Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 318

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Local Cultural Context on the Success of Community‐Based Conservation Interventions

Open access
WAYLEN, KERRY A., FISCHER, ANKE, MCGOWAN, PHILIP J. K., THIRGOOD, SIMON J., MILNER‐GULLAND, E. J.·2010·Conservation Biology

Abstract

Abstract: Conservation interventions require evaluation to understand what factors predict success or failure. To date, there has been little systematic investigation of the effect of social and cultural context on conservation success, although a large body of literature argues it is important. We investigated whether local cultural context, particularly local institutions and the efforts of interventions to engage with this culture significantly influence conservation outcomes. We also tested the effects of community participation, conservation education, benefit provision, and market integration. We systematically reviewed the literature on community‐based conservation and identified 68 interventions suitable for inclusion. We used a protocol to extract and code information and evaluated a range of measures of outcome success (attitudinal, behavioral, ecological, and economic). We also examined the association of each predictor with each outcome measure and the structure of predictor covariance. Local institutional context influenced intervention outcomes, and interventions that engaged with local institutions were more likely to succeed. Nevertheless, there was limited support for the role of community participation, conservation education, benefit provision, and market integration on intervention success. We recommend that conservation interventions seek to understand the societies they work with and tailor their activities accordingly. Systematic reviews are a valuable approach for assessing conservation evidence, although sensitive to the continuing lack of high‐quality reporting on conservation interventions.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01446.x

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 50 references

Cited by

See all 318

Metadata

Authors
WAYLEN, K. A., FISCHER, A., MCGOWAN, P. J. K., THIRGOOD, S. J., & MILNER‐GULLAND, E. J.
Venue
Conservation Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-07-15
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
1119-1129
ISSN
  • 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-1739
OpenAlex
W1519629334
Cited by
318
References
50
FWCI
11.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Effect of Local Cultural Context on the Success of Community‐Based Conservation Interventions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01446.x
The paper
WAYLEN, K. A., FISCHER, A., MCGOWAN, P. J. K., THIRGOOD, S. J., & MILNER‐GULLAND, E. J. (2010). Effect of Local Cultural Context on the Success of Community‐Based Conservation Interventions. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01446.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.