Conservation International

152.2k citations
1.7k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

Conservation International

1.6k papers receiving 147.5k citations

Peers

Conservation International
Comparison fields: 5 of 233
  • Ecological Modeling 28.7k
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation 43.2k
  • Global and Planetary Change 58.4k
  • Ecology 63.2k
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics 27.6k
Replace World Wildlife Fund with:
World Wildlife Fund United States
Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies United States
Smithsonian Environmental Research Center United States
Woodwell Climate Research Center United States
Michigan Department of Natural Resources United States
Bureau of Land Management United States
Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Canada
NatureServe United States
NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Fisheries Science Center United States
Parks Canada Canada
Conservation International relative to World Wildlife Fund United States World Wildlife Fund's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.8×
World Wildlife Fund · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Conservation International

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Conservation International. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by papers produced at Conservation International with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Conservation International more than expected).

Fields of papers published by authors at Conservation International

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Conservation International at the time of their publication. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers affiliated with Conservation International at the time of their publication.

About Conservation International

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Conservation International have published 1.7k papers, which have received a total of 152.2k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 268 papers in Ecological Modeling, 480 papers in Nature and Landscape Conservation, 699 papers in Global and Planetary Change, 740 papers in Ecology and 34 papers in Developmental Biology on the topics of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation (297 papers), Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management (280 papers), Species Distribution and Climate Change (268 papers), Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies (255 papers), Coral and Marine Ecosystems Studies (192 papers), Land Use and Ecosystem Services (141 papers), Marine and fisheries research (137 papers) and Economic and Environmental Valuation (119 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Ecological Modeling (28.7k citations), Nature and Landscape Conservation (43.2k citations), Global and Planetary Change (58.4k citations), Ecology (63.2k citations) and Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (27.6k citations). Authors at Conservation International collaborate with scholars in United States, United Kingdom and Australia and have published in prestigious journals including Conservation Biology, Biological Conservation, PLoS ONE, Conservation Letters and Oryx. Some of Conservation International's most productive authors include Russell A. Mittermeier, Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca, Cristina G. Mittermeier, Norman Myers, Jennifer Kent, Lee Hannah, Guy F. Midgley, Thomas M. Brooks, Ana S. L. Rodrigues and Simon N. Stuart.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore institutions with similar magnitude of impact