数字服务平台需要采取紧急行动,帮助实现保护和公共卫生目标

IF 7.7 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Conservation Letters Pub Date : 2024-05-20 DOI:10.1111/conl.13023
Daniel J. Ingram, Thais Q. Morcatty, Hani R. El Bizri, Mahesh Poudyal, Edward Mundy
{"title":"数字服务平台需要采取紧急行动,帮助实现保护和公共卫生目标","authors":"Daniel J. Ingram,&nbsp;Thais Q. Morcatty,&nbsp;Hani R. El Bizri,&nbsp;Mahesh Poudyal,&nbsp;Edward Mundy","doi":"10.1111/conl.13023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Wildlife use is widespread across the world where animals and their derivates are consumed and/or traded (Ingram et al., <span>2021</span>). When the use is unsustainable, it is a leading cause of biodiversity loss worldwide, with profound consequences for ecosystem services and functions (IPBES, <span>2022</span>). In December 2022, Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, agreeing to achieve the sustainable use and management of biodiversity as one of four central goals by 2050. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has focussed global attention on the wildlife trade and potential risk of zoonotic emerging infectious disease spread. From February 2023, the World Health Organization (WHO) has been negotiating drafts of a global Pandemic Agreement, calling for collective action on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, including the need to “take measures to reduce risks of zoonotic spill-over” (Article 4; World Health Organisation, <span>2024</span>). Given how wholly interconnected these issues are, leveraging approaches that tackle integrated issues around the health of people, animals, and ecosystems, such as One Health and Planetary Health approaches (de Castañeda et al., <span>2023</span>), will be paramount to addressing the global challenges of biodiversity loss and zoonotic disease emergence.</p><p>Managing the use of wildlife can be challenging for many reasons, including the number of actors involved along varied supply chains across rural and urban areas, the complexities around the legality of trade in different circumstances, and the capacities of governments to act (Ingram et al., <span>2021</span>). The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a worldwide initiative to end the wildlife trade (Coalition to End the Trade, <span>2020</span>), resulting in certain countries banning physical wildlife markets. Yet, it is becoming increasingly evident that digital services platforms, particularly social media platforms, are playing a pivotal role in the legal and illegal trade of wildlife (Morcatty et al., <span>2021</span>). Yet, little has been done to stem the illegal online trade of wildlife, which undermines efforts to manage the trade effectively, sustainably, and safely (Morcatty et al., <span>2021</span>). Here, we highlight two major ways in which technology companies running global social media, e-commerce (marketplaces), and content-sharing platforms (hereafter just “tech companies”) can assist in achieving the goals of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the WHO Pandemic Agreement.</p><p>For the latter, examples could include public lists of tech companies, which are not part of groups working to reduce online illegal wildlife trade (Sebagh, <span>2021</span>), and transparent monitoring of such groups to ensure that activities are taking place and reporting tools are effective. Furthermore, monitored trade should not only include high-value wildlife products such as ivory, or live animals in the trade, but should also include advertisements for traders and establishments that sell the meat of wild animals (i.e., wild meat), where illegal. This has received substantially less attention than the trade in high-value wildlife products. Crucially, member states differ in their resources and capabilities to tackle illegal wildlife trade online and deliver effective pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. The latter is acknowledged in the most recent WHO Pandemic Agreement draft (World Health Organisation, <span>2024</span>). Although the use of certain platforms differs by country (Ghermandi et al., <span>2023</span>), global tech companies must play a role in addressing some of these inequities by targeting online interventions to countries with high illegal wildlife trade prevalence.</p><p>Second, online social media and video sharing platforms have been vehicles for (mis)information dissemination across the world, with social media being described as creating the “climate change of culture” (Harris, <span>2019</span>). The spread of misinformation regarding emerging infectious disease spread and effective treatment, as was evident during the COVID-19 pandemic (Cinelli et al., <span>2020</span>), is a significant threat to global public health because it can hinder evidence-based actions designed to prevent or respond to outbreaks. Additionally, on some social media and video sharing platforms, the content recommender algorithms amplify minority extreme content (Whittaker et al., <span>2021</span>), thus contributing to the polarization of views (Van Bavel et al., <span>2021</span>), which can drive viewing figures on platforms. This could include extreme views about wildlife and wildlife uses, disease origin, risk, prevention, and treatment that have no evidence base. For example, misinformation about species purported to transmit zoonotic diseases may lead to intentional killing of those species. As already highlighted in Article 18 of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the Parties will commit to “countering and addressing misinformation or disinformation” (World Health Organisation, <span>2024</span>), which could be more easily achieved through action and cooperation from social media and content-sharing tech companies, such as through minor changes in algorithms to nudge users to consider the accuracy of the information before sharing (Pennycook et al., <span>2020</span>). Some platforms, for example, use link recommendation algorithms to recommend new connections to users. These algorithms may increase the likelihood of polarization when users preferentially make connections in groups where they share mutual connections; however, evidence suggests this could be curbed by platforms if they adapt link recommendation algorithms to sporadically recommend dissimilar individuals with few common connections (Santos et al., <span>2021</span>). Similarly, users may engage in <i>opinion amplification</i>, which refers to “the range of behaviours by users that may distort the original opinion with a more positive or negative sentiment”, which can proliferate through networks when the topic is trending (Lim &amp; Bentley, <span>2022</span>). Platforms could employ two methods which have shown promise in curbing extreme polarization: consistent communication of opinions with “normal range” sentiments and limiting the number of amplifications for users that disobey platform policies (Lim &amp; Bentley, <span>2022</span>). However, it is likely that content moderation and fact-checking alone will not be enough to address these issues. To be successful, regulation needs to match the complexity of the problem (Harris, <span>2019</span>), governed by a suitable international regulatory body.</p><p>In tropical countries, the situation is likely a perfect storm of high prevalence of wildlife trade and emerging infectious disease risk (Allen et al., <span>2017</span>), and sometimes lower financial and technical capacities in tackling the online trade in wildlife and managing the spread of disinformation. Recent progress has been made through the EU's new Digital Services Act, which aims to “prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation” through regulating online platforms, thus providing an example for regulation that could be developed in the rest of the world. If tropical member states are to be able to adequately achieve the goals outlined in the Kunming—Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the technology companies running social media, e-commerce, and content-sharing platforms will need to step-up their role in assisting countries to tackle the illegal trade in wildlife and spread of misinformation on their platforms. Tech companies, therefore, have a significant role to play in creating technology that is humane for people and wildlife.</p><p><b>Daniel J. Ingram</b>: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. <b>Thais Q. Morcatty</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Hani R. El Bizri</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Mahesh Poudyal</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Edward Mundy</b>: Writing—review and editing.</p><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interests.