Merge pull request #134 from unepwcmc/amends

Amends

lib/data/content/chapter-10.yml

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ content_2:
   -
     Against the backdrop of the ongoing biodiversity crisis, these developments have been motivated by growing evidence that protected areas are not always well managed or reaching the biodiversity most in need of protection (Geldmann <em>et al.,</em> 2019; Watson <em>et al.,</em> 2014). Although Aichi Target 11’s percentage coverage elements are measurable and have incentivised national action (Woodley <em>et al.,</em> 2019; Green <em>et al.,</em> 2019), increases in coverage are necessary but insufficient to conserve global biodiversity.
   -
-    "In the context of governance, quality is in part linked to diversity (Borrini-Feyerabend <em>et al.,</em> 2013). Although governance diversity has received greater attention in recent years, there is more to be done. Indigenous peoples traditionally own, manage or occupy at least one quarter of the world’s land (including 35% of terrestrial areas with very low human intervention) (IPBES, 2019). However, indigenous peoples and local communities often care for nature while lacking formal rights to lands, waters and resources. Stronger partnerships between indigenous peoples, local communities, governments, conservation NGOs and rights-based NGOs will help to articulate how indigenous peoples and local communities can best be recognised and supported in their conservation efforts, with due consideration for their rights, livelihoods and development aspirations. Such efforts should take into account gender-differentiated roles, responsibilities and needs."
+    "In the context of governance, quality is in part linked to diversity (Borrini-Feyerabend <em>et al.,</em> 2013). Although governance diversity has received greater attention in recent years, there is more to be done. Indigenous peoples traditionally own, manage or occupy at least one quarter of the world’s land (including 35% of terrestrial areas with very low human intervention) (IPBES, 2019), and this figure rises to at least 32% when local communities are considered alongside indigenous peoples (WWF <em>et al.,</em> 2021).  However, indigenous peoples and local communities often care for nature while lacking formal rights to lands, waters and resources. Stronger partnerships between indigenous peoples, local communities, governments, conservation NGOs and rights-based NGOs will help to articulate how indigenous peoples and local communities can best be recognised and supported in their conservation efforts, with due consideration for their rights, livelihoods and development aspirations. Such efforts should take into account gender-differentiated roles, responsibilities and needs."
   -
     "It has been similarly documented that private actors often lack recognition for their role in conservation (Bingham <em>et al.,</em> 2017), with only 39 countries and territories reporting privately protected areas to the WDPA (UNEP-WCMC & IUCN, 2021c). The achievement of the CBD’s 2050 Vision for Biodiversity will therefore depend partially on recognising and documenting actions that are already ongoing, and supporting those responsible to maintain positive outcomes in the long term. Beyond non-state protected areas, this requires a considerable and collaborative effort to identify, recognise and document OECMs."
   -

