↓ Skip to main content

Resource Wars and Conflict Ivory: The Impact of Civil Conflict on Elephants in the Democratic Republic of Congo - The Case of the Okapi Reserve

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2011
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 (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
7 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
200 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
Resource Wars and Conflict Ivory: The Impact of Civil Conflict on Elephants in the Democratic Republic of Congo - The Case of the Okapi Reserve
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0027129
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rene L. Beyers, John A. Hart, Anthony R. E. Sinclair, Falk Grossmann, Brian Klinkenberg, Simeon Dino

Abstract

Human conflict generally has substantial negative impacts on wildlife and conservation. The recent civil war (1995-2006) in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) resulted in a significant loss of wildlife, including elephants, due to institutional collapse, lawlessness and unbridled exploitation of natural resources such as minerals, wood, ivory and bushmeat. We used data from distance sampling surveys conducted before and after the war in a protected forest, the Okapi Faunal Reserve, to document changes in elephant abundance and distribution. We employed Generalized Additive Models to relate changes in elephant distribution to human and environmental factors. Populations declined by nearly fifty percent coinciding with a major increase in elephant poaching as indicated by reports of ivory trade during the war. Our results suggest that humans influenced elephant distribution far more than habitat, both before and after the war, but post-war models explained more of the variation. Elephant abundance declined more, closer to the park boundary and to areas of intense human activity. After the war, elephant densities were relatively higher in the centre of the park where they were better protected, suggesting that this area may have acted as a refuge. In other sites in Eastern DRC, where no protection was provided, elephants were even more decimated. Post-war dynamics, such as weakened institutions, human movements and availability of weapons, continue to affect elephants. Survival of remaining populations and recovery will be determined by these persistent factors and by new threats associated with growing human populations and exploitation of natural resources. Prioritizing wildlife protection, curbing illegal trade in ivory and bushmeat, and strengthening national institutions and organizations in charge of conservation will be crucial to counter these threats.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Germany 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 192 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 19%
Student > Master 33 17%
Student > Bachelor 33 17%
Researcher 23 12%
Other 9 5%
Other 27 14%
Unknown 37 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 74 37%
Environmental Science 40 20%
Social Sciences 13 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 8 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 41 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 31 October 2023.
All research outputs
#944,642
of 23,476,369 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#12,695
of 200,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,090
of 144,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#130
of 2,644 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,476,369 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 200,932 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 144,550 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 2,644 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.