Abstract

There are many barriers to using science to inform conservation policy and practice. Conservation scientists wishing to produce management-relevant science must balance this goal with the imperative of demonstrating novelty and rigor in their science. Decision makers seeking to make evidence-based decisions must balance a desire for knowledge with the need to act despite uncertainty. Generating science that will effectively inform management decisions requires that the production of information (the components of knowledge) be salient (relevant and timely), credible (authoritative, believable, and trusted), and legitimate (developed via a process that considers the values and perspectives of all relevant actors) in the eyes of both researchers and decision makers. We perceive 3 key challenges for those hoping to generate conservation science that achieves all 3 of these information characteristics. First, scientific and management audiences can have contrasting perceptions about the salience of research. Second, the pursuit of scientific credibility can come at the cost of salience and legitimacy in the eyes of decision makers, and, third, different actors can have conflicting views about what constitutes legitimate information. We highlight 4 institutional frameworks that can facilitate science that will inform management: boundary organizations (environmental organizations that span the boundary between science and management), research scientists embedded in resource management agencies, formal links between decision makers and scientists at research-focused institutions, and training programs for conservation professionals. Although these are not the only approaches to generating boundary-spanning science, nor are they mutually exclusive, they provide mechanisms for promoting communication, translation, and mediation across the knowledge–action boundary. We believe that despite the challenges, conservation science should strive to be a boundary science, which both advances scientific understanding and contributes to decision making.Logrando que la Ciencia de la Conservación Trasponga la Frontera Conocimiento-AcciónResumenHay muchas barreras para utilizar ciencia para informar a la política y práctica de la conservación. Los científicos de la conservación que desean producir ciencia relevante para el manejo deben equilibrar esta meta con el imperativo de demostrar novedad y rigor en su ciencia. Los tomadores de decisiones que buscan que sus decisiones se basen en evidencias deben equilibrar el deseo de conocimientos con la necesidad de actuar a pesar de la incertidumbre. La generación de ciencia que informe efectivamente a las decisiones de manejo requiere que la producción de información (los componentes del conocimiento) sea sobresaliente (relevante y oportuna), creíble (autoritativa, verosímil y confiable) y legítima (desarrollada mediante un proceso que considera los valores y perspectivas de todos los actores relevantes) a la vista tanto de investigadores como de tomadores de decisiones. Percibimos tres retos clave para quienes desean generar ciencia de la conservación que logre estas tres características de la información. Primero, las audiencias científicas y de manejo pueden tener percepciones contrastantes sobre la relevancia de la investigación. Segundo, la credibilidad se puede lograr a costa de la relevancia y legitimidad a la vista de los tomadores de decisiones y tercero, los diferentes actores pueden tener percepciones conflictivas sobre los que constituye información legítima. Resaltamos cuatro marcos institucionales que pueden facilitar que la ciencia informe al manejo: organizaciones de frontera (organizaciones ambientales que trasponen la frontera entre la ciencia y el manejo), investigadores científicos insertados en agencias de manejo de recursos, vínculos formales entre tomadores de decisiones y científicos en instituciones enfocadas a la investigación, y programas de capacitación para profesionales de la conservación. Aunque estos no son los únicos métodos para generar ciencia que traspone fronteras, ni son mutuamente excluyentes, proporcionan mecanismos que promueven la comunicación, traslación y mediación para trasponer la frontera conocimiento-acción. Consideramos que no obstante los retos, la ciencia de la conservación debería pugnar por ser una ciencia de frontera, que incrementa el entendimiento científico y contribuye a la toma de decisiones.

Highlights

  • Underpinning conservation policy and practice with rigorous scientific evidence can be vital for efficiently solving environmental problems (Pullin & Knight 2001; Sutherland et al 2004)

  • The term boundary organization is used to refer to an environmental organization that spans the boundary between science and practice (Guston 2001)

  • Conservation science should be a boundary science, and we refer to conservation science in this ideal form that crosses the boundaries between scholarship and application

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Underpinning conservation policy (regulatory decisions) and practice (on-the-ground decisions) with rigorous scientific evidence can be vital for efficiently solving environmental problems (Pullin & Knight 2001; Sutherland et al 2004). Impediments to the use of science cited by decision makers include a lack of financial resources and operational capacity to implement findings (Young & Van Aarde 2011); lack of alignment between the scientific research conducted and the information needed (Fazey et al 2005; Young & Van Aarde 2011); difficulty accessing and interpreting relevant scientific information (Pullin & Knight 2005; Arlettaz et al 2010); a perception that scientists are driven by personal agenda and that there is lack of consensus among scientists on the best course of action (Young & Van Aarde 2011); organizational cultures that often do not promote the use of science when implementing management strategies (Young & Van Aarde 2011); and bureaucratic restrictions within agencies In some cases, it may be more appropriate for decision makers not to incorporate science when innovative approaches to solving environmental problems are impractical to implement, too costly, or their outcomes are not sufficiently predictable (Pannell et al 2006). There is an emerging literature on the need for conservation science to bridge barriers (e.g., Arlettaz et al 2010), there has been little consideration of the partnerships, institutions, and processes that foster such progress

Impediments to Achieving Effective Conservation Science
Salience for Scientists Versus Managers
Scientific Credibility Versus Salience and Legitimacy
Views of Legitimate Information
Boundary Organizations
Research Scientists in Resource Management Agencies
Area Network
Forest Service Research Stations Linkage Grants
Environment and Heritage trusts for conservation
Resources for the Future
Scientists embedded in conservation agencies
Benefits to scientists
Links between Researchers and Decision Makers
Training Conservation Professionals
Combined Approaches to Achieving Effective Conservation Science
Literature Cited
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call