The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Value of Tropical Forest to Local Communities: Complications, Caveats, and Cautions
Open accessAbstract
The methods used to value tropical forests have the potential to influence how policy makers and others perceive forest landsforestlands. A small number of valuation studies achieve real impact. These are generally succinct accounts supporting a specific perception. However, such reports risk being used to justify inappropriate actions. The end users of such results are rarely those who produced them and misunderstanding of key details is a concern. One defence is to ensure that the ultimate users appreciate shortcomings and common pitfalls. In this article, the authors aim to reduce such risks by discussing how valuation studies should be assessed and challenged by users. The authors consider two concise, high profile valuation papers here, by Peters and colleagues and by Godoy and colleagues. They illustrate a series of questions that should be asked, not only about the two papers, but also about any landscape valuation study. The article highlighted the many challenges faced in valuing tropical forest landsforestlands and in presenting and using results sensibly, and it offers some suggestions for improvement. Attention to compexitiescomplexities and clarity about uncertainties are required. Forest valuation must be pursued and promoted with caution.
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
The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., et al. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/387253a0 · Cited by 22,585
Bodmer, R. E., Fang, T. G., Moya, L., & Gill, R. (1994) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/0006-3207(94)90005-1 · Cited by 143
Cited by
Effects of Habitat Fragmentation on Biodiversity
Fahrig, L. (2003) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419 · Cited by 7,879
Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature?
Fairhead, J., Leach, M., & Scoones, I. (2012) · The Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2012.671770 · Cited by 1,928
Commercialisation of Non‐timber Forest Products: A Reality Check
Belcher, B., & Schreckenberg, K. (2007) · Development Policy Review · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7679.2007.00374.x · Cited by 458
Forests, Livelihoods, and Conservation: Broadening the Empirical Base
Wunder, S., Angelsen, A., & Belcher, B. (2014) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.03.007 · Cited by 326
Self-citationMartensen, A. C., Pimentel, R. G., & Metzger, J. P. (2008) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2008.06.008 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Sheil, D., & Wunder, S.
- Venue
- Conservation Ecology
- Publisher
- Resilience Alliance, Inc.
- Published
- 2002
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 1195-5449 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2126137752
- Cited by
- 235
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.52
- 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: The Value of Tropical Forest to Local Communities: Complications, Caveats, and Cautions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5751/es-00458-060209
- The paper
- Sheil, D., & Wunder, S. (2002). The Value of Tropical Forest to Local Communities: Complications, Caveats, and Cautions. Conservation Ecology. https://doi.org/10.5751/es-00458-060209
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.