World Wildlife Fund
Impact in
- Global and Planetary Change top 2%
- Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Land Use and Ecosystem Services
- Marine and fisheries research
-
- Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
- Fish Ecology and Management Studies
Papers in
-
- Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management 381
- Land Use and Ecosystem Services 121
- Marine and fisheries research 75
- Ecology 657
- Wildlife Ecology and Conservation 304
- Coral and Marine Ecosystems Studies 64
- Top scholars
- Taylor H. RickettsBernhard LehnerRobin NaidooPetra DöllEric DinersteinDavid Mark OlsonAndrew P. BalmfordNeil D. Burgess
- Journals
- Conservation Biology (83 papers)Biological Conservation (82 papers)PLoS ONE (44 papers)Oryx (40 papers)Marine Policy (39 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesUnited KingdomAustralia
In The Last Decade
World Wildlife Fund
1.9k papers receiving 123k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 226
- Global and Planetary Change 38.6k
- Nature and Landscape Conservation 17k
- Ecological Modeling 3.6k
- Ecology 31.6k
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law 10.9k
Countries citing scholars working at World Wildlife Fund
This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at World Wildlife Fund. 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 World Wildlife Fund with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites World Wildlife Fund more than expected).
Fields of papers published by authors at World Wildlife Fund
This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with World Wildlife Fund 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 World Wildlife Fund at the time of their publication.
About World Wildlife Fund
In recent decades, authors affiliated with World Wildlife Fund have published 2k papers, which have received a total of 123k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 651 papers in Global and Planetary Change, 657 papers in Ecology, 278 papers in Nature and Landscape Conservation, 58 papers in Ecological Modeling and 247 papers in Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law on the topics of Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management (381 papers), Wildlife Ecology and Conservation (304 papers), Coastal and Marine Management (126 papers), Land Use and Ecosystem Services (121 papers), Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies (86 papers), Marine and fisheries research (75 papers), Primate Behavior and Ecology (73 papers) and Coral and Marine Ecosystems Studies (64 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Global and Planetary Change (38.6k citations), Nature and Landscape Conservation (17k citations), Ecological Modeling (3.6k citations), Ecology (31.6k citations) and Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law (10.9k citations). Authors at World Wildlife Fund collaborate with scholars in United States, United Kingdom and Australia and have published in prestigious journals including Conservation Biology, Biological Conservation, PLoS ONE, Oryx and Marine Policy. Some of World Wildlife Fund's most productive authors include Taylor H. Ricketts, Bernhard Lehner, Robin Naidoo, Petra Döll, Eric Dinerstein, David Mark Olson, Andrew P. Balmford, Neil D. Burgess, Theo Colborn and Robin Abell.
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.