"Meta-analysis of conservation measures: 44,000 species at risk of extinction, but actions help to preserve biodiversity"

The results of this first-ever comprehensive meta-analysis of the impact of conservation measures are of immense significance. Published in the journal Science, it explicitly confirms that more than 44,000 species are currently facing the threat of extinction.

This underscores the necessity of protecting ecosystems that stabilize the climate and sustain the lives of billions of people.

The study was conducted by analysts from the Re:wild group, which includes ecologist scientists and Leonardo DiCaprio.

"Governments have recently set new global targets to halt and reverse biodiversity loss, making it even more critical to understand the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation measures. By focusing only on species loss, one might mistakenly assume that safeguarding biodiversity is unattainable.

However, this article demonstrates that conservation indeed yields results, helping to halt and reverse biodiversity loss.

It is evident that this work should be prioritized and receive significant additional resources and political support globally, while simultaneously addressing various systemic factors contributing to biodiversity loss, including unsustainable food production," says Penny Langhammer, lead author of the study and executive director.

Today, most countries around the world are implementing sustainable agriculture tools in the agricultural sector. They are promoting biologization with support for organic production, revitalizing so-called "orphan crops," and investing in the conversion of agricultural waste into closed-loop systems.

While many studies have examined individual conservation projects and initiatives and their impacts compared to inaction, these articles have never been consolidated into a unified analysis to determine the overall effectiveness of conservation actions.

The co-authors conducted the first-ever meta-analysis of 186 studies, including 665 trials, examining the impact of a broad range of conservation measures at a global level and over time, comparing them to situations without these measures.

The studies spanned over a hundred years of conservation efforts and assessed actions targeting different levels of biodiversity – species, ecosystems, and genetic diversity.

The meta-analysis revealed that conservation measures, including creating and managing protected areas, eradicating and controlling invasive species, sustainable ecosystem management, reducing habitat loss, and habitat restoration, improved biodiversity status or slowed its decline in the majority of cases (66%) compared to no action at all.

When conservation measures proved effective, researchers found them to be highly effective. For example, in the Congo basin, deforestation was 74% lower when using a Forest Management Plan (FMP) compared to without FMP.

Protected areas and indigenous lands also significantly reduced deforestation rates and fire density in the Brazilian Amazon. Inside protected areas, deforestation was 1.7–20 times lower, and anthropogenic fires occurred 4–9 times less frequently than outside them.

Even in cases where conservation measures failed to restore or slow the decline of targeted species or ecosystems, they were valuable for refining methods. For instance, in India, physically removing invasive algae led to their spread in other areas. Conservationists can now employ alternative algae removal strategies with a higher likelihood of success.

A correlation was also discovered between recent conservation actions and positive outcomes for biodiversity. Preserving biodiversity likely becomes more effective over time. Other possible reasons for this correlation include increased funding and more targeted interventions.

In some cases, conservation actions did not benefit the target species compared to inaction but provided benefits to other local species. For example, the population of seahorses was lower in protected areas because they were subject to increased predation, including by octopuses.

Researchers note that conservation measures are always preferable to inaction. They calculated that over half of the global GDP, nearly $44 trillion USD, moderately or strongly depends on nature. They also estimated that over $121 billion USD is invested annually worldwide in wildlife conservation on all continents, and the cost-benefit ratio of an effective global wildlife conservation program is at least 1 to 100.