Protecting global biodiversity is one of the most urgent tasks for the coming decades. Area-based conservation is a pillar for preserving ecosystems and species. Strictly protected areas specifically preserve biodiversity and ecosystem processes. The “EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030” targets strict protection for 10% of land area. Here we performed the first analysis of strictly protected areas (as IUCN type Ia, Ib, and II) across Europe, by investigating their area coverage at the level of biogeographical regions, countries and elevation gradients. We show that, with few exceptions, the amount of strictly protected area is very limited and the spatial distribution of such protected areas is biased towards higher elevation sites, as in the case of other protected areas. Then, we suggest that potential areas should be identified to expand strictly protected areas with low economic and social costs including, for instance, areas with high biodiversity value, low population, and low productive land use. Finally, we propose that a coordinated effort and a strategic plan to achieve continental-scale conservation are fundamental, and at least half of this land under strict conservation (i.e. 5%) should be under the protection categories Ia and Ib.
Habitat richness, that is, the diversity of ecosystem types, is a complex, spatially explicit aspect of biodiversity, which is affected by bioclimatic, geographic, and anthropogenic variables. The distribution of habitat types is a key component for understanding broad‐scale biodiversity and for developing conservation strategies. We used data on the distribution of European Union (EU) habitats to answer the following questions: (i) how do bioclimatic, geographic, and anthropogenic variables affect habitat richness? (ii) Which of those factors is the most important? (iii) How do interactions among these variables influence habitat richness and which combinations produce the strongest interactions? The distribution maps of 222 terrestrial habitat types as defined by the Natura 2000 network were used to calculate habitat richness for the 10 km × 10 km EU grid map. We then investigated how environmental variables affect habitat richness, using generalized linear models, generalized additive models, and boosted regression trees. The main factors associated with habitat richness were geographic variables, with negative relationships observed for both latitude and longitude, and a positive relationship for terrain ruggedness. Bioclimatic variables played a secondary role, with habitat richness increasing slightly with annual mean temperature and overall annual precipitation. We also found an interaction between anthropogenic variables, with the combination of increased landscape fragmentation and increased population density strongly decreasing habitat richness. This is the first attempt to disentangle spatial patterns of habitat richness at the continental scale, as a key tool for protecting biodiversity. The number of European habitats is related to geography more than climate and human pressure, reflecting a major component of biogeographical patterns similar to the drivers observed at the species level. The interaction between anthropogenic variables highlights the need for coordinated, continental‐scale management plans for biodiversity conservation.