Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 340

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

CONSERVING SPECIES IN A WORKING LANDSCAPE: LAND USE WITH BIOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC OBJECTIVES

Polasky, Stephen, Nelson, Erik, Lonsdorf, Eric, Fackler, Paul, Starfield, Anthony·2005·Ecological Applications

Abstract

Habitat loss and fragmentation are major threats to biodiversity. Establishing formal protected areas is one means of conserving habitat, but socio‐economic and political constraints limit the amount of land in such status. Addressing conservation issues on lands outside of formal protected areas is also necessary. In this paper we develop a spatially explicit model for analyzing the consequences of alternative land‐use patterns on the persistence of various species and on market‐oriented economic returns. The biological model uses habitat preferences, habitat area requirements, and dispersal ability for each species to predict the probability of persistence of that species given a land‐use pattern. The economic model uses characteristics of the land unit and location to predict the value of commodity production given a land‐use pattern. We use the combined biological and economic model to search for efficient land‐use patterns in which the conservation outcome cannot be improved without lowering the value of commodity production. We illustrate our methods with an example that includes three alternative land uses, managed forestry, agriculture, and biological reserve (protected area), for a modeled landscape whose physical, biological, and economic characteristics are based on conditions found in the Willamette Basin in Oregon (USA). We find that a large fraction of conservation objectives can be achieved at little cost to the economic bottom line with thoughtful land‐use planning. The degree of conflict between conservation and economic returns appears much less using our joint biological and economic modeling approach than using a reserve‐site selection approach, which assumes that species survive only inside of reserves and economic activity occurs only outside of reserves.

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 · 10.1890/03-5423

Cites

48 of 48 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 48 references

Cited by

See all 340

Metadata

Authors
Polasky, S., Nelson, E., Lonsdorf, E., Fackler, P., & Starfield, A.
Venue
Ecological Applications
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-08
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
1387-1401
ISSN
  • 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-5582
OpenAlex
W2048306642
Cited by
340
References
48
FWCI
16.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: CONSERVING SPECIES IN A WORKING LANDSCAPE: LAND USE WITH BIOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC OBJECTIVES. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/03-5423
The paper
Polasky, S., Nelson, E., Lonsdorf, E., Fackler, P., & Starfield, A. (2005). CONSERVING SPECIES IN A WORKING LANDSCAPE: LAND USE WITH BIOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC OBJECTIVES. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.1890/03-5423

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.