@article{RODRIGUEZRODRIGUEZ2024100965,

title = {Socioeconomic impacts of small conserved sites on rural communities in Madagascar},

author = {D. Rodríguez-Rodríguez and N. Knecht and J. C. Llopis and R. A. Heriarivo and H. Rakotoarison and V. Andriamampionomanjaka and E. Navarro-Jurado and V. Randriamamonjy},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211464524000034},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2024.100965},

issn = {2211-4645},

year  = {2024},

date = {2024-01-01},

urldate = {2024-01-01},

journal = {Environmental Development},

pages = {100965},

abstract = {Madagascar is considered one of the top global biodiversity hotspots while at the same time is among the world's least developed countries. Pressing socioeconomic needs such as food provision often lead to unsustainable land use and widespread loss, fragmentation and degradation of natural habitats. Thus, ascertaining the socioeconomic effects of small conserved sites is urgent in order to show their benefits and identify their costs to attain sustainable rural development on the island. Here, we used structured questionnaires in two surveys to key local stakeholders, including 1) managers of three conserved sites smaller than 100 ha, and 2) local communities living around such sites (cases) and similar neighbouring communities unaffected by those conserved sites (controls), following a Before-After-Control-Impact design. Median income did not differ between case and control communities, although case communities reported better self-perception of their economic situation and wider availability of basic services. Substantial revenues from tourism accrued only to one local community from a conveniently located, community-managed site: Anja Community Reserve. No differences in the economic effects from the establishment of the conserved sites were found between sex, age or education levels of community members. Exploitation of natural resources from conserved sites was either prohibited (two sites) or severely restricted (one site). As a result, case communities tended to collect fewer natural resources from nearby areas than control communities. Contrary to expectations, case communities reported less economic impact than control communities during the COVID-19 pandemic even though visitors were reduced to zero, which likely indicate greater socioeconomic resilience due to previous community investments and greater availability of ecosystem services. Successful, bottom-up and replicable approaches to locally manage natural resources sustainably are urgently needed in a country with rich and vanishing biodiversity, weak institutions, high poverty rates and strong dependence on natural resources for subsistence.},

keywords = {Biodiversity, Conservation and management, Ecosystem services, Environmental conservation},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081348,

title = {Governance and Conservation Effectiveness in Protected Areas and Indigenous and Locally Managed Areas},

author = {Yin Zhang and Paige West and Lerato Thakholi and Kulbhushansingh Suryawanshi and Miriam Supuma and Dakota Straub and Samantha S. Sithole and Roshan Sharma and Judith Schleicher and Ben Ruli and D. Rodríguez-Rodríguez and Mattias Borg Rasmussen and Victoria C. Ramenzoni and Siyu Qin and Deborah Delgado Pugley and Rachel Palfrey and Johan Oldekop and Emmanuel O. Nuesiri and Van Hai Thi Nguyen and Nouhou Ndam and Catherine Mungai and Sarah Milne and Mathew Bukhi Mabele and Sadie Lucitante and Hugo Lucitante and Jonathan Liljeblad and Wilhelm Andrew Kiwango and Alfred Kik and Nikoleta Jones and Melissa Johnson and Christopher Jarrett and Rachel Sapery James and George Holmes and Lydia N. Gibson and Arash Ghoddousi and Jonas Geldmann and Maria Fernanda Gebara and Thera Edwards and Wolfram H. Dressler and Leo R. Douglas and Panayiotis G. Dimitrakopoulos and Veronica Davidov and Eveline M. F. W. Compaoré-Sawadogo and Yolanda Ariadne Collins and Michael Cepek and Paul Berne Burow and Dan Brockington and Michael Philippe Bessike Balinga and Beau J. Austin and Rini Astuti and Christine Ampumuza and Frank Kwaku Agyei},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081348},

doi = {10.1146/annurev-environ-112321-081348},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-01-01},

