• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Environmental Research Letters >More strictly protected areas are not necessarily more protective: evidence from Bolivia, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and Thailand
【24h】

More strictly protected areas are not necessarily more protective: evidence from Bolivia, Costa Rica, Indonesia, and Thailand

机译：更加严格的保护区不一定更具保护性：玻利维亚，哥斯达黎加，印度尼西亚和泰国的证据

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

National parks and other protected areas are at the forefront of global efforts to protect biodiversity and ecosystem services. However, not all protection is equal. Some areas are assigned strict legal protection that permits few extractive human uses. Other protected area designations permit a wider range of uses. Whether strictly protected areas are more effective in achieving environmental objectives is an empirical question: although strictly protected areas legally permit less anthropogenic disturbance, the social conflicts associated with assigning strict protection may lead politicians to assign strict protection to less-threatened areas and may lead citizens or enforcement agents to ignore the strict legal restrictions. We contrast the impacts of strictly and less strictly protected areas in four countries using IUCN designations to measure de jure strictness, data on deforestation to measure outcomes, and a quasi-experimental design to estimate impacts. On average, stricter protection reduced deforestation rates more than less strict protection, but the additional impact was not always large and sometimes arose because of where stricter protection was assigned rather than regulatory strictness per se. We also show that, in protected area studies contrasting y management regimes, there are y2 policy-relevant impacts, rather than only y, as earlier studies have implied.
机译：国家公园和其他保护区在保护生物多样性和生态系统服务的全球努力中处于最前沿。但是，并非所有保护都是平等的。一些地区被赋予了严格的法律保护，几乎不允许人类使用。其他保护区名称允许更广泛的用途。严格保护区是否在实现环境目标方面更加有效是一个经验性的问题：尽管严格保护区在法律上允许较少的人为干扰，但与分配严格保护相关的社会冲突可能导致政客向受到威胁的地区分配严格保护，并可能导致公民或执法人员无视严格的法律限制。我们比较了四个国家中严格和不严格的保护区的影响，使用自然保护联盟的名称来衡量法律上的严格性，使用森林砍伐的数据来衡量结果，并使用准实验性的设计来估计影响。平均而言，更严格的保护措施比不严格的保护措施更能减少毁林率，但是额外的影响并不总是那么大，有时是由于分配了更严格的保护措施本身而不是监管严格性而产生的。我们还表明，在与y个管理制度形成鲜明对比的保护区研究中，有y2个与政策相关的影响，而不仅仅是y个，如先前的研究所暗示的那样。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号