lib/data/content/chapter-2.yml

@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ case_studies:
     Statistics in this chapter were calculated by UNEP-WCMC using the January 2021 release of the WDPA and January 2021 release of the WD-OECM. Three individual layers were used to depict ecoregions: Terrestrial ecoregions, realms and biomes from Olson et al. (2001), minus Antarctic, Rock and Ice and Lake ecoregions. Marine ecoregions, realms and provinces from Spalding et al. (2007); pelagic provinces from Spalding et al. (2012). These three layers were harmonised and merged to form one definitive layer. These layers were chosen for consistency with previous Protected Planet Reports. Protected areas and OECMs were intersected with these ecoregions to determine the scale of overlap between each ecoregion and protected areas and OECMs.\n
     <span class='bold'>Chapter 5: Areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services</span>\n
     Statistics in this chapter have three sources:\n
-    <ol><li>Statistics on KBA coverage by number use the January 2021 release of the WDPA and WD-OECM (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2021b) and the KBA 2020 02 release of the WDKBA These statistics represent the number of KBAs that are fully or partially protected per country and are calculated by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC). More information on this indicator and how it is calculated can be found <a href='https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/DOPA%20Factsheet%20B3%20Key%20Biodiversity%20Areas_0.pdf' title='View the information on how the indicator is calculated' target='_blank'>here</a>.</li>
+    <ol><li>Statistics on KBA coverage by number use the January 2021 release of the WDPA and WD-OECM (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2021b) and the KBA 2020 02 release of the WDKBA These statistics represent the number of KBAs that are fully or partially protected per country and are calculated by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC). More information on this indicator and how it is calculated can be found <a href='https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/static/dopa/static/dopa/files/factsheets/en/DOPA%20Factsheet%20B3%20EN%20Key%20Biodiversity%20Areas.pdf' title='View the information on how the indicator is calculated' target='_blank'>here</a>.</li>
     <li>Statistics on whether individual KBAs are partially, fully or not protected were calculated by UNEP-WCMC using the January 2021 release of the WDPA and WD-OECM and the KBA 2020 02 release of the WDKBA (BirdLife International, 2020). This is an intersect of the KBA data with the January 2021 WDPA and WD-OECM – the overlapping areas are calculated and compared to the size of the whole KBA. Sites that are <2% covered by KBAs are considered not covered. Sites >98% covered are fully covered and those in between are considered partially covered.</li>
     <li>Statistics on KBA coverage over time or by specific biomes (e.g. freshwater) derive from statistics calculated by BirdLife International, IUCN and UNEP-WCMC for SDG indicators 14.5.1, 15.1.2 and 15.4.1. These data used the November 2020 release of the WDPA and WD-OECM (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2020) and the KBA 2020 02 release of the WDKBA. The methodology can be found <a href='https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/files/Metadata-14-05-01.pdf' title='View the WDKBA methodology' target='_blank'>here</a>.</li></ol>
     <span class='bold'>Chapter 6: Effectively managed</span>\n
@@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ case_studies:
     <span class='bold'>Chapter 7: Equitably managed</span>\n
     No new data-driven analyses were used in this chapter.\n
     <span class='bold'>Chapter 8: Well-connected</span>\n
-    Connectivity statistics were calculated by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC).The methodology for this indicator can be accessed <a href='https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/DOPA%20Factsheet%20C1%20Connectivity.pdf' title='View methodology for the Well-connected indicator' target='_blank'>here</a>.\n
+    Connectivity statistics were calculated by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC).The methodology for this indicator can be accessed <a href='https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/static/dopa/static/dopa/files/factsheets/en/DOPA%20Factsheet%20C1%20EN%20Connectivity.pdf' title='View methodology for the Well-connected indicator' target='_blank'>here</a>.\n
     <span class='bold'>Chapter 9: Integrated into the landscape and seascape</span>\n
     No new data-driven analyses were used in this chapter.\n
     <span class='bold'>Chapter 10: Beyond Aichi Target 11</span>\n

lib/data/content/chapter-4.yml

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 title: "Ecologically representative"
 menu_title: "Ecologically representative"
 subtitle: "Chapter 4"
-intro: "Compared to 10 years ago, the world’s network of protected and conserved areas covers a more representative sample of ecoregions. Nevertheless, 55.5% of terrestrial ecoregions do not yet have 17% coverage, and 52.6% of marine ecoregions do not yet have 10% coverage. Among the ocean’s pelagic provinces, largely beyond national jurisdiction, only 10.8% meet the 10% coverage target. The percentage of ecoregions entirely outside protected and conserved areas is now low in the terrestrial realm, at 5.1%, but higher in the marine realm at 15.5%"
+intro: "Compared to 10 years ago, the world’s network of protected and conserved areas covers a more representative sample of ecoregions. Nevertheless, 55.5% of terrestrial ecoregions do not yet have 17% coverage, and 52.6% of marine ecoregions do not yet have 10% coverage. Among the ocean’s pelagic provinces, largely beyond national jurisdiction, only 10.8% meet the 10% coverage target. The percentage of ecoregions entirely outside protected and conserved areas is now low in the terrestrial realm, at 5.1%, but higher in the marine realm at 15.5%."
 content_1:
   -
     "Systems of protected and conserved areas will not deliver global biodiversity outcomes effectively if they do not include sufficient representation of the world’s ecosystems and species, a fact acknowledged through Aichi Target 11’s ‘ecologically representative’ wording. The coverage of ecoregions<sup>1</sup> is generally used to assess this element of Target 11 (Gannon <em>et al.,</em> 2019), and is the metric used in this analysis."
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ map_1_source: "UNEP-WCMC and IUCN (2021) Protected Planet: The World Database on
 content_2: "However, many ecoregions remain under-protected. The 365 terrestrial ecoregions with at least 17% coverage by protected areas and OECMs represent fewer than half (44.5%) of all terrestrial ecoregions. Similarly, the 110 marine ecoregions with at least 10% coverage represent only 47.4% of such ecoregions. This drops further to 10.8% in pelagic provinces, which are considerably larger and fall largely outside national jurisdiction. Methodologies and datasets for assessing coverage of freshwater ecoregions vary, but studies agree they are less than 22% protected in total (Bastin <em>et al.,</em> 2019; UNEP-WCMC <em>et al.,</em> 2018)."
 blockquote_text: "Although some ecoregions contain more biodiversity than others, all ecoregions require at least some form of protection in order for the world’s protected and conserved areas to capture a representative sample of species and ecosystems."
 content_3: 
-  - "There therefore remains a clear need to improve ecological representation, and attention is particularly needed in ecoregions that lack protection entirely. Ways of increasing ecological representation include greater use of systematic conservation planning (Box 5), and consideration and wider uptake of nationally-differentiated targets (Box 6)"
+  - "There therefore remains a clear need to improve ecological representation, and attention is particularly needed in ecoregions that lack protection entirely. Ways of increasing ecological representation include greater use of systematic conservation planning (Box 5), and consideration and wider uptake of nationally-differentiated targets (Box 6)."
   - "<sup>1</sup> Ecological units of land, ocean or freshwater that share similar and geographically-distinct biological characteristics (Olson <em>et al.,</em> 2001; Spalding <em>et al.,</em> 2012, 2007)."
   - "<sup>2</sup> Antarctic, Rock and Ice and Lake ecoregions have been excluded."
 row_chart_title: "Coverage of biogeographic regions"

