Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40810866›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental management2025

Cumulative effects assessment under the World Heritage and Ramsar regimes.

Evan Hamman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Evan HammanResearch Fellow, Centre for Environmental Governance, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia. Evan.hamman@canberra.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-6535-5545

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Managing cumulative pressures on socio-ecological systems presents as one of the foremost policy challenges of our time. Climate change, invasive species, development and pollution all have the potential to individually, and collectively, degrade the earth's natural and cultural resources. International environmental law, a crucial element of global environmental governance, has a role to play in prompting and coordinating a response to cumulative effects. Hitherto, however, international approaches have been fragmented and unfocused, further complicating the already challenging application of Cumulative Effects Assessment (CEA) at the local level. This article examines how the two primary protected area treaties-the World Heritage Convention and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands-have evolved to address the concepts of CEA and cumulative effects. It uncovers instances of ambiguity and fragmentation in treaty guidance material and concludes with a suggestion for further empirical research into how CEA could (or should) apply in the context of internationally protected areas.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEnvironmental PolicyInternational CooperationClimate ChangeIntroduced SpeciesWetlandsCumulative Effects Assessment (CEA)Global Environmental GovernanceInternational Environmental LawRamsar Convention.World Heritage Convention

Identifiers

PMID40810866
PMCPMC12546474

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.