The article "High and Far: Biases in the Location of Protected Areas" by Lucas N. Joppa and Alexander Pfaff examines the spatial distribution of protected areas (PAs) across 147 nations, highlighting biases in their placement. The authors find that PAs are disproportionately located on higher elevations, steeper slopes, and greater distances from roads and cities, even in areas that are not currently under significant land conversion pressure. This bias is more pronounced in higher-protection status PAs. The study suggests that these biases can affect the effectiveness of PAs in preventing land conversion and species loss, and recommends that future PA creation and management should prioritize areas with higher threat levels to maximize conservation impact. The findings have implications for global carbon-based payments for avoided deforestation and REDD initiatives, emphasizing the need to consider threat levels when siting PAs.The article "High and Far: Biases in the Location of Protected Areas" by Lucas N. Joppa and Alexander Pfaff examines the spatial distribution of protected areas (PAs) across 147 nations, highlighting biases in their placement. The authors find that PAs are disproportionately located on higher elevations, steeper slopes, and greater distances from roads and cities, even in areas that are not currently under significant land conversion pressure. This bias is more pronounced in higher-protection status PAs. The study suggests that these biases can affect the effectiveness of PAs in preventing land conversion and species loss, and recommends that future PA creation and management should prioritize areas with higher threat levels to maximize conservation impact. The findings have implications for global carbon-based payments for avoided deforestation and REDD initiatives, emphasizing the need to consider threat levels when siting PAs.