Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 106 of the 106 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Understanding protected area resilience: a multi‐scale, social‐ecological approach

Open access
Cumming, Graeme S., Allen, Craig R., Ban, Natalie C., Biggs, Duan, Biggs, Harry C., Cumming, David H. M., De Vos, Alta, Epstein, Graham, Etienne, Michel, Maciejewski, Kristine, Mathevet, Raphaël, Moore, Christine, Nenadovic, Mateja, Schoon, Michael·2015·Ecological Applications

Abstract

Protected areas (PAs) remain central to the conservation of biodiversity. Classical PAs were conceived as areas that would be set aside to maintain a natural state with minimal human influence. However, global environmental change and growing cross‐scale anthropogenic influences mean that PAs can no longer be thought of as ecological islands that function independently of the broader social‐ecological system in which they are located. For PAs to be resilient (and to contribute to broader social‐ecological resilience), they must be able to adapt to changing social and ecological conditions over time in a way that supports the long‐term persistence of populations, communities, and ecosystems of conservation concern. We extend Ostrom's social‐ecological systems framework to consider the long‐term persistence of PAs, as a form of land use embedded in social‐ecological systems, with important cross‐scale feedbacks. Most notably, we highlight the cross‐scale influences and feedbacks on PAs that exist from the local to the global scale, contextualizing PAs within multi‐scale social‐ecological functional landscapes. Such functional landscapes are integral to understand and manage individual PAs for long‐term sustainability. We illustrate our conceptual contribution with three case studies that highlight cross‐scale feedbacks and social‐ecological interactions in the functioning of PAs and in relation to regional resilience. Our analysis suggests that while ecological, economic, and social processes are often directly relevant to PAs at finer scales, at broader scales, the dominant processes that shape and alter PA resilience are primarily social and economic.

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 · 10.1890/13-2113.1

Cites

106 of 106 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 106 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Cumming, G. S., Allen, C. R., Ban, N. C., Biggs, D., Biggs, H. C., Cumming, D. H. M., De Vos, A., Epstein, G., Etienne, M., Maciejewski, K., Mathevet, R., Moore, C., Nenadovic, M., & Schoon, M.
Venue
Ecological Applications
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
299-319
ISSN
  • 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-5582
OpenAlex
W2136537904
Cited by
257
References
106
FWCI
13.57
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: Understanding protected area resilience: a multi‐scale, social‐ecological approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1890/13-2113.1
The paper
Cumming, G. S., Allen, C. R., Ban, N. C., Biggs, D., Biggs, H. C., Cumming, D. H. M., De Vos, A., Epstein, G., Etienne, M., Maciejewski, K., Mathevet, R., Moore, C., Nenadovic, M., & Schoon, M. (2015). Understanding protected area resilience: a multi‐scale, social‐ecological approach. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.1890/13-2113.1

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.