ReviewLandscape ecology2026
Causal machine learning methods for understanding land use and land cover change.
Review in Landscape ecology, 2026. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Understanding the roles of different drivers in land use and land cover change (LULCC) is a critical research challenge. However, as LULCC is the result of complex, socio-ecological processes and is highly context dependent, achieving such understanding is difficult. This is particularly true for causal modelling approaches that are critical for effective policy formulation. Causal machine learning (ML) methods could help address this challenge, but are as yet poorly understood or applied by the LULCC community. Objectives: To provide an accessible introduction to the state of the art for causal ML methods, their limitations, and their potential applications understanding LULCC. Methods: We conducted two workshops where we identified the most promising ML methods for increasing understanding of LULCC dynamics. Results: We provide a brief overview of the challenges to causal modelling of LULCC, including a simple example, and the most relevant causal ML approaches for addressing these challenges, as well as their limitations. Conclusions: Causal ML methods hold considerable promise for improving causal modelling of LULCC. However, the complexity of LULCC dynamics mean that such methods must be combined with domain understanding and qualitative insights for effective policy design.
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.