↓ Skip to main content

The global flood protection savings provided by coral reefs

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, June 2018
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 (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
65 news outlets
blogs
9 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
158 tweeters
facebook
6 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
377 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
The global flood protection savings provided by coral reefs
Published in
Nature Communications, June 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41467-018-04568-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael W. Beck, Iñigo J. Losada, Pelayo Menéndez, Borja G. Reguero, Pedro Díaz-Simal, Felipe Fernández

Abstract

Coral reefs can provide significant coastal protection benefits to people and property. Here we show that the annual expected damages from flooding would double, and costs from frequent storms would triple without reefs. For 100-year storm events, flood damages would increase by 91% to $US 272 billion without reefs. The countries with the most to gain from reef management are Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, Mexico, and Cuba; annual expected flood savings exceed $400 M for each of these nations. Sea-level rise will increase flood risk, but substantial impacts could happen from reef loss alone without better near-term management. We provide a global, process-based valuation of an ecosystem service across an entire marine biome at (sub)national levels. These spatially explicit benefits inform critical risk and environmental management decisions, and the expected benefits can be directly considered by governments (e.g., national accounts, recovery plans) and businesses (e.g., insurance).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 158 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 377 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 377 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 76 20%
Student > Master 64 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 16%
Student > Bachelor 35 9%
Other 19 5%
Other 50 13%
Unknown 72 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 104 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 58 15%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 38 10%
Engineering 29 8%
Social Sciences 13 3%
Other 41 11%
Unknown 94 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 697. 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 18 May 2021.
All research outputs
#16,162
of 18,021,256 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#272
of 35,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#494
of 288,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,021,256 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,909 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 52.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 288,438 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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