Johnson, C. N. et al. Biodiversity losses and conservation responses in the Anthropocene. Science 356, 270–275 (2017).
Google Scholar
Rockström, J. et al. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472–475 (2009).
Google Scholar
Maxwell, S. L. et al. Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century. Nature 586, 217–227 (2020).
Google Scholar
Schulze, K. et al. An assessment of threats to terrestrial protected areas. Conserv. Lett. 11, e12435 (2018).
Google Scholar
Bingham, H. C. et al. (eds). Protected Planet Report 2020 (UNEP-WCMC & IUCN, 2021); https://livereport.protectedplanet.net/
Buchanan, G. M., Butchart, S. H., Chandler, G. & Gregory, R. D. Assessment of national-level progress towards elements of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. Ecol. Indic. 116, 106497 (2020).
Google Scholar
Xu, H. et al. Ensuring effective implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity targets. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 411–418 (2021).
Google Scholar
Report of the Open-ended Working Group on the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework on Its Third Meeting (CBD Secretariat, 2022); https://www.cbd.int/conferences/post2020/wg2020-03/documents
Rodrigues, A. S. & Cazalis, V. The multifaceted challenge of evaluating protected area effectiveness. Nat. Commun. 11, 5147 (2020).
Google Scholar
Geldmann, J., Manica, A., Burgess, N. D., Coad, L. & Balmford, A. A global-level assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas at resisting anthropogenic pressures. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 23209–23215 (2019).
Google Scholar
Starnes, T. et al. The extent and effectiveness of protected areas in the UK. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 30, e01745 (2021).
Google Scholar
Kremen, C. et al. Aligning conservation priorities across taxa in Madagascar with high-resolution planning tools. Science 320, 222–226 (2008).
Google Scholar
Cazalis, V. et al. Mismatch between bird species sensitivity and the protection of intact habitats across the Americas. Ecol. Lett. 24, 2394–2405 (2021).
Google Scholar
Venter, O. et al. Targeting global protected area expansion for imperiled biodiversity. PLoS Biol. 12, e1001891 (2014).
Google Scholar
Gamero, A. et al. Tracking progress toward EU biodiversity strategy targets: EU policy effects in preserving its common farmland birds. Conserv. Lett. 10, 395–402 (2017).
Google Scholar
Pellissier, V. et al. Effects of Natura 2000 on nontarget bird and butterfly species based on citizen science data. Conserv. Biol. 34, 666–676 (2020).
Google Scholar
Princé, K., Rouveyrol, P., Pellissier, V., Touroult, J. & Jiguet, F. Long-term effectiveness of Natura 2000 network to protect biodiversity: a hint of optimism for common birds. Biol. Conserv. 253, 108871 (2021).
Google Scholar
Cunningham, C. A., Thomas, C. D., Morecroft, M. D., Crick, H. Q. P. & Beale, C. M. The effectiveness of the protected area network of Great Britain. Biol. Conserv. 257, 109146 (2021).
Google Scholar
Duckworth, G. D. & Altwegg, R. Effectiveness of protected areas for bird conservation depends on guild. Divers. Distrib. 24, 1083–1091 (2018).
Google Scholar
Rada, S. et al. Protected areas do not mitigate biodiversity declines: a case study on butterflies. Divers. Distrib. 25, 217–224 (2019).
Google Scholar
Terraube, J., Van Doninck, J., Helle, P., & Cabeza, M. Assessing the effectiveness of a national protected area network for carnivore conservation. Nat. Commun. 11, 2957 (2020).
Google Scholar
Lenoir, J. et al. Species better track the shifting isotherms in the oceans than on land. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1044–1059 (2020).
Google Scholar
van Teeffelen, A., Meller, L., van Minnen, J., Vermaat, J. & Cabeza, M. How climate proof is the European Union’s biodiversity policy? Regional Environ. Change 15, 997–1010 (2015).
Google Scholar
Thomas, C. D. & Gillingham, P. K. The performance of protected areas for biodiversity under climate change. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 115, 718–730 (2015).
Google Scholar
Gillingham, P. K. et al. The effectiveness of protected areas in the conservation of species with changing geographical ranges. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 115, 707–717 (2015).
Google Scholar
Geldmann, J. et al. Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in reducing habitat loss and population declines. Biol. Conserv. 161, 230–238 (2013).
Google Scholar
Stokstad, E. Species? Climate? Cost? Ambitious goal means trade-offs. Science 371, 555 (2021).
Google Scholar
Brlík, V. et al. Long-term and large-scale multispecies dataset tracking population changes of common European breeding birds. Sci. Data 8, 21 (2021).
