SynthesisAmbio2024
Reviewing the science on 50 years of conservation: Knowledge production biases and lessons for practice.
Synthesis in Ambio, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Community-led landscape regeneration: A review of and framework for engagement in restoration initiatives.Ambio · 2026Pooled it
- Insights from equitable governance assessments in conservation areas around the world.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Pooled it
- A framework for unit-level biodiversity credit integrity and market-level governance.npj biodiversity · 2026Article
- Article
- Robust estimates of biodiversity change require high-resolution time series.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Enabling conditions for conservation on Indigenous and community lands.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Review
- Rewilding for resilience: A call to integrate quantitative and qualitative approaches for monitoring rewilding.Cambridge prisms. Extinction · 2026Review
- The Ecological Genome Project and the Promises of Ecogenomics for Society: Realising a Shared Vision as One Health.Bioethics · 2025Article
- Traditional ecological knowledge for great ape conservation in Gabon.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drawing on 662 studies from 102 countries, we present a systematic review of published empirical studies about site-level biodiversity conservation initiated between 1970 and 2019. Within this sample, we find that knowledge production about the Global South is largely produced by researchers in the Global North, implying a neocolonial power dynamic. We also find evidence of bias in reported ecological outcomes linked to lack of independence in scientific studies, serving to uphold narratives about who should lead conservation. We explore relationships in the sample studies between conservation initiative types, the extent of Indigenous Peoples' and local communities' influence in governance, and reported social and ecological outcomes. Findings reveal positive ecological and social outcomes are strongly associated with higher levels of influence of Indigenous Peoples and local communities and their institutions, implying equity in conservation practice should be advanced not only for moral reasons, but because it can enhance conservation effectiveness.
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.