Water quality is a poor predictor of recreational hotspots in England
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 11, Issue: 11, Page: e0166950
2016
- 26Citations
- 68Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations26
- Citation Indexes21
- 21
- CrossRef8
- Policy Citations5
- Policy Citation5
- Captures68
- Readers68
- 68
Article Description
Maintaining and improving water quality is key to the protection and restoration of aquatic ecosystems, which provide important benefits to society. In Europe, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) defines water quality based on a set of biological, hydro-morphological and chemical targets, and aims to reach good quality conditions in all river bodies by the year 2027. While recently it has been argued that achieving these goals will deliver and enhance ecosystem services, in particular recreational services, there is little empirical evidence demonstrating so. Here we test the hypothesis that good water quality is associated with increased utilization of recreational services, combining four surveys covering walking, boating, fishing and swimming visits, together with water quality data for all water bodies in eight River Basin Districts (RBDs) in England. We compared the percentage of visits in areas of good water quality to a set of null models accounting for population density, income, age distribution, travel distance, public access, and substitutability. We expect such association to be positive, at least for fishing (which relies on fish stocks) and swimming (with direct contact to water). We also test if these services have stronger association with water quality relative to boating and walking alongside rivers, canals or lakeshores. In only two of eight RBDs (Northumbria and Anglian) were both criteria met (positive association, strongest for fishing and swimming) when comparing to at least one of the null models. This conclusion is robust to variations in dataset size. Our study suggests that achieving the WFD water quality goals may not enhance recreational ecosystem services, and calls for further empirical research on the connection between water quality and ecosystem services.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; 10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g002
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84997124410&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27875562; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.t002; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0166950; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950.g002; http://www.plosone.org/article/metrics/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0166950; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0166950&type=printable
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know