ArticleNature ecology & evolution2026
Comparing potential biodiversity conflicts from renewable energy expansion in China at different centralization levels.
Article in Nature ecology & evolution, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid deployment of renewable energy creates urgent trade-offs with biodiversity conservation. The uneven distribution of renewable energy potential and biodiversity creates a critical governance challenge: at which administrative level should goal setting and spatial planning decisions be set to best mitigate these conflicts? Here we model the expansion of solar and wind energy in China through 2060 to reach its carbon neutrality goal, to compare a centralized national planning scenario against the current provincial (more decentralized) planning approach. We find that national sitings' spatial conflict with richness-based conservation priorities is 4-7% less and overlaps 11-33% fewer species on average than the provincial planning. However, these gains are offset by greater conflicts with functional diversity and with open or dry biomes, including associated species such as the endangered marbled polecat (Vormela peregusna). By contrast, decentralized planning disproportionately overlapped more with the habitats of small-ranged forest species. Such divergence reveals the limitations of any single governance level in addressing these trade-offs, showing the imperative for integrated, multilevel siting frameworks. Effectively meeting dual climate and biodiversity targets requires strategies that synthesize strengths across administrative scales.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42231009What 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.