Achieving the 30x30 objective: a sub-national approach
One of the key targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (CMB-KM), adopted at COP15 in 2022, is to protect 30% of terrestrial, aquatic and marine areas by 2030.
But how do you choose which areas to protect? How do we build a network of protected areas that takes into account ecological and climatic requirements, as well as economic realities? At what scale should we analyze our territories to make the most judicious choices?
These questions are at the heart of Habitat's reflections, in partnership with researchers from the University of Minnesota, McGill University, the Centre de la science de la biodiversité du Québec and Stanford University's Natural Capital Project, in a mandate coordinated by the Ministère des relations internationales et de la francophonie (MRIF), and carried out in collaboration with the Ministère de l'Environnement, de la Lutte contre les changements climatiques, de la Faune et des Parcs (MELCCFP).
As part of this project, the team developed an innovative approach to inform the decisions of sub-national actors in achieving the 30x30 objective, and to provide food for thought to the governments of Quebec and California, in three stages:
Identify areas of high ecological value
Assessing the ecological performance of alternative 30% conservation scenarios
Modeling the economic impact of conservation scenarios
Identify areas of high ecological value for conservation
Five key criteria, aligned with the objectives of the CMB-KM and best practices from the scientific literature, were selected to identify areas of high conservation importance:
Current (2020) and future (2080) biodiversity richness
Richness in endangered species
Connectivity
Climate change mitigation
Climate resilience
The team selected and harmonized multiple local and national datasets to obtain a high-resolution picture of the ecological value of all the territories studied, while distinguishing areas already protected at present.
A multi-criteria optimization tool was then applied, highlighting the areas that would contribute most to biodiversity conservation as defined by our five criteria. In addition, the tool allows the selection of complementary zones to current protected areas, in order to achieve the target of conserving 30% of the territory according to the chosen scale of analysis.
The scale of analysis has an impact on the distribution of protected areas, and therefore largely influences the profile of the extended network of protected areas.
As part of this study, three different scenarios were developed and evaluated with the tool in Quebec:
On a provincial scale, the tool identifies the majority of areas to be protected in southern Quebec and the James Bay lowlands, due to the richness of the species, the importance of connectivity and the carbon stored underground.
At the scale of the natural provinces, the distribution of new sites to be conserved is more representative of northern regions and favours the protection of future climate refuges.
In the third scenario, in which each territorial zone is required to establish 30% protected areas, the distribution of selected areas is well distributed throughout the territory, resulting in better protection of the uniqueness of the species specific to each ecosystem.
It is possible to identify areas of overlap between the three scenarios in order to designate the areas which, whatever the scale considered, are considered to have the highest ecological values for conservation.
Large-scale conservation planning scenarios are more effective for biodiversity, but are not evenly distributed across the territory.
Assessing the ecological performance of alternative conservation scenarios to make informed choices
Once the high-value areas have been identified, several complementary factors need to be considered to assess the relative ecological performance of each conservation scenario.
This is what Habitat has achieved by creating a complementary tool for calculating and visualizing the benefits and trade-offs generated by each scenario, based on 8 indicators specifically selected to best represent the objectives of the CMB-KM. These indicators include, in particular, the representativeness of ecosystem types and species taxa, and the integrity of the areas considered for conservation, elements which add nuance to the results obtained in the previous step. The performance of each scenario can be seen in Figure 2.
Although it is impossible to obtain a scenario that optimizes the performance of all indicators at once, the tool developed by Habitat will enable sub-national and national governments, as well as other conservation players operating over large territories, to better understand the trade-offs involved in prioritizing certain criteria. The tool will thus enable them to optimize their approach to land protection according to local realities.
Modeling regional economic impacts
In addition to ecological considerations, Habitat and its collaborators also looked at the economic impacts of achieving the 30x30 target. The integrated land-economy-ecosystem services (LEES) modeling framework developed by the World Bank had never before been applied on a regional scale. Yet it is a promising approach for better understanding the economic impact of establishing protected areas.
The team therefore developed an application of the GTAP-InVEST tools (TESE model) to the 30x30 scenarios developed for Quebec and California.
Analyses show that achieving the 30x30 target has only minor economic impacts on sub-national economies. In fact, the extension of protected areas generates benefits that offset any negative economic impacts of conserving 30% of land.
In an optimized scenario, achieving the 30x30 objective in Quebec would result in a slight drop in GDP (-0.04%) compared to a status quo scenario (current protected areas maintained at 17% of the territory). This slight decrease is explained by the economic losses caused by a reduction in the exploitation of natural resources (e.g.: logging), offset by several benefits, including :
Improved ecosystem services, leading for example to higher agricultural yields.
A reduction in carbon emissions linked to land use, particularly in a context of future climate change.
Rising land prices.
Although the GTAP-InVEST model offers interesting perspectives for understanding the high-level impact of conservation decisions on the economy, the use of more granular datasets that take inter-regional economic dynamics into account would enable us to refine its results.
In conclusion
The work accomplished during this project confirms that a well-designed sub-national conservation approach can not only contribute to the protection of biodiversity, but also ensure manageable economic impacts. The conservation challenge, when approached strategically, offers a balance between economic development and ecosystem preservation, enabling the 30x30 target to be achieved in a sustainable and equitable way.