In the heart of Tanzania, a groundbreaking study is reshaping our understanding of biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision, particularly in areas outside protected area networks (OPAN areas). Published in *Ecology and Evolution*, the research led by Florence Godfrey Tarimo from the Nelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology, offers a novel approach to valuing and enhancing ecosystem services (ESs) through improved conservation and management.
The study applies an ecosystem-based conservation (EBC) framework to assess how biodiversity and land use/land cover (LULC) types shape the monetary value of selected ESs in OPAN areas. The findings are striking. Across six ecosystems and four LULC types, waterbodies emerged as the highest ES value contributors, delivering a staggering US$12.8 billion through water provision and flood control. Miombo woodlands also showed significant value, yielding US$12.4 billion, with nearly half of that value attributed to flood control and the rest split between water provision and carbon storage.
The research underscores the spatial heterogeneity and ES overlap in OPAN areas, highlighting the need to integrate these areas into the EBC framework. This integration could link local restoration gains with national policies and global biodiversity frameworks, offering a more holistic approach to conservation.
One of the most compelling aspects of the study is its forward-looking perspective. By 2030, restoring 197,497 hectares of degraded land within 53 prioritized wildlife corridors in Tanzania could generate up to US$62.8 million annually in ESs under full restoration, and US$31.4 million under partial restoration. Carbon storage alone would contribute over 90% of this total value.
For the agriculture sector, these findings are particularly relevant. “Understanding how people and biodiversity overlap and interact outside protected area networks is essential for setting realistic, sustainable targets to guide biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision beyond PAN,” Tarimo explains. This research could inform more sustainable land use practices, enhancing both agricultural productivity and ecosystem health.
The study’s implications extend beyond Tanzania, offering a blueprint for other regions grappling with similar challenges. By integrating OPAN areas into broader conservation strategies, policymakers and stakeholders can work towards more sustainable and resilient ecosystems. As Tarimo notes, “The spatial heterogeneity and ES overlap observed highlight the need to integrate OPANs into the EBC framework, linking local restoration gains with national policies and global biodiversity frameworks.”
This research not only advances our scientific understanding but also provides actionable insights for policymakers, conservationists, and the agriculture sector. By valuing and enhancing ecosystem services in OPAN areas, we can pave the way for a more sustainable future, where biodiversity and human needs coexist harmoniously.