Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How is your MPA doing ? A guidebook of natural and social indicators for evaluating marine protected areas management effectiveness

Open access
Pomeroy, Robert S., Parks, John E., Watson, Lani M.·2004·IUCN eBooks

Abstract

IUCN, WWF and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) have developed this guidebook to assist marine protected area (MPA) managers in assessing the performance of their MPA. Based on this assessment, it shows how necessary changes can be made to improve management measures. It presents a flexible approach that can be used in many types of MPA and offers a variety of specific biological, socio-economic and governance indicators to measure the effectiveness of management actions in achieving MPA goals and objectives.

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 · 10.2305/iucn.ch.2004.paps.1.en

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
Pomeroy, R. S., Parks, J. E., & Watson, L. M.
Venue
IUCN eBooks
Publisher
IUCN
Published
2004
OpenAlex
W1909708168
Cited by
316
References
1
FWCI
27.45
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: How is your MPA doing ? A guidebook of natural and social indicators for evaluating marine protected areas management effectiveness. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2305/iucn.ch.2004.paps.1.en
The paper
Pomeroy, R. S., Parks, J. E., & Watson, L. M. (2004). How is your MPA doing ? A guidebook of natural and social indicators for evaluating marine protected areas management effectiveness. IUCN eBooks. https://doi.org/10.2305/iucn.ch.2004.paps.1.en

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.