51
|
Jouffray JB, Blasiak R, Norström AV, Österblom H, Nyström M. The Blue Acceleration: The Trajectory of Human Expansion into the Ocean. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020. [DOI: 10.1016/j.oneear.2019.12.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
|
52
|
Cooke SJ, Madliger CL, Cramp RL, Beardall J, Burness G, Chown SL, Clark TD, Dantzer B, de la Barrera E, Fangue NA, Franklin CE, Fuller A, Hawkes LA, Hultine KR, Hunt KE, Love OP, MacMillan HA, Mandelman JW, Mark FC, Martin LB, Newman AEM, Nicotra AB, Robinson SA, Ropert-Coudert Y, Rummer JL, Seebacher F, Todgham AE. Reframing conservation physiology to be more inclusive, integrative, relevant and forward-looking: reflections and a horizon scan. CONSERVATION PHYSIOLOGY 2020; 8:coaa016. [PMID: 32274063 PMCID: PMC7125050 DOI: 10.1093/conphys/coaa016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/26/2019] [Revised: 01/27/2020] [Accepted: 02/10/2020] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
Applying physiological tools, knowledge and concepts to understand conservation problems (i.e. conservation physiology) has become commonplace and confers an ability to understand mechanistic processes, develop predictive models and identify cause-and-effect relationships. Conservation physiology is making contributions to conservation solutions; the number of 'success stories' is growing, but there remain unexplored opportunities for which conservation physiology shows immense promise and has the potential to contribute to major advances in protecting and restoring biodiversity. Here, we consider how conservation physiology has evolved with a focus on reframing the discipline to be more inclusive and integrative. Using a 'horizon scan', we further explore ways in which conservation physiology can be more relevant to pressing conservation issues of today (e.g. addressing the Sustainable Development Goals; delivering science to support the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration), as well as more forward-looking to inform emerging issues and policies for tomorrow. Our horizon scan provides evidence that, as the discipline of conservation physiology continues to mature, it provides a wealth of opportunities to promote integration, inclusivity and forward-thinking goals that contribute to achieving conservation gains. To advance environmental management and ecosystem restoration, we need to ensure that the underlying science (such as that generated by conservation physiology) is relevant with accompanying messaging that is straightforward and accessible to end users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven J Cooke
- Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada
- Corresponding author: Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
| | - Christine L Madliger
- Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Rebecca L Cramp
- School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, 4072, Australia
| | - John Beardall
- School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia
| | - Gary Burness
- Department of Biology, Trent University, 1600 West Bank Drive, Peterborough, ON, K9L 0G2, Canada
| | - Steven L Chown
- School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia
| | - Timothy D Clark
- School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria 14 3216, Australia
| | - Ben Dantzer
- Department of Psychology, Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
| | - Erick de la Barrera
- Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Antigua Carretera a Pátzcuaro 8701, Morelia, Michoacán, 58190, Mexico
| | - Nann A Fangue
- Department of Wildlife, Fish & Conservation Biology, University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA
| | - Craig E Franklin
- School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, 4072, Australia
| | - Andrea Fuller
- Brain Function Research Group, School of Physiology, University of the Witwatersrand, 7 York Rd, Parktown, 2193, South Africa
| | - Lucy A Hawkes
- College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Hatherly Laboratories, University of Exeter, Prince of Wales Road, Exeter, EX4 4PS, UK
| | - Kevin R Hultine
- Department of Research, Conservation and Collections, Desert Botanical Garden, Phoenix, AZ 85008, USA
| | - Kathleen E Hunt
- Department of Biology, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA
| | - Oliver P Love
- Department of Integrative Biology, University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Avenue, Windsor, ON N9B 3P4, Canada
| | - Heath A MacMillan
- Department of Biology and Institute of Biochemistry, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - John W Mandelman
- Anderson Cabot Center for Ocean Life, New England Aquarium, 1 Central Wharf, Boston, MA 02110, USA
| | - Felix C Mark
- Department of Integrative Ecophysiology, Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Center for Polar and Marine Research, Am Handelshafen 12, 27574 Bremerhaven, Germany
| | - Lynn B Martin
- Global Health and Infectious Disease Research, University of South Florida, 3720 Spectrum Boulevard, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
| | - Amy E M Newman
- Department of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
| | - Adrienne B Nicotra
- Research School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
| | - Sharon A Robinson
- School of Earth, Atmospheric and Life Sciences (SEALS) and Centre for Sustainable Ecosystem Solutions, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia
| | - Yan Ropert-Coudert
