Improving protected area effectiveness through consideration of different human-pressure baselines.

Previous assessments of the effectiveness of protected areas (PAs) focused primarily on changes in human pressure over time and did not consider the different human-pressure baselines of PAs, thereby potentially over- or underestimating PA effectiveness. We developed a framework that considers both human-pressure baseline and change in human pressure over time and assessed the effectiveness of 338 PAs in China from 2010 to 2020. The initial state of human pressure on PAs was taken as the baseline, and changes in human pressure index (HPI) were further analyzed under different baselines. We used the random forest models to identify the management measures that most improved effectiveness in resisting human pressure for the PAs with different baselines. Finally, the relationships between the changes in the HPI and the changes in natural ecosystems in PAs were analyzed with different baselines. Of PAs with low HPI baselines, medium HPI baselines, and high HPI baselines, 76.92% (n=150), 11.11% (n=12), and 22.86% (n=8) , respectively, showed positive effects in resisting human pressure. Overall, ignoring human-pressure baselines somewhat underestimated the positive effects of PAs, especially for those with low initial human pressure. For PAs with different initial human pressures, different management measures should be taken to improve effectiveness and reduce threats to natural ecosystems. We believe our framework is useful for assessing the effectiveness of PAs globally, and we recommend it be included in the Convention on Biological Diversity Post-2020 Strategy.