Identification of conservation priority areas on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau considering habitat, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being.

The delineation of conservation priority areas may involve both trade-offs and synergies with sustainable development goals, but region-specific and integrative assessments that simultaneously consider habitat, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being remain limited in high-altitude regions such as the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Taking habitat, biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being as management objectives, this paper focuses on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau (QTP) and develops an indicator system that integrates these considerations. The paper: a) uses the zonation model to identify conservation priority areas under both single-objective and multi-objective conditions, b) evaluates the conservation gaps in existing protected areas and c) assesses the synergies and trade-offs among the different objectives by employing various scenarios. Results reveal a northwest-to-southeast zonal shift in dominant conservation priorities, transitioning from ecosystem services to biodiversity and habitat and returning to ecosystem services. High-threat regions include mining zones, Qinghai-Gansu borders, and central Tibet. Integrated multi-objective analysis shows conservation importance and viability priorities increasing southeastward, with the largest priority area (2.85 × 10 km, 11 % of QTP) concentrated in eastern Tibet and western Sichuan's alpine valleys. Over 57 % of priority zones remain unprotected. Synergies emerge between habitat and biodiversity conservation, while both show significant trade-offs with ecosystem service provision. Threat-focused scenario conflicts sharply with balanced multi-objective scenario, demonstrating irreconcilable divergences in conservation prioritization. Spatial optimization reveals objective-specific priority zones requiring differentiated management. The findings propose differentiated conservation strategies for each eco-geographical region, advocating IUCN Class Ia and Ib for habitat/biodiversity priority zones and IUCN Class II-VI for ecosystem service priority zones.