The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Four barriers to the global understanding of biodiversity conservation: wealth, language, geographical location and security
Open accessAbstract
Global biodiversity conservation is seriously challenged by gaps and heterogeneity in the geographical coverage of existing information. Nevertheless, the key barriers to the collection and compilation of biodiversity information at a global scale have yet to be identified. We show that wealth, language, geographical location and security each play an important role in explaining spatial variations in data availability in four different types of biodiversity databases. The number of records per square kilometre is high in countries with high per capita gross domestic product (GDP), high proportion of English speakers and high security levels, and those located close to the country hosting the database; but these are not necessarily countries with high biodiversity. These factors are considered to affect data availability by impeding either the activities of scientific research or active international communications. Our results demonstrate that efforts to solve environmental problems at a global scale will gain significantly by focusing scientific education, communication, research and collaboration in low-GDP countries with fewer English speakers and located far from Western countries that host the global databases; countries that have experienced conflict may also benefit. Findings of this study may be broadly applicable to other fields that require the compilation of scientific knowledge at a global level.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
Solutions for a cultivated planet
Foley, J. A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K. A., Cassidy, E. S., Gerber, J. S., Johnston, M., Mueller, N. D., O’Connell, C., Ray, D. K., West, P. C., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10452 · Cited by 8,476
Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants
Root, T. L., Price, J. T., Hall, K. R., Schneider, S. H., Rosenzweig, C., & Pounds, J. A. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01333 · Cited by 4,774
Global patterns and predictors of marine biodiversity across taxa
Tittensor, D. P., Mora, C., Jetz, W., Lotze, H. K., Ricard, D., Berghe, E. V., & Worm, B. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09329 · Cited by 1,524
Distorted Views of Biodiversity: Spatial and Temporal Bias in Species Occurrence Data
Boakes, E. H., McGowan, P. J. K., Fuller, R. A., Chang-qing, D., Clark, N. E., O'Connor, K., & Mace, G. M. (2010) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000385 · Cited by 824
Global distribution and conservation of rare and threatened vertebrates
Grenyer, R., Orme, C. D. L., Jackson, S. F., Thomas, G. H., Davies, R. G., Davies, T. J., Jones, K. E., Olson, V. A., Ridgely, R. S., Rasmussen, P. C., et al. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05237 · Cited by 569
Monitoring Change in Vertebrate Abundance: the Living Planet Index
COLLEN, B., LOH, J., WHITMEE, S., McRAE, L., AMIN, R., & BAILLIE, J. E. M. (2009) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01117.x · Cited by 441
How Global Is the Global Biodiversity Information Facility?
Yesson, C., Brewer, P. W., Sutton, T., Caithness, N., Pahwa, J. S., Burgess, M., Gray, W. A., White, R. J., Jones, A. C., Bisby, F. A., et al. (2007) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001124 · Cited by 369
The tropical biodiversity data gap: addressing disparity in global monitoring
Collen, B., Ram, M., Zamin, T., & McRae, L. (2008) · Tropical Conservation Science · doi:10.1177/194008290800100202 · Cited by 327
Cited by
Biological invasions, climate change and genomics
Chown, S. L., Hodgins, K. A., Griffin, P. C., Oakeshott, J. G., Byrne, M., & Hoffmann, A. A. (2015) · Evolutionary Applications · doi:10.1111/eva.12234 · Cited by 284
The challenge of biased evidence in conservation
Christie, A. P., Amano, T., Martin, P. A., Petrovan, S. O., Shackelford, G. E., Simmons, B. I., Smith, R. K., Williams, D. R., Wordley, C. F. R., & Sutherland, W. J. (2021) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/cobi.13577 · Cited by 202
Self-citationWhy is biodiversity data-deficiency an ongoing conservation dilemma in Africa?
Siddig, A. A. H. (2019) · Journal for Nature Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2019.125719 · Cited by 43
Faxon, H., & Chapman, M. (2025) · Environmental Research Letters · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/add6b6 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Amano, T., & Sutherland, W. J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2013-04-07
- Volume
- 280
- Issue
- 1756
- Pages
- 20122649
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- OpenAlex
- W2135327225
- Cited by
- 261
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 10.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Four barriers to the global understanding of biodiversity conservation: wealth, language, geographical location and security. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.2012.2649
- The paper
- Amano, T., & Sutherland, W. J. (2013). Four barriers to the global understanding of biodiversity conservation: wealth, language, geographical location and security. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.2649
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
