Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31705460›Full record

ArticleAmbio2020

Policy change implications for forest water protection in Sweden over the last 50 years.

Eliza Maher Hasselquist, Irina Mancheva, Katarina Eckerberg, Hjalmar Laudon

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Ambio, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Eliza Maher HasselquistDepartment of Forest Ecology and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Skogsmarksgränd, 901 83, Umeå, Sweden. eliza.hasselquist@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2152-245X
Irina ManchevaDepartment of Political Science, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5582-9877
Katarina EckerbergDepartment of Political Science, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6546-5210
Hjalmar LaudonDepartment of Forest Ecology and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Skogsmarksgränd, 901 83, Umeå, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6058-1466

Funding

Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas 2013-316-25892-32
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improving water quality has become an important environmental issue, spurred in part by the Water Framework Directive. However, the relationship of policy change with forest water protection measures is relatively unknown. We analyzed how policy and practice have developed in Sweden using 50 years of historic data from the Krycklan Catchment Study, focusing on riparian buffers. Corresponding to legislation, education and voluntary measures emphasizing stream protection, two step changes occurred; between the 1970s-1980s, buffers increased by 67%, then by 100% between 1990s and 2000s. By 2013, just 50% of the stream length affected by forestry was protected and the application has varied by stream size; small streams lacked a buffer approximately 65% of the time, while 90% of large streams had buffers. The doubling of buffer implementation from the 1990s-2000s corresponded to the adoption of a number of environmental protection policies in the 1990s that all came into effect during this period.

Indexed as

ForestsWaterEnvironmental MonitoringForestryRiversSwedenWaterForest waterPolicy changeProtection zoneRiparian bufferRiparian reservesWater quality

Identifiers

PMID31705460
PMCPMC7190599

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.