capped at 10% so that countries cannot offset less than 10% protection of any given biome with greater than 10% protection in another.

Caveats: All three datasets are widely accepted and used, even though as with all other global databases they do have limitations relative to the resolution of the data and problems with protected area delineations. Further spatial errors can arise in the overlay process, especially for the smallest island nations.

Additional Citations: Olson, D.M., E. Dinerstein, E.D. Wikramanayake, et al. (2001). Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth, Bioscience 51(11), pp. 933-938.

Sanderson, E.W., M. Jaiteh, M.A. Levy, K.H. Redford, A.V. Wannebo, and G. Wolmer. (2002). “The Human Footprint and the Last of the Wild,” BioScience, Vol. 52, No. 10, pp. 891-904.