Conservation areas can enlarge a network without connecting it

A global audit finds many alternative conservation sites touch protected areas, but few bridge fragmented ones.

Wild Lands Ecological Intelligence Editor
Wild Lands Institute · 27 October 2026

Conservation areas can enlarge a network without connecting it — Levi Novey/USFWS — illustrative tropical forest landscape; not one of the study's mapped sites · Public domain — U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service · Rights: Public domain

Evidence: Peer-reviewed
Geography: 6,234 reported OECMs across 14 countries
System: Area-based conservation networks; protected-area configuration

WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS

Sharma and colleagues developed a spatial typology for other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs), assessing whether sites enlarge, connect, buffer, or aggregate protected areas. Nearly a third of 6,234 mapped OECMs across 14 countries directly adjoined protected areas. Roughly 3% structurally connected, buffered or aggregated otherwise isolated or fragmented protected areas, while around two thirds lay within 10 km of an existing protected area.

WHY IT MATTERS / OUR READ

The first question is not how many new hectares appear in a conservation inventory, but what ecological role each hectare can actually perform. Adjacency may enlarge an existing footprint without restoring movement pathways. Map conservation additions against barriers, viable habitat and species-specific dispersal before equating area with ecological connectivity.

CAVEATS / UNCERTAINTY

The study quantifies geometric network roles, not confirmed animal movement, management quality or biodiversity outcomes; the 14-country reporting sample is not a census of all OECMs.

SOURCE

Nature Ecology & Evolution — Sharma, van der Velden & Cook (26 Oct 2026)
View original evidence ↗