Protected areas (PAs) have long been the foundation of conservation strategies to halt biodiversity losses and ecosystem degradation. In the South Caucasus (SC), coverage of PAs increased after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, yet how well biodiversity is represented in them is unknown. We utilized the PA downgrading, downsizing and degazettement (PADDD) conceptual framework and the gap analysis approach to assess how changes in the PAs of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia between 1991 and 2014 have affected the representation of biodiversity. Throughout this period, vegetation formations associated with high mountain ecosystems changed (≥17% representation). Colchic lowland vegetation formations which are only present in Georgia, also changed from unrepresented (0%) to under-represented (from 0% to <17%). The effect of PADDD events on biodiversity representation varied among countries depending on the amount of area gazetted after 1991. There is an inherent bias in the expansion of PAs in the SC. Our findings could be a first step towards changing the status quo by helping conservationists to strategically allocate resources towards ecosystems that are below 17% representation. Yet this will require governments in the SC to shift their views about PAs from being only national efforts to being key pieces of a larger-scale conservation strategy.

Because protected areas are a major means of conservation, the extent to which ecosystems are represented under different protection regimes needs to be ascertained. A gap analysis approach was used to assess the representativeness of Chile's terrestrial ecosystems in differing kinds of protected areas. Terrestrial ecosystems were described in terms of potential vegetation, employing three protection scenarios. Scenario 1 was based exclusively on the Chilean National System of Protected Wild Areas (SNASPE). Scenario 2 included all types of public protected areas, namely SNASPE, nature sanctuaries and Ministry of National Heritage lands. Scenario 3 included all items in Scenario 2, but also included private protected areas and biodiversity priority sites. There is insufficient protection of terrestrial ecosystems under the Scenario 2. In addition to the low level of ecosystem protection provided by state protected areas (only 42 of the 127 terrestrial ecosystems had >10% of their area protected), 23 terrestrial ecosystems were identified as having no protection at the national level. Gaps in protection were concentrated in the North (both coastal and inland desertic scrub), Central (thorny scrub, thorny forests, sclerophyllous forests and deciduous coastal forests) and Austral (steppe ecosystems) regions of Chile. These gaps include ecosystems that are of global conservation importance.