- Centre d'Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, CNRS UMR 7372 - La Rochelle Université, 79360 Villiers-en-Bois, France
| | - Jodie L Rummer
- ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 5811, Australia
| | - Frank Seebacher
- School of Life and Environmental Sciences A08, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
| | - Anne E Todgham
- Department of Animal Science, University of California Davis, One Shields Ave. Davis, CA, 95616, USA
| |
Collapse
|
53
|
Burger J, Gochfeld M, Jeitner C. Importance of buffer lands to determining risk to ecological resources at legacy contaminated sites: A case study for the Department of Energy's Hanford Site, Washington, USA. JOURNAL OF TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH. PART A 2019; 82:1151-1163. [PMID: 31852396 DOI: 10.1080/15287394.2019.1702911] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
Contaminated lands remain from World War II, the Cold War, and industrial development. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) faces the largest cleanup task, with Hanford Site having the biggest challenge. DOE is committed to protection of human health and the environment during remediation. The Hanford Site has extensive ecological resources and unique ecosystems that require protection. The aims of this study were to: 1) describe a rapid evaluation method for ecological resources, 2) examine the relationship between the resource values on evaluation units (EU) and associated buffer lands for legacy waste sites, 3) discuss risk ratings for ecological resources during remediation, and 4) determine why the relationship may differ among different types of waste sites. For legacy sites, the risk rating for ecological resources was largely a function of % of valued resources on EUs and their buffer (in a 1:1 ratio). This ratio differs from that on operating facilities considered previously, where the relationship between high-quality resources was 1:4. The differences are unusual because both types of facilities are located on the Hanford Central Plateau where active waste management occurs. Differences may be due to 1) location of legacy sites close to the edge of waste area, 2) size of legacy site EUs, which indicates that buffers are large and extend into shrub-steppe habitat, and 3) less human activities on legacy sites. Considering risk from cleanup on ecological resources before the planning and during execution of a remediation strategy may reduce damages to ecological resources and remediation costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Burger
- Division of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, NJ, USA
| | - Michael Gochfeld
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, NJ, USA
- Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, NJ, USA
| | - Christian Jeitner
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, NJ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
54
|
Poot CC, van der Kleij RM, Brakema EA, Vermond D, Williams S, Cragg L, van den Broek JM, Chavannes NH. From research to evidence-informed decision making: a systematic approach. J Public Health (Oxf) 2019. [PMID: 29538728 PMCID: PMC5896638 DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdx153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Knowledge creation forms an integral part of the knowledge-to-action framework aimed at bridging the gap between research and evidence-informed decision making. Although principles of science communication, data visualisation and user-centred design largely impact the effectiveness of communication, their role in knowledge creation is still limited. Hence, this article aims to provide researchers a systematic approach on how knowledge creation can be put into practice. Methods A systematic two-phased approach towards knowledge creation was formulated and executed. First, during a preparation phase the purpose and audience of the knowledge were defined. Subsequently, a developmental phase facilitated how the content is 'said' (language) and communicated (channel). This developmental phase proceeded via two pathways: a translational cycle and design cycle, during which core translational and design components were incorporated. The entire approach was demonstrated by a case study. Results The case study demonstrated how the phases in this systematic approach can be operationalised. It furthermore illustrated how created knowledge can be delivered. Conclusion The proposed approach offers researchers a systematic, practical and easy-to-implement tool to facilitate effective knowledge creation towards decision-makers in healthcare. Through the integration of core components of knowledge creation evidence-informed decision making will ultimately be optimized.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlotte C Poot
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Postbus 9600 zone V-0-P, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Rianne M van der Kleij
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Postbus 9600 zone V-0-P, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Evelyn A Brakema
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Postbus 9600 zone V-0-P, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Debbie Vermond
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Postbus 9600 zone V-0-P, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Siân Williams
- International Primary Care Respiratory Group, IPCRG, PO Box 11961, Westhill AB32 9AE, UK
| | - Liza Cragg
- International Primary Care Respiratory Group, IPCRG, PO Box 11961, Westhill AB32 9AE, UK
