Cited by 299Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesWildlife Ecology and Conservation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interactions between protected areas and their surroundings in human-dominated tropical landscapes

DeFries, Ruth, Karanth, Krithi K., Pareeth, Sajid·2010·Biological Conservation

Abstract

Protected areas (PAs) often depend on landscapes surrounding them to maintain flows of organisms, water, nutrients, and energy. Park managers have little authority over the surrounding landscape although land use change and infrastructure development can have major impacts on the integrity of a PA. The need for scientifically-based regional-scale land use planning around protected areas is acute in human-dominated landscapes to balance conservation goals with livelihood needs for fuelwood, fodder, and other ecosystem services. As a first step, we propose the designation of a “zone of interaction” (ZOI) around PAs that encompasses hydrologic, ecological, and socioeconomic interactions between a PA and the surrounding landscape. We illustrate the concept by delineating the ZOI in three Indian PAs - Kanha, Ranthambore, and Nagarahole - using remote sensing, population census, and field data. The ZOI in Ranthambore is three times the size of the park and is largely defined by the socioeconomic interactions with surrounding villages. Ranthambore is located in headwaters and wildlife corridors are largely severed. In Nagarahole, the ZOI is more than seven times larger than the park and includes upstream watershed and elephant corridors. Kanha's ZOI is approximately four times larger than the park and is mostly defined by contiguous surrounding forest. The three examples highlight the differing extents of ZOIs when applying equivalent criteria, even though all are located in densely-populated landscapes. Quantitative understanding of which activities (e.g. collection of forest products, grazing, road construction, tourism development) and which locations within the ZOI are most crucial to conservation goals will enable improved land use planning around PAs in human-dominated landscapes.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.010

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 58 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lakshamana, 2001, A saga of rehabilitation, Contemporary Analyst, 24
  2. Mittermeier, 2005, Megadiversity: earth’s biologically wealthiest nations, Cemex

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–298 of 298

Metadata

Authors
DeFries, R., Karanth, K. K., & Pareeth, S.
Affiliations
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Centre For Wildlife Studies (IN)
Corresponding author
DeFries, Ruth
Venue
Biological Conservation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-12
Volume
143
Issue
12
Pages
2870-2880
ISSN
0006-3207 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2135328819
Cited by
299
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 21
FWCI
14.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Biological Conservation (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
protected areas, anthropogenic landscapes, land use planning, ecosystem services, ecological corridors, watershed connectivity, human-wildlife interactions, conservation and livelihoods, Kanha National Park, road construction impacts, tourism development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review