↓ Skip to main content

Protecting aquatic biodiversity in Europe: How much do EU environmental policies support ecosystem-based management?

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 Mendeley
Title
Protecting aquatic biodiversity in Europe: How much do EU environmental policies support ecosystem-based management?
Published in
Ambio, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13280-017-0928-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josselin Rouillard, Manuel Lago, Katrina Abhold, Lina Röschel, Terri Kafyeke, Verena Mattheiß, Helen Klimmek

Abstract

The sustainable management of aquatic ecosystems requires better coordination between policies span-ning freshwater, coastal and marine environments. Ecosystem-based management (EBM) has been promoted as a holistic and integrative approach for the safekeeping and protection of aquatic biodiversity. The paper assesses the degree to which key European environmental policies for the aquatic environment, namely the Birds and Habitats Directives, Water Framework Directive and Marine Strategy Framework Directive, individually support EBM and can work synergistically to implement EBM. This assessment is based on a review of legal texts, EU guidance and implementation documents. The paper concludes that EBM can be made operational by implementing these key environmental directives. Opportunities for improving the integration of EU environmental policies are highlighted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 17%
Student > Master 9 10%
Other 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 18 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 34 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 26 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 December 2020.
All research outputs
#2,711,728
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#508
of 1,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,023
of 334,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,954 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.