Table 2 Main rationale and hypotheses explaining the expected relationships between the seven socioeconomic factors used in our study and the presence of protected areas on land and sea

From: The socioeconomic and environmental niche of protected areas reveals global conservation gaps and opportunities

Variable

Rationale

Hypothesised effect

Local Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Poorer areas tend to have fewer protected areas20,33,79, so areas with higher GDP could be more protected.

Positive

Conflicts

The high incidence of armed conflicts poses significant challenges in achieving conservation targets24. Countries with higher intensity of conflicts are likely to have less protection.

Negative

Human Development Index (HDI)

Countries with a higher HDI (a measure of health, education, and economy) are likely to have a greater capacity to manage their environment20 and engage their citizens in policy-making12 so are expected to have more protection.

Positive

Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)

Civil society organisations and local communities can be important actors in advocating for policies aimed at improving measures for biodiversity conservation80. While not being the only element of civil society, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are expected to be important actors in lobbying for, and establishing, protected areas81. Thus, countries with a higher number of NGOs are expected to have greater protection.

Positive

Marine and terrestrial resources dependency

Protected area designations tend to be biased towards places that have low value to human activities like fisheries and agriculture22,82. Thus, countries with lower dependency upon marine and terrestrial resources are expected to have greater protection.

Negative

Accessibility in terms of travel time to the nearest city

The majority of protected areas are biased towards greater distance from roads and cities21. Thus, less accessible areas are expected to have greater protection.

Negative

Human footprint

A high human footprint means that people have easy access to resources, is associated with overexploitation and represents competition for space83. Areas with higher human footprints are thus expected to have less protection.

Negative