Comparative assessment of regional representation and research productivity of conservation biologists and applied ecologists

To assess the regional representation and research productivity of conserva tion biologists and applied ecologists, we reviewed 2524 papers published f rom 1987-1995 in five international journals: Biodiversity and Conservation , Biological Conservation, Conservation Biology, Ecological Applications an d the Journal of Applied Ecology. Half of all papers came from first author s whose addresses are in the United States or the United Kingdom. Papers fr om developing nations accounted for a very small component of the total res earch effort. Seventy-one percent of the variation in national productivity in conservation biology/applied ecology can be explained by national GNP. Residual analysis indicated that the United Kingdom was the most productive nation, followed by Australia, South Africa, United States, New Zealand, S weden, The Netherlands and Canada. Canada was about four times as productiv e in conservation biology/applied ecology as expected from its GNP. Of the 38 developing nations, 63% were represented in the literature at rates in b alance with or greater than their national economies. Three wealthy G-7 cou ntries (Germany, Italy and Japan) did not contribute as substantially to th e international literature in conservation biology/applied ecology, produci ng one-half, one-quarter and one-sixteenth, respectively, as many papers as expected from their GNPs.