The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Assessing Management Effectiveness and Setting Priorities in Protected Areas in KwaZulu-Natal
Abstract
KwaZulu-Natal Wildlife is the governmental agency responsible for managing protected areas in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Province, South Africa. The agency recently conducted an assessment of the management effectiveness of all 110 protected areas throughout the province. The assessment highlighted a range of management problems, including poor design and layout of protected areas; staffing problems; and inadequate financial resources, management planning, research efforts, and resource inventories. Major threats include invasive alien plants and the isolation of protected areas, the latter leading to problems in species viability. The assessment was part of a broader systematic conservation planning program being conducted throughout KZN Province; this article concludes with a discussion of how these two assessment processes are being integrated.
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
“Invasive plants are almost universally regarded as a major threat by managers of protected areas (Goodman, 2003; Randall, 2011; Pyšek et al., 2013).”
From Scientists' warning on invasive alien species (2020) · cites this paper as Goodman, 2003
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Ervin, 2003b, BioScience, 53, 833, 10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0833:RAOPAM]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- Margules, 2000, Nature, 405, 243, 10.1038/35012251 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scientists' warning on invasive alien species
Pyšek, P., Hulme, P. E., Simberloff, D., Bacher, S., Blackburn, T. M., Carlton, J. T., Dawson, W., Essl, F., Foxcroft, L. C., Genovesi, P., et al. (2020) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12627 · Cited by 2,234
“GOODMAN, P. S. (2003). Assessing management effectiveness and setting priorities in protected areas in KwaZulu-Natal.”
BackgroundPlant invasion science in protected areas: progress and priorities
Foxcroft, L. C., Pyšek, P., Richardson, D. M., Genovesi, P., & MacFadyen, S. (2017) · Biological Invasions · doi:10.1007/s10530-016-1367-z · Cited by 213
Metadata
- Authors
- GOODMAN, P. S.
- Corresponding author
- GOODMAN, PETER S.
- ORCID
- GOODMAN, PETER S.
- Venue
- BioScience
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 843
- ISSN
- 0006-3568 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2121545921
- Cited by
- 75
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 1.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- BioScience (publishedVersion)
- BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- World Wildlife Fund
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology, Conservation, and Geographical Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Keywords
- protected area management effectiveness, management effectiveness evaluation, conservation planning, protected area design, invasive alien plants, species viability, conservation prioritization, conservation funding, KwaZulu-Natal
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: Assessing Management Effectiveness and Setting Priorities in Protected Areas in KwaZulu-Natal. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053%5B0843:ameasp%5D2.0.co;2
- The paper
- GOODMAN, P. S. (2003). Assessing Management Effectiveness and Setting Priorities in Protected Areas in KwaZulu-Natal. BioScience. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053%5B0843%3Aameasp%5D2.0.co%3B2
