The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Globalization and Multi-spatial Trends in the Coverage of Protected-Area Conservation (1980–2000)
Abstract
This study is focused on the global expansion of protected-area coverage that occurred during the 1980--2000 period. We examine the multi-scale patterning of four of the basic facets of this expansion: i) estimated increases at the world-regional and country-level scales of total protected-area coverage; ii) transboundary protected areas; iii) conservation corridor projects; and iv) type of conservation management. Geospatial patterning of protected-area designations is a reflection of the priorities of global conservation organizations and the globalization of post-Cold War political and economic arrangements. Local and national-level factors (political leadership and infrastructure) as well as international relations such as multilateral and bilateral aid combine with these globalization processes to impact the extent, type, and location of protected-area designations. We conclude that the interaction of these factors led to the creation and reinforcement of marked spatial differences (rather than tendencies toward worldwide evenness or homogenization) in the course of protected-area expansion during the 1980--2000 period.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
There has been a recent conservation boom with unprecedented increases in the land area designated for conservation.
“Many have noted the recent conservation boom, with unprecedented increases in the land area designated for conservation (see Zimmerer et al., 2004).”
From Power of Maps: (Counter) Mapping for Conservation (2015) · cites this paper as Zimmerer et al., 2004
Linking conservation goals to specific territories finds expression in an expanding map of protected areas.
“The linking of conservation goals to specific territories (mapping for conservation) is a practice that finds expression in an expanding map of protected areas (Zimmerer et al., 2004; see Map 1 and Box 1).”
From Power of Maps: (Counter) Mapping for Conservation (2015) · cites this paper as Zimmerer et al., 2004
Most protected areas remain limited to the confines of just one political state, although the number of transboundary protected areas is on the rise.
“As a result, most protected areas remain limited to the confines of just one political state, although the number of 'transboundary protected areas' is on the rise (Zimmerer et al., 2004).”
From Power of Maps: (Counter) Mapping for Conservation (2015) · cites this paper as Zimmerer et al., 2004
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Interactions between protected areas and their surroundings in human-dominated tropical landscapes
DeFries, R., Karanth, K. K., & Pareeth, S. (2010) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.010 · Cited by 299
Power of Maps: (Counter) Mapping for Conservation
Harris, L. M., & Hazen, H. D. (2015) · ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies · doi:10.14288/acme.v4i1.730 · Cited by 158
Metadata
- Authors
- Zimmerer, K. S., Galt, R. E., & Buck, M. V.
- Venue
- AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment
- Publisher
- Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2004-12
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 520-529
- ISSN
- 0044-7447
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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