↓ Skip to main content

Guidelines for Using Movement Science to Inform Biodiversity Policy

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 Mendeley
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
Guidelines for Using Movement Science to Inform Biodiversity Policy
Published in
Environmental Management, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00267-015-0570-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philip S. Barton, Pia E. Lentini, Erika Alacs, Sana Bau, Yvonne M. Buckley, Emma L. Burns, Don A. Driscoll, Lydia K. Guja, Heini Kujala, José J. Lahoz-Monfort, Alessio Mortelliti, Ran Nathan, Ross Rowe, Annabel L. Smith

Abstract

Substantial advances have been made in our understanding of the movement of species, including processes such as dispersal and migration. This knowledge has the potential to improve decisions about biodiversity policy and management, but it can be difficult for decision makers to readily access and integrate the growing body of movement science. This is, in part, due to a lack of synthesis of information that is sufficiently contextualized for a policy audience. Here, we identify key species movement concepts, including mechanisms, types, and moderators of movement, and review their relevance to (1) national biodiversity policies and strategies, (2) reserve planning and management, (3) threatened species protection and recovery, (4) impact and risk assessments, and (5) the prioritization of restoration actions. Based on the review, and considering recent developments in movement ecology, we provide a new framework that draws links between aspects of movement knowledge that are likely the most relevant to each biodiversity policy category. Our framework also shows that there is substantial opportunity for collaboration between researchers and government decision makers in the use of movement science to promote positive biodiversity outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Australia 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 151 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 22%
Researcher 35 22%
Student > Master 14 9%
Other 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 33 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 38%
Environmental Science 43 27%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Unspecified 2 1%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 1%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 42 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 14 February 2017.
All research outputs
#5,446,629
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#403
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,291
of 278,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#8
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. 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 278,300 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 73% of its contemporaries.