Global policies aim to provide quantifiable goals for conservation success, such as protection of 17% of land- and seascapes (2010 Aichi Biodiversity Target 11) or protection of 30% of land- and seascapes (2030 Global Biodiversity Framework Target 3). In order to reach these targets, however, it’s necessary to have baseline information how much area is currently protected, and which areas have the potential to be protected in the future.
Theobald, D.M., Jacob, A.L., Elsen, P.R., Beever, E.A., Ehlers, L. and Hilty, J. 2024. Evaluating ecosystem protection and fragmentation of the world’s major mountain regions. Conservation Biology, p.e14240.
This information is particularly important for mountainous regions, which tend to support high levels of biodiversity and act as climate refugia or contain critical habitat needed for climate change adaptation. Although mountainous regions are often perceived as less developed and therefore good candidates for protection, more information is needed to understand the extent to which these regions are already developed and fragmented, and their potential to protect a diversity of ecosystems.
A recent assessment of global mountain ecosystems focuses on quantifying levels of protection and human modification for the largest, contiguous mountainous region on each continent (except Antarctica): the Albertine Rift (Africa), the Andes (South America), the Y2Y region (North America), the Alps (Europe), the Himalayas (Asia), and the Great Eastern Range (Australia). Using multiple data sets that combine information on climate, landforms, and fragmentation, each region was assessed to determine the amount of human modification, the degree of fragmentation, the extent to which they achieve 30×30 goals, and the diversity of protected ecosystems.
The results show a high degree of variation across the six mountainous regions. While the level of human modification across all regions was lower than the global average, the Alps had almost twice the human modification as the average and only the Himalayas and Y2Y had less than half of the average. The Alps also had over 25% fragmentation, while the least amount of fragmentation (<3%) was in the Andes, Y2Y, and the Albertine Rift.
Regions also varied in the degree to which they were protected. While the Great Eastern Ranges had over 35% of the landscape protected, the Himalayas had less than 10% protected, making them particularly vulnerable to human modification. However, all other regions except the Himalayas has at least double the global average of 7% for all protected areas.
There was a wide range in the number of ecosystems represented, with only 10 ecosystems represented by the Great Eastern Ranges but almost 50 represented by the Himalayas. This highlights the fact that a high level of protection doesn’t necessarily correlate with a high diversity of ecosystems under protection, leaving many ecosystems vulnerable to human modification.
Reaching 30×30 targets will require a deep understanding of how well current protected area networks are working to conserve biodiversity. Mountainous regions, despite often being remote and less populated, still show high degrees of fragmentation and modification. Minimizing further fragmentation and restoring and maintaining connectivity across regions will be critical for achieving conservation goals across the globe.
Related Posts
Are marine protected areas as effective as they seem?
A global analysis of shallow reef MPAs suggests that less than 2% of global oceans may be protected by ecologically effective MPAs, falling short of the global goal of 30% by 2030.
Balancing biodiversity and carbon conservation in 30×30
A global analysis shows that conservation strategies can simultaneously advance biodiversity and carbon goals, but may come with trade-offs for connectivity.
Planning connected protected areas for 30×30
A new predictive framework helps conservation planners identify where protected areas can most effectively strengthen ecological connectivity while advancing global 30x30 conservation goals.
