↓ Skip to main content

Perceptions of risk in communities near parks in an African biodiversity hotspot

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
Title
Perceptions of risk in communities near parks in an African biodiversity hotspot
Published in
Ambio, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13280-016-0775-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joel Hartter, Nicholas Dowhaniuk, Catrina A. MacKenzie, Sadie J. Ryan, Jeremy E. Diem, Michael W. Palace, Colin A. Chapman

Abstract

Understanding conservation and livelihood threats in park landscapes is important to informing conservation policy. To identify threats, we examined perceived risks of residents living near three national parks in Uganda. We used cross-sectional household data to document, rank, and measure severity of perceived risks. Three risk categories, grouped into protected area, climate, and health, were cited by 80 % of respondents and received the highest severity scores. Elevation, proximity to the park, local forest loss, recent population change, and measures of poverty were the most important variables in predicting whether or not an individual identified these risks as the most or second most severe risk. Health issues were cited throughout the landscape, while problems attributed to climate (mainly insufficient rainfall) were reported to be most severe farther from the park. Increased population density was associated with increased perceived risk of health challenges, but decreased perceived risks attributed to the park and climate. Participatory risk mapping provides the opportunity to make standardized comparisons across sites, to help identify commonalities and differences, as a first step to examining the degree to which conservation management might address some of these local challenges and where mitigation techniques might be transferable between different sites or conflict scenarios.

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 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 151 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 13%
Researcher 17 11%
Student > Bachelor 17 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 44 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 39 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 11%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 4%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 56 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,505,102
of 23,299,593 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#1,352
of 1,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,195
of 302,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#20
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,299,593 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 302,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.