SDG Indicator 15.1.2 | Sustainable developments Goals

SDG Indicator 15.1.2: Proportion of important sites for terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity that are covered by protected areas, by ecosystem type

1. Key features and metadata

Definition: This indicator shows temporal trends in the mean percentage of each important site for terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity (i.e. those that contribute significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity) that is covered by designated Protected Areas (PA) and Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs).

Sub-indicator	Disaggregated by
ER_PTD_FRHWTR Average proportion of Freshwater Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) covered by protected areas (%)	No current data disaggregation available.
ER_PTD_TERR Average proportion of Terrestrial Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) covered by protected areas (%)

Sub-indicator

Disaggregated by

ER_PTD_FRHWTR

Average proportion of Freshwater Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) covered by protected areas (%)

No current data disaggregation available.

ER_PTD_TERR

Average proportion of Terrestrial Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) covered by protected areas (%)

Sources of information: Ministries of Environment and other ministries and agencies (e.g. National Parks) responsible for the designation and maintenance of protected areas, Ramsar Convention and UNESCO World Heritage Convention, and KBA consultative processes.

Related SDG Indicators: 14.5.1 (Coverage of protected areas in relation to marine areas) and 15.4.1 (Coverage by protected areas of important sites for mountain biodiversity).

2. Data availability by region, SDG Global Database, as of 02 July 2025

Figure 3.33 15.1.2a Proportion of important sites for terrestrial biodiversity that are covered by protected areas

Figure 3.3415.1.2b Proportion of important sites for freshwater biodiversity that are covered by protected areas

3. Proposed disaggregation, links to policymaking and its impact

Proposed disaggregation	Link to policymaking	Impact
By ecosystem type (%): Terrestrial: Tropical-subtropical forests Temperate-boreal forests and woodlands Shrublands and shrubby woodlands Savannas and grasslands Deserts and semi-deserts Polar-alpine Intensive land-use systems Freshwater: Palustrine wetlands Rivers and streams Lakes Artificial fresh waters Semi-confined transitional waters (Keith et al.2020) Applies to: ER_PTD_TERR ER_PTD_FRHWTR	This disaggregation provides an understanding about the varying diversity and ecological features of Protected Areas (PAs), their role in the global persistence of biodiversity and related ecosystem services, and the specific pressures they are facing. It also helps identify ecosystem types within PAs where policy interventions are needed to improve the wellbeing of ecosystems and extend their protection(IUCN 2003). This disaggregation is particularly relevant in the context of the recent adoption of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)(CBD 2022).	A disaggregation by ecosystem type that integrates their functional and compositional features helps to understand the contribution of PAs on a number of levels. Including the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of ecosystems; biodiversity and their services, including supporting life on earth; elemental cycling; climate regulation; the provision of natural resources (i.e. food, water, materials, substances, and energy); as well as poverty reduction(IUCN-WCPA 2017).
By Management Category (%)(IUCN 2012): Strict nature reserve Wilderness area National park Natural monument or feature Protected landscape or seascape Protected areas with sustainable use of natural resources Applies to: ER_PTD_TERR ER_PTD_FRHWTR	This disaggregationhelps to identify the targeted policies needed to achieve efficient conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems and their services. It is also useful for assessing trends in the performance of PAs over time and for enhancing their environmental benefits and cost-effectiveness. This disaggregation is particularly relevant in the context of the recent adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), Target 3: Conserve 30% of Land, Waters and Seas(CBD 2022).	Improving the management of terrestrial and freshwater PAs not only helps preserving biodiversity. It also provides valuable social and economic benefits. For example, supporting local livelihood; reducing the risks of natural disasters; hosting genetic resources; supporting recreation and tourism activities; and contributing to science, research, education, cultural and other non-material values(IUCN-WCPA 2017).
By taxonomic groups of specific interest (%)(Butchart et al. 2012): Important Bird Areas (IBAs) Alliance for Zero Extinction sites (AZEs) Applies to: ER_PTD_TERR ER_PTD_FRHWTR	This disaggregation provides useful information on specific taxonomic groups of interest like birds – Important Bird Areas (IBAs) – or highly threatened vertebrates and conifers – Alliance for Zero Extinction sites (AZEs) – occurring in important sites. This is useful information for decision-makers in monitoring the effectiveness of PA designation on species protection and ecosystem conservation. It is also useful in being able to select the most appropriate sites when expanding the PA network.This disaggregation is consistent with Target 11 of the CBD Strategic Plan for biodiversity to expand PA coverage to target areas of particular importance for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services(UN 2010a).	While there is evidence that PAs contribute to the protection of natural habitats and ecosystems, their impact on the preservation of species populations is less documented. IBAs and AZEs are identified global networks of relevant sites for biodiversity protection. Yet PAs do not appear to have been designated to cover specifically these sites. Protecting them would enhance the contribution of PAs towards species loss and would help to address the current discrepancy between expanding PA areas and declining species populations. This disaggregation helps to identify where PAs have a the most beneficial impact on species populations, especially threated species, and the types of interventions that are effective in curbing their decline. It is also useful for improving the PA coverage of important sites for species conservation (Butchart et al. 2012).

