Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model

Given the important role of protected areas (PAs) in biological conservation and the huge investment required to establish and manage them, it is essential to accurately assess the effectiveness of PAs. Previous studies typically used the difference between the PA and a non-protected area to measure...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Yuhao Feng, Yupin Wang, Haojie Su, Jiamin Pan, Yuanfeng Sun, Jiangling Zhu, Jingyun Fang, Zhiyao Tang
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Elsevier 2021
Materias:	Protected areas Effectiveness Plant productivity Ecological stability Propensity score matching (PSM) method Difference in differences (DID) model Ecology QH540-549.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/be47934dcb8b4c7fb025f3f892526289
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:be47934dcb8b4c7fb025f3f892526289
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:be47934dcb8b4c7fb025f3f8925262892021-12-01T04:58:51ZAssessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model1470-160X10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108078https://doaj.org/article/be47934dcb8b4c7fb025f3f8925262892021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X21007433https://doaj.org/toc/1470-160XGiven the important role of protected areas (PAs) in biological conservation and the huge investment required to establish and manage them, it is essential to accurately assess the effectiveness of PAs. Previous studies typically used the difference between the PA and a non-protected area to measure the effectiveness and presented many space constraints to enhance the comparability between treatment and control groups. In contrast, however, researchers have given less consideration to time constraints, and there is still no consensus on the choice of period for assessing the effectiveness. Here, we explored this issue and assessed the effectiveness of 2,975 PAs worldwide using the difference in differences (DID) model. We found that 56.2% of PAs were effective in maintaining plant productivity, and PAs in forests were more effective than those in non-forests. However, the effectiveness of PAs in improving ecological stability was limited. The stability rose only in the regions where PAs could effectively maintain plant productivity (e.g., needleleaf forest, woodland or Central Europe). Further, an event-study analysis showed that global PAs had been playing a positive and persistent role in maintaining plant productivity. In addition to providing these new assessment results, we compared the assessment results derived from different methods and confirmed that the impact of not using the DID model was greater than that of not using the propensity score matching (PSM) method. We therefore recommend the use of the DID model in future effectiveness assessments.Yuhao FengYupin WangHaojie SuJiamin PanYuanfeng SunJiangling ZhuJingyun FangZhiyao TangElsevierarticleProtected areasEffectivenessPlant productivityEcological stabilityPropensity score matching (PSM) methodDifference in differences (DID) modelEcologyQH540-549.5ENEcological Indicators, Vol 130, Iss , Pp 108078- (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Protected areas Effectiveness Plant productivity Ecological stability Propensity score matching (PSM) method Difference in differences (DID) model Ecology QH540-549.5
spellingShingle	Protected areas Effectiveness Plant productivity Ecological stability Propensity score matching (PSM) method Difference in differences (DID) model Ecology QH540-549.5 Yuhao Feng Yupin Wang Haojie Su Jiamin Pan Yuanfeng Sun Jiangling Zhu Jingyun Fang Zhiyao Tang Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model
description	Given the important role of protected areas (PAs) in biological conservation and the huge investment required to establish and manage them, it is essential to accurately assess the effectiveness of PAs. Previous studies typically used the difference between the PA and a non-protected area to measure the effectiveness and presented many space constraints to enhance the comparability between treatment and control groups. In contrast, however, researchers have given less consideration to time constraints, and there is still no consensus on the choice of period for assessing the effectiveness. Here, we explored this issue and assessed the effectiveness of 2,975 PAs worldwide using the difference in differences (DID) model. We found that 56.2% of PAs were effective in maintaining plant productivity, and PAs in forests were more effective than those in non-forests. However, the effectiveness of PAs in improving ecological stability was limited. The stability rose only in the regions where PAs could effectively maintain plant productivity (e.g., needleleaf forest, woodland or Central Europe). Further, an event-study analysis showed that global PAs had been playing a positive and persistent role in maintaining plant productivity. In addition to providing these new assessment results, we compared the assessment results derived from different methods and confirmed that the impact of not using the DID model was greater than that of not using the propensity score matching (PSM) method. We therefore recommend the use of the DID model in future effectiveness assessments.
format	article
author	Yuhao Feng Yupin Wang Haojie Su Jiamin Pan Yuanfeng Sun Jiangling Zhu Jingyun Fang Zhiyao Tang
author_facet	Yuhao Feng Yupin Wang Haojie Su Jiamin Pan Yuanfeng Sun Jiangling Zhu Jingyun Fang Zhiyao Tang
author_sort	Yuhao Feng
title	Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model
title_short	Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model
title_full	Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model
title_fullStr	Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model
title_full_unstemmed	Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model
title_sort	assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model
publisher	Elsevier
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/be47934dcb8b4c7fb025f3f892526289
work_keys_str_mv	AT yuhaofeng assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel AT yupinwang assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel AT haojiesu assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel AT jiaminpan assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel AT yuanfengsun assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel AT jianglingzhu assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel AT jingyunfang assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel AT zhiyaotang assessingtheeffectivenessofglobalprotectedareasbasedonthedifferenceindifferencesmodel
_version_	1718405624062017536

Assessing the effectiveness of global protected areas based on the difference in differences model

Ejemplares similares