miun.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The benefits of systematic mapping to evidence-based environmental management
Stockholm Environm Inst, Mistra Council Evidence Based Environm Management, Stockholm.
Stockholm Environm Inst, Mistra Council Evidence Based Environm Management, Stockholm.
Mid Sweden University, Faculty of Science, Technology and Media, Department of Natural Sciences.
Lund Univ, Dept Biol, Lund.
2016 (English)In: Ambio, ISSN 0044-7447, E-ISSN 1654-7209, Vol. 45, no 5, 613-620 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Reviews of evidence are a vital means of summarising growing bodies of research. Systematic reviews (SRs) aim to reduce bias and increase reliability when summarising high priority and controversial topics. Similar to SRs, systematic maps (SMs) were developed in social sciences to reliably catalogue evidence on a specific subject. Rather than providing answers to specific questions of impacts, SMs aim to produce searchable databases of studies, along with detailed descriptive information. These maps (consisting of a report, a database, and sometimes a geographical information system) can prove highly useful for research, policy and practice communities, by providing assessments of knowledge gaps (subjects requiring additional research), knowledge gluts (subjects where full SR is possible), and patterns across the research literature that promote best practice and direct research resources towards the highest quality research. Here, we introduce SMs in detail using three recent case studies that demonstrate their utility for research and decision-making.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 45, no 5, 613-620 p.
Keyword [en]
Environmental policy, Evidence review, Evidence-informed policy, Forestry, Secondary synthesis, Soil carbon
National Category
Biological Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:miun:diva-29138DOI: 10.1007/s13280-016-0773-xISI: 000381580800009PubMedID: 26984257Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84962593151OAI: oai:DiVA.org:miun-29138DiVA: diva2:1040315
Available from: 2016-10-27 Created: 2016-10-27 Last updated: 2017-08-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(526 kB)1 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 526 kBChecksum SHA-512
9b9d88bd3adb7402f112bdc2186beffc6e0ed665d6acda6b89023064fd51c57f691b1135c82f4fbe657361ffbb717baf5e6867c3818cb18c118ee152baab28ba
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jonsson, Bengt Gunnar
By organisation
Department of Natural Sciences
In the same journal
Ambio
Biological Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 58 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf