ReviewAmbio2021
Why European biodiversity reporting is not reliable.
Review in Ambio, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
- Building a Portuguese coalition for biodiversity genomics.npj biodiversity · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Impact of Population Management on the Genetic Parameters of Selected Spiral-Horned Antelopes.Biology · 2024Article
- Monitoring of species' genetic diversity in Europe varies greatly and overlooks potential climate change impacts.Nature ecology & evolution · 2024Article
- Opinion: Nationally reported metrics can't adequately guide transformative change in biodiversity policy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aims to end the loss of biodiversity, which is one of the greatest ecological challenges of our time. The lack of success in biodiversity policy implementation is partly related to gaps in biodiversity monitoring. Our overall objective is to contribute to the preparation of the upcoming post 2020 period by a review of biodiversity indicator choices in European CBD reports and hence in national monitoring systems. Negative binary generalized models and poisson generalized linear models prove that through free indicator choice in CBD reporting, countries do not choose biodiversity indicators according to their national geographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Moreover, species and ecosystem diversity indicators were chosen with a disproportionate frequency compared to that of genetic diversity indicators. Consequently, trends derived from national CBD reports and monitoring systems in Europe are not reliable, which should be an alarming signal concerning biodiversity policy implementation. Finally, a flow chart to revise national biodiversity monitoring systems is proposed.
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.