ArticleConservation science and practice2025
Are climate change adaptation strategies working? A call to expedite learning.
Article in Conservation science and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evidence is lacking for what constitutes effective climate change adaptation to successfully conserve and steward ecosystems. Yet we urgently need this information to develop robust adaptation strategies to keep pace with unprecedented change, given our limited resources to do so. This includes not just understanding if a given strategy is effective in a single application, but perhaps more importantly if a given strategy has proven effective across sites where it has been applied, or has benefits only under certain sets of conditions. This learning across the field of adaptation is currently missing and is what is necessary for bringing adaptation to scale. We propose an approach that can guide adaptation efficacy testing under varying levels of baseline knowledge and ecosystem complexity. The approach includes clearly defining conservation goals and climate vulnerabilities, methodically collecting site and climate metrics to inform analysis of efficacy, and evaluating and communicating both positive and negative results in order to advance the adaptation field. Using this approach with meta-analyses and post-hoc testing can quickly scale efficacy testing in a meaningful way. Furthermore, explicitly incorporating efficacy testing into adaptation processes can support the growth of the adaptation field and spark creative, adaptive management approaches that will increase the likelihood of reducing climate change vulnerability.
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.