Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38583468›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2024

An assessment of the state of conservation planning in Europe.

Martin Jung, Diogo Alagador, Melissa Chapman, Virgilio Hermoso, Heini Kujala, Louise O'Connor, Rafaela Schinegger, Peter H Verburg, Piero Visconti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Modeling nature-based restoration potential across aquatic-terrestrial boundaries.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. An assessment of the state of conservation planning in Europe.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Review
  5. Navigating ecological novelty towards planetary stewardship: challenges and opportunities in biodiversity dynamics in a transforming biosphere.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    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

9 authors.

Martin JungBiodiversity, Ecology and Conservation Research Group, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlosspark 1, Laxenburg, 2361, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7569-1390
Diogo AlagadorBiodiversity Chair, MED: Mediterranean Institute for Agriculture, Environment and Development, 7006-554, University of Evora, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0710-3187
Melissa ChapmanBiodiversity, Ecology and Conservation Research Group, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlosspark 1, Laxenburg, 2361, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-1377-1539
Virgilio HermosoDepartment of Plant Biology and Ecology, University of Sevilla, 41012, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-3205-5033
Heini KujalaFinnish Museum of Natural History, 00100 Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-9772-3202
Louise O'ConnorBiodiversity, Ecology and Conservation Research Group, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlosspark 1, Laxenburg, 2361, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6671-9144
Rafaela SchineggerUniversity of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, 1180 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-9374-5551
Peter H VerburgVU University Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6977-7104
Piero ViscontiBiodiversity, Ecology and Conservation Research Group, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlosspark 1, Laxenburg, 2361, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6823-2826

Funding

BiodivProtect programInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg (Austria)National Member OrganizationsYoung Scientists Summer Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Expanding and managing current habitat and species protection measures is at the heart of the European biodiversity strategy. A structured approach is needed to gain insights into such issues is systematic conservation planning, which uses techniques from decision theory to identify places and actions that contribute most effectively to policy objectives given a set of constraints. Yet culturally and historically determined European landscapes make the implementation of any conservation plans challenging, requiring an analysis of synergies and trade-offs before implementation. In this work, we review the scientific literature for evidence of previous conservation planning approaches, highlighting recent advances and success stories. We find that the conceptual characteristics of European conservation planning studies likely reduced their potential in contributing to better-informed decisions. We outline pathways towards improving the uptake of decision theory and multi-criteria conservation planning at various scales, particularly highlighting the need for (a) open data and intuitive tools, (b) the integration of biodiversity-focused conservation planning with multiple objectives, (c) accounting of dynamic ecological processes and functions, and (d) better facilitation of entry-points and co-design practices of conservation planning scenarios with stakeholders. By adopting and improving these practices, European conservation planning might become more actionable and adaptable towards implementable policy outcomes. This article is part of the theme issue 'Ecological novelty and planetary stewardship: biodiversity dynamics in a transforming biosphere'.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemBiodiversityEurope‘30 × 30’biodiversity conservationdecision theoryprioritizationspatial optimizationstakeholder

Identifiers

PMID38583468
PMCPMC10999267

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.