Forty years of bias in habitat fragmentation research

This chapter evaluates biases that contribute to the common misrepresentation of fragmentation as a major threat to biodiversity. The idea that habitat fragmentation seriously threatens biodiversity is so widespread that it might be considered a “conservation biology principle.” However, effects attributed to habitat fragmentation are usually confounded with effects of habitat loss. A recent review of the effects of habitat fragmentation per se (effects independent of habitat loss) indicated that 76% of significant effects of fragmentation were positive, and in no situation were most effects negative. Comparing the abstracts of papers with the actual results reported in the body of each paper revealed that fewer than half of the authors who found only positive fragmentation effects actually discuss these positive effects in their abstracts. Thus, authors themselves reinforce the misrepresentation of the fragmentation literature, potentially because authors fear that their results could be incorrectly used to justify habitat destruction.