Conservation International

199.5k citations
1.9k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

Conservation International

1.9k papers receiving 199.4k citations

Peers

Conservation International
Comparison fields: 5 of 223
  • Ecological Modeling 15.3k
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation 38.7k
  • Global and Planetary Change 61.7k
  • Ecology 48.4k
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law 15.4k
Replace World Wildlife Fund with:
World Wildlife Fund United States
Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies United States
National Zoological Park United States
Smithsonian Environmental Research Center United States
Woodwell Climate Research Center United States
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute United States
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
Environmental Defense Fund United States
Joint Global Change Research Institute United States
Natural Resources Conservation Service United States
Conservation International relative to World Wildlife Fund United States World Wildlife Fund's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×3×4.2×
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 1.9k papers, which have received a total of 199.5k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 114 papers in Ecological Modeling, 794 papers in Global and Planetary Change, 330 papers in Nature and Landscape Conservation, 256 papers in Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law and 442 papers in Ecology on the topics of Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management (488 papers), Land Use and Ecosystem Services (161 papers), Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies (156 papers), Coastal and Marine Management (135 papers), Wildlife Ecology and Conservation (125 papers), Coral and Marine Ecosystems Studies (116 papers), Species Distribution and Climate Change (114 papers) and Primate Behavior and Ecology (92 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Ecological Modeling (15.3k citations), Nature and Landscape Conservation (38.7k citations), Global and Planetary Change (61.7k citations), Ecology (48.4k citations) and Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law (15.4k citations). Authors at Conservation International collaborate with scholars in United States, United Kingdom and Australia and have published in prestigious journals including Conservation Biology, PLoS ONE, Biological Conservation, Science and Zootaxa. Some of Conservation International's most productive authors include Russell A. Mittermeier, Gustavo A. B. da Fonseca, Cristina Goettsch Mittermeier, Norman Myers, Lee Hannah, Thomas M. Brooks, Guy Franklin Midgley, Ana S. L. Rodrigues, Simon N. Stuart and Adrian Treves.

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