ArticleScientific reports2024
Estimating the impact of airport wildlife hazards management on realized wildlife strike risk.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A model to quantify the probability of collision between birds and aircraft: Applications for onboard lighting.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026Article
- Migratory bird species as the primary contributors to wildlife collisions: a case study at Shanghai Pudong International Airport, China.BMC zoology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Collisions between wildlife and aircraft, commonly referred to as wildlife strikes or bird strikes, are rare events that pose considerable safety and economic risks to the aviation industry. Given the potentially dramatic consequences of such events, airports scheduled for passenger service are required to conduct wildlife hazard assessments and implement wildlife hazard management plans for the purpose of mitigating wildlife strike risk. The evaluation of such management, however, is complicated by imperfect reporting that mediates the relationship between realized wildlife strike risk and wildlife strike metrics. In this paper, we shed light on such phenomena by investigating the staggered adoption of a federal wildlife hazards management program at joint-use airports across the contiguous United States. This research design allowed us to exploit variation in both management presence across airports, over time as well as variation in the quality of wildlife strike reporting within airports. As hypothesized, we found that wildlife hazards management intervention has a significant impact on the quality of reporting, as evidenced by a substantial increase in the number of civil strikes reported over the management period. Where pre-existing reporting mechanisms were more robust, however, we found that wildlife hazards management had a significant impact on realized wildlife strike risk as evidenced by a decrease in strike-induced economic damages among military aircraft. Overall, we found that the estimated economic benefits of the studied airport wildlife hazards management program were 7 times greater than the costs over the management period. Our results have important implications for the measurement of wildlife strike risk and the management of wildlife hazards at airports, as well as important insights pertaining to the use of observational data for causal inference, particularly in the context of risk management.
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.