The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Protected Area Effectiveness in Reducing Conversion in a Rapidly Vanishing Ecosystem: The Brazilian Cerrado
Abstract
Measuring how far protected areas (PAs) reduce threats to nature is essential for effective conservation. This is especially important where a high degree of threat is coupled with opportunities for increasing conservation investments, such as in the Brazilian Cerrado. We examined the effectiveness of strictly protected and multiple‐use PAs as well as indigenous lands (ILs) in reducing conversion in Cerrado from 2002 to 2009 by using matching methods to sample protected and unprotected sites similarly exposed to pressures. We found that both types of PAs and ILs experienced lower habitat conversion during this period than did matched unprotected sites, whether results were analysed for individual PAs or for PA networks as a whole. Judging from their matched unprotected sites, strictly PAs had similar levels of baseline conversion to multiple‐use PAs, but were more effective at reducing it. This may be expected as multiple‐use PAs are under less restrictive land‐use rules. ILs had a strong effect in reducing conversion, though baseline rates in matched areas were also high. Our results highlight the usefulness of PAs in the Cerrado and the value of research that differentiates among PA categories.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities
Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., da Fonseca, G. A. B., & Kent, J. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35002501 · Cited by 31,710
Matching Methods for Causal Inference: A Review and a Look Forward
Stuart, E. A. (2010) · Statistical Science · doi:10.1214/09-sts313 · Cited by 5,478
Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity
Rodrigues, A. S. L., Andelman, S. J., Bakarr, M. I., Boitani, L., Brooks, T. M., Cowling, R. M., Fishpool, L. D. C., da Fonseca, G. A. B., Gaston, K. J., Hoffmann, M., et al. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02422 · Cited by 1,525
Inhibition of Amazon deforestation and fire by parks and indigenous lands
NEPSTAD, D., SCHWARTZMAN, S., BAMBERGER, B., SANTILLI, M., RAY, D., SCHLESINGER, P., LEFEBVRE, P., ALENCAR, A., PRINZ, E., FISKE, G., et al. (2006) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00351.x · Cited by 966
Nolte, C., Agrawal, A., Silvius, K. M., & Soares-Filho, B. S. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1214786110 · Cited by 592
Cited by
Local biodiversity is higher inside than outside terrestrial protected areas worldwide
Gray, C. L., Hill, S. L. L., Newbold, T., Hudson, L. N., Börger, L., Contu, S., Hoskins, A. J., Ferrier, S., Purvis, A., & Scharlemann, J. P. W. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms12306 · Cited by 835
Habitat loss and the effectiveness of protected areas in the Cerrado Biodiversity Hotspot
Françoso, R. D., Brandão, R., Nogueira, C. C., Salmona, Y. B., Machado, R. B., & Colli, G. R. (2015) · Natureza & Conservação · doi:10.1016/j.ncon.2015.04.001 · Cited by 395
Candino, M., Brandão, A., Munger, J., Rausch, L., & Gibbs, H. K. (2024) · Land · doi:10.3390/land13070901 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Carranza, T., Balmford, A., Kapos, V., & Manica, A.
- Venue
- Conservation Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-07-26
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 216-223
- ISSN
- 1755-263X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1558978511
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 7.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Protected Area Effectiveness in Reducing Conversion in a Rapidly Vanishing Ecosystem: The Brazilian Cerrado. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/conl.12049
- The paper
- Carranza, T., Balmford, A., Kapos, V., & Manica, A. (2014). Protected Area Effectiveness in Reducing Conversion in a Rapidly Vanishing Ecosystem: The Brazilian Cerrado. Conservation Letters. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12049
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
