Corrections for Environment

The CAB Direct Environment section covers climate change, biodiversity, conservation, pollution, sustainable land use, water resources, ecosystem resilience, sustainability, and environmental policy. Readers can report possible factual errors, inaccurate figures, incorrect source references, attribution problems, outdated information, or concerns about how evidence has been interpreted. A report should identify the material and the specific issue clearly enough for an editor or reviewer to check it against the relevant evidence.

The main route for submitting a possible correction is /corrections/. A submitted suggestion starts a review of the issue but does not by itself establish that a change is required. CAB Direct does not set a correction deadline here because no specific response or correction timeframe has been confirmed for this section.

What to report

A correction request can concern the accuracy, sourcing, scope, or interpretation of Environment content. Useful reports point to the exact page or article and explain what may be wrong or outdated.

1. A factual statement, claim, or description that appears to be incorrect.
2. A numerical value, date, unit of measurement, geographic scope, or timeframe that may be wrong or misleading.
3. A name, attribution, scientific term, or cited source that may be inaccurate or incomplete.
4. A source reference that no longer supports the wording used in the material.
5. Information that may be outdated because a source has been updated, corrected, or withdrawn.
6. An interpretation that may not accurately reflect the cited evidence or its limitations.

What to include in a correction request

To make the review as precise as possible, include the page or article URL, the specific sentence or data point in question, the reason you believe it should be checked, and the source or evidence supporting your concern when available. If the issue concerns a number, date, name, unit, place, or cited source, identify that element directly. This helps the editorial review focus on the exact claim rather than requiring the whole article to be reassessed without a defined issue.

How reported issues are reviewed

The review begins by identifying the exact material, claim, data point, or source reference involved. The cited source is then checked together with relevant numerical values, dates, names and attribution, scientific terminology, units of measurement, geographic scope, and timeframe. Editors or reviewers also check whether the source has been updated, corrected, or withdrawn and whether newer evidence materially changes the statement being reviewed.

For scientific claims, the original source should be checked where possible rather than relying only on secondary reporting. If the concern is about interpretation, a reviewer or editor examines whether the wording accurately reflects the evidence and its stated limitations. The purpose of this step is to determine whether the reported problem is supported by the source record, not to assume that every submitted suggestion requires an editorial change.

How confirmed corrections are handled

When a correction is confirmed, the affected wording, figure, attribution, reference, or other element should be updated so that the identified error is removed while other accurate parts of the material remain unchanged. If newer evidence materially changes an existing statement, the relevant passage can be updated to reflect that evidence. A report may also be closed without a change when the review does not confirm the reported problem. No fixed correction deadline is stated on this page.

Environment editorial team

Correction reviews may involve the Environment authors, reviewers, and editors listed below, depending on the type of issue being assessed.

Related editorial information

For the wider rules used to prepare and review content, see /editorial-policy/. The evidence methodology is available at /how-we-rate-evidence/, and the authors and reviewers directory is at /authors/.

Contact

Possible errors in Environment material should be submitted through /corrections/. For general editorial questions, use /contacts/. These routes keep correction reports separate from broader enquiries while directing both to the relevant editorial workflow.