Advanced search
Start date
(Reference retrieved automatically from Web of Science through information on FAPESP grant and its corresponding number as mentioned in the publication by the authors.)

Private reserves suffer from the same location biases of public protected areas

Full text
d'Albertas, Francisco [1] ; Gonzalez-Chaves, Adrian [1] ; Borges-Matos, Clarice [1] ; de Almeida Paciello, Vitor Zago [1] ; Maron, Martine [2, 3] ; Metzger, Jean Paul [1]
Total Authors: 6
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Dept Ecol, Inst Biosci, Rua Matao, Travessa 14, BR-05508090 Sao Paulo, SP - Brazil
[2] Univ Queensland, Sch Earth & Environm Sci, Brisbane, Qld 4072 - Australia
[3] Univ Queensland, Ctr Biodivers & Conservat Sci, Brisbane, Qld 4072 - Australia
Total Affiliations: 3
Document type: Journal article
Source: Biological Conservation; v. 261, SEP 2021.
Web of Science Citations: 0

Setting aside private land is an essential component of the biodiversity crisis response. In Brazil, landowners are required to have Legal Reserves (LR) (20%-80% of their property set aside for native vegetation) which, if degraded, need to be restored. Alternatively, landowners can compensate for an LR deficit by purchasing surplus credits. Each landowner can define the location and spatial arrangement of their LR, affecting the reserve's ability to maintain biodiversity and provide ecosystem services (ES). We used hierarchical models to determine drivers for the amount and location of those LR in 3622 farms. The likelihood of setting aside part of the farm as LR (avoiding off-farm compensation) increased with farm size and extent of native vegetation cover, particularly for riparian areas and steep slopes, where conserving vegetation is also mandated in what are called Areas of Permanent Protection (APP). Properties with APP were more likely to meet the full LR requirement within their areas if located in areas of higher transportation costs and lower agricultural suitability. Within properties, the location of LR was mostly in areas with low agricultural suitability, high transportation cost, and close to APP. Landowners' decisions intend to maximize property income and reduce restoration costs, resulting in a spatial pattern similar to public protected areas - usually located on marginal land for agriculture. These areas do not necessarily provide the greatest biodiversity and ES benefits, suggesting that government interventions may be needed to encourage landowners to set aside native vegetation in ways that maximize conservation and ES outcomes. (AU)

FAPESP's process: 13/23457-6 - Interface project: relationships among landscape structure, ecological processes, biodiversity and ecosystem services
Grantee:Jean Paul Walter Metzger
Support Opportunities: BIOTA-FAPESP Program - Thematic Grants
FAPESP's process: 18/22881-2 - Paths to ecological intensification trough restoration and agricultural certification
Grantee:Francisco d'Albertas Gomes de Carvalho
Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate
FAPESP's process: 17/26684-4 - Environmental compensation as a mechanism for conservation: from methods to scenario testing based on the Brazilian new forest code
Grantee:Clarice Borges Matos
Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate
FAPESP's process: 17/19411-1 - Bee conservation and pollination service provision: using a landscape approach to reach a common goal
Grantee:Adrian David González Chaves
Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Doctorate