urldate = {2023-01-01},

journal = {Annual Review of Environment and Resources},

volume = {48},

number = {1},

pages = {559-588},

abstract = {Increased conservation action to protect more habitat and species is fueling a vigorous debate about the relative effectiveness of different sorts of protected areas. Here we review the literature that compares the effectiveness of protected areas managed by states and areas managed by Indigenous peoples and/or local communities. We argue that these can be hard comparisons to make. Robust comparative case studies are rare, and the epistemic communities producing them are fractured by language, discipline, and geography. Furthermore the distinction between these different forms of protection on the ground can be blurred. We also have to be careful about the value of this sort of comparison as the consequences of different forms of conservation for people and nonhuman nature are messy and diverse. Measures of effectiveness, moreover, focus on specific dimensions of conservation performance, which can omit other important dimensions. With these caveats, we report on findings observed by multiple study groups focusing on different regions and issues whose reports have been compiled into this article. There is a tendency in the data for community-based or co-managed governance arrangements to produce beneficial outcomes for people and nature. These arrangements are often accompanied by struggles between rural groups and powerful states. Findings are highly context specific and global generalizations have limited value.},

keywords = {Biodiversity, Conservation and management, Environmental conservation, Marine protected areas, Protected areas},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{García-Millán2022,

title = {Identification of Priority Forest Conservation Areas for Critically Endangered Lemur Species of Madagascar},

author = {V. E. García-Millán and D. Rodríguez-Rodríguez and A. Martín Oncina and A. Andrianarimisa and L. O. Randriamiharisoa and G. Martorell-Guerrero and A. Bóveda and D. Abdul-Malak},

url = {https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091455},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091455},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-09-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Land},

volume = {11},

number = {1455},

issue = {9},

abstract = {Forests have extraordinary importance for the conservation of endemic species in Madagascar. However, they are disappearing fast due to a number of pressures, notably unsustainable agricultural practices leading to aggravated status of biodiversity. Here, we used a number of ecological and spatial criteria to identify and prioritise unprotected forest areas for the conservation of the eight critically endangered species of lemur belonging to the Lemuridae family in Madagascar. By combining spatial information layers on the distribution areas of the studied lemurs, forest extension and conservation status, and potential human impacts (such as roads, human settlements and agriculture lands), it was possible to identify the most appropriate sites for the expansion of the conservation areas of critically endangered lemur species. Seven new sites, totalling over 33,000 ha, were identified as priority sites for the protection of those species. All of them were adjacent to or inside (just one site) existing protected areas (PAs), which likely makes their protection both feasible and socioeconomically efficient by enlarging those PAs. Legally protecting these sites would not only take Madagascar one little step ahead for meeting oncoming global biodiversity targets for 2030 but could also make a substantial contribution to the mid-term survival of the studied lemur species.},

keywords = {Biodiversity, Conservation and management, Environmental conservation, Forest, Geotechnology, Protected areas},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Rodríguez-Rodríguez2021b,

title = {Potential contribution of OECMs to international area-based conservation targets in a biodiversity rich country, Spain},

author = {D. Rodríguez-Rodríguez and A. Sánchez-Espinosa and D. Abdul-Malak},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2021.126019},

doi = {10.1016/j.jnc.2021.126019},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-15},

journal = {Journal for Nature Conservation},

volume = {62},

abstract = {Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) are new conservation tools intended to complement protected areas (PAs) at achieving effective biodiversity conservation and meeting international area-based targets. However, OECMs have been rarely considered in practical terms until recently. Here, we performed a rapid evaluation on the degree of fulfilment of current area-based international biodiversity targets, post-2020 foreseeable oncoming targets, and ecological targets by considering: 1) Protection coverage; 2) Inclusiveness of important areas for biodiversity; 3) Protection management; 4) Connectivity; and 5) Habitat representation, on land and at sea in Spain, a Euro-Mediterranean, biodiversity rich country. We conducted the evaluation under two scenarios: 1) Scenario 1 considers designated PAs; and 2) Scenario 2, that also includes potential OECMs. In order to generate Scenario 2, thirteen legal categories were assessed against international guidance on OECMs as a first step to screen their likelihood of providing OECMs in Spain. Our findings show that some potentially satisfactory OECM categories such as Public Utility Forests, River Reserves or Geoparks meet the OECM criteria to a large degree and deserve further study. Our results also highlight that Spain is currently well above most foreseeable post-2020 biodiversity targets and even close to some ecological targets using just PAs, except for marine protected area (MPA) management and MPA offshore coverage. Adding OECMs would noticeably improve the country’s figures yet without reaching many exigent ecological targets. OECMs can become a useful, cost-effective biodiversity conservation tool that contributes to international targets under new, more ambitious area-based conservation requirements in Spain and elsewhere. Nevertheless, for this to happen, suitable biodiversity management and monitoring schemes must be ensured.},

