The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Decision-Making in Conservation and Natural Resource Management: Models for Interdisciplinary Approaches
Abstract
Making decisions about the management and conservation of nature is necessarily complex, with many competing pressures on natural systems, opportunities and benefits for different groups of people and a varying, uncertain social and ecological environment. An approach which is narrowly focused on either human development or environmental protection cannot deliver sustainable solutions. This volume provides frameworks for improving the integration of natural resource management with conservation and supporting stronger collaboration between researchers and practitioners in developed and developing countries. Novel approaches are required when ecological and social dynamics are highly interdependent. A structured, participatory, model-based approach to decision-making for biodiversity conservation has been proven to produce real-world change. There are surprisingly few successful case studies, however; some of the best are presented here, from fisheries, pest management and conservation. Researchers and practitioners need this interdisciplinary approach, focused on quantitative tools that have been tested and applied, and learning from success.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Doing so will likely enable the identification of new objectives and parameters for models to fit better with the realities of conservation practice58–63.”
From Connectivity modelling in conservation science: a comparative evaluation (2022) · cites this paper as [58]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Connectivity modelling in conservation science: a comparative evaluation
Unnithan Kumar, S., & Cushman, S. A. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-20370-w · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2017-06-22
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 0
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