Assessing the space between science and practice in endangered species conservation

Abstract

The accelerating loss of biodiversity has created an urgent need for applied science to help halt species extinction. However, conservation scientists have long been concerned about the extent to which their findings have been incorporated into management practices. In the case of the U.S. Endangered Species Act, the use of science in decision-making is mandated in the drafting and revision of recovery planning documents, making it an ideal case study to assess the extent to which threat-addressing research is being conducted and incorporated into endangered species recovery. We evaluated which animal species tended to receive the most peer-reviewed research, the extent to which research was relevant to the known threats faced by species, how often relevant research was integrated into recovery planning revisions, and the attributes of research that was utilized. We found that endangered species research has increased exponentially over the past 50 years, with more peer-reviewed research being produced on endangered species that are larger in size, receive more funding, and are more popular. Half (54.6 %) of peer-reviewed publications on endangered species addressed a recognized threat, with publications increasingly addressing threats over time. Recovery planning documents only cited 35 % of threat-focused peer-reviewed publications, with publications containing more government-affiliated authors being more likely to be cited in recovery plans. To better navigate this space between science and practice in endangered species recovery, we encourage researchers and practitioners to counteract entrenched taxonomic biases and to collaborate on research that is focused on identifiable threats to species and that produces findings clearly applicable to practice.