↓ Skip to main content

Resource allocation for efficient environmental management

Overview of attention for article published in Ecology Letters, August 2010
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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Resource allocation for efficient environmental management
Published in
Ecology Letters, August 2010
DOI 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01522.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael A. McCarthy, Colin J. Thompson, Cindy Hauser, Mark A. Burgman, Hugh P. Possingham, Melinda L. Moir, Thanawat Tiensin, Marius Gilbert

Abstract

Environmental managers must decide how to invest available resources. Researchers have previously determined how to allocate conservation resources among regions, design nature reserves, allocate funding to species conservation programs, design biodiversity surveys and monitoring programs, manage species and invest in greenhouse gas mitigation schemes. However, these issues have not been addressed with a unified theory. Furthermore, uncertainty is prevalent in environmental management, and needs to be considered to manage risks. We present a theory for optimal environmental management, synthesizing previous approaches to the topic and incorporating uncertainty. We show that the theory solves a diverse range of important problems of resource allocation, including distributing conservation resources among the world's biodiversity hotspots; surveillance to detect the highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 virus in Thailand; and choosing survey methods for the insect order Hemiptera. Environmental management decisions are similar to decisions about financial investments, with trade-offs between risk and reward.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 6 4%
United States 6 4%
Brazil 3 2%
United Kingdom 3 2%
Canada 2 1%
Finland 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 117 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 42 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 23%
Student > Master 13 9%
Other 9 6%
Professor 7 5%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 16 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 55 38%
Environmental Science 40 28%
Social Sciences 5 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 5 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 21 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 August 2014.
All research outputs
#2,655,267
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Ecology Letters
#1,442
of 3,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,888
of 104,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ecology Letters
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 3,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 104,216 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.