The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management
Open accessAbstract
The conservation community is increasingly focusing on the monitoring and evaluation of management, governance, ecological, and social considerations as part of a broader move toward adaptive management and evidence‐based conservation. Evidence is any information that can be used to come to a conclusion and support a judgment or, in this case, to make decisions that will improve conservation policies, actions, and outcomes. Perceptions are one type of information that is often dismissed as anecdotal by those arguing for evidence‐based conservation. In this paper, I clarify the contributions of research on perceptions of conservation to improving adaptive and evidence‐based conservation. Studies of the perceptions of local people can provide important insights into observations, understandings and interpretations of the social impacts, and ecological outcomes of conservation; the legitimacy of conservation governance; and the social acceptability of environmental management. Perceptions of these factors contribute to positive or negative local evaluations of conservation initiatives. It is positive perceptions, not just objective scientific evidence of effectiveness, that ultimately ensure the support of local constituents thus enabling the long‐term success of conservation. Research on perceptions can inform courses of action to improve conservation and governance at scales ranging from individual initiatives to national and international policies. Better incorporation of evidence from across the social and natural sciences and integration of a plurality of methods into monitoring and evaluation will provide a more complete picture on which to base conservation decisions and environmental management.
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
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior
Stern, P. C. (2000) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00175 · Cited by 8,682
REDISCOVERY OF TRADITIONAL ECOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE AS ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT
Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2000) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[1251:roteka]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 4,206
Global conservation outcomes depend on marine protected areas with five key features
Edgar, G. J., Stuart-Smith, R. D., Willis, T. J., Kininmonth, S., Baker, S. C., Banks, S., Barrett, N. S., Becerro, M. A., Bernard, A. T. F., Berkhout, J., et al. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13022 · Cited by 1,922
The need for evidence-based conservation
Sutherland, W. J., Pullin, A. S., Dolman, P. M., & Knight, T. M. (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018 · Cited by 1,822
A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental behaviour—A meta-analysis
Klöckner, C. A. (2013) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.014 · Cited by 1,773
Sacred Ecology: Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Resource Management
Robbins, P., & Berkes, F. (2000) · Economic Geography · doi:10.2307/144393 · Cited by 1,753
Parks and Peoples: The Social Impact of Protected Areas
West, P., Igoe, J., & Brockington, D. (2006) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123308 · Cited by 1,577
Money for Nothing? A Call for Empirical Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation Investments
Ferraro, P. J., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2006) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040105 · Cited by 1,312
Bennett, N. J., & Dearden, P. (2014) · Marine Policy · doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2013.08.017 · Cited by 897
Self-citation
Cited by
Conservation social science: Understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation
Bennett, N. J., Roth, R., Klain, S. C., Chan, K., Christie, P., Clark, D. A., Cullman, G., Curran, D., Durbin, T. J., Epstein, G., et al. (2017) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2016.10.006 · Cited by 1,254
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bennett, N. J.
- Venue
- Conservation Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-03-08
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 582-592
- ISSN
- 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-1739
- OpenAlex
- W2283675648
- Cited by
- 908
- References
- 75
- FWCI
- 51.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/cobi.12681
- The paper
- Bennett, N. J. (2016). Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12681
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.