Proposed disaggregation

Link to policymaking

Impact

By ecosystem type (%):

Terrestrial:

Tropical-subtropical forests
Temperate-boreal forests and woodlands
Shrublands and shrubby woodlands
Savannas and grasslands
Deserts and semi-deserts
Polar-alpine
Intensive land-use systems

Freshwater:

Palustrine wetlands
Rivers and streams
Lakes
Artificial fresh waters
Semi-confined transitional waters

(Keith et al.2020)

Applies to:

ER_PTD_TERR
ER_PTD_FRHWTR

This disaggregation provides an understanding about the varying diversity and ecological features of Protected Areas (PAs), their role in the global persistence of biodiversity and related ecosystem services, and the specific pressures they are facing. It also helps identify ecosystem types within PAs where policy interventions are needed to improve the wellbeing of ecosystems and extend their protection(IUCN 2003).

This disaggregation is particularly relevant in the context of the recent adoption of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)(CBD 2022).

A disaggregation by ecosystem type that integrates their functional and compositional features helps to understand the contribution of PAs on a number of levels. Including the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of ecosystems; biodiversity and their services, including supporting life on earth; elemental cycling; climate regulation; the provision of natural resources (i.e. food, water, materials, substances, and energy); as well as poverty reduction(IUCN-WCPA 2017).

By Management Category (%)(IUCN 2012):

Strict nature reserve
Wilderness area
National park
Natural monument or feature
Protected landscape or seascape
Protected areas with sustainable use of natural resources

Applies to:

ER_PTD_TERR
ER_PTD_FRHWTR

This disaggregationhelps to identify the targeted policies needed to achieve efficient conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems and their services.

It is also useful for assessing trends in the performance of PAs over time and for enhancing their environmental benefits and cost-effectiveness.

This disaggregation is particularly relevant in the context of the recent adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), Target 3: Conserve 30% of Land, Waters and Seas(CBD 2022).

Improving the management of terrestrial and freshwater PAs not only helps preserving biodiversity. It also provides valuable social and economic benefits. For example, supporting local livelihood; reducing the risks of natural disasters; hosting genetic resources; supporting recreation and tourism activities; and contributing to science, research, education, cultural and other non-material values(IUCN-WCPA 2017).

By taxonomic groups of specific interest (%)(Butchart et al. 2012):

Important Bird Areas (IBAs)
Alliance for Zero Extinction sites (AZEs)

Applies to:

ER_PTD_TERR
ER_PTD_FRHWTR

This disaggregation provides useful information on specific taxonomic groups of interest like birds – Important Bird Areas (IBAs) – or highly threatened vertebrates and conifers – Alliance for Zero Extinction sites (AZEs) – occurring in important sites. This is useful information for decision-makers in monitoring the effectiveness of PA designation on species protection and ecosystem conservation. It is also useful in being able to select the most appropriate sites when expanding the PA network.This disaggregation is consistent with Target 11 of the CBD Strategic Plan for biodiversity to expand PA coverage to target areas of particular importance for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services(UN 2010a).

While there is evidence that PAs contribute to the protection of natural habitats and ecosystems, their impact on the preservation of species populations is less documented. IBAs and AZEs are identified global networks of relevant sites for biodiversity protection. Yet PAs do not appear to have been designated to cover specifically these sites. Protecting them would enhance the contribution of PAs towards species loss and would help to address the current discrepancy between expanding PA areas and declining species populations. This disaggregation helps to identify where PAs have a the most beneficial impact on species populations, especially threated species, and the types of interventions that are effective in curbing their decline. It is also useful for improving the PA coverage of important sites for species conservation (Butchart et al. 2012).