Literature DB >> 29923638

Ten-year assessment of the 100 priority questions for global biodiversity conservation.

Tommaso Jucker1,2, Bonnie Wintle3,4, Gorm Shackelford5, Pierre Bocquillon6,7, Jan Laurens Geffert8,9, Tim Kasoar5, Eszter Kovacs8,10, Hannah S Mumby5,11, Chloé Orland1, Judith Schleicher8,9, Eleanor R Tew5, Aiora Zabala7, Tatsuya Amano3,5, Alexandra Bell12, Boris Bongalov1, Josephine M Chambers8, Colleen Corrigan9,13, América P Durán5,9,14, Leslie-Anne Duvic-Paoli7, Caroline Emilson15, Erik J S Emilson1,15, Jéssica Fonseca da Silva1, Emma E Garnett5, Elizabeth J Green9, Miriam K Guth9, Andrew Hacket-Pain16, Amy Hinsley17, Javier Igea1, Martina Kunz7, Sarah H Luke5,18, William Lynam1, Philip A Martin5, Matheus H Nunes1, Nancy Ockendon5, Aly Pavitt9, Charlotte L R Payne5, Victoria Plutshack7, Tim T Rademacher8,19,20, Rebecca J Robertson5, David C Rose5,21, Anca Serban8, Benno I Simmons5, Catherine Tayleur5,22, Claire F R Wordley5, Nibedita Mukherjee5,23.   

Abstract

In 2008, a group of conservation scientists compiled a list of 100 priority questions for the conservation of the world's biodiversity. However, now almost a decade later, no one has yet published a study gauging how much progress has been made in addressing these 100 high-priority questions in the peer-reviewed literature. We took a first step toward reexamining the 100 questions to identify key knowledge gaps that remain. Through a combination of a questionnaire and a literature review, we evaluated each question on the basis of 2 criteria: relevance and effort. We defined highly relevant questions as those that - if answered - would have the greatest impact on global biodiversity conservation and quantified effort based on the number of review publications addressing a particular question, which we used as a proxy for research effort. Using this approach, we identified a set of questions that, despite being perceived as highly relevant, have been the focus of relatively few review publications over the past 10 years. These questions covered a broad range of topics but predominantly tackled 3 major themes: conservation and management of freshwater ecosystems, role of societal structures in shaping interactions between people and the environment, and impacts of conservation interventions. We believe these questions represent important knowledge gaps that have received insufficient attention and may need to be prioritized in future research.
© 2018 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  agenda de investigación; análisis de redes; cuestionario; escaneo del horizonte; establecimiento de prioridades; horizon scanning; knowledge gaps; literature review; network analysis; priority setting; questionnaire; research agenda; revisión de la literatura; vacíos de conocimiento; 文献综述, 水平扫描,知识空缺, 网络分析, 确定保护优先性, 问卷, 研究议程

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29923638     DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  3 in total

Review 1.  A review and meta-analysis of collaborative research prioritization studies in ecology, biodiversity conservation and environmental science.

Authors:  Cody J Dey; Adam I Rego; Jonathan D Midwood; Marten A Koops
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Addressing priority questions of conservation science with palaeontological data.

Authors:  Wolfgang Kiessling; Nussaïbah B Raja; Vanessa Julie Roden; Samuel T Turvey; Erin E Saupe
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on environmental values.

Authors:  Joanne Sneddon; Ella Daniel; Ronald Fischer; Julie A Lee
Journal:  Sustain Sci       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 7.196

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.