Almost 80% of nature critical for human wellbeing is outside of protected areas

Scientists have released a new analysis showing that the bits of land most critical to human survival are unprotected.

Many of these environments – such as carbon-storing forests, wetlands buffering from floods and flower-rich meadows supporting pollinators – have little to no protection from development or destruction.

For example, the fens and peatlands of Northern Ireland are providing an outsized contribution to ecosystem services for the UK, and yet the country has no national parks. Some of these crucial areas fall under other protection schemes but the vast majority of land in Northern Ireland remains free from any form of safeguarding.

This means that the benefits provided by the natural world in this region, such as fresh water and carbon storage, are at risk.

In addition to this, there are concerns that even when these lands are within protected areas, we are failing to conserve the animals and plants. Research is showing that biodiversity within these regions is still falling, despite the efforts to protect them. This implies that the current management of them is not working.

This latest analysis looking into where key natural sites sit outside of protected areas has been carried out by researchers at the Natural History Museum, London. They’ve found that overall, protected areas only conserve about 20% of the land that is necessary for people and planet to thrive.

“Our food systems rely on healthy insect populations which can pollinate our crops,” explains the Natural History Museum’s Dr Gavin Broad, who has been working to document all insect species that live across the UK. This work will provide a crucial baseline for future conservation work.

“Without the flies, beetles, wasps and butterflies, we simply wouldn’t be able to grow enough food to feed the population. Yet despite that, in the UK the flower-rich meadows that support these critical pollinators have declined by 90% during the twentieth century.”

Where should we be protecting?

It’s now fairly well understood that we’ve not been looking after the natural world as we should have been. The UK, for example, has lost half of all the nature that once existed in the nation. In fact, we’re one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. Meanwhile, deforestation rates in other parts of the world are climbing again.

The latest State of Nature report shows how over the past five decades wildlife populations have plummeted by 73% around the world. We’ve lost 600 million birds in Europe alone, while in the UK flying insects have declined by 60% in just 20 years.

In response to this biodiversity crisis, there has been an international push to pledge to protect more of nature. This has resulted in a campaign to preserve 30% of all land by 2030, known more widely as ‘30 by 30’.

The idea of this is to provide enough space for animals and plants to thrive, preserving their populations while also restoring the biodiversity we have lost.

As a result, many governments have focused attention on the parts of the world that already have protection and contain the highest levels of biodiversity. This strategy makes sense if the only criteria is to save as many species as possible.

But research from Natural History Museum scientists has highlighted that 30 by 30 should go further than this.

Nature-based solutions

We rely on nature for everything, from the soil in which our food grows to the air that we breathe. The natural world can also help protect us against extreme weather events, provide medicine, and even shape our mental health.

“Biodiversity isn’t just something that is nice to look at, but critical for our own survival” says Dr Adriana De Palma, who has been working on how to measure declines in nature around the world along with Gonzalo Albaladejo. “Without it, we simply wouldn’t be able to exist.”

“This means we need to think a bit more strategically about where we are protecting.”

The researchers have mapped out which parts of the planet provide the lion’s share of environmental benefits that people need. Known as ‘ecosystem services’, some of these areas would be considered pristine and natural environments, but others perhaps less so.

The vast majority of the identified regions fall outside of pre-existing protected areas. But not only that, the researchers also discovered that even parts which are technically protected are still losing their nature, bringing into question their effectiveness.

“Currently, only 22% of the land delivering the world’s most critical ecosystem services is located within the global protected area network,” explains Adriana.

“Within this 22%, biodiversity intactness is declining more quickly than it is outside protected areas. This means that current conservation efforts are not working to sustain these critical ecosystem services, and we risk losing them.”

This is particularly clear in Northern Ireland. Despite the majority of the country’s land providing critical ecosystem services, such as the extensive peat bogs clear and retain fresh drinking water, there are currently no national parks set up to protect any of this. If the UK Government was thinking about which bits of the nation it should be protecting under the 30 by 30 initiative, then these are the kinds of locations it should be looking at.

As we push the planet ever closer to the brink, we need to think far more strategically about where we should be preserving. Simultaneously we need to make sure that these regions are fully protected and properly managed. Only then will we create a truly sustainable future.