Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41163751›Full record

ArticleBioscience2025

Beyond crisis and grief: Rethinking conservation narratives.

Marco Malavasi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Marco MalavasiDepartment of Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics, and Natural Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9639-1784

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since 1985, conservation science has been unquestioningly described as a crisis discipline. This narrative entails prioritizing immediate responses to threats despite limited knowledge. Although crisis interventions have grown significantly, biodiversity loss has continued unabated, and those working or living alongside declining ecosystems report increasing levels of emotional distress. Ecological grief is particularly on the rise and is claimed by some as a necessary process to fuel the urgent lifesaving changes. However, I argue that both narratives-the emerging ecological grief and the established crisis approach-can synergically reinforce a loop of resignation, where ecological decline is either passively accepted or inadvertently perpetuated. Such resignation ultimately leads to harmful adaptation to ongoing ecological degradation. Finally, I propose a shift toward a transformative conservation narrative, moving away from the primary focus on crisis thinking to embrace proactive futures. Reframing the underlying narratives is essential, because they can influence the broader conservation agenda.

Indexed as

crisisecological griefresignation looptransformative change

Identifiers

PMID41163751
PMCPMC12559850

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.