| | - Jos M van den Broek
- Department Science Communication & Society, Leiden University, PO Box 9505, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Niels H Chavannes
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Postbus 9600 zone V-0-P, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
55
|
Walsh JC, Dicks LV, Raymond CM, Sutherland WJ. A typology of barriers and enablers of scientific evidence use in conservation practice. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2019; 250:109481. [PMID: 31518795 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109481] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2019] [Revised: 08/22/2019] [Accepted: 08/25/2019] [Indexed: 05/12/2023]
Abstract
Over the last decade, there has been an increased focus (and pressure) in conservation practice globally towards evidence-based or evidence-informed decision making. Despite calls for increased use of scientific evidence, it often remains aspirational for many conservation organizations. Contributing to this is the lack of guidance on how to identify and classify the array of complex reasons limiting research use. In this study, we collated a comprehensive inventory of 230 factors that facilitate or limit the use of scientific evidence in conservation management decisions, through interviews with conservation practitioners in South Africa and UK and a review of the healthcare literature. We used the inventory, combined with concepts from knowledge exchange and research use theories, to construct a taxonomy that categorizes the barriers and enablers. We compared the similarities and differences between the taxonomies from the conservation and the healthcare fields, and highlighted the common barriers and enablers found within conservation organizations in the United Kingdom and South Africa. The most commonly mentioned barriers limiting the use of scientific evidence in our case studies were associated with the day-to-day decision-making processes of practitioners, and the organizational structures, management processes and resource constraints of conservation organizations. The key characteristics that facilitated the use of science in conservation decisions were associated with an organization's structure, decision-making processes and culture, along with practitioners' attitudes and the relationships between scientists and practitioners. This taxonomy and inventory of barriers and enablers can help researchers, practitioners and other conservation actors to identify aspects within their organizations and cross-institutional networks that limit research use - acting as a guide on how to strengthen the science-practice interface.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica C Walsh
- Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, David Attenborough Building, Cambridge, CB2 3QZ, United Kingdom.
| | - Lynn V Dicks
- Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, David Attenborough Building, Cambridge, CB2 3QZ, United Kingdom; School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom.
| | - Christopher M Raymond
- Ecosystems and Environment Research Program, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 65, 00014, Finland; Helsinki Institute for Sustainability Science (HELSUS), University of Helsinki, Yliopistonkatu 3, 00014, Helsinki, Finland; Department of Economics and Management, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, University of Helsinki, Latokartanonkaari 7, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
| | - William J Sutherland
- Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, David Attenborough Building, Cambridge, CB2 3QZ, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
56
|
O'Connor RA, Nel JL, Roux DJ, Lim-Camacho L, van Kerkhoff L, Leach J. Principles for evaluating knowledge co-production in natural resource management: Incorporating decision-maker values. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2019; 249:109392. [PMID: 31446123 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109392] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2018] [Revised: 08/09/2019] [Accepted: 08/10/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
A key reason for undertaking transdisciplinary processes such as knowledge co-production in natural resource management is to access and apply different knowledge systems to complex issues. However, the value of co-production is predominantly framed by academics. They have focused on research design and outcomes in the form of 'science informing policy'. In this paper we build a more inclusive and holistic framing of knowledge co-production incorporating values of non-academic participants, and values related to the participatory process. Specifically, we examine how knowledge is communicated and deliberated upon and the requirements for this to be done effectively. We draw upon empirical data from interviews with natural resource managers who participated in two case studies of knowledge co-production in Australia and South Africa. Their perspectives are captured in eight evaluation principles that build upon existing evaluation frameworks for public participation. Critically, decision-makers valued science-based outputs not just as salient knowledge sources, but to give legitimacy to their decisions. This need for legitimacy necessitates transparency, fairness and inclusivity in knowledge selection, participation and dialogue within knowledge co-production processes. The practice-based knowledge of decision-makers was important for contextualizing and applying science to specific decision contexts. Another key finding is that communicative competence is central to the process of knowledge co-production because it enables participants to critically explore and understand the knowledge claims of others.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth A O'Connor
