IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v5y2016i4p35-d81448.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Terrestrial Species in Protected Areas and Community-Managed Lands in Arunachal Pradesh, Northeast India

Author

Listed:
  • Nandini Velho

    (Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science (TESS) and College of Marine and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD 4878, Australia)

  • Rachakonda Sreekar

    (School of Biological Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia)

  • William F. Laurance

    (Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science (TESS) and College of Marine and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD 4878, Australia)

Abstract

Protected areas (including areas that are nominally fully protected and those managed for multiple uses) encompass about a quarter of the total tropical forest estate. Despite growing interest in the relative value of community-managed lands and protected areas, knowledge about the biodiversity value that each sustains remains scarce in the biodiversity-rich tropics. We investigated the species occurrence of a suite of mammal and pheasant species across four protected areas and nearby community-managed lands in a biodiversity hotspot in northeast India. Over 2.5 years we walked 98 transects (half of which were resampled on a second occasion) across the four paired sites. In addition, we interviewed 84 key informants to understand their perceptions of species trends in these two management regimes. We found that protected areas had higher overall species richness and were important for species that were apparently declining in occurrence. On a site-specific basis, community-managed lands had species richness and occurrences comparable to those of a protected area, and in one case their relative abundances of mammals were higher. Interviewees indicated declines in the abundances of larger-bodied species in community-managed lands. Their observations agreed with our field surveys for certain key, large-bodied species, such as gaur and sambar, which generally occurred less in community-managed lands. Hence, the degree to which protected areas and community-managed lands protect wildlife species depends upon the species in question, with larger-bodied species usually faring better within protected areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Nandini Velho & Rachakonda Sreekar & William F. Laurance, 2016. "Terrestrial Species in Protected Areas and Community-Managed Lands in Arunachal Pradesh, Northeast India," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-11, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:35-:d:81448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/4/35/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/5/4/35/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ana S. L. Rodrigues & Sandy J. Andelman & Mohamed I. Bakarr & Luigi Boitani & Thomas M. Brooks & Richard M. Cowling & Lincoln D. C. Fishpool & Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca & Kevin J. Gaston & Michael Hoff, 2004. "Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity," Nature, Nature, vol. 428(6983), pages 640-643, April.
    2. B D Spracklen & M Kalamandeen & D Galbraith & E Gloor & D V Spracklen, 2015. "A Global Analysis of Deforestation in Moist Tropical Forest Protected Areas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeffrey Sayer & Chris Margules, 2017. "Biodiversity in Locally Managed Lands," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-5, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karyn Tabor & Jennifer Hewson & Hsin Tien & Mariano González-Roglich & David Hole & John W. Williams, 2018. "Tropical Protected Areas Under Increasing Threats from Climate Change and Deforestation," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-14, July.
    2. A.S. Duden & P.A. Verweij & A.P.C. Faaij & D. Baisero & C. Rondinini & F. van der Hilst, 2020. "Biodiversity Impacts of Increased Ethanol Production in Brazil," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, January.
    3. David B. Lindenmayer, 2023. "Forest Biodiversity Declines and Extinctions Linked with Forest Degradation: A Case Study from Australian Tall, Wet Forests," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Yves Hategekimana & Mona Allam & Qingyan Meng & Yueping Nie & Elhag Mohamed, 2020. "Quantification of Soil Losses along the Coastal Protected Areas in Kenya," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Rochelle Steven & J Guy Castley & Ralf Buckley, 2013. "Tourism Revenue as a Conservation Tool for Threatened Birds in Protected Areas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-8, May.
    6. Javier Martínez-Vega & David Rodríguez-Rodríguez, 2022. "Protected Area Effectiveness in the Scientific Literature: A Decade-Long Bibliometric Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Herring, Matthew W. & Garnett, Stephen T. & Zander, Kerstin K., 2022. "Producing rice while conserving the habitat of an endangered waterbird: Incentives for farmers to integrate water management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. Kerchner, Charles & Honzák, Miroslav & Kemkes, Robin & Richardson, Amanda & Townsend, Jason & Rimmer, Christopher C., 2010. "Designing spatially explicit incentive programs for habitat conservation: A case study of the Bicknell's thrush wintering grounds," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2108-2115, September.
    9. Chen, Yuquan & Fan, Shenggen & Liu, Chang & Yu, Xiaohua, 2022. "Is there a tradeoff between nature reserves and grain production in China?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Luqiong Fan & Chunting Feng & Zhixue Wang & Jing Tian & Wenjie Huang & Wei Wang, 2022. "Balancing the Conservation and Poverty Eradication: Differences in the Spatial Distribution Characteristics of Protected Areas between Poor and Non-Poor Counties in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Liu, Yujie & Li, Zemin & Jin, Xing & Tao, Yuchen & Ding, Hong & Wang, Zhen, 2022. "The effect of perceptions competition and learning costs on cooperation in spatial evolutionary multigames," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    12. Ochoa-Ochoa, Leticia M. & Flores-Villela, Oscar A. & Bezaury-Creel, Juan E., 2016. "Using one vs. many, sensitivity and uncertainty analyses of species distribution models with focus on conservation area networks," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 320(C), pages 372-382.
    13. Conceição, Eliezer O. & Garcia, Jéssica Magon & Alves, Gustavo Henrique Zaia & Delanira-Santos, Driele & Corbetta, Daiany de Fátima & Betiol, Tânia Camila Crivelari & Pacifico, Ricardo & Romagnolo, Ma, 2022. "The impact of downsizing protected areas: How a misguided policy may enhance landscape fragmentation and biodiversity loss," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    14. Bernard W T Coetzee & Kevin J Gaston & Steven L Chown, 2014. "Local Scale Comparisons of Biodiversity as a Test for Global Protected Area Ecological Performance: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-11, August.
    15. Haider, Zulqarnain & Charkhgard, Hadi & Kwon, Changhyun, 2018. "A robust optimization approach for solving problems in conservation planning," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 288-297.
    16. Wilson, Clevo & Tisdell, Clement A., 2004. "What role does knowledge of wildlife play in providing support for species' conservation," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 51417, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    17. Mengtian Cao & Li Peng & Shaoquan Liu, 2015. "Analysis of the Network of Protected Areas in China Based on a Geographic Perspective: Current Status, Issues and Integration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-15, November.
    18. Belachew Gizachew & Svein Solberg & Stefano Puliti, 2018. "Forest Carbon Gain and Loss in Protected Areas of Uganda: Implications to Carbon Benefits of Conservation," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-14, November.
    19. Erin McCreless & Piero Visconti & Josie Carwardine & Chris Wilcox & Robert J Smith, 2013. "Cheap and Nasty? The Potential Perils of Using Management Costs to Identify Global Conservation Priorities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-1, November.
    20. Azevedo-Ramos, Claudia & Moutinho, Paulo, 2018. "No man’s land in the Brazilian Amazon: Could undesignated public forests slow Amazon deforestation?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 125-127.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:35-:d:81448. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.