Tapping into non-English-language science for the conservation of global biodiversity.
View / Open Files
Authors
Berthinussen, Anna
Bertolino, Sandro
Chen, Min
Hidalgo Aranzamendi, Nataly
Liu, Yifan
Ramos, Danielle L
Reboredo Segovia, Ana L
Rocha, Ricardo
Schwab, Dominik
Seo, Hae-Min
Tyler, Elizabeth H M
Vozykova, Svetlana
Zhou, Wenjun
Publication Date
2021-10-07Journal Title
PLoS biology
ISSN
1544-9173
Volume
19
Issue
10
Language
eng
Type
Article
This Version
VoR
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Amano, T., Berdejo-Espinola, V., Christie, A. P., Willott, K., Akasaka, M., Báldi, A., Berthinussen, A., et al. (2021). Tapping into non-English-language science for the conservation of global biodiversity.. PLoS biology, 19 (10) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001296
Abstract
The widely held assumption that any important scientific information would be available in English underlies the underuse of non-English-language science across disciplines. However, non-English-language science is expected to bring unique and valuable scientific information, especially in disciplines where the evidence is patchy, and for emergent issues where synthesising available evidence is an urgent challenge. Yet such contribution of non-English-language science to scientific communities and the application of science is rarely quantified. Here, we show that non-English-language studies provide crucial evidence for informing global biodiversity conservation. By screening 419,679 peer-reviewed papers in 16 languages, we identified 1,234 non-English-language studies providing evidence on the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation interventions, compared to 4,412 English-language studies identified with the same criteria. Relevant non-English-language studies are being published at an increasing rate in 6 out of the 12 languages where there were a sufficient number of relevant studies. Incorporating non-English-language studies can expand the geographical coverage (i.e., the number of 2° × 2° grid cells with relevant studies) of English-language evidence by 12% to 25%, especially in biodiverse regions, and taxonomic coverage (i.e., the number of species covered by the relevant studies) by 5% to 32%, although they do tend to be based on less robust study designs. Our results show that synthesising non-English-language studies is key to overcoming the widespread lack of local, context-dependent evidence and facilitating evidence-based conservation globally. We urge wider disciplines to rigorously reassess the untapped potential of non-English-language science in informing decisions to address other global challenges. Please see the Supporting information files for Alternative Language Abstracts.
Identifiers
PMC8496809, 34618803
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001296
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/330418
Statistics
Total file downloads (since January 2020). For more information on metrics see the
IRUS guide.
Recommended or similar items
The current recommendation prototype on the Apollo Repository will be turned off on 03 February 2023. Although the pilot has been fruitful for both parties, the service provider IKVA is focusing on horizon scanning products and so the recommender service can no longer be supported. We recognise the importance of recommender services in supporting research discovery and are evaluating offerings from other service providers. If you would like to offer feedback on this decision please contact us on: support@repository.cam.ac.uk