Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28934282›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Assessing ecosystem service provision under climate change to support conservation and development planning in Myanmar.

Lisa Mandle, Stacie Wolny, Nirmal Bhagabati, Hanna Helsingen, Perrine Hamel, Ryan Bartlett, Adam Dixon, Radley Horton, Corey Lesk, Danielle Manley and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Extent, characteristics and policy applications of Key Biodiversity Areas.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Prioritizing actions: spatial action maps for conservation.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Lisa MandleNatural Capital Project, Department of Biology and the Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1420-8529
Stacie WolnyNatural Capital Project, Department of Biology and the Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Nirmal BhagabatiWorld Wildlife Fund, Washington DC, United States of America.
Hanna HelsingenWorld Wide Fund for Nature, Yangon, Myanmar.
Perrine HamelNatural Capital Project, Department of Biology and the Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Ryan BartlettWorld Wildlife Fund, Washington DC, United States of America.
Adam DixonWorld Wildlife Fund, Washington DC, United States of America.
Radley HortonCenter for Climate Systems Research, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Corey LeskCenter for Climate Systems Research, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Danielle ManleyCenter for Climate Systems Research, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Manishka De MelCenter for Climate Systems Research, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Daniel BaderCenter for Climate Systems Research, Earth Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Sai Nay Won MyintWorld Wide Fund for Nature, Yangon, Myanmar.
Win MyintWorld Wide Fund for Nature, Yangon, Myanmar.
Myat Su MonForest Department, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Inclusion of ecosystem services (ES) information into national-scale development and climate adaptation planning has yet to become common practice, despite demand from decision makers. Identifying where ES originate and to whom the benefits flow-under current and future climate conditions-is especially critical in rapidly developing countries, where the risk of ES loss is high. Here, using Myanmar as a case study, we assess where and how ecosystems provide key benefits to the country's people and infrastructure. We model the supply of and demand for sediment retention, dry-season baseflows, flood risk reduction and coastal storm protection from multiple beneficiaries. We find that locations currently providing the greatest amount of services are likely to remain important under the range of climate conditions considered, demonstrating their importance in planning for climate resilience. Overlap between priority areas for ES provision and biodiversity conservation is higher than expected by chance overall, but the areas important for multiple ES are underrepresented in currently designated protected areas and Key Biodiversity Areas. Our results are contributing to development planning in Myanmar, and our approach could be extended to other contexts where there is demand for national-scale natural capital information to shape development plans and policies.

Indexed as

BiodiversityClimate ChangeConservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemAdaptation, PhysiologicalDecision MakingHumansMyanmarSocial Planning

Identifiers

PMID28934282
PMCPMC5608473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.