- Climate Change Institute, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia; Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
| | - Jeanne L Nel
- Sustainability Research Unit, Nelson Mandela University, South Africa; Wageningen Environmental Research, Wageningen University, the Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Roux
- Sustainability Research Unit, Nelson Mandela University, South Africa; Scientific Services, South African National Parks, South Africa
| | | | - Lorrae van Kerkhoff
- Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| | - Joan Leach
- Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
57
|
Ferraz L, Pereira RPG, Pereira AMRDC. Tradução do Conhecimento e os desafios contemporâneos na área da saúde: uma revisão de escopo. SAÚDE EM DEBATE 2019. [DOI: 10.1590/0103-11042019s215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
RESUMO A implementação das melhores evidências científicas nos serviços de saúde ainda não ocorre de forma satisfatória. Diante dessa problemática, o objetivo deste estudo foi investigar os desafios da Tradução do Conhecimento (TC) na área da saúde na atualidade. A metodologia desta revisão foi desenvolvida de acordo com os propósitos da revisão de escopo. Para tanto, as palavras-chave ‘translational medical research’ e ‘knowledge translation’ foram consultadas nos bancos de dados de periódicos da PubMed, Scopus e Web of Science. Foram incluídos os estudos publicados a partir do ano de 2008 até abril de 2018. Entre os 1.677 estudos encontrados, 839 artigos eram duplicados, e 818 não atendiam plenamente ao objetivo desta revisão; assim, 20 estudos foram submetidos à apreciação desse escopo. De acordo com as análises dos estudos, o desafio da TC advém de dois fatores: por um lado, a falta de coesão entre a comunidade científica e os tomadores de decisão em saúde; por outro, a inabilidade dos profissionais em traduzir e aplicar novos conhecimentos, além da omissão de apoio e de incentivos das instituições de saúde. Outrossim, esta revisão aborda um corpo significativo de diversos outros aspectos que limitam e/ou dificultam a TC área da saúde.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucimare Ferraz
- Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Brasil; Universidade Comunitária da Região de Chapecó, Brasil
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
58
|
Transnational corporations and the challenge of biosphere stewardship. Nat Ecol Evol 2019; 3:1396-1403. [DOI: 10.1038/s41559-019-0978-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 132] [Impact Index Per Article: 26.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2019] [Accepted: 08/06/2019] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
|
59
|
Holderegger R, Balkenhol N, Bolliger J, Engler JO, Gugerli F, Hochkirch A, Nowak C, Segelbacher G, Widmer A, Zachos FE. Conservation genetics: Linking science with practice. Mol Ecol 2019; 28:3848-3856. [PMID: 31392753 DOI: 10.1111/mec.15202] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2019] [Revised: 07/09/2019] [Accepted: 07/22/2019] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
Conservation genetics is a well-established scientific field. However, limited information transfer between science and practice continues to hamper successful implementation of scientific knowledge in conservation practice and management. To mitigate this challenge, we have established a conservation genetics community, which entails an international exchange-and-skills platform related to genetic methods and approaches in conservation management. First, it allows for scientific exchange between researchers during annual conferences. Second, personal contact between conservation professionals and scientists is fostered by organising workshops and by popularising knowledge on conservation genetics methods and approaches in professional journals in national languages. Third, basic information on conservation genetics has been made accessible by publishing an easy-to-read handbook on conservation genetics for practitioners. Fourth, joint projects enabled practitioners and scientists to work closely together from the start of a project in order to establish a tight link between applied questions and scientific background. Fifth, standardised workflows simplifying the implementation of genetic tools in conservation management have been developed. By establishing common language and trust between scientists and practitioners, all these measures help conservation genetics to play a more prominent role in future conservation planning and management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rolf Holderegger
- WSL Swiss Federal Research Institute, Birmensdorf, Switzerland.,Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Niko Balkenhol
- Wildlife Sciences, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany
| | - Janine Bolliger
- WSL Swiss Federal Research Institute, Birmensdorf, Switzerland
| | - Jan O Engler
- Department of Biology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Felix Gugerli
- WSL Swiss Federal Research Institute, Birmensdorf, Switzerland
| | - Axel Hochkirch
- Department of Biogeography, Trier University, Trier, Germany
