When it comes to research on land management behavior, how are we doing? A systematic review on theory, measurement, and suggestions for improvement

Author:

Winkler‐Schor Sophia1ORCID,Coon Jaime J.23ORCID,Sanji Daniel14,Barefoot‐Yaeger Martha2

Affiliation:

1. Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies University of Wisconsin—Madison Madison Wisconsin USA

2. Department of Environmental Sustainability Earlham College Richmond Indiana USA

3. Department of Biology Earlham College Richmond Indiana USA

4. University of California Berkeley Berkeley California USA

Abstract

AbstractWith increasing attention to climate change and biodiversity loss, conservation social science research on land management practices is burgeoning. Researchers have broadened their focus from protected areas to diverse types of land management to support conservation and climate mitigation. But, developing effective strategies for these issues requires an in‐depth understanding of both the socio‐psychological factors that guide landholders' decision‐making and global trends in land management practices and literature. To assess the trends and status of land management behavior research, we systematically reviewed research published between 2010 and 2020 in five seminal conservation journals. Of 11,607 articles reviewed, we identified 100 articles about land management behavior. We assessed theoretical groundings, measurement methodology, land‐use terminology and practices, ecosystem type, and geographic distribution. We identified strengths and significant  gaps and weaknesses across land management research. For example, 52% of articles made no meaningful connection to theory, only 14% of papers used observed behavioral data, 86% of studies uses non‐experimental methods and researchers disproportionately measured land management behavior in developed nations (66%). We also find that language used to describe land management behavior is very heterogeneous, making it difficult to summarize land management research using traditional systematic review methods. Conducting a limited systematic review can help summarize research and also identify trends across disciplines that might otherwise missed. Results from our limited systematic review can guide future research and support the development of evidence‐based policies to mitigate climate change and biodiversity loss.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3