The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A social–ecological approach to conservation planning: embedding social considerations
Open accessAbstract
Many conservation plans remain unimplemented, in part because of insufficient consideration of the social processes that influence conservation decisions. Complementing social considerations with an integrated understanding of the ecology of a region can result in a more complete conservation approach. We suggest that linking conservation planning to a social–ecological systems (SES) framework can lead to a more thorough understanding of human–environment interactions and more effective integration of social considerations. By characterizing SES as a set of subsystems, and their interactions with each other and with external factors, the SES framework can improve our understanding of the linkages between social and ecological influences on the environment. Using this framework can help to identify socially and ecologically focused conservation actions that will benefit ecosystems and human communities, and assist in the development of more consistent evidence for evaluating conservation actions by comparing conservation case studies.
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
Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action
Ostrom, E. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511807763 · Cited by 20,653
Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action
Field, B. C., & Ostrom, E. (1992) · Land Economics · doi:10.2307/3146384 · Cited by 18,859
Dilemmas in a general theory of planning
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01405730 · Cited by 16,338 · cited 1×
“Australia; 6Conservation International, Arlington, VA 195 © The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org cated because it presents many problems for which the “solutions” generally lead to the emergence of additional issues (Rittel and Webber 1973).”
BackgroundA General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems
Ostrom, E. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1172133 · Cited by 8,656
At Risk: Natural Hazards, People's Vulnerability and Disasters
Wisner, B., Blaikie, P. M., Cannon, T., & Davis, I. J. (1994) · Cited by 6,286
Systematic conservation planning
Margules, C. R., & Pressey, R. L. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35012251 · Cited by 4,631
Self-citationBeyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems
Ostrom, E. (2010) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.100.3.641 · Cited by 4,529
A place-based model for understanding community resilience to natural disasters
Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burton, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., & Webb, J. (2008) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.07.013 · Cited by 4,307
Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis
Scoones, I. (1998) · OpenDocs (Institute of Development Studies) · Cited by 3,099
Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation
Agrawal, A., & Gibson, C. C. (1999) · World Development · doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(98)00161-2 · Cited by 2,908
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01535.x · doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01535.x
- Conservation Measures Partnership, 2007, Open standards for the practice of conservation, version 2.0
- 10.1017/S0030605307001949 · doi:10.1017/s0030605307001949
- 10.1016/j.marpol.2008.03.014 · doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2008.03.014
- 10.1080/08920753.2010.523412 · doi:10.1080/08920753.2010.523412
- 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00140.x · doi:10.1111/j.1755-263x.2010.00140.x
- Harper J., 2002, Endangered species: health, illness and death among Madagascar's People of the Forest
- 10.1890/090047 · doi:10.1890/090047
- 10.1525/bio.2011.61.8.10 · doi:10.1525/bio.2011.61.8.10
- 10.1017/S0030605309990500 · doi:10.1017/s0030605309990500
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-citationGlobal priority areas for ecosystem restoration
Strassburg, B. B. N., Iribarrem, A., Beyer, H. L., Cordeiro, C. L., Crouzeilles, R., Jakovac, C. C., Braga Junqueira, A., Lacerda, E., Latawiec, A. E., Balmford, A., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2784-9 · Cited by 1,175
Making the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration a Social-Ecological Endeavour
Fischer, J., Riechers, M., Loos, J., Martin-Lopez, B., & Temperton, V. M. (2021) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2020.08.018 · Cited by 462
Bennett, N. J., Govan, H., & Satterfield, T. (2015) · Marine Policy · doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.03.026 · Cited by 421
Self-citationLevers and leverage points for pathways to sustainability
Chan, K. M. A., Boyd, D. R., Gould, R. K., Jetzkowitz, J., Liu, J., Muraca, B., Naidoo, R., Olmsted, P., Satterfield, T., Selomane, O., et al. (2020) · People and Nature · doi:10.1002/pan3.10124 · Cited by 323
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ban, N. C., Mills, M., Tam, J., Hicks, C. C., Klain, S., Stoeckl, N., Bottrill, M. C., Levine, J., Pressey, R. L., Satterfield, T., & Chan, K. M.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-05
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 194-202
- ISSN
- 1540-9295 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-9309
- OpenAlex
- W2145725211
- Cited by
- 572
- References
- 49
- FWCI
- 30.47
- 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: A social–ecological approach to conservation planning: embedding social considerations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/110205
- The paper
- Ban, N. C., Mills, M., Tam, J., Hicks, C. C., Klain, S., Stoeckl, N., Bottrill, M. C., Levine, J., Pressey, R. L., Satterfield, T., & Chan, K. M. (2013). A social–ecological approach to conservation planning: embedding social considerations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1890/110205
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.