| | - Carsten Nowak
- Conservation Genetics Section and LOEWE Center for Translational Biodiversity Genomics, Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Gernot Segelbacher
- Wildlife Ecology and Management, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Alex Widmer
- Institute of Integrative Biology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Frank E Zachos
- Natural History Museum Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Genetics, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.,Department of Integrative Zoology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
60
|
Nguyen VM, Young N, Brownscombe JW, Cooke SJ. Collaboration and engagement produce more actionable science: quantitatively analyzing uptake of fish tracking studies. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS : A PUBLICATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2019; 29:e01943. [PMID: 31161708 DOI: 10.1002/eap.1943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2019] [Accepted: 04/17/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Aquatic telemetry technology generates new knowledge about the underwater world that can inform decision-making processes and thus can improve conservation and natural resource management. Still, there is lack of evidence on how telemetry-derived knowledge can or has informed management, and what factors facilitate or deter its use. We present one of the first quantitative studies related to the science-action gap and evaluate factors that influence the uptake of fish telemetry findings into policies and practices, as well as social acceptance of these findings. We globally surveyed 212 fish telemetry researchers regarding the knowledge uptake of an applied fish telemetry research project of their choice. Respondents' personal and professional attributes, as well as the attributes of their chosen projects, were analyzed using machine learning algorithms to identify important factors that influenced the uptake (i.e., use, trust, and/or acceptance) of their findings. Researchers with extensive collaborations and who spent more time engaging in public outreach experienced greater uptake of their findings. Respondents with greater telemetry experience and commitment (e.g., more telemetry publications, higher proportion of research on fish telemetry) tended to achieve more social acceptance of their findings. Projects led by researchers who were highly involved and familiar with the fisheries management processes, and those where greater effort was devoted to research dissemination, also tended to experience greater uptake. Last, the levels of complexity and controversy of the issue addressed by the research project had a positive influence on the uptake of findings. The empirical results of this study support recent messages in the science practitioner literature for greater collaboration, knowledge co-production with partners, and public engagement to enable the transfer of knowledge and the use of evidence in decision-making and policies. Scientific organizations should consider shifting reward incentives to promote engagement and collaboration with non-scientific actors, and perhaps even rethinking hiring practices to consider personal and professional characteristics or attitudes such as altruism and networking skills given the influence of these factors in our model. Last, networks composed of both research and practice potentially have a key role in brokering and facilitating knowledge exchange and actions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivian M Nguyen
- Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Nathan Young
- Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada
| | - Jacob W Brownscombe
- Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5B6, Canada
- Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, 1355 Oxford Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B4H 4R2, Canada
| | - Steven J Cooke
- Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5B6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
61
|
Burger J. Costs and Benefits of Delaying Remediation on Ecological Resources at Contaminated Sites. ECOHEALTH 2019; 16:454-475. [PMID: 31377906 DOI: 10.1007/s10393-019-01437-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2018] [Revised: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 07/15/2019] [Indexed: 05/11/2023]
Abstract
The USA and other nations have massive industrial, radiologic, and chemical legacy wastes on numerous sites, for example from the Cold War and industrial activities. Most of these sites will require remediation (cleanup of contaminants). Prioritization is essential to determine the order of cleanup, leaving some tasks for a later time. This paper examines the potential costs and benefits of delaying remediation on ecological resources on contaminated sites. Aspects to consider include those related to management and planning, source term and pathways, risks and resources, and external drivers (regulations and laws, stakeholders). The US Department of Energy was used as a case study to examine the effects of delaying remediation. The conceptual model and tables provided here can serve as guidance or checklists for site managers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Burger
- Division of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, 604 Allison Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8082, USA.
- Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Insitutute, Rutgers Univesity, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA.