</p>","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/conl.13023","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urgent actions needed by digital services platforms to help achieve conservation and public health goals\",\"authors\":\"Daniel J. Ingram,&nbsp;Thais Q. Morcatty,&nbsp;Hani R. El Bizri,&nbsp;Mahesh Poudyal,&nbsp;Edward Mundy\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/conl.13023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Wildlife use is widespread across the world where animals and their derivates are consumed and/or traded (Ingram et al., <span>2021</span>). When the use is unsustainable, it is a leading cause of biodiversity loss worldwide, with profound consequences for ecosystem services and functions (IPBES, <span>2022</span>). In December 2022, Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, agreeing to achieve the sustainable use and management of biodiversity as one of four central goals by 2050. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has focussed global attention on the wildlife trade and potential risk of zoonotic emerging infectious disease spread. From February 2023, the World Health Organization (WHO) has been negotiating drafts of a global Pandemic Agreement, calling for collective action on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, including the need to “take measures to reduce risks of zoonotic spill-over” (Article 4; World Health Organisation, <span>2024</span>). Given how wholly interconnected these issues are, leveraging approaches that tackle integrated issues around the health of people, animals, and ecosystems, such as One Health and Planetary Health approaches (de Castañeda et al., <span>2023</span>), will be paramount to addressing the global challenges of biodiversity loss and zoonotic disease emergence.</p><p>Managing the use of wildlife can be challenging for many reasons, including the number of actors involved along varied supply chains across rural and urban areas, the complexities around the legality of trade in different circumstances, and the capacities of governments to act (Ingram et al., <span>2021</span>). The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a worldwide initiative to end the wildlife trade (Coalition to End the Trade, <span>2020</span>), resulting in certain countries banning physical wildlife markets. Yet, it is becoming increasingly evident that digital services platforms, particularly social media platforms, are playing a pivotal role in the legal and illegal trade of wildlife (Morcatty et al., <span>2021</span>). Yet, little has been done to stem the illegal online trade of wildlife, which undermines efforts to manage the trade effectively, sustainably, and safely (Morcatty et al., <span>2021</span>). Here, we highlight two major ways in which technology companies running global social media, e-commerce (marketplaces), and content-sharing platforms (hereafter just “tech companies”) can assist in achieving the goals of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the WHO Pandemic Agreement.</p><p>For the latter, examples could include public lists of tech companies, which are not part of groups working to reduce online illegal wildlife trade (Sebagh, <span>2021</span>), and transparent monitoring of such groups to ensure that activities are taking place and reporting tools are effective. Furthermore, monitored trade should not only include high-value wildlife products such as ivory, or live animals in the trade, but should also include advertisements for traders and establishments that sell the meat of wild animals (i.e., wild meat), where illegal. This has received substantially less attention than the trade in high-value wildlife products. Crucially, member states differ in their resources and capabilities to tackle illegal wildlife trade online and deliver effective pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. The latter is acknowledged in the most recent WHO Pandemic Agreement draft (World Health Organisation, <span>2024</span>). Although the use of certain platforms differs by country (Ghermandi et al., <span>2023</span>), global tech companies must play a role in addressing some of these inequities by targeting online interventions to countries with high illegal wildlife trade prevalence.</p><p>Second, online social media and video sharing platforms have been vehicles for (mis)information dissemination across the world, with social media being described as creating the “climate change of culture” (Harris, <span>2019</span>). The spread of misinformation regarding emerging infectious disease spread and effective treatment, as was evident during the COVID-19 pandemic (Cinelli et al., <span>2020</span>), is a significant threat to global public health because it can hinder evidence-based actions designed to prevent or respond to outbreaks. Additionally, on some social media and video sharing platforms, the content recommender algorithms amplify minority extreme content (Whittaker et al., <span>2021</span>), thus contributing to the polarization of views (Van Bavel et al., <span>2021</span>), which can drive viewing figures on platforms. This could include extreme views about wildlife and wildlife uses, disease origin, risk, prevention, and treatment that have no evidence base. For example, misinformation about species purported to transmit zoonotic diseases may lead to intentional killing of those species. As already highlighted in Article 18 of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the Parties will commit to “countering and addressing misinformation or disinformation” (World Health Organisation, <span>2024</span>), which could be more easily achieved through action and cooperation from social media and content-sharing tech companies, such as through minor changes in algorithms to nudge users to consider the accuracy of the information before sharing (Pennycook et al., <span>2020</span>). Some platforms, for example, use link recommendation algorithms to recommend new connections to users. These algorithms may increase the likelihood of polarization when users preferentially make connections in groups where they share mutual connections; however, evidence suggests this could be curbed by platforms if they adapt link recommendation algorithms to sporadically recommend dissimilar individuals with few common connections (Santos et al., <span>2021</span>). Similarly, users may engage in <i>opinion amplification</i>, which refers to “the range of behaviours by users that may distort the original opinion with a more positive or negative sentiment”, which can proliferate through networks when the topic is trending (Lim &amp; Bentley, <span>2022</span>). Platforms could employ two methods which have shown promise in curbing extreme polarization: consistent communication of opinions with “normal range” sentiments and limiting the number of amplifications for users that disobey platform policies (Lim &amp; Bentley, <span>2022</span>). However, it is likely that content moderation and fact-checking alone will not be enough to address these issues. To be successful, regulation needs to match the complexity of the problem (Harris, <span>2019</span>), governed by a suitable international regulatory body.</p><p>In tropical countries, the situation is likely a perfect storm of high prevalence of wildlife trade and emerging infectious disease risk (Allen et al., <span>2017</span>), and sometimes lower financial and technical capacities in tackling the online trade in wildlife and managing the spread of disinformation. Recent progress has been made through the EU's new Digital Services Act, which aims to “prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation” through regulating online platforms, thus providing an example for regulation that could be developed in the rest of the world. If tropical member states are to be able to adequately achieve the goals outlined in the Kunming—Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the technology companies running social media, e-commerce, and content-sharing platforms will need to step-up their role in assisting countries to tackle the illegal trade in wildlife and spread of misinformation on their platforms. Tech companies, therefore, have a significant role to play in creating technology that is humane for people and wildlife.</p><p><b>Daniel J. Ingram</b>: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. <b>Thais Q. Morcatty</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Hani R. El Bizri</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Mahesh Poudyal</b>: Writing—review and editing. <b>Edward Mundy</b>: Writing—review and editing.</p><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interests.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":157,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Letters\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/conl.13023\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Letters\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.13023\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Letters","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.13023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

