Trends and biases in the listing and recovery planning for threatened species: an Australian case study
By J. Walsh, James E. M. Watson, Madeleine C. Bottrill, Liana N. Joseph, Hugh P. Possingham. Oryx, 2012
92 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecological Modeling, Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6d607cd22d46caacc954dfa8bc543a64e4e7566a
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecological Modeling
- S. Butchart
- A. Burbidge
- Christopher N. Johnson
- A. Rodrigues
- M. Hoffmann
- P. Salaman
- C. Rondinini
- Chris R. Dickman
In Ecology
- S. Butchart
- Chris R. Dickman
- J. Woinarski
- Christopher N. Johnson
- A. Burbidge
- P. Harrison
- A. Rodrigues
- J. Calzada
In Nature and Landscape Conservation
- J. Woinarski
- A. Burbidge
- P. Harrison
- Chris R. Dickman
- Christopher N. Johnson
- A. Rodrigues
- J. Calzada
- M. Hoffmann
Citations in the corpus
- Ongoing unraveling of a continental fauna: Decline and extinction of Australian mammals since European settlement (2015, background): “legislated threatened species listing process against more poorly known groups (24); however, the main reason is more likely to be that the Australian mammal fauna has proven particularly susceptible to novel threats.”
- How many bird and mammal extinctions has recent conservation action prevented? (2020, background): “We focused on birds and mammals as some of the best documented taxonomic Classes on the IUCN Red List, and with disproportionate attention from the public (Troudet et al., 2017) and for recovery planning (Walsh et al., 2013).”