Conservation abandonment threatens global biodiversity goals, study warns

Collective global efforts to protect nature are failing to keep pace with the rapid degradation of ecosystems, as widespread and often undocumented “conservation abandonment” undermines biodiversity goals, a new paper has warned. The warning comes as world leaders meet at 30th Conference of Parties (COP30) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Belém, Brazil that began November 10, 2025.

The comment article, Conservation abandonment is a policy blind spot, published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution, notes that 2025 marks the halfway point to achieving several international environmental targets, including the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) goal to protect 30 per cent of the world’s land and seas by 2030.

The authors define conservation abandonment as the failure of governments or communities to uphold conservation commitments despite formal agreements remaining in place, a phenomenon seen in so-called “paper parks” that exist on record but lack real protection. It also encompasses the reversal or weakening of protections, termed Protected Area Downgrading, Downsizing or Degazettement (PADDD). 

Analysing 3,749 PADDD events across 73 countries between 1892 and 2018, the study found that governments collectively reduced or removed protections equivalent to the size of Greenland. Two-thirds of these cases were directly linked to industrial-scale resource extraction, such as mining, oil exploration and large infrastructure projects.

Conservatively, about $87 billion is spent annually on conservation worldwide, rising to $200 billion depending on what’s counted, said Matthew Clark, postdoctoral researcher at the University of Sydney’s Thriving Oceans Research Hub and honorary research associate at Imperial College London.

“As we grapple with the biodiversity and climate crises, these required investments are expected to be $540 billion by 2030 and $740 billion by 2050,” Clark said. “While these investments are essential for meeting both carbon and biodiversity goals, we have virtually no line of sight on how long these programs endure.”

Evidence suggests at least one third are abandoned just a few years after implementation, he pointed out. “This blind spot potentially compromises progress announced at events like COP, as meaningful ecological recovery can take decades,” he said.

Examples of conservation abandonment are widespread. In Chile, 22 per cent of Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries granted to local communities were later discontinued as management responsibilities were dropped. In southern and eastern Africa, one-third of community groups participating in nine national conservation initiatives eventually abdicated governance or reversed rules and boundaries, experts estimated.

Even government-designated “Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures” (OECM), recognised under the GBF as alternatives to formal protected areas, have been rolled back. In Canada, exploratory oil drilling was permitted across 26,450 square kilometres of a marine OECM, while Canada and Morocco together disestablished seven OECMs covering over 2,400 square kilometres.

This lack of accountability could jeopardise global climate and biodiversity targets, since “meaningful ecological recovery can take decades,” the authors warned.

Abandonment is most common in areas facing intense land-use pressure, or where external funding dwindles, the paper said. Shifts in cultural and social structures — such as secularisation reducing protection of sacred natural sites and rural-to-urban migration weakening local stewardship — further exacerbate the trend.

The authors also cite political and economic reversals as major threats. In February 2025, for example, the US government cut $365 million in international conservation funding, affecting hundreds of protected areas globally. It also revoked formal protections from the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument and all 18 of California’s national forests.

Citing one of the 23 targets under the Global Biodiversity Framework that focuses on mitigating introduction of invasive species, reducing biodiversity-harming pollution and promoting sustainable use of plants and wildlife, the paper noted that these goals also hold importance to mitigate climate change.

“Meeting these targets will require diverse regulatory and voluntary initiatives, such as campaigns to reduce demand for rhino horn, programs to control invasive lionfish or schemes to encourage reduced meat consumption. Abandonment among these programs may be even harder to track and mitigate than for initiatives with clearly defined boundaries,” it observed.

The abandonment primarily appears more likely in locations that face higher land use pressures and for larger sites including places where external funding also drains away and is not persistent. 

The comment said that recent global political events also adversely impacted and threatened to erode the conservation gains through legal reversals and by legitimising informal abdication of commitments. 

“In February 2025, for example, the US government eliminated $365 million in international conservation funding, which included support for hundreds of protected areas and other conservation initiatives around the world. The US government subsequently eliminated formal protections from keystone areas such as the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument and all 18 of California’s national forests,” the paper stated.

In Europe, several right-wing populist parties have opposed the EU’s Green Deal and other environmental policies. Meanwhile, in Brazil, environmental rollbacks during Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency (2019-2023), including weakened anti-deforestation enforcement and encroachment into Indigenous forests, accelerated global conservation decline.

The paper concludes that without urgent attention, conservation abandonment will cripple efforts to halt biodiversity loss and limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.