Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35794166›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

New land tenure fences are still cropping up in the Greater Mara.

Mette Løvschal, Maria Juul Nørmark, Jens-Christian Svenning, Jake Wall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Short-term study fails to capture negative impacts of livestock intensification on wildlife.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Predicting the impact of targeted fence removal on connectivity in a migratory ecosystem.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Rethinking livestock encroachment at a protected area boundary.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  7. 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.

Mette LøvschalDepartment of Archaeology and Heritage Studies, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. lovschal@cas.au.dk.
Maria Juul NørmarkSection for Ecoinformatics and Biodiversity, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Jens-Christian SvenningSection for Ecoinformatics and Biodiversity, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Jake WallMara Elephant Project, Narok, Kenya.

Funding

European Research Council 853356
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Expanding and intensifying anthropogenic land use is one of the greatest drivers of changes of biodiversity loss and political inequality worldwide. In the Greater Mara, Kenya, a trend of private land enclosure is currently happening, led by smallholders wishing to protect and uphold their land titles. Here we expand on previous work by Løvschal et al. quantifying the rapid, large-scale development of fencing infrastructure that began in 1985 but has increased by 170% from 2010 onwards. We provide fine-scale analysis of the spatial and temporal trends in fencing using high-resolution Sentinel-2 imagery. The formally unprotected regions have distinctly more fences than the rest of the Mara, one experiencing a 740% increase in fenced land in four years. Conservancies have an effect in stemming fencing but fences crop up within and along conservancy boundaries. We estimate the actual geographical coverage of the fences in the Mara to be 130,277 ha (19% of the total region) using an error margin of 8%, derived by calibrating our satellite mapping with ground-truth data. The study suggests the need for revising community-based eco-conservation efforts and pursuing a richer understanding of the socio-political and historical dynamics underlying this phenomenon.

Indexed as

BiodiversityGeographyKenyaSocioeconomic Factors

Identifiers

PMID35794166
PMCPMC9259569

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.