ArticleOcean & coastal management2018
Linking People to Coastal Habitats: A meta-analysis of final ecosystem goods and services on the coast.
Article in Ocean & coastal management, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic valuation of ecosystem services in agriculture and agroforestry: A meta-analysis.PloS one · 2026Pooled it
- Recreational beneficiaries and their landscape dependencies across national estuary program sites: Tillamook Bay (OR) and Tampa Bay (FL), USA.Ecosystems and people (Abingdon, England) · 2023Article
- Synthesis of Two Decades of US EPA's Ecosystem Services Research to Inform Environmental, Community, and Sustainability Decision Making.Sustainability · 2021Article
- The ecosystem service of property protection and exposure to environmental stressors in the Gulf of Mexico.Ocean & coastal management · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Coastal ecosystem goods and services (EGS) have steadily gained traction in the scientific literature over the last few decades, providing a wealth of information about underlying coastal habitat dependencies. This meta-analysis summarizes relationships between coastal habitats and final ecosystem goods and services (FEGS) users. Through a "weight of evidence" approach synthesizing information from published literature, we assessed habitat classes most relevant to coastal users. Approximately 2,800 coastal EGS journal articles were identified by online search engines, of which 16% addressed linkages between specific coastal habitats and FEGS users, and were retained for subsequent analysis. Recreational (83%) and industrial (35%) users were most cited in literature, with experiential-users/hikers and commercial fishermen most prominent in each category, respectively. Recreational users were linked to the widest diversity of coastal habitat subclasses (i.e., 22 of 26). Whereas, mangroves and emergent wetlands were most relevant for property owners. We urge EGS studies to continue surveying local users and identifying habitat dependencies, as these steps are important precursors for developing appropriate coastal FEGS metrics and facilitating local valuation. In addition, understanding how habitats contribute to human well-being may assist communities in prioritizing restoration and evaluating development scenarios in the context of future ecosystem service delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.