The DOI matches its Crossref record; 84 of the 84 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting the ecological consequences of environmental change: a review of the methods*
Open accessAbstract
Summary: There is a clear need to increase our ability to predict the consequences of environmental change. The seven main approaches that are currently used are: extrapolation, experiments, phenomenological models, game‐theory population models, expert opinion, outcome‐driven modelling and scenarios. Each approach has different strengths and weaknesses. In practice, several approaches are often combined. Adaptive management aimed at testing hypotheses is excellent in principle and widely advocated. In reality, however, it is almost never carried out because the changes in management usually have to be severe in order to bring about detectable changes in a reasonable time, and the political risks of such management are usually considered too high. Game‐theory population models are used to determine population‐level phenomena based upon the decisions individuals make in response to resource depletion, interference, territoriality or rank. This allows predictions to be made regarding responses to novel conditions. The main drawback is that for some models considerable information is required. Much of conservation practice is not based upon evidence. Evidence‐based conservation is the practice of accumulating, reviewing and disseminating evidence with the aim of formulating appropriate management strategies. Evidence‐based medicine revolutionized medical practice and similar opportunities exist to improve conservation practice. Synthesis and applications. The conventional approach of making assumptions and deriving models to make predictions about the consequences of environmental change is often unsatisfactory for complex problems, with considerable uncertainty. Tackling such problems is likely to require greater exploration of techniques such as expert opinion, output‐driven modelling and scenarios.
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
Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis
Cooper, R. N., Houghton, J. T., McCarthy, J. J., & Metz, B. (2002) · Foreign Affairs · doi:10.2307/20033020 · Cited by 12,889
Extinction risk from climate change
Thomas, C. D., Cameron, A., Green, R. E., Bakkenes, M., Beaumont, L. J., Collingham, Y. C., Erasmus, B. F. N., de Siqueira, M. F., Grainger, A., Hannah, L., et al. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02121 · Cited by 7,695
Pearson, R. G., & Dawson, T. P. (2003) · Global Ecology and Biogeography · doi:10.1046/j.1466-822x.2003.00042.x · Cited by 4,252
Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources.
Rutherford, A. A., & Walters, C. (1987) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531565 · Cited by 3,308
Fretwell, S. D., & Lucas, H. L. (1969) · Acta Biotheoretica · doi:10.1007/bf01601953 · Cited by 3,138
Directions in Conservation Biology
Caughley, G. (1994) · The Journal of Animal Ecology · doi:10.2307/5542 · Cited by 2,405
Müller, G., Pannhorst, W., & Schiffner, U. (1995) · Schott Series on Glass and Glass Ceramics · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-03083-7_2 · Cited by 1,982
Individual-based Modeling and Ecology
Grimm, V., & Railsback, S. F. (2005) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400850624 · Cited by 1,940
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
Self-citationThe Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis
Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (1999) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/s0169-2070(99)00018-7 · Cited by 1,789
Cited by
Eliciting Expert Knowledge in Conservation Science
MARTIN, T. G., BURGMAN, M. A., FIDLER, F., KUHNERT, P. M., LOW‐CHOY, S., MCBRIDE, M., & MENGERSEN, K. (2012) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01806.x · Cited by 829
A decade of climate change experiments on marine organisms: procedures, patterns and problems
Wernberg, T., Smale, D. A., & Thomsen, M. S. (2012) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02656.x · Cited by 428
Eight questions about invasions and ecosystem functioning
Strayer, D. L. (2012) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01817.x · Cited by 408
Capital breeding and income breeding: their meaning, measurement, and worth
Stephens, P. A., Boyd, I. L., McNamara, J. M., & Houston, A. I. (2009) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/08-1369.1 · Cited by 382
The ecological forecast horizon, and examples of its uses and determinants
Petchey, O. L., Pontarp, M., Massie, T. M., Kéfi, S., Ozgul, A., Weilenmann, M., Palamara, G. M., Altermatt, F., Matthews, B., Levine, J. M., et al. (2015) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/ele.12443 · Cited by 348
Metadata
- Authors
- SUTHERLAND, W. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-06-23
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 599-616
- ISSN
- 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2664
- OpenAlex
- W1516331600
- Cited by
- 307
- References
- 84
- FWCI
- 16.30
- 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: Predicting the ecological consequences of environmental change: a review of the methods*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01182.x
- The paper
- SUTHERLAND, W. J. (2006). Predicting the ecological consequences of environmental change: a review of the methods*. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01182.x
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.