SynthesisJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2024
The influence of urbanization on local ecological knowledge: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 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.
- Addressing environmental misperceptions for nature recovery.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026Article
- Reflections on the future of European ethnobiology.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urbanization is a complex and multifaceted process studied across various scientific disciplines. However, in ethnobiology, research on the impacts of urbanization on local ecological knowledge (LEK) often lacks standardization and tends to focus primarily on local scales. This study aims to systematically characterize how researchers address urbanization in ethnobiology and assess its effects on LEK globally. We conducted a systematic review using the PRISMA protocol and selected 66 studies from the Web of Science and Scopus databases for analysis. Our findings reveal that researchers often do not adopt a consistent definition of urbanization, frequently framing their study areas within a simplistic urban-rural dichotomy. Although some studies used urbanization indicators, our qualitative analyses, including a correlation matrix, showed that these indicators were largely independent of each other. Additionally, principal component analysis (PCA) with clustering identified four groupings among the indicators, yet with low correlations between them. A t test analysis of the 66 papers shows that urbanization generally has a negative impact on LEK. Based on these findings, we emphasize the critical need for standardized urbanization indicators in ethnobiological studies and propose a new approach for characterizing urbanization, which will enhance the precision and relevance of future research in this field.
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.