Trade-offs between nature and people reveal challenges in translating global conservation targets into national realities

Sophie Caitlin Jago , Gebremeskel Gizaw, Bezawit Genanaw, Joe Langley , Ermias Lulekal, Joseph D.M. White, Adèle N Rowlands, Tariku Geda, Kumara Wakjira, Fekede Regassa, Sebsebe Demissew, Feleke Woldeyes, Wendawek Abebe, Julia P G Jones, Robert J. Smith, James Borrell

Achieving global biodiversity targets depends on the ability of individual countries to translate targets into reality on the ground. In 2022, 196 parties committed to conserving 30% of the planet by 2030, yet questions remain over whether existing protected areas are effective at conserving biodiversity, and furthermore whether conservation successes impact the wellbeing of local communities. We focus on Ethiopia, a country supporting globally important and endemic biodiversity but facing substantial poverty and food insecurity challenges. We characterise the extent and representativeness of Ethiopia’s existing protected area network, illustrating a three-fold expansion would be required to meet the global target, potentially impacting millions of people. Using a quasi-experimental approach (accounting for known confounders and exploring sensitivity of results to potential unobserved confounders), we demonstrate that the existing protected area network has delivered environmental benefits, with strict protected areas associated with 25% less forest loss and 44% less agricultural expansion compared to statistically matched controls. This is likely to provide national-scale benefits through ecosystem service provision, however, local communities neighbouring protected areas were exposed to significantly worse food security outcomes, equivalent to 3.9 million fewer household-months of adequate food. Surveys with conservation stakeholders show national recognition of these challenges: they prioritise improving effectiveness and governance of the existing network rather than expansion. Our findings highlight the importance of national context, and the risk of prioritising global area-based targets without addressing local social impacts.