Are fieldwork studies being relegated to second place in conservation science
Are fieldwork studies being relegated to second place in conservation science
复制标题
实地考察研究是否已在保护科学中退居第二位
DOI：
10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00389
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
C. Ferreira
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. A. Ríos;M. Delibes‐Mateos;C. Ferreira
生物信息的收集，包括在现场收集的数据，对于提高我们对如何识别、减轻或避免人类对生物系统的影响的理解至关重要。然而，在过去的几十年里，实证实地研究的作用已明显减弱，并产生了发人深省的影响。事实上，由于缺乏通过实地工作收集的可靠观测数据，帮助确定国家和全球生物多样性保护优先事项的重要工具（即综合分析和大数据方法）可能会受到严重阻碍。我们分析了 1980 年至 2014 年保护文献的发表趋势，以确定是否有理由担心与其他类型的研究相比，基于实地调查的调查可能会减少。在这里，我们表明，从 20 世纪 80 年代至今，基于实地调查的保护文献中的比例显着下降；事实上，基于实地考察的出版物减少了 20%，而建模和数据分析研究分别增长了 600% 和 800%。与此同时，我们发现保护科学领域被引用率最高的学术期刊发表实地调查研究的频率低于排名较低的期刊。我们认为，实地调查的明显减少是自下而上的压力的结果，包括与出版和学术奖励制度相关的压力，而第二组则是自上而下的，由当前的社会需求和/或优先事项驱动。我们敦促研究人员、资助者和期刊分别致力于开展、资助和披露相关的实地调查研究，并就可以朝这个方向采取的具体步骤提出一些建议。
The collection of biological information, including data gathered in the field, is fundamental to improve our understanding of how human impacts on biological systems can be recognized, mitigated or averted. However, the role of empirical field research has faded appreciably in the past decades with sobering implications. Indeed, important instruments to help set national and global priorities in biodiversity conservation (i.e. synthetic analyses and big data approaches) can be severely handicapped by a lack of sound observational data, collected through fieldwork. We analyzed publication trends in the conservation literature from 1980 to 2014 to ascertain whether there is reason for concern about a potential decrease in fieldwork-based investigations compared to other types of studies. Here, we show that the proportion of fieldwork-based investigations in the conservation literature dropped significantly from the 1980s until today; indeed, fieldwork-based publications decreased by 20% in comparison to a rise of 600% and 800% in modelling and data analysis studies, respectively. In parallel, we found that the most highly cited academic journals in conservation science published fieldwork studies less frequently than the lower rank journals. We contend that an apparent decrease in fieldwork-based investigations is the result of bottom-up pressures, including those associated with the publishing and the academic reward systems, while a second set acts top-down, driven by current societal needs and/or priorities. We urge researchers, funders and journals to commit, respectively, to conducting, funding and divulging relevant fieldwork research, and make some recommendations on specific steps that can be adopted in that direction.