A conservation planning approach to mitigate the impacts of leakage from protected area networks. Issue 3 (11th December 2014)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bode, Michael; Tulloch, Ayesha I. T.; Mills, Morena; Venter, Oscar; W. Ando, Amy
• Is Part Of: Conservation biology. Volume 29:Issue 3(2015)
• Page Start: 765
• Page End: 774
• Publication Date: 2014-12-11
• Subjects: Conservation biology -- Periodicals; 333.9516
• DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12434
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0888-8892

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title>Abstract</title> <p>Protected area networks are designed to restrict anthropogenic pressures in areas of high biodiversity. Resource users respond by seeking to replace some or all of the lost resources from locations elsewhere in the landscape. Protected area networks thereby perturb the pattern of human pressures by displacing extractive effort from within protected areas into the broader landscape, a process known as leakage. The negative effects of leakage on conservation outcomes have been empirically documented and modeled using homogeneous descriptions of conservation landscapes. Human resource use and biodiversity vary greatly in space, however, and a theory of leakage must describe how this heterogeneity affects the magnitude, pattern, and biodiversity impacts of leakage. We combined models of household utility, adaptive human foraging, and biodiversity conservation to provide a bioeconomic model of leakage that accounts for spatial heterogeneity. Leakage had strong and divergent impacts on the performance of protected area networks, undermining biodiversity benefits but mitigating the negative impacts on local resource users. When leakage was present, our model showed that poorly designed protected area networks resulted in a substantial net loss of biodiversity. However, the effects of leakage can be mitigated if they are incorporated ex‐ante into the conservation planning process. If protected areas are coupled with nonreserve policy instruments such as market subsidies, our model shows that the trade‐offs between biodiversity and human well‐being can be further and more directly reduced.</p> </abstract>