↓ Skip to main content

Digital Surveillance: A Novel Approach to Monitoring the Illegal Wildlife Trade

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2012
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
290 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
Digital Surveillance: A Novel Approach to Monitoring the Illegal Wildlife Trade
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0051156
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amy L. Sonricker Hansen, Annie Li, Damien Joly, Sumiko Mekaru, John S. Brownstein

Abstract

A dearth of information obscures the true scale of the global illegal trade in wildlife. Herein, we introduce an automated web crawling surveillance system developed to monitor reports on illegally traded wildlife. A resource for enforcement officials as well as the general public, the freely available website, http://www.healthmap.org/wildlifetrade, provides a customizable visualization of worldwide reports on interceptions of illegally traded wildlife and wildlife products. From August 1, 2010 to July 31, 2011, publicly available English language illegal wildlife trade reports from official and unofficial sources were collected and categorized by location and species involved. During this interval, 858 illegal wildlife trade reports were collected from 89 countries. Countries with the highest number of reports included India (n = 146, 15.6%), the United States (n = 143, 15.3%), South Africa (n = 75, 8.0%), China (n = 41, 4.4%), and Vietnam (n = 37, 4.0%). Species reported as traded or poached included elephants (n = 107, 12.5%), rhinoceros (n = 103, 12.0%), tigers (n = 68, 7.9%), leopards (n = 54, 6.3%), and pangolins (n = 45, 5.2%). The use of unofficial data sources, such as online news sites and social networks, to collect information on international wildlife trade augments traditional approaches drawing on official reporting and presents a novel source of intelligence with which to monitor and collect news in support of enforcement against this threat to wildlife conservation worldwide.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 290 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
South Africa 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Botswana 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Nepal 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 273 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 17%
Student > Master 47 16%
Researcher 46 16%
Student > Bachelor 37 13%
Other 26 9%
Other 34 12%
Unknown 50 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 78 27%
Environmental Science 74 26%
Social Sciences 30 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 3%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 3%
Other 38 13%
Unknown 53 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,812,128
of 24,311,255 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#34,799
of 209,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,214
of 286,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#680
of 4,778 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,311,255 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 209,430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 286,240 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 4,778 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.