keywords = {Biodiversity, Conservation and management, Ecosystem, Environmental conservation, Marine protected areas, Protected areas},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Rodríguez-Rodríguez2018e,

title = {Representation and protection of the threatened biodiversity by the largest Spanish regional network of protected areas},

author = {D. Rodríguez-Rodríguez and J. Martínez-Vega},

url = {https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00878},

doi = {10.3354/esr00878},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-03-15},

journal = {Endangered Species Research},

volume = {35},

pages = {125-139},

abstract = {The main global strategy to stop biodiversity loss is the designation of protected areas (PAs). Spain is a highly biodiverse country. It has one of the world's greatest terrestrial PA coverages. However, the status of its biodiversity is delicate as a result of serious pressures, and some important areas for biodiversity are outside PAs. We used official census data to spatially assess how 71 habitats of community interest (HCIs), 126 regionally threatened flora, fauna and fungi species and subspecies (RTSs), and 33 globally threatened species or subspecies (GTSs) are represented in a network of 404 PAs in Andalusia, a region rich in biodiversity in southern Spain. We also assessed the legal and managerial protection afforded to these threatened habitats and species by those PAs. The Andalusian PA network expands across one-third of the region’s territory and includes the threatened species’ richest areas. However, it only covers 57% of the area of occupancy of RTSs, 81% of the regional area of occupancy of GTSs, and 53% of the extent of HCIs. Over 61% of the regional PA network area is assigned more than 1 PA designation category, although cumulative legal protection is marginally related to RTS richness and unrelated to GTS richness. RTSs and especially GTSs occupy the most relative area in Ramsar sites (i.e. wetlands of international importance), although these are of relatively minor importance for threatened habitats. Wetlands and agricultural areas are the broad ecosystem types showing the greatest numbers of RTSs and GTSs. Seven GTSs were not included in the Andalusian Register of Threatened Species. One hundred and eleven unprotected Areas of High Importance for Threatened Species (AHITSs) and one Area of High Importance for Threatened Biodiversity (AHITB) were identified. Those species and sites are good candidates for a targeted expansion of legal protection of biodiversity in the region.},

keywords = {Biodiversity, Conservation and management, Ecosystem services, Pressures, Protected areas, SOSTPARK},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Rodríguez-Rodríguez2016d,

title = {Achieving Blue Growth through maritime spatial planning: Offshore wind energy optimization and biodiversity conservation in Spain},

author = {D. Rodríguez-Rodríguez and D. Abdul-Malak and T. Soukissian and A. Sánchez-Espinosa},

url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305824278_Achieving_Blue_Growth_through_maritime_spatial_planning_Offshore_wind_energy_optimization_and_biodiversity_conservation_in_Spain},

doi = {10.1016/j.marpol.2016.07.022},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-11-01},

journal = {Marine Policy},

volume = {73},

pages = {8-14},

abstract = {Spain has a high potential for renewable energy production, being the world's third country by installed on-shore wind power. However, it has not yet fully developed its renewable energy production capacity, with no commercial offshore wind production to date, and remains highly dependent on fossil fuel imports. The country is also one of Europe's most biodiverse, on land and at sea. This study spatially assesses the country's offshore wind energy potential by incorporating the newly designated marine protected areas (MPAs) to the official Spanish strategic environmental assessment for the installation of offshore windfarms (SEA). It also identifies optimal areas for offshore windfarm development according to key physical variables such as wind speed, depth and substrate type. It finally assesses real commercial windfarm projects against current environmental constraints. The results show that nearly 50% of the whole area within 24 nm from the Spanish coast could be suitable for offshore windfarm development at the planning phase. However, only 0.7% of that area is optimal for wind energy production with current fixed turbine technology. Nevertheless, either area would allow Spain to meet its national targets of 750 MW of ocean power capacity installed by 2020 under adequate local wind conditions. Over 88% of all commercial windfarm project area is within the SEA's Exclusion zone, thus unfeasible under current circumstances. Technological breakthroughs like floating turbines may soon make the optimal windfarm area (OWA) less restrictive and reduce current environmental impacts of marine windfarms within a truly sustainable Blue Growth.},

keywords = {Biodiversity, Blue Growth, Climate Change, Conservation and management, Pressures},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}