↓ Skip to main content

Poverty within watershed and environmentally protected areas: the case of the indigenous community in Peninsular Malaysia

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Poverty within watershed and environmentally protected areas: the case of the indigenous community in Peninsular Malaysia
Published in
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10661-016-5162-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fatimah Binti Kari, Muhammad Mehedi Masud, Siti Rohani Binti Yahaya, Md. Khaled Saifullah

Abstract

"Indigenous people" have been acknowledged as among the poorest and most socio-economically and culturally marginalized all over the world. This paper explores the socio-economic status of the indigenous people and their poverty profile within watershed and environmentally protected areas in Peninsular Malaysia. The findings of the study indicate that the "indigenous community" is likely to be poor if they live in environmentally sensitive and unprotected areas as compared to families under the new resettlement scheme. Inadequate access to basic education and employment contributed significantly to their poor economic status. The findings further reveal that the indigenous community is facing difficulties in receiving access and support in terms of basic needs such as housing, education, economic livelihood, and other social infrastructure. Moreover, the regulatory structure for the management of watershed areas as well as the emphasis for commodity crops such as palm oil and natural rubber have indirectly contributed toward the poverty level of the indigenous people.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 12 21%
Environmental Science 9 16%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 16 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 July 2016.
All research outputs
#15,002,375
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#1,271
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,907
of 301,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#15
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 301,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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 69% of its contemporaries.