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
62
|
Ruhl JB, Posner SM, Ricketts TH. Engaging policy in science writing: Patterns and strategies. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0220497. [PMID: 31369620 PMCID: PMC6675390 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220497] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2018] [Accepted: 07/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Many scientific researchers aspire to engage policy in their writing, but translating scientific research and findings into policy discussion often requires an understanding of the institutional complexities of legal and policy processes and actors. To examine how researchers have undertaken that challenge, we developed a set of metrics and applied them to articles published in one of the principal academic publication venues for science and policy—Science magazine’s Policy Forum. We reviewed each Policy Forum article published over a five-year period (2011–15), 220 in all. For each article, we assessed the level of policy content based on presence of a stated policy proposal or position and identification of the relevant policy actors and actions, and recorded attributes such as field of science, field of policy, number of references to legal and policy sources, number of authors from law and policy institutions, and number of citations. We find that a handful of science fields dominate publication frequency, but that all fields have produced publications with high policy engagement. Of the attributes, number of references to law and policy sources is correlated positively with level of engagement, whereas number of law and policy authors was fairly constant across all depths of engagement. Surprisingly, level of policy engagement was negatively correlated with the number of citations an article subsequently received. We offer possible explanations for these results and thoughts for authors, editors, and research institutions interested in facilitating robust engagement of policy in scientific writing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J. B. Ruhl
- Vanderbilt University Law School, Nashville, TN, United States of America
- * E-mail:
| | - Stephen M. Posner
- COMPASS, Silver Spring, MD, United States of America
- Gund Institute for Environment, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, United States of America
| | - Taylor H. Ricketts
- Gund Institute for Environment, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, United States of America
- Rubenstein School for Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
63
|
Miller RL, Marsh H, Benham C, Hamann M. A framework for improving the cross‐jurisdictional governance of a marine migratory species. CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE 2019. [DOI: 10.1111/csp2.58] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel L. Miller
- College of Science and EngineeringJames Cook University Townsville Queensland Australia
| | - Helene Marsh
- College of Science and EngineeringJames Cook University Townsville Queensland Australia
| | - Claudia Benham
- College of Science and EngineeringJames Cook University Townsville Queensland Australia
| | - Mark Hamann
- College of Science and EngineeringJames Cook University Townsville Queensland Australia
| |
Collapse
|
64
|
Durant SM, Groom R, Kuloba B, Samna A, Muzuma U, Gadimang P, Mandisodza-Chikerema R, Ipavec A, Mitchell N, Ikanda D, Msuha M. Bridging the divide between scientists and decision-makers: how behavioural ecologists can increase the conservation impact of their research? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2019; 374:20190011. [PMID: 31352894 DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Effective conservation management is underpinned by science. Yet, there are often barriers against the incorporation of up-to-date scientific research into decision-making and policy. Here, we draw on experience from a multi-nation approach to conserve cheetah and African wild dogs across Africa, using relationships between scientists and managers established over more than a decade, to better understand scientific information needs of managers. While our analysis focuses on Africa, many of our findings are likely to be relevant to other regions. Managers view science as critical to their decision-making processes and strongly support scientific research, particularly when research directly addresses their information needs. However, managers reported problems in accessing final results and highlighted the need to access raw ecological data from research undertaken within protected areas. Fundamental to improving the management relevance of scientific research is the need for scientists to engage with managers through all steps of the research process, from project design and implementation through to scientific publication and end-of-project agreements. Effective engagement requires open and clear communication; including agreed processes for access to biodiversity data and submission of final results. In order to foster future scientific endeavours and collaborations, systems should be established to better facilitate information exchange, while also safeguarding the rights of scientists to publish their data and protect their academic freedom. Our analysis also calls for a greater awareness of the geo-political context under which science is undertaken, and for increased scientific participation through an inclusive approach that recognizes, and gives credit to, a wider diversity of scientific contributions and expertise. This article is part of the theme issue 'Linking behaviour to dynamics of populations and communities: application of novel approaches in behavioural ecology to conservation'.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah M Durant
- Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, UK.,Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, NY, USA
| | - Rosemary Groom
- Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, UK
| | | | | | | | - Phemelo Gadimang
- Republic of Botswana Department of Wildlife and National Parks, 439808 Gaborone, Botswana
