@article {459,
	title = {Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity},
	journal = {Nature},
	volume = {428},
	year = {2004},
	abstract = {<p>The Fifth World Parks Congress in Durban, South Africa, announced in  September 2003 that the global network of protected areas now covers  11.5\% of the planet{\textquoteright}s land surface. This surpasses the 10\% target  proposed a decade earlier, at the Caracas Congress2, for 9 out of 14  major terrestrial biomes. Such uniform targets based on percentage of  area have become deeply embedded into national and international  conservation planning.Although politically expedient, the scientific  basis and conservation value of these targets have been questioned. In  practice, however, little is known of how to set appropriate targets, or  of the extent to which the current global protected area network  fulfils its goal of protecting biodiversity. Here, we combine five  global data sets on the distribution of species and protected areas to  provide the first global gap analysis assessing the effectiveness of  protected areas in representing species diversity. We show that the  global network is far from complete, and demonstrate the inadequacy of  uniform-that is, {\textquoteright}one size fits all{\textquoteright}-conservation targets.</p>},
	keywords = {Africas biodiversitys conservations distributions diversitys effectivenesss fish, network, planning, protected area, size, value},
	author = {A-S-L. Rodrigues and G-A-B. DeFonseca and L-D-C. Fishpool and R.M. Cowling and T-M. Brooks and L. Boitani and M-I. Bakarr and S-J. Andelman and K-J. Gaston and J. Schipper and R-L. Pressey and J-D. Pilgriim and P-A. Marquet and J-S. Long and M. Hoffmann and W. Sechrest and X. Yan and M-E-J. Watts and R-W. Walter and L-G. Underhill and S-N. Stuart}
}
