What are the effects of nature conservation on human well-being? A systematic map of empirical evidence from developing countries
What are the effects of nature conservation on human well-being? A systematic map of empirical evidence from developing countries
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13750-016-0058-7
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Woodhouse, Emily
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McKinnon, Madeleine C.;Cheng, Samantha H.;Woodhouse, Emily
背景：全球政策倡议和国际养护组织力求强调和加强自然生态系统养护与人类发展之间的联系。虽然已经开发了许多指数来衡量保护干预措施的各种社会结果，但支持保护对人类福祉不同维度的正面和负面影响的证据的数量和强度仍然不清楚、分散和不一致。方法：我们使用20篇相关文章库中的搜索词在11个学术引文数据库、两个搜索引擎和30个组织网站上搜索相关文章。联系了主要的线人，要求提供文章和可能的证据来源。根据已公布的协议，根据标题、摘要和全文的预先确定的纳入标准，对文章进行相关性筛选。纳入的文章使用问卷进行编码。对8项系统评价进行了批判性评估，以评估方法的可靠性和对研究结果的置信度。结果：系统地图数据库共收录文献1043篇。包括八个与自然保护相关的干预措施和十个与人类福祉相关的结果类别的衡量影响的文章。干预措施与证据发生率高的结果之间的联系包括资源管理干预措施，如渔业和林业，以及经济和物质成果。超过25%的收录文章审查了保护区与经济福祉各方面之间的联系。只有不到2%的文章评估了人类健康结果。稳健的研究设计有限，只有不到9%的文章使用定量方法来评估干预的因果影响。超过700篇文章出现在森林生物群中，而在沙漠或红树林中的文章加起来不到50篇。结论：关于保护与人类福祉联系的证据基础正在增长，但关于关键联系的文章的广度和稳定性方面的偏见仍然存在。系统审查的优先事项包括海洋资源管理与经济/物质福祉成果之间的联系；保护区和治理成果。许多既定干预措施需要更多和更有力的证据，以更好地了解干预措施之间的协同作用和权衡，特别是那些正在出现或有争议的干预措施。
Background: Global policy initiatives and international conservation organizations have sought to emphasize and strengthen the link between the conservation of natural ecosystems and human development. While many indices have been developed to measure various social outcomes to conservation interventions, the quantity and strength of evidence to support the effects, both positive and negative, of conservation on different dimensions of human wellbeing, remain unclear, dispersed and inconsistent.Methods: We searched 11 academic citation databases, two search engines and 30 organisational websites for relevant articles using search terms tested with a library of 20 relevant articles. Key informants were contacted with requests for articles and possible sources of evidence. Articles were screened for relevance against predefined inclusion criteria at title, abstract and full text levels according to a published protocol. Included articles were coded using a questionnaire. A critical appraisal of eight systematic reviews was conducted to assess the reliability of methods and confidence in study findings. A visual matrix of the occurrence and extent of existing evidence was also produced.Results: A total of 1043 articles were included in the systematic map database. Included articles measured effects across eight nature conservation-related intervention and ten human well-being related outcome categories. Linkages between interventions and outcomes with high occurrence of evidence include resource management interventions, such as fisheries and forestry, and economic and material outcomes. Over 25 % of included articles examined linkages between protected areas and aspects of economic well-being. Fewer than 2% of articles evaluated human health outcomes. Robust study designs were limited with less than 9 % of articles using quantitative approaches to evaluate causal effects of interventions. Over 700 articles occurred in forest biomes with less than 50 articles in deserts or mangroves, combined.Conclusions: The evidence base is growing on conservation-human well-being linkages, but biases in the extent and robustness of articles on key linkages persist. Priorities for systematic review, include linkages between marine resource management and economic/material well-being outcomes; and protected areas and governance outcomes. Greater and more robust evidence is needed for many established interventions to better understand synergies and trade-offs between interventions, in particular those that are emerging or contested.