| | | | - Audrey Ipavec
- Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, UK
| | | | - Dennis Ikanda
- Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute, Arusha, United Republic of Tanzania
| | - Maurus Msuha
- Wildlife Division, Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, 119143 Dar es Salaam, Arusha, United Republic of Tanzania
| |
Collapse
|
65
|
Cristescu RH, Scales KL, Schultz AJ, Miller RL, Schoeman DS, Dique D, Frère CH. Robust science underpinning legislation can create better outcomes for threatened species impacted by infrastructure projects. Anim Conserv 2019. [DOI: 10.1111/acv.12528] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- R. H. Cristescu
- Global Change Ecology Research Group; School of Science and Engineering; University of the Sunshine Coast; Maroochydore QLD Australia
| | - K. L. Scales
- Global Change Ecology Research Group; School of Science and Engineering; University of the Sunshine Coast; Maroochydore QLD Australia
| | - A. J. Schultz
- Global Change Ecology Research Group; School of Science and Engineering; University of the Sunshine Coast; Maroochydore QLD Australia
| | - R. L. Miller
- Global Change Ecology Research Group; School of Science and Engineering; University of the Sunshine Coast; Maroochydore QLD Australia
| | - D. S. Schoeman
- Global Change Ecology Research Group; School of Science and Engineering; University of the Sunshine Coast; Maroochydore QLD Australia
- Centre for African Conservation Ecology; Department of Zoology; Nelson Mandela University; Port Elizabeth South Africa
| | - D. Dique
- Environmental Resources Management Australia Pty Ltd; 201 Leichhardt St QLD 4006 Australia
| | - C. H. Frère
- Global Change Ecology Research Group; School of Science and Engineering; University of the Sunshine Coast; Maroochydore QLD Australia
| |
Collapse
|
66
|
|
67
|
Burger J, Zappalorti RT, Gochfeld M, Jeitner C, DeVito E, Howell J. A paradigm for information needed to protect at-risk species: northern pine snake ( Pituophis melanoleucus) in the pine barrens as a case study. JOURNAL OF TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH. PART A 2019; 82:422-435. [PMID: 31096868 DOI: 10.1080/15287394.2019.1615587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
New methods of examining the risk to endangered, threatened and rare species are required to identify vulnerability. A paradigm for examining risk is presented that describes anthropogenic threats, species activities, and vulnerabilities, and uses Northern pine snakes (Pituophis melanoleucus) in the New Jersey Pine Barrens as a case study. The paradigm includes (1) conceptual model of natural, anthropogenic, and interactive stressors, (2) template of the functional attributes of threats from human activities, and (3) template of effects from different human activities. Pine snake behavior throughout the year was used to examine the temporal overlap in high snake vulnerability periods and desired human activities in a shared habitat. New data on autumn behavior of pine snakes are also provided. Passive integrated transponders (PIT tag) tracking technology indicated that the fall basking activity period is both longer in duration, and at a higher intensity than previously presumed. During the autumn, individual snakes moved in and out of dens an average of 6 times over a two-month period. Younger snakes at a small hibernaculum were more active than those at hibernacula with larger and older snakes. The high activity period of pine snakes overlaps with the timing of preferred off-road-vehicle (ORV) use, controlled burns, and other human activities, increasing snake vulnerability, potentially causing behavioral disruptions, injury, and death. The conceptual model illustrating relationships between attributes of human activity and effects may be utilized to determine risks to other listed species, and those of special concern in different habitats. This paradigm also provides managers with template tools to assess risks to species that may also be used to provide information to the public.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Burger
- a Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Division of Life Sciences , Rutgers University , Piscataway , NJ , USA
- b Ecology and Evolution Graduate Program , Rutgers University , New Brunswick , NJ , USA
| | | | - Michael Gochfeld
- b Ecology and Evolution Graduate Program , Rutgers University , New Brunswick , NJ , USA
- d Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute & Robert Wood Johnson Medical School , Rutgers University , Piscataway , NJ , USA
| | - Christian Jeitner
- a Department of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Division of Life Sciences , Rutgers University , Piscataway , NJ , USA
| | - Emile DeVito
- e Conservation Foundation , Far Hills , NJ , USA
| | - Jason Howell
- f Pinelands Preservation Alliance , Southampton Township , NJ , USA
| |
Collapse
|
68
|
Burger J. A framework for increasing sustainability and reducing risk to ecological resources through integration of remediation planning and implementation. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH 2019; 172:586-595. [PMID: 30875512 DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2019.02.