↓ Skip to main content

Fishing for ecosystem services

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Environmental Management, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fishing for ecosystem services
Published in
Journal of Environmental Management, April 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.04.024
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin L. Pope, Mark A. Pegg, Nicholas W. Cole, Stephen F. Siddons, Alexis D. Fedele, Brian S. Harmon, Ryan L. Ruskamp, Dylan R. Turner, Caleb C. Uerling

Abstract

Ecosystems are commonly exploited and manipulated to maximize certain human benefits. Such changes can degrade systems, leading to cascading negative effects that may be initially undetected, yet ultimately result in a reduction, or complete loss, of certain valuable ecosystem services. Ecosystem-based management is intended to maintain ecosystem quality and minimize the risk of irreversible change to natural assemblages of species and to ecosystem processes while obtaining and maintaining long-term socioeconomic benefits. We discuss policy decisions in fishery management related to commonly manipulated environments with a focus on influences to ecosystem services. By focusing on broader scales, managing for ecosystem services, and taking a more proactive approach, we expect sustainable, quality fisheries that are resilient to future disturbances. To that end, we contend that: (1) management always involves tradeoffs; (2) explicit management of fisheries for ecosystem services could facilitate a transition from reactive to proactive management; and (3) adaptive co-management is a process that could enhance management for ecosystem services. We propose adaptive co-management with an ecosystem service framework where actions are implemented within ecosystem boundaries, rather than political boundaries, through strong interjurisdictional relationships.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 135 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 23%
Student > Master 25 18%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 5%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 31 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 35 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 24%
Social Sciences 13 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 4 3%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 36 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 April 2020.
All research outputs
#7,538,708
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Environmental Management
#1,859
of 6,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,572
of 314,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Environmental Management
#12
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,405 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.