正如《世界卫生组织大流行病协议》第 18 条所强调的,缔约方将致力于 "反击和解决误导或虚假信息"(World Health Organisation, 2024),这可以通过社交媒体和内容共享技术公司的行动与合作更容易地实现,例如通过算法的细微变化来引导用户在分享之前考虑信息的准确性(Pennycook 等人,2020)。例如,一些平台使用链接推荐算法向用户推荐新的连接。这些算法可能会增加两极分化的可能性,因为用户倾向于在有共同联系的群体中建立联系;然而,有证据表明,如果平台调整链接推荐算法,零星地向用户推荐没有多少共同联系的不同个体,就可以抑制两极分化(Santos 等,2021 年)。同样,用户可能会参与意见放大,这指的是 "用户的一系列行为,这些行为可能会以更积极或消极的情绪扭曲原始意见",当话题成为趋势时,这些行为可能会在网络中扩散(Lim &amp; Bentley, 2022)。平台可采用两种有望遏制极端极化的方法:以 "正常范围 "的情绪持续传播观点,以及限制不遵守平台政策的用户的放大数量(Lim &amp; Bentley, 2022)。然而,仅靠内容审核和事实核查可能不足以解决这些问题。在热带国家,情况很可能是一场完美风暴:野生动植物贸易和新出现的传染病风险非常普遍(Allen 等人,2017 年),有时在应对野生动植物在线贸易和管理虚假信息传播方面的财政和技术能力较低。欧盟新的《数字服务法》最近取得了进展,该法旨在通过监管在线平台 "防止非法和有害的在线活动以及虚假信息的传播",从而为世界其他地区提供了一个可借鉴的监管范例。热带成员国要想充分实现《昆明-蒙特利尔全球生物多样性框架》和《世界卫生组织大流行病协议》中提出的目标,运营社交媒体、电子商务和内容共享平台的科技公司就必须加强自身的作用,协助各国解决野生动植物非法贸易问题以及在其平台上传播虚假信息的问题。因此,科技公司在创造对人类和野生动物都人道的技术方面可以发挥重要作用:写作-原稿;写作-审阅和编辑。Thais Q. Morcatty:写作-审稿和编辑。Hani R. El Bizri:撰写-审阅和编辑。Mahesh Poudyal:写作-审阅和编辑。爱德华-蒙迪作者声明无利益冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Urgent actions needed by digital services platforms to help achieve conservation and public health goals

