Home About Indicator Development Partners Resources Dashboard

Protected Areas Management Effectiveness

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Last update

2017

Coverage

Global

Availability

Data freely available

Partners

Uqlogoc colour m

University of Queensland

Un environment wcmc

UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre

Contact point

Indicator description

This indicator provides information on status and trends in effectiveness of management of protected areas (PA) that can be disaggregated to examine environmental, social and managerial aspects of protected area management. The indicator records the number and area of assessments of management effectiveness completed by countries, and the overall management effectiveness score for each aspect of management. The indicator therefore measures how effectively and equitably managed protected areas are, which is of critical importance in meeting Aichi Target 11, as the declaration of a protected area does not always result in adequate protection.

Related Aichi Targets

Primary target

11

Target 11:

By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.

Primary target

11

Target 11:

By 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes.

11

Related SDGs

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 11

GOAL 11 - Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.

Target 11.4| Relevant indicator

Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 14

GOAL 14 - Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.

Target 14.5| Relevant indicator

By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 15

GOAL 15 - Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.

Target 15.2| Relevant indicator

By 2020, promote the implementation of sustainable management of all types of forests, halt deforestation, restore degraded forests and substantially increase afforestation and reforestation globally.

Target 15.4| Relevant indicator

By 2030, ensure the conservation of mountain ecosystems, including their biodiversity, in order to enhance their capacity to provide benefits that are essential for sustainable development.

Target 15.5| Relevant indicator

Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species.

Target 15.7| Relevant indicator

Take urgent action to end poaching and trafficking of protected species of flora and fauna and address both demand and supply of illegal wildlife products.

Target 15.c| Relevant indicator

Enhance global support for efforts to combat poaching and trafficking of protected species, including by increasing the capacity of local communities to pursue sustainable livelihood opportunities.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 11

GOAL 11 - Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 14

GOAL 14 - Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 15

GOAL 15 - Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.

E sdg goals icons individual rgb 11
E sdg goals icons individual rgb 14
E sdg goals icons individual rgb 15

Other related MEAs and processes

Cms logo blue4c

CMS

Target 3| Relevant indicator

National, regional, and international governance arrangements and agreements affecting migratory species and their migratory systems have improved significantly, making relevant policy, legislative and implementation processes more coherent, accountable, transparent, participatory, equitable and inclusive.

Target 9| Relevant indicator

International action and cooperation between States for the conservation and effective management of migratory species fully reflects a migratory systems approach, in which all States sharing responsibility for the species concerned engage in such actions in a concerted way.

Indicator icon

IPBES Global Assessment Chapters

Chapter 3| Official indicator

Progress towards meeting major international objectives related to biodiversity and ecosystem services

Chapter 6| Official indicator

Opportunities and challenges for decision makers

Indicator icon

IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters

Chapter 3| Official indicator

Status, trends and future dynamics of biodiversity and ecosystems underpinning nature’s benefits to people

Chapter 6| Official indicator

Options for governance, institutional arrangements and private and public decision-making across scales and sectors

Unccd logo3

UNCCD

Expected impact 3.1| Relevant indicator

Sustainable land management and combating desertification/land degradation contribute to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the mitigation of climate change.

Cms logo blue4c

CMS

Indicator icon

IPBES Global Assessment Chapters

Indicator icon

IPBES Regional Assessment Chapters

Unccd logo3

UNCCD

Cms logo blue4c
Indicator icon
Unccd logo3
Indicator icon

Themes

Bip policy

Policy & conservation actions

View related indicators >
Bip policy

Partners

Uqlogoc colour m
Un environment wcmc

Key indicator facts

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Indicator type

Response

Applicable for national use

Yes (find out more)

Indicator classification

Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

Last update

2017

Coverage

Global

Availability

Data freely available

Indicator description

This indicator provides information on status and trends in effectiveness of management of protected areas (PA) that can be disaggregated to examine environmental, social and managerial aspects of protected area management. The indicator records the number and area of assessments of management effectiveness completed by countries, and the overall management effectiveness score for each aspect of management. The indicator therefore measures how effectively and equitably managed protected areas are, which is of critical importance in meeting Aichi Target 11, as the declaration of a protected area does not always result in adequate protection.

Contact point

Graphs / Diagrams

Figure 1. Percentage of protected areas assessed for Protected Area Management Effectiveness

Current storyline

Since the mid-1990s, various methodologies have been developed for assessing PA management effectiveness (PAME). Assessment data from all over the world have now been collated in the Global Database for Protected Area Management Effectiveness (GD-PAME), which contains records of almost 18,000 PAME assessments—the only global dataset on PA management. The GD-PAME includes information about the methodologies and indicators used, and records details of individual assessments. It also reports PAME results under a set of headline indicators, standardizing data from a wide range of methodologies.

