Conservation value of multiple-use areas in East Africa
Abstract
Despite wide agreement that strictly protected areas (World Conservation Union categories I-III) are the best strategy for conserving biodiversity, they are limited in extent and exclude many species of key conservation importance. In contrast, multiple-use management areas (categories IV-VI), comprising >60% of the world's protected-area network, are often considered of little value to biodiversity conservation, particularly in Africa, where they typically contain few charismatic large mammals. We sampled small mammals, amphibians, birds, butterflies, and trees at 41 sites along a four-step gradient of increasing human activity and decreasing conservation protection, from a well-protected Tanzanian national park to nonintensive agricultural land. Although preliminary, our results indicate that species richness of these five taxa did not decline along this gradient, but different management areas, occupying areas of largely similar habitat, hosted distinct communities of each taxon. Differences in species composition in the absence of manifest differences in species richness highlight the importance of developing landscape-scale conservation strategies and the danger of using either a limited suite of indicator taxa or umbrella species as surrogates for biodiversity. Although strictly protected areas perform a unique and vital conservation service in East Africa by protecting large mammals, areas that allow varied resource extraction activities still possess vital and complem…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Multiple-use landscapes and unprotected areas are important for species survival, especially where the existing protected area network does not entirely cover species' ranges and suitable habitats.
“Multiple-use landscapes and unprotected areas are important for species survival (Gardner et al., ; Perfecto & Vandermeer, ), especially where the existing network of protected areas does not entirely cover species' ranges and suitable habitats; e.g. for some large mammalian carnivores (Forrest et al., ; Swanepoel et al., ) and migratory herbivores (Western et al., ).”
From A mix of community-based conservation and protected forests is needed for the survival of the Endangered pygmy hippopotamus<i>Choeropsis liberiensis</i> (2017) · cites this paper as Gardner et al., 2007
Cites
A biodiversity intactness index
Scholes, R. J., & Biggs, R. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03289 · Cited by 577 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Single-species conservation in a multiple-use landscape: current protection of the tiger range
Forrest, J. L., Bomhard, B., Budiman, A., Coad, L., Cox, N., Dinerstein, E., Hammer, D., Huang, C., Huy, K., Kraft, R., et al. (2011) · Animal Conservation · doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2010.00428.x · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Hillers, A., Buchanan, G. M., Garteh, J. C., Tommy, S. M., Fofana, M. L., & Lindsell, J. A. (2017) · Oryx · doi:10.1017/s003060531600020x · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- GARDNER, T. A., CARO, T., FITZHERBERT, E. B., BANDA, T., & LALBHAI, P.
- Affiliations
- University of East Anglia (GB)
- Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute (TZ)
- University of California, Davis (US)
- Corresponding author
- CARO, TIM
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-10-05
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1516-1525
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2146518770
- Cited by
- 87
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Conservation Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of California, Davis
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
- Keywords
- protected areas, biodiversity conservation, species richness, species composition, umbrella species, indicator taxa, large mammals, small mammals, amphibians, birds, butterflies, trees, landscape conservation, East Africa, Tanzania
- MeSH terms
- Africa, Amphibians, Animals, Birds, Butterflies, Conservation of Natural Resources, Humans, Human Activities, Mammals, Population Dynamics, Trees, Biodiversity
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