Google Scholar
Stanbury, A. et al. The status of bird populations: the fifth Birds of Conservation Concern in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man and second IUCN Red List assessment of extinction risk for Great Britain. Br. Birds 114, 723–747 (2021).
Dudley, N. (ed). Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories (IUCN, 2008).
Deguignet, M. et al. Measuring the extent of overlaps in protected area designations. PLoS ONE 12, e0188681 (2017).
Google Scholar
JNCC. Common Standards Monitoring: Introduction to the Guidance Manual (JNCC Resource Hub, 2004).
Hayhow, D. B. et al. State of Nature 2019 (RSPB, 2019).
Schleicher, J. et al. Statistical matching for conservation science. Conserv. Biol. 34, 538–549 (2019).
Google Scholar
Waldron, A. et al. Protecting 30% of the Planet for Nature: Costs, Benefits and Economic Implications (Campaign for Nature, 2020); https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/326470
Franks, S. E., Roodbergen, M., Teunissen, W., Carrington Cotton, A. & Pearce‐Higgins, J. W. Evaluating the effectiveness of conservation measures for European grassland‐breeding waders. Ecol. Evol. 8, 10555–10568 (2018).
Google Scholar
Pearce-Higgins, J. W. et al. Site-based adaptation reduces the negative effects of weather upon a southern range margin Welsh black grouse Tetrao tetrix population that is vulnerable to climate change. Clim. Change 153, 253–265 (2019).
Google Scholar
Jellesmark, S. et al. A counterfactual approach to measure the impact of wet grassland conservation on U.K. breeding bird populations. Conserv. Biol. 35, 1575–1585 (2021).
Google Scholar
Morrison, C. A. et al. Covariation in population trends and demography reveals targets for conservation action. Proc. Biol. Sci. 288, 20202955 (2021).
Google Scholar
Donald, P. F. et al. International conservation policy delivers benefits for birds in Europe. Science 317, 810–813 (2007).
Google Scholar
Martay, B. et al. Monitoring landscape-scale environmental changes with citizen scientists: Twenty years of land use change in Great Britain. J. Nat. Conserv. 44, 33–42 (2018).
Google Scholar
Sullivan, M. J. P., Newson, S. E. & Pearce‐Higgins, J. W. Changing densities of generalist species underlie apparent homogenization of UK bird communities. Ibis 158, 645–655 (2016).
Google Scholar
Wauchope, H. S. et al. Evaluating impact using time-series data. Trends Ecol. Evol. 36, 196–205 (2021).
Google Scholar
Devictor, V. et al. Differences in the climatic debts of birds and butterflies at a continental scale. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 121–124 (2012).
Google Scholar
Lehikoinen, P., Santangeli, A., Jaatinen, K., Rajasärkkä, A. & Lehikoinen, A. Protected areas act as a buffer against detrimental effects of climate change—evidence from large‐scale, long‐term abundance data. Glob. Change Biol. 25, 304–313 (2019).
Google Scholar
Gaüzère, P., Jiguet, F. & Devictor, V. Can protected areas mitigate the impacts of climate change on bird’s species and communities? Diversity Distrib. 22, 625–637 (2016).
Google Scholar
Neate‐Clegg, M. H. C., Jones, S. E. I., Burdekin, O., Jocque, M. & Şekercioğlu, Ç. H. Elevational changes in the avian community of a Mesoamerican cloud forest park. Biotropica 50, 805–815 (2018).
Google Scholar
Oliver, T. H. et al. Large extents of intensive land use limit community reorganization during climate warming. Glob. Change Biol. 23, 2272–2283 (2017).
Google Scholar
Hiley, J. R., Bradbury, R. B., Holling, M. & Thomas, C. D. Protected areas act as establishment centres for species colonizing the UK. Proc. Biol. Sci. 280, 20122310 (2013).
Google Scholar
Thomas, C. D. et al. Protected areas facilitate species’ range expansions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 14063–14068 (2012).
Google Scholar
Grace, M. K. et al. Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact. Conserv. Biol. 35, 1833–1849 (2021).
Google Scholar
Gibbons, D. W., Reid, J. B. & Chapman, R. A. The New Atlas of Breeding Birds in Britain & Ireland 1988–1991 (T. & A. D. Poyser, 1993).
Balmer, D. E. et al. Bird Atlas 2007–11: the Breeding and Wintering Birds of Britain and Ireland (BTO, 2013).
Gillings, S. et al. Breeding and wintering bird distributions in Britain and Ireland from citizen science bird atlases. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 28, 866–874 (2019).