As of January 2015, 17,739 PAME assessments had been collated in the GD-PAME, representing 9,037 PAs, with 3,666 sites having multiple assessments. Some 17.5% of countries have already 60% of the area of their protected area estate assessed for PAME.

Data and methodology

Coverage: Global.

Scale: Aggregated from site-level data.

Time series available: 2005-2015.

Possible disaggregations: By region, nation, protected area.

Metadata used: The analysis is based on assessments of 9,037 protected areas. This is 4% of the protected areas recorded in the World Database on Protected Areas at the time of the analyses.

Methodology: Most countries have developed protected area systems as a core strategy to protect biodiversity and environment, and protected areas across the world have increased dramatically in number, area and size. The many values of protected areas for biodiversity conservation, protection of cultural heritage, maintenance of vital ‘ecosystem services’ and provision of a range of socioeconomic benefits have been well recognized. However, the declaration of a protected area does not always result in adequate protection, and the need to evaluate protected area management effectiveness is of critical importance.

Various methodologies and indicators have been developed at different levels to access the management effectiveness of protected areas. In order to create a global management effectiveness indicator, a mechanism was created to enable cross-analysis of data from methodologies using a variety of indicators. This mechanism has two components: ‘matching’ the topic of each indicator to a common ‘summary indicator’; and establishing a ‘translation’ system so that the different scoring systems are incorporated in a consistent way. Fourteen summary indicators have been created for the global indicator:

  • Values and significance
  • Threats and constraints
  • Site design and establishment
  • Management planning
  • Management resources
  • Information base
  • Internal management systems and processes
  • Law enforcement
  • Stakeholder relations
  • Visitor management
  • Achievement of work program
  • Conservation outcomes
  • Natural & cultural resource management systems
  • Community outcomes

  • Summary indicators scores are generated for each management effectiveness assessment, and from the scores for all the assessments it is possible to generate global and regional averages for each of the 14 summary indicators which can be compared over time.

    National use of indicator

    Producing this indicator nationally: Management effectiveness of protected areas is calculated from the sites level assessments undertaken in protected areas around the world. UNEP-WCMC host and manage the Global Database on Protected Area Management Effectiveness (GD-PAME), in collaboration with governments, nongovernmental organisations, academia and industry. The GD-PAME can be used to report at national, regional and global levels. UNEP-WCMC is working on a continuous basis with country representatives to update PAME information in the database.

    Use at the national level: Countries are meant to assess the management effectiveness of their protected areas on a regular basis to evaluate how well conserved and well managed they are. They do so using various methodologies (e.g. METT, RAPPAM). These assessments are compiled in the GD-PAME and can be used to assess how much of a country’s protected area network has been assessed through any kind of methodologies at a site or system level.

    The number of protected areas reported in the WDPA for each country enables us to calculate the marine and terrestrial coverage in protected areas. Information in the GD-PAME provides the number of sites and the total area covered with protected area that has been assessed, which can then be compared against the total number and total coverage in protected areas.

    No guidance on how to produce this indicator at the national level currently exists. However there is some ongoing work of reviewing and updating information currently stored in the database that will be used to publish a new edition of the United Nations List on Protected Areas focused on management effectiveness in December 2018. Guidance on calculating this indicator will then be developed along with the publication.

    Examples of national use: Many reports have been produced by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and others on management effectiveness in countries and regions. For example:

    The Global Study into management effectiveness evaluation: http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/publications/downloads/coad11-protected-areas.pdf.

    Thailand: https://www.mangrovesforthefuture.org/grants/large-grant-facilities/thailand-large-projects/evaluating-and-improving-the-management-effectiveness-of-thailand-s-marine-and-coastal-protected-areas/.

    South Africa: https://www.environment.gov.za/sites/default/files/docs/management_effectiveness_saprotected_areas.pdf.

    Availability of global data for national use: Data will be available from March 2018. Site level data is not publically available unless specific approval for this has been granted by the data provider.

    Contact person for supporting national use: Marine Deguignet: Marine.Deguignet@unep-wcmc.org

    Further resources

    Key indicator facts

    Indicator type

    Response

    Applicable for national use

    Yes (find out more)

    Indicator classification

    Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

    Indicator type

    Response

    Applicable for national use

    Yes (find out more)

    Indicator classification

    Operational and included in the CBD's list of indicators

    Last update

    2017

    Coverage

    Global

    Availability

    Data freely available

    Partners

    Uqlogoc colour m

    University of Queensland

    Un environment wcmc

    UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre

    Contact point