Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31707581›Full record

ArticleAmbio2020

Conserving biodiversity takes a plan: How planners implement ecological information for biodiversity conservation.

Sara A Gagné, Kaitlynn Bryan-Scaggs, Robert H W Boyer, Wei-Ning Xiang

Abstract read
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.

Sara A GagnéDepartment of Geography and Earth Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, University City Blvd., 9201, Charlotte, NC, 28223, USA. sgagne@uncc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4385-7189
Kaitlynn Bryan-ScaggsDepartment of Geography and Earth Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, University City Blvd., 9201, Charlotte, NC, 28223, USA.
Robert H W BoyerRISE Viktoria, Lindholmen Science Park, Lindholmspiren 3A, 417 56, Göteborg, Sweden.
Wei-Ning XiangDepartment of Geography and Earth Sciences, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, University City Blvd., 9201, Charlotte, NC, 28223, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conserving biodiversity is critical to the sustainability of human settlements, and stands to benefit from collaboration between ecologists focused on understanding natural systems and planners balancing social, environmental, and economic priorities. Drawing from the socially-situated definition of 'sustainability', we sought to understand the relationship between ecologists and planners by probing how planners in the southeastern US prioritize and engage with biodiversity conservation and ecological information, and how context influences these decisions. We find that context matters, e.g., higher jurisdictional population density was positively associated with prioritizing tree cover and diversity. We find, also, that while biodiversity conservation and ecological information are valuable to planners, planners rely heavily on their colleagues to inform conservation-related activities and prioritize conservation topics that differ from ecological research foci. Improved communication by ecologists and context-specific transdisciplinary sustainability research, especially that which incorporates the primary role of elected officials in biodiversity conservation, may help to integrate ecological science and planning practice.

Indexed as

BiodiversityConservation of Natural ResourcesHumansConservation policyEcological guidelinesLand use planningSocio-ecological systemsSustainability

Identifiers

PMID31707581
PMCPMC7320128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.