lib/data/content/chapter-7.yml

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ content_1:
 blockquote_text: "Despite these advances, achieving equitable governance remains one of the greatest challenges faced by the world’s conservation network."
 
 content_2:
-  - "Among other things, an equitably governed conservation network is one where a diversity of governance types is recognised (Box 10). However, to date the conservation efforts of private actors, indigenous peoples and local communities remain undervalued and under-reported to the WDPA and WD-OECM, though their contributions to conservation are extensive."     
+  - "Among other things, an equitably governed conservation network is one where a diversity of governance types is recognised (Box 10). However, to date the conservation efforts of private actors, indigenous peoples and local communities remain undervalued and under-reported to the WDPA and WD-OECM, though their contributions to conservation are extensive. Notably, areas potentially fitting the description of territories and areas conserved by indigenous peoples and local communities (ICCAs) cover at least 21% of the world’s land (UNEP-WCMC and ICCA Consortium, 2021)"     
   - "There is a need for greater recognition of the role of non-state actors in conservation, underpinned by (with their consent) improved reporting of non-state protected areas and OECMs to the WDPA and WD-OECM, and therefore availability of information on the extent of their contributions. There is also a need to roll out and refine methodologies like SAGE, establish and maintain a global reporting system for equity assessments of protected and conserved areas, and use the information reported to ensure that the world’s conservation network truly works for people as well as nature."
 
 

lib/data/content/shared.yml

@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ references:
   -
     "Tucker, M.A., Böhning-Gaese, K., Fagan, W.F., Fryxell, J.M., Van Moorter, B., Alberts, S.C., Ali, A.H., Allen, A.M., Attias, N., Avgar, T. et al. 2018. Moving in the Anthropocene: Global reductions in terrestrial mammalian movements. Science, 359(6374): 466–469."
   -
-    "UNEP-WCMC and ICCA Consortium 2021. A global spatial analysis of the estimated extent of territories and areas conserved by Indigenous peoples and local communities. Territories of Life: 2021 Report. UNEP-WCMC and ICCA Consortium, Cambridge."
+    "UNEP-WCMC and ICCA Consortium 2021. A global spatial analysis of the estimated extent of territories and areas conserved by Indigenous peoples and local communities, Territories of Life: 2021 Report. UNEP-WCMC (Cambridge, UK) and ICCA Consortium (worldwide)."
   -
     "UNEP-WCMC and IUCN 2016. Protected Planet Report 2016. UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, Cambridge and Gland."
   -
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ references:
   -
     "WWF 2020. Living Planet Report 2020 - Bending the curve of biodiversity loss. Almond, R.E.A., Grooten, M. and Petersen, T. (Eds.). WWF, Gland."
   -
-    "WWF, UNEP-WCMC, ALDEA, COICA, Conservation International, GEF Small Grants Programme, International Land Coalition, Landmark (Global Platform for Indigenous and Community Lands), Philippine Association for Intercultural Development (PAFID), RECONCILE/Rangelands Initiative, The Nature Conservancy, UNDP, and Wildlife Conservation Society 2021. The State of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Communities’ lands and territories: A technical review of the state of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Communities’ lands, their contributions to global biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services, the pressures they face, and recommendations for actions. WWF, Gland."
+    "WWF, UNEP-WCMC, GEF Small Grants Programme/ICCA Global Support Initiative, LandMark, TNC, CI, WCS, UNDP Equator Prize, International Land Coalition Secretariat, Conservation Matters LLC and IUCN 2021. The State of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Communities’ Lands and Territories: A technical review of the state of Indigenous Peoples’ and Local Communities’ lands, their contributions to global biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services, the pressures they face, and recommendations for actions. WWF (Gland, Switzerland)."
   -
     "Zafra-Calvo, N., Garmendia, E., Pascual, U., Palomo, I., Gross-Camp, N., Brockington, D., Cortes-Vazquez, J.A., Coolsaet, B. and Burgess, N.D. 2019. Progress toward Equitably Managed Protected Areas in Aichi Target 11: A Global Survey. BioScience, 69: 191–197."
   -