Literature DB >> 16112339

Why most conservation monitoring is, but need not be, a waste of time.

Colin J Legg1, Laszlo Nagy.   

Abstract

Ecological conservation monitoring programmes abound at various organisational and spatial levels from species to ecosystem. Many of them suffer, however, from the lack of details of goal and hypothesis formulation, survey design, data quality and statistical power at the start. As a result, most programmes are likely to fail to reach the necessary standard of being capable of rejecting a false null hypothesis with reasonable power. Results from inadequate monitoring are misleading for their information quality and are dangerous because they create the illusion that something useful has been done. We propose that conservation agencies and those funding monitoring work should require the demonstration of adequate power at the outset of any new monitoring scheme.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16112339     DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Manage        ISSN: 0301-4797            Impact factor:   6.789


  34 in total

1.  Using variance components to estimate power in a hierarchically nested sampling design.

Authors:  Maria C Dzul; Philip M Dixon; Michael C Quist; Stephen J Dinsmore; Michael R Bower; Kevin P Wilson; D Bailey Gaines
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 2.513

2.  The premises and promises of trolls in Norwegian biodiversity preservation: on the boundaries between bureaucracy and science.

Authors:  Ingrid Bay-Larsen
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2012-03-22       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Evaluating the power of surface attendance counts to detect long-term trends in populations of crevice-nesting auklets.

Authors:  Heather M Renner; Joel H Reynolds; Michelle Sims; Martin Renner
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2010-09-02       Impact factor: 2.513

Review 4.  A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities.

Authors:  Cathy C Conrad; Krista G Hilchey
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2010-07-17       Impact factor: 2.513

Review 5.  Improved probability of detection of ecological "surprises".

Authors:  D B Lindenmayer; G E Likens; C J Krebs; R J Hobbs
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Long-term monitoring of western aspen--lessons learned.

Authors:  E K Strand; S C Bunting; L A Starcevich; M T Nahorniak; G Dicus; L K Garrett
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 2.513

7.  Statistical power to detect change in a mangrove shoreline fish community adjacent to a nuclear power plant.

Authors:  T E Dolan; P D Lynch; J L Karazsia; J E Serafy
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 2.513

Review 8.  Community-based participatory research for the study of air pollution: a review of motivations, approaches, and outcomes.

Authors:  Adwoa Commodore; Sacoby Wilson; Omar Muhammad; Erik Svendsen; John Pearce
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2017-07-06       Impact factor: 2.513

9.  Systematic monitoring of heathy woodlands in a Mediterranean climate--a practical assessment of methods.

Authors:  Greg R Guerin; Andrew J Lowe
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 2.513

10.  Monitoring great ape and elephant abundance at large spatial scales: measuring effectiveness of a conservation landscape.

Authors:  Emma J Stokes; Samantha Strindberg; Parfait C Bakabana; Paul W Elkan; Fortuné C Iyenguet; Bola Madzoké; Guy Aimé F Malanda; Brice S Mowawa; Calixte Moukoumbou; Franck K Ouakabadio; Hugo J Rainey
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-04-23       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.