↓ Skip to main content

Critical need for new definitions of “forest” and “forest degradation” in global climate change agreements

Overview of attention for article published in Conservation Letters, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
9 policy sources
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
794 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Article details
Title
Critical need for new definitions of “forest” and “forest degradation” in global climate change agreements
Published in
Conservation Letters, October 2009
DOI 10.1111/j.1755-263x.2009.00067.x
Authors

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 794 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 15 2%
United Kingdom 8 1%
Brazil 6 <1%
Germany 4 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Bolivia, Plurinational State of 1 <1%
Other 12 2%
Unknown 741 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 147 19%
Researcher 126 16%
Student > Master 116 15%
Student > Bachelor 66 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 46 6%
Other 146 18%
Unknown 147 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 293 37%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 177 22%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 63 8%
Social Sciences 29 4%
Engineering 12 2%
Other 52 7%
Unknown 168 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 38. 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 27 February 2025.
All research outputs
#1,334,072
of 34,259,606 outputs
Outputs from Conservation Letters
#394
of 1,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,581
of 148,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Conservation Letters
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,259,606 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 50.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 148,964 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them