@article {158950, title = {Long-term ecological monitoring in India: A synthesis.}, year = {2025}, abstract = {

Long-term ecological monitoring (LTEM) is crucial for understanding ecological processes and responses to environmental change, informing management of natural resources, and biodiversity conservation. Systematic LTEM efforts began in India in the mid-1900s, but there is a lack of comprehensive synthesis of LTEM efforts in the country. Here, we use a wide-ranging questionnaire survey of LTEM efforts coupled with a survey of published literature on LTEM efforts in India to synthesise their thematic and geographical spread, and types of data being collected, and identify key challenges to the establishment and maintenance of LTEM projects in the country. Studies monitor 77 unique subjects across 272 LTEM efforts in India. LTEM efforts are more often located in the Western Ghats and Eastern Himalaya, focused on forest vegetation, and monitoring factors such as abundance, distribution, species richness, and biomass. Regions such as North-Eastern, Eastern, Central, and North-Western India, ecosystems such as grasslands, deserts and wetlands, organisms such as macrofungi, amphibians, and reptiles (other than turtles) are underrepresented. Short turnover times of funding and permits were most frequently reported as hurdles in sustaining LTEM efforts. Data from LTEM efforts have been largely used to produce academic outputs such as journal articles, but have also found use for on-the-ground conservation efforts. Overall, this synthesis can help draw attention to the need for systematic long-term ecological monitoring, help efficient utilisation of existing long-term ecological data, identify regions, species and ecosystem components that are underrepresented in Indian LTEM efforts, foster collaborations, and serve as a starting point to address challenges in sustaining LTEM efforts in India.

}, keywords = {Questionnaire survey; Permanent plots; Biodiversity;Conservation;Research infrastructure; Tropical ecosystems}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111344 }, author = {"Thiruvaimozhi, Y V and Borah, J and Kala, C P and Kunte, K and Patel, B and Sreejith, K A and Thadani, R and Osuri, A.M and Ghosh-Harihar, M} } @article {66849, title = {Protected areas and biodiversity conservation in India}, journal = {BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION}, volume = {237}, year = {2019}, month = {09/2019}, pages = {114-124}, abstract = {

Three well-supported generalizations in conservation biology are that developing tropical countries will experience the greatest biodiversity declines in the near future, they are some of the least studied areas in the world, and in these regions especially, protection requires local community support. We assess these generalizations in an evaluation of protected areas in India. The 5\% of India officially protected covers most ecoregions and protected areas have been an important reason why India has suffered no documented species extinctions in the past 70 years. India has strong legislation favouring conservation, government investment focused on 50 Tiger Reserves, and government compensation schemes that facilitate local support, all of which brighten future prospects. However, many protected areas are too small to maintain a full complement of species, making connectivity and species use of buffer zones a crucial issue. Conservation success and challenges vary across regions according to their development status. In less developed areas, notably the biodiverse northeast Himalaya, protected areas maintaining the highest biodiversity result from locally-focused efforts by dedicated individuals. Across India, we demonstrate considerable opportunities to increase local income through ecotourism. Our evaluation confirms a lack of data, increasing threats, and the importance of local support. Research on biodiversity in buffer zones, development of long-term monitoring schemes, and assessment of cash and conservation benefits from tourism are in particular need. For policy makers, two main goals should be the development of monitoring plans for {\textquoteleft}eco-sensitive zones{\textquoteright} around protected areas, and a strong emphasis on preserving established protected areas.

}, doi = {10.1016/j.biocon.2019.06.024}, author = {Ghosh-Harihar, M and An, R and Athrey, R and Borthakur, U and Chanchani, P and Chetry, D and Datta, A and Harihar, A and Karanth, KK and Mariyam, D and Mohan, D and Onial, M and Ramakrishnan, U and Robin, VV and Saxena, A and Shahabuddin, G and Thatte, P and Vijay, V and Wacker, K and Mathur, VB and Pimm, SL and Price, TD} }