Wildlife use is widespread across the world where animals and their derivates are consumed and/or traded (Ingram et al., 2021). When the use is unsustainable, it is a leading cause of biodiversity loss worldwide, with profound consequences for ecosystem services and functions (IPBES, 2022). In December 2022, Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, agreeing to achieve the sustainable use and management of biodiversity as one of four central goals by 2050. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has focussed global attention on the wildlife trade and potential risk of zoonotic emerging infectious disease spread. From February 2023, the World Health Organization (WHO) has been negotiating drafts of a global Pandemic Agreement, calling for collective action on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response, including the need to “take measures to reduce risks of zoonotic spill-over” (Article 4; World Health Organisation, 2024). Given how wholly interconnected these issues are, leveraging approaches that tackle integrated issues around the health of people, animals, and ecosystems, such as One Health and Planetary Health approaches (de Castañeda et al., 2023), will be paramount to addressing the global challenges of biodiversity loss and zoonotic disease emergence.

Managing the use of wildlife can be challenging for many reasons, including the number of actors involved along varied supply chains across rural and urban areas, the complexities around the legality of trade in different circumstances, and the capacities of governments to act (Ingram et al., 2021). The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a worldwide initiative to end the wildlife trade (Coalition to End the Trade, 2020), resulting in certain countries banning physical wildlife markets. Yet, it is becoming increasingly evident that digital services platforms, particularly social media platforms, are playing a pivotal role in the legal and illegal trade of wildlife (Morcatty et al., 2021). Yet, little has been done to stem the illegal online trade of wildlife, which undermines efforts to manage the trade effectively, sustainably, and safely (Morcatty et al., 2021). Here, we highlight two major ways in which technology companies running global social media, e-commerce (marketplaces), and content-sharing platforms (hereafter just “tech companies”) can assist in achieving the goals of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the WHO Pandemic Agreement.