Google Scholar
Freeman, S. N., Noble, D. G., Newson, S. E. & Baillie, S. R. Modelling population changes using data from different surveys: the Common Birds Census and the Breeding Bird Survey. Bird Study 54, 61–72 (2007).
Google Scholar
Robinson, R. A., Julliard, R. & Saracco, J. F. Constant effort: studying avian population processes using standardised ringing. Ring. Migr. 24, 199–204 (2009).
Google Scholar
Cave, V. M., Freeman, S. N., Brooks, S. P., King, R. & Balmer, D. E. in Modeling Demographic Processes in Marked Populations, 949–963 (Springer, 2009).
Rowland, C. S. et al. Land Cover Map 2015 (1km Percentage Aggregate Class, GB) (eds Thomson, D. L. et al) (Environmental Information Data Centre, 2017); https://doi.org/10.5285/7115bc48-3ab0-475d-84ae-fd3126c20984
Rowland, C. S. et al. Land Cover Map 2015 (1km Percentage Aggregate Class, N. Ireland) (Environmental Information Data Centre, 2017); https://doi.org/10.5285/362feaea-0ccf-4a45-b11f-980c6b89a858
ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model V003 (dataset). NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC (NASA/METI/AIST/Japan Space Systems and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team, 2019); https://doi.org/10.5067/ASTER/ASTGTM.003
Schiavina, M., Freire, S. & MacManus, K. GHS-SMOD R2019A – GHS Settlement Layers, Updated and Refined REGIO Model 2014 in Application to GHS-BUILT R2018A and GHS-POP R2019A, Multitemporal (1975-1990-2000-2015) (European Commission Joint Research Centre, 2019); https://doi.org/10.2905/42E8BE89-54FF-464E-BE7B-BF9E64DA5218
Robinson, R. A. BirdFacts: Profiles of Birds Occurring in Britain & Ireland (BTO, 2005).
Gibbons, D. W. et al. Bird species of conservation concern in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man: revising the Red Data List. RSPB Conserv. Rev. 10, 7–18 (1996).
Stone, B. H. et al. Population estimates of birds in Britain and in the United Kingdom. Br. Birds 90, 1–22 (1997).
Woodward, I. et al. Population estimates of birds in Great Britain and the United Kingdom. Br. Birds 113, 69–104 (2020).
R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
Joppa, L. N. & Pfaff, A. High and far: biases in the location of protected areas. PLoS ONE 4, e8273 (2009).
Google Scholar
Bull, J. W., Strange, N., Smith, R. J. & Gordon, A. Reconciling multiple counterfactuals when evaluating biodiversity conservation impact in social‐ecological systems. Conserv. Biol. 35, 510–521 (2020).
Google Scholar
Jellesmark, S. et al. Assessing the global impact of targeted conservation actions on species abundance. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.14.476374 (2022).
Wauchope, H. S. et al. Protected areas have a mixed impact on waterbirds but management helps. Nature 605, 103–107 (2022).
Google Scholar
Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G. & Stuart, E. A. MatchIt: nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference. J. Stat. Softw. 42, 1–28 (2011).
Google Scholar
Wood, S. N. Generalized Additive Models: an Introduction with R 2nd edn (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2017).
Hartig, F. DHARMa: Residual diagnostics for hierarchical (multi-level/mixed) regression models. R package v.0.4.4 (2021); https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=DHARMa
Jetz, W., Thomas, G. H., Joy, J. B., Hartmann, K. & Mooers, A. O. The global diversity of birds in space and time. Nature 491, 444–448 (2012).
Google Scholar
Hadfield, J. D. MCMC methods for multi-response generalized linear mixed models: the MCMCglmm R package. J. Stat. Softw. 33, 1–22 (2010).
Google Scholar
Paradis, E., Claude, J. & Strimmer, K. APE: analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R language. Bioinformatics 20, 289–290 (2004).
Google Scholar
Johnston, A. et al. Species traits explain variation in detectability of UK birds. Bird Study 61, 340–350 (2014).
Google Scholar
Hill, M. O. Diversity and evenness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54, 427–432 (1973).
Google Scholar
Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G. & Stuart, E. A. Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Anal. 15, 199–236 (2007).
Google Scholar
Julliard, R., Clavel, J., Devictor, V., Jiguet, F. & Couvet, D. Spatial segregation of specialists and generalists in bird communities. Ecol. Lett. 9, 1237–1244 (2006).
Google Scholar
Devictor, V., Julliard, R., Couvet, D. & Jiguet, F. Birds are tracking climate warming, but not fast enough. Proc. Biol. Sci. 275, 2743–2748 (2008).
Google Scholar
Source: Ecology - nature.com
