Institution: | 1. School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia;2. School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
Environmental Science and Resource Management, California State University Channel Islands, Camarillo, California, USA;3. Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Koç University, Istanbul, Turkey;4. Graduate School of Agricultural Science, Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Fuchu, Japan;5. Institute of Nature Conservation, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland;6. Department of Life Sciences and Systems Biology, University of Turin, Torino, Italy;7. Sovon Dutch Centre for Field Ornithology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands;8. State Key Laboratory of Biocontrol, Department of Ecology/School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China;9. Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany;10. School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen, China;11. Department of Migration, Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Radolfzell, Germany
Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany;12. Plant Technology and Environmental Monitoring Ltd, Technological Park of São José dos Campos, São José dos Campos, Brazil;13. CEFE, Univ Montpellier, CNRS, EPHE, IRD, Montpellier, France;14. Centre for Environmental and Climate Science, Lund University, Lund, Sweden;15. Faculty of Energy and Ecotechnology (GreenTech), ITMO University, St Petersburg, Russia;16. CONACYT - Centro Interdisciplinario de Investigación para el Desarrollo Integral Regional Unidad Durango (CIIDIR), Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Ciudad de México, México |
Abstract: | English is widely recognized as the language of science, and English-language publications (ELPs) are rapidly increasing. It is often assumed that the number of non-ELPs is decreasing. This assumption contributes to the underuse of non-ELPs in conservation science, practice, and policy, especially at the international level. However, the number of conservation articles published in different languages is poorly documented. Using local and international search systems, we searched for scientific articles on biodiversity conservation published from 1980 to 2018 in English and 15 non-English languages. We compared the growth rate in publications across languages. In 12 of the 15 non-English languages, published conservation articles significantly increased every year over the past 39 years, at a rate similar to English-language articles. The other three languages showed contrasting results, depending on the search system. Since the 1990s, conservation science articles in most languages increased exponentially. The variation in the number of non-English-language articles identified among the search systems differed markedly (e.g., for simplified Chinese, 11,148 articles returned with local search system and 803 with Scopus). Google Scholar and local literature search systems returned the most articles for 11 and 4 non-English languages, respectively. However, the proportion of peer-reviewed conservation articles published in non-English languages was highest in Scopus, followed by Web of Science and local search systems, and lowest in Google Scholar. About 20% of the sampled non-English-language articles provided no title or abstract in English; thus, in theory, they were undiscoverable with English keywords. Possible reasons for this include language barriers and the need to disseminate research in countries where English is not widely spoken. Given the known biases in statistical methods and study characteristics between English- and non-English-language studies, non-English-language articles will continue to play an important role in improving the understanding of biodiversity and its conservation. |