For the latter, examples could include public lists of tech companies, which are not part of groups working to reduce online illegal wildlife trade (Sebagh, 2021), and transparent monitoring of such groups to ensure that activities are taking place and reporting tools are effective. Furthermore, monitored trade should not only include high-value wildlife products such as ivory, or live animals in the trade, but should also include advertisements for traders and establishments that sell the meat of wild animals (i.e., wild meat), where illegal. This has received substantially less attention than the trade in high-value wildlife products. Crucially, member states differ in their resources and capabilities to tackle illegal wildlife trade online and deliver effective pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. The latter is acknowledged in the most recent WHO Pandemic Agreement draft (World Health Organisation, 2024). Although the use of certain platforms differs by country (Ghermandi et al., 2023), global tech companies must play a role in addressing some of these inequities by targeting online interventions to countries with high illegal wildlife trade prevalence.

Second, online social media and video sharing platforms have been vehicles for (mis)information dissemination across the world, with social media being described as creating the “climate change of culture” (Harris, 2019). The spread of misinformation regarding emerging infectious disease spread and effective treatment, as was evident during the COVID-19 pandemic (Cinelli et al., 2020), is a significant threat to global public health because it can hinder evidence-based actions designed to prevent or respond to outbreaks. Additionally, on some social media and video sharing platforms, the content recommender algorithms amplify minority extreme content (Whittaker et al., 2021), thus contributing to the polarization of views (Van Bavel et al., 2021), which can drive viewing figures on platforms. This could include extreme views about wildlife and wildlife uses, disease origin, risk, prevention, and treatment that have no evidence base. For example, misinformation about species purported to transmit zoonotic diseases may lead to intentional killing of those species. As already highlighted in Article 18 of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the Parties will commit to “countering and addressing misinformation or disinformation” (World Health Organisation, 2024), which could be more easily achieved through action and cooperation from social media and content-sharing tech companies, such as through minor changes in algorithms to nudge users to consider the accuracy of the information before sharing (Pennycook et al., 2020). Some platforms, for example, use link recommendation algorithms to recommend new connections to users. These algorithms may increase the likelihood of polarization when users preferentially make connections in groups where they share mutual connections; however, evidence suggests this could be curbed by platforms if they adapt link recommendation algorithms to sporadically recommend dissimilar individuals with few common connections (Santos et al., 2021). Similarly, users may engage in opinion amplification, which refers to “the range of behaviours by users that may distort the original opinion with a more positive or negative sentiment”, which can proliferate through networks when the topic is trending (Lim & Bentley, 2022). Platforms could employ two methods which have shown promise in curbing extreme polarization: consistent communication of opinions with “normal range” sentiments and limiting the number of amplifications for users that disobey platform policies (Lim & Bentley, 2022). However, it is likely that content moderation and fact-checking alone will not be enough to address these issues. To be successful, regulation needs to match the complexity of the problem (Harris, 2019), governed by a suitable international regulatory body.

In tropical countries, the situation is likely a perfect storm of high prevalence of wildlife trade and emerging infectious disease risk (Allen et al., 2017), and sometimes lower financial and technical capacities in tackling the online trade in wildlife and managing the spread of disinformation. Recent progress has been made through the EU's new Digital Services Act, which aims to “prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation” through regulating online platforms, thus providing an example for regulation that could be developed in the rest of the world. If tropical member states are to be able to adequately achieve the goals outlined in the Kunming—Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the WHO Pandemic Agreement, the technology companies running social media, e-commerce, and content-sharing platforms will need to step-up their role in assisting countries to tackle the illegal trade in wildlife and spread of misinformation on their platforms. Tech companies, therefore, have a significant role to play in creating technology that is humane for people and wildlife.

Daniel J. Ingram: Writing—original draft; writing—review and editing. Thais Q. Morcatty: Writing—review and editing. Hani R. El Bizri: Writing—review and editing. Mahesh Poudyal: Writing—review and editing. Edward Mundy: Writing—review and editing.

The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Letters
Conservation Letters BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
13.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
70
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Conservation Letters is a reputable scientific journal that is devoted to the publication of both empirical and theoretical research that has important implications for the conservation of biological diversity. The journal warmly invites submissions from various disciplines within the biological and social sciences, with a particular interest in interdisciplinary work. The primary aim is to advance both pragmatic conservation objectives and scientific knowledge. Manuscripts are subject to a rapid communication schedule, therefore they should address current and relevant topics. Research articles should effectively communicate the significance of their findings in relation to conservation policy and practice.
期刊最新文献
Kleptoparasitism in seabirds—A potential pathway for global avian influenza virus spread Moving beyond simplistic representations of land use in conservation Not all conservation “policy” is created equally: When does a policy give rise to legally binding obligations? Identifying Pareto-efficient eradication strategies for invasive populations Genetic variation and hybridization determine the outcomes of conservation reintroductions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1