Study finds global conservation coverage exceeds official estimates

A study published in Nature on 14 October 2026 reports that global conservation area coverage is substantially higher than current official estimates. While the World Database on Protected and Conserved Areas (WDPCA) reports that conservation areas cover 18.5% of the terrestrial realm, the new research estimates the figure is likely 26.81%. This finding suggests the world may be closer to achieving the Global Biodiversity Framework Target 3 goal of 30% coverage by 2030 than previously thought.

Methodology and Coverage Estimates

The research team, led by Helen M. K. O’Neill and colleagues, evaluated progress towards the area component of Target 3 using a globally representative sample across 25 countries and territories. The sample covered 10% of the terrestrial realm and incorporated national datasets that include conservation areas not reflected in global figures. The study identified three categories of conservation areas: globally recognized protected areas (PAs), nationally recognized PAs, and possible other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs).

According to the study, the estimated 26.81% coverage comprises:

• 15.79% in globally recognized PAs.
• 3.64% in nationally recognized PAs.
• 7.38% in possible OECMs.

The authors note that most nationally recognized PAs are likely to qualify for globally recognized PA or OECM status. Consequently, the data indicates that the world may only be 3.2% short of achieving 30% terrestrial coverage. The study emphasizes that this is likely an underestimate, as some nations lack the capacity to map their conservation areas.

Ecological Representativeness Concerns

Despite the higher coverage estimates, the study finds that the additional land does not substantially address gaps in ecological representativeness. The researchers analyzed the protection equality of ecoregions, a metric ranging from 0 to 1 where 1 indicates equal coverage across all ecoregions. Globally recognized PAs had a protection equality score of 0.405. Adding nationally recognized PAs and possible OECMs increased this score only to 0.505, leaving the network still relatively unequal.

The analysis showed that of the median 173 ecoregions in each sample, 80 had less than 10% coverage in globally recognized PAs. This number decreased to 64 when including all PAs and 51 when including all conservation area types. Conversely, the number of ecoregions meeting the 30% coverage target increased from 43 (globally recognized PAs) to 80 (all conservation areas). The authors state that possible OECMs are largely found in the same ecoregions as existing PAs, influenced by similar economic factors, and therefore do little to improve representativeness.

Implications for Target 3

The study highlights that solely meeting the area component of Target 3 will do little to solve continuing global biodiversity loss. The authors argue that more focus and resources are needed to achieve the other components of the target, which include effective management, equitable governance, and well-connected sites. The research indicates that the extra conserved land often covers ecoregions that are already well represented, leaving many others under-represented.

The authors suggest that designating more conservation areas will be necessary to achieve the ecological representativeness components of Target 3. They recommend using systematic conservation planning to account for trade-offs between conservation and other societal goals, such as food security and sustainable trade. The study also notes that OECMs and diversified PA governance arrangements could play a major role in meeting Target 3 by providing recognition to Indigenous Peoples and local communities, who govern substantial portions of the world but are under-represented in formally recognized PA networks.

Why it matters

The findings challenge the prevailing narrative that the world is far from meeting its 30x30 conservation goals. By revealing that nearly 27% of the terrestrial realm is already under some form of conservation, the study shifts the focus from quantity to quality. It underscores that achieving the numerical target does not guarantee ecological effectiveness, urging policymakers to prioritize strategic planning, equitable governance, and the protection of under-represented ecosystems rather than simply expanding the total area of protected land.

---

Sources

• nature.com: Global conservation area coverage substantially exceeds current estimates | Nature

This article was drafted with AI assistance and checked against the sources above. Company claims are reported as claims. Cover image is AI-generated.