Related reviews
- Bowler et al. (2010) “The evidence base for community forest management as a mechanism for supplying global environmental benefits and improving local welfare.” CEE review 08-011.
- Geldmann et al. (2013) “Effectiveness of terrestrial protected areas in maintaining biodiversity and reducing habitat loss.” CEE review 10-007.
- Hall et al. (2012) “The impact of land property rights interventions on agricultural productivity in developing countries: a systematic review“. The Campbell Collaboration.
- Samii et al. (2013) “Impact of payment for environmental services and de-centralized forest management on environmental and human welfare: A systematic review.” The Campbell Collaboration.
Open access background reading
- Bilotta G.S., Milner A.M., Boyd I.L. (2014). Quality assessment tools for evidence from environmental science. Environmental Evidence 3(14).
- Bumann S, Hermes, N, Lensink R. (2012). Financial liberalisation and economic growth: a meta-analysis. Technical report. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
- Chalmers, I. (2003). Trying to do more good than harm in policy and practice: The role of rigorous, transparent, up-to-date evaluations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 589(1), 22-40. doi:10.1177/0002716203254762
- Cook, C. N., Possingham, H. P., Fuller, R. A. (2013). Contribution of systematic reviews to management decisions. Conservation Biology, 00(0), 1-14. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12114.
- Hannes, K., & Macaitis, K. (2012). A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis: Update on a review of published papers. Qualitative Research, 12(4), 402-442. doi:10.1177/1468794111432992
- Humaidan, P., & Polyzos, N. P. (2012). (Meta)analyze this: Systematic reviews might lose credibility. Nature Medicine, 18(9), 1321-1321. doi:10.1038/nm0912-1321 (available free online).
- Koper, C. S., & Mayo-Wilson, E. (2006). Police crackdowns on illegal gun carrying: A systematic review of their impact on gun crime. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2(2), 227-261. doi:10.1007/s11292-006-9005-x.
- Laurent, C. at al. (2009). Pourquoi s’intéresser à la notion d’Evidence-based policy”? (Why should we care about evidence-based policy?). Published in: Revue Tiers Monde No. 200 (December 2009): pp. 853-873.
- Noonan, E. (2009). Evaluation, propaganda, policy and practice. 3rd Impact Evaluation Conference, Cairo, April 2, 2009.
- Pullin, A. S., & Stewart, G. B. (2006). Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 20(6), 1647-1656. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00485.x.
- Pullin, A. S., Knight, T. M., & Watkinson, A. R. (2009). Linking reductionist science and holistic policy using systematic reviews: Unpacking environmental policy questions to construct an evidence-based framework. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46(5), 970-975. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01704.x.
- Pullin, A. S., Knight, T. M., Stone, D. A., & Charman, K. (2004). Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Biological Conservation, 119(2), 245-252. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2003.11.007.
- Soomai, S. S., Wells, P. G., & MacDonald, B. H. (2011). Multi-stakeholder perspectives on the use and influence of “grey” scientific information in fisheries management. Marine Policy, 35(1), 50-62. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2010.07.006.
- Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207-222. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.00375.
