@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{Rodríguez-Rodríguez2021,

title = {Are protected areas good for the human species? Effects of protected areas on rural depopulation in Spain},

author = {D. Rodríguez-Rodríguez and R. Larrubia and J.D. Sinoga},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969720379304#!},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144399},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-04-21},

journal = {Science of The Total Environment},

volume = {763},

abstract = {Protected areas (PAs) seek to conserve valuable genes, species and ecosystems by applying a legal regime that restricts some socioeconomic activities and also offers opportunities for new ones. As a result, PAs have been claimed by some authors to boost socioeconomic conditions in rural areas mainly through tourism activities. However, others have claimed that PAs contribute to rural depopulation through the worsening of living conditions of local residents because of restrictions resulting from protection regulations. Here, we applied a multiple-paired Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) research design on a census on protected rural municipalities (cases; N = 52) versus unprotected rural municipalities (controls; N = 55) in Spain to ascertain whether PAs had positive or negative effects on rural populations using three indicators on depopulation with official municipal data from 1996 until 2019: Compound annual growth rate (CAGR); Proportion of reproductive individuals (REP); and Proportion of reproductive females (WREP). We controlled for some confounders such as biophysical characteristics and regional regulations by carefully selecting our sample of municipalities spatially. Our results show that depopulation figures were worse in cases than in controls, with some exceptions whose characteristics should be further explored. Municipalities in Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) performed best against rural depopulation and generally better than their controls, whereas municipalities in Biosphere Reserves and Special Protection Areas (SPAs) showed mostly worse figures. Our findings suggest that, while necessary and important for biodiversity, multiple-use PAs generally entailed negative consequences for Spanish rural populations that need to be offset by State's intervention.},

keywords = {Conservation and management, Ecosystem services, 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}

}