4.5.3 Conservation improvement
Only 24% of respondents thought that the conservation status of the species had improved
since they began their research, but whether the respondent had answered ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ to use
of findings (fig. 25) was a significant predictor of this with a higher proportion reporting that
conservation status had improved if the findings had been implemented. 73% of responses
were further validated by open-ended comment.
Answer to question based upon:
IUCN listing
75
CITES listing
46
Personal communication
136
Personal observation
117
Long term trends
131
The study in question
41
Follow up study
62
Research reported by others 84
Fig 25. The relationship between conservation status and uptake of findings. There was a significant
difference in the conservation status depending on uptake of findings (X
2
=23.4,df = 4,p= <0.001).
53
4.6 Geographical determinants of implementation
The majority of research (60%) was carried out in developed countries. There was a highly
significant difference between journals (X
2
= 90.34, df = 8, p= <0.001) in the proportion of
research that was carried out in developed and developing countries (fig. 26), but there was no
significant difference in the levels of implementation in developing countries by journal.
Fig 26. Journal differences in the proportion of studies based in developing countries showed only Oryx to
have a high proportion of developing country studies.
Of the studies based in developing countries, 50% of respondents’ findings had been
implemented (n=179), (compared to 61% in developed countries), 44% in terms of practical
implementation. 37% had a corresponding author resident in the study area, compared to 88%
in developed countries. However, 70% of the papers based in developing countries had at least
one author from the country of residence. There was no relationship between year of
publication and the proportion of papers with resident authors.
Although residence of author did not have sufficient explanatory power to remain in the
original model (table 6), it had been hypothesised that studies in developing countries would
have higher levels of implementation if resident authors were involved in the research. This
was not true for developing countries, with neither resident corresponding authors, nor
whether there was any author resident, impacting upon levels of implementation (fig. 27).
|
