Literature DB >> 16567653

You can't always get what you want: conservation planning with feedback effects.

Stephen Polasky1.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  2006        PMID： 16567653      PMCID： PMC1459338          DOI： 10.1073/pnas.0601348103

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN： 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


× No keyword cloud information.
  4 in total

Review 1.  Systematic conservation planning.

Authors:  C R Margules; R L Pressey
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-05-11       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Global variation in terrestrial conservation costs, conservation benefits, and unmet conservation needs.

Authors:  Andrew Balmford; Kevin J Gaston; Simon Blyth; Alex James; Val Kapos
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-01-27       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Land market feedbacks can undermine biodiversity conservation.

Authors:  Paul R Armsworth; Gretchen C Daily; Peter Kareiva; James N Sanchirico
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-03-22       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Species distributions, land values, and efficient conservation

Authors: 
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-03-27       Impact factor: 47.728
  4 in total
  1 in total

1.  Natural resource assessment: an approach to science based planning in national parks.

Authors:  Carolyn G Mahan; James P Vanderhorst; John A Young
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 3.266
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.