Institution
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Nonprofit•Dhaka, Bangladesh•
About: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources is a nonprofit organization based out in Dhaka, Bangladesh. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Biodiversity & Population. The organization has 1317 authors who have published 1870 publications receiving 97588 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
University of Oxford1, Panthera Corporation2, University of California, Berkeley3, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit4, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources5, African Wildlife Foundation6, Frankfurt Zoological Society7, Wildlife Conservation Society8, University of Pretoria9, Griffith University10
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identified three main CMP organisational structures: delegated management, where a non-profit shares governance responsibility with the state and is delegated full management authority; co-management, where non-profits share governance and management responsibility with state; and financial and technical support (advisory or implementary), where anon-profit assists the state with aspects of management without formal decision-making authority.
36 citations
••
McGill University1, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources2, Flinders University3, University of Manitoba4, United States Geological Survey5, Newcastle University6, Natural Resources Defense Council7, Massey University8, Centre national de la recherche scientifique9, University of Alberta10, University of Freiburg11, Morton Arboretum12
TL;DR: The rapidly emerging field of macrogenetics focuses on analysing publicly accessible genetic datasets from thousands of species to explore large-scale patterns and predictors of intraspecific genetic variation as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The rapidly emerging field of macrogenetics focuses on analysing publicly accessible genetic datasets from thousands of species to explore large-scale patterns and predictors of intraspecific genetic variation. Facilitated by advances in evolutionary biology, technology, data infrastructure, statistics and open science, macrogenetics addresses core evolutionary hypotheses (such as disentangling environmental and life-history effects on genetic variation) with a global focus. Yet, there are important, often overlooked, limitations to this approach and best practices need to be considered and adopted if macrogenetics is to continue its exciting trajectory and reach its full potential in fields such as biodiversity monitoring and conservation. Here, we review the history of this rapidly growing field, highlight knowledge gaps and future directions, and provide guidelines for further research.
36 citations
••
TL;DR: The lion has historically probably been widespread at low densities in West and Central Africa, nowadays they are largely restricted to small isolated populations inside protected areas, the total number is probably between 1200 and 2700, the best possible guesstimate would be 1700.
36 citations
••
Stony Brook University1, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources2, University of New South Wales3, Office of Environment and Heritage4, Imperial College London5, University of Melbourne6, BirdLife International7, University of Cambridge8, Zoological Society of London9, University of California, Riverside10, Conservation International11, University College London12
TL;DR: A framework for setting thresholds of P(E) for classifying species as extinct, possibly extinct, and extant is proposed.
36 citations
••
Australian National University1, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources2, University of Oxford3, ETH Zurich4, University of Liverpool5, University of Technology, Sydney6, University of Waterloo7, University of Arizona8, Wageningen University and Research Centre9, Mayo Clinic10, London School of Economics and Political Science11, University of Texas at Austin12, Université du Québec en Outaouais13, Macquarie University14, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile15, Universidad Veracruzana16, Utrecht University17, Stockholm Resilience Centre18, Stellenbosch University19
TL;DR: A research and action agenda that calls for a collective task of 'revisiting biodiversity' towards the goal of sustaining diverse and just futures for life on Earth, and articulates four thematic areas for future research.
Abstract: Decades of research and policy interventions on biodiversity have insufficiently addressed the dual issues of biodiversity degradation and social justice. New approaches are therefore needed. We devised a research and action agenda that calls for a collective task of revisiting biodiversity toward the goal of sustaining diverse and just futures for life on Earth. Revisiting biodiversity involves critically reflecting on past and present research, policy, and practice concerning biodiversity to inspire creative thinking about the future. The agenda was developed through a 2-year dialogue process that involved close to 300 experts from diverse disciplines and locations. This process was informed by social science insights that show biodiversity research and action is underpinned by choices about how problems are conceptualized. Recognizing knowledge, action, and ethics as inseparable, we synthesized a set of principles that help navigate the task of revisiting biodiversity. The agenda articulates 4 thematic areas for future research. First, researchers need to revisit biodiversity narratives by challenging conceptualizations that exclude diversity and entrench the separation of humans, cultures, economies, and societies from nature. Second, researchers should focus on the relationships between the Anthropocene, biodiversity, and culture by considering humanity and biodiversity as tied together in specific contexts. Third, researchers should focus on nature and economies by better accounting for the interacting structures of economic and financial systems as core drivers of biodiversity loss. Finally, researchers should enable transformative biodiversity research and action by reconfiguring relationships between human and nonhuman communities in and through science, policy, and practice. Revisiting biodiversity necessitates a renewed focus on dialogue among biodiversity communities and beyond that critically reflects on the past to channel research and action toward fostering just and diverse futures for human and nonhuman life on Earth.
36 citations
Authors
Showing all 1320 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Kevin M. Smith | 114 | 1711 | 78470 |
Ary A. Hoffmann | 113 | 907 | 55354 |
David W. Macdonald | 111 | 1109 | 51334 |
Michael R. Hoffmann | 109 | 500 | 63474 |
Fred W. Allendorf | 86 | 230 | 34738 |
Edward B. Barbier | 84 | 450 | 36753 |
James J. Yoo | 81 | 491 | 27738 |
Michael William Bruford | 80 | 369 | 23635 |
James E. M. Watson | 74 | 461 | 23362 |
Brian Huntley | 74 | 225 | 28875 |
Brian W. Bowen | 74 | 181 | 17451 |
Gordon Luikart | 72 | 193 | 37564 |
Stuart H. M. Butchart | 72 | 245 | 26585 |
Thomas M. Brooks | 71 | 215 | 33724 |
Joshua E. Cinner | 68 | 177 | 14384 |