Author Correction: Environmental data justice is key for developing more effective area-based conservation approaches

Correction to: Nature Reviews Biodiversity https://doi.org/10.1038/s44358-025-00126-w, published online 27 January 2026.

In the version of the article initially published, in the fourth paragraph of the “Seven useful elements of environmental data justice” section, the following text was incorrect: “Challenging this false dichotomy reveals additional forms of landscape protection, which is important because the WDPA only records official state protection, missing other protective measures owing to restrictive protocols. This gap has been demonstrated by examination of protected lands across nine Amazonian countries⁸³: the WDPA recognized just 28% of lands as protected, but broader criteria classified 41% as protected, and most of the additional areas qualified as OECMs through payments for ecosystem services or eco-certification schemes.” The text has been updated to “Challenging this false dichotomy reveals additional forms of landscape protection, which is important because the WDPA is primarily a record of national systems of protected areas that are recognised and reported by governments. It can therefore miss other forms of protection as these national systems often largely comprise state-governed areas and fail to recognise diverse approaches to conservation and particularly those led by non-state actors.” The original ref. 83 has also been removed and subsequent references have been renumbered. This correction has been made to the HTML and PDF versions of the article.