Abstract
No abstract - Ist paragraph of the article A species’ ecological
significance remains same whether it is found inside or outside a
protected area (PA) then why the PAs are obligatory guarantor to
maintain the biodiversity within their boundaries (Gascon et al. 2015)?
Despite an increase in the number of PAs, connectivity is generally poor
between and amongst the PAs, over 60% of PAs are too small to support
major ecologically important and migratory species and eventually
biodiversity is falling across the board (Coad et al. 2019). The PA
approach, which was developed in the 20th century has been widely
recognised as one of the most important strategies for achieving
conservation goals (Shafer 2015). However, in the 21st century, it
appears that PA based conservation approach has almost reached its
practical and political limits (Coad et al. 2019; Shafer 2015) . Over
the previous 1.5 century, the role of PAs was explored and expanded and
both success and failures have been spectacular(Shafer 2015; Kalamandeen
& Gillson 2007; Butchart et al. 2010; Watson et al. 2014). Most of the
PAs were established for the primary goal of conservation and later
sustainable growth have now stretched to contribute towards livelihood,
poverty reduction and national development (Shafer 2015). Over 202,000
PAs worldwide, cover almost 15% of planet’s surface under some practice
of protection (Terraube et al. 2020). Moreover, substantial wildlife
exists outside the PAs, where exact estimates are not available due to
insufficient monitoring efforts (Cox & Underwood 2011; McCleery et al.
2020).