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2019] [Revised: 02/21/2019] [Accepted: 02/22/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Remediation of lands contaminated with radionuclides and hazardous chemicals provides an ongoing challenge for many countries. It is particularly problematic for remediation of old industrial sites remaining from World War II and the Cold War. Remediating and restoring large sites is often costly, time-consuming, and involves complex planning and sequencing, as well as consideration of future land use policies. The goal of remediation is to reduce contamination, reduce risk to humans and the environment, and restore land to productive land uses, and ultimately, to sustainability. Often reducing risk to people takes precedence over protecting ecological resources in overall planning, characterization, and execution of remediation strategies. This paper examines when and how stakeholders, including anyone interested and affected by remediation on ecological resources, can become involved in the planning, decision-making, and implementation of remediation. There is a formal process under federal law (e.g. CERCLA) in the US for examining risk to resources, including indicator species. However, there are other informal points during the cleanup process when managers should consider the value of ecological resources, the public may express their concerns for particular ecological resources, and ecologists may provide data and expert advice early in the process as critical decisions are being made about remediation that impact ecological resources. The framework presented in this paper for increasing sustainability of ecological resources has three periods of intervention 1) major decision points, 2) process interdiction points, and 3) remediation action points. Major decision points include site and problem identification, regional ecological resource and local land use practice determination, remediation goals and options determination, and other local issues. Interdiction points include examining remediation options, and in-depth assessments of ecological resources on-site. Remediation action points are aimed at reducing risk to ecological resources during remediation, and include defining the remediation site and buffer, understanding the effects of timing and sequencing of remediation, education of all remediation personnel, and specific suggestions for reducing risk during active remediation. While this framework was developed for Department of Energy remediation sites, it is applicable to brownfields and other contaminated lands world-wide. The overall goal is to provide interested and affected parties with a framework for protecting and enhancing ecological resources during the planning and execution of remediation on contaminated lands.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Burger
- Division of Life Sciences, Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), and Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
69
|
Godsmark CN, Rother HA. Part of the solution - an engaged scholarship approach for the sustainable reduction of street pesticides and poisonings. Glob Public Health 2019; 14:1535-1545. [PMID: 30887912 DOI: 10.1080/17441692.2019.1590619] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
In low-income townships, pests are rife, a nuisance and are vectors of disease. Although alternatives are available, chemical means of pest control is often the first resort due to lack of knowledge of other methods, convenience and presumed efficacy. The demand for chemical pest control has created a unique business opportunity for informal vendors in South Africa servicing predominately low socio-economic communities. That is the selling of 'street pesticides', which are either containing agricultural pesticides too toxic for domestic use or illegally imported products. Poisonings from street pesticide exposures, particularly in children, are increasingly common and, along with pest-related diseases, creates a double burden of disease. Solutions are needed to decrease these incidences and to develop pest control strategies that are low- or non-toxic. It is imperative that, for sustainable problem-solving, all stakeholders, including vendors, be part of the solution in tackling this public health issue. This manuscript outlines an engaged scholarship approach for developing a sustainable resolution for reducing street pesticide use. This cyclical and iterative approach encompasses: the establishment of relationships, co-creation of solutions, co-implementation, co-monitoring, co-evaluation, co-reflection and co-re-design. The significance of the research and proposed engagement are discussed, as are anticipated challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christie Nicole Godsmark
- Division of Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town , Cape Town , South Africa
| | - Hanna-Andrea Rother
- Division of Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town , Cape Town , South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
70
|
Burger J, Gochfeld M, Kosson DS, Brown KG, Bliss LS, Bunn A, Clarke JH, Mayer HJ, Salisbury JA. The costs of delaying remediation on human, ecological, and eco-cultural resources: Considerations for the Department of Energy: A methodological framework. THE SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT 2019; 649:1054-1064. [PMID: 30308877 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2018] [Revised: 08/16/2018] [Accepted: 08/17/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Remediation and restoration of the Nation's nuclear legacy of radiological and chemical contaminated areas is an ongoing and costly challenge for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). For large sites, such as the Hanford and Savannah River Sites, successful remediation involves complex decisions related to remedies, end-states, timing, and sequencing of cleanup of separate and related contaminated units within a site. Hanford Site cannot clean up every unit simultaneously due to limits in funding, personnel, and technology. This paper addresses one of the major considerations - the consequences of delaying remediation of a unit on different receptors (e.g. people, ecological, and eco-cultural resources), using the DOE Hanford Site as a case study. We develop a list of attributes that managers should consider for successful remediation, examine how delaying remediation could affect workers, the public and ecological resources (including water resources), and use some examples to illustrate potential effects of delays. The factors to consider when deciding whether and how long to delay remediation of a unit include personnel, information and data, funding, equipment, structural integrity, contaminant source, and resource vulnerability. Each of these factors affects receptors differently. Any remediation task may be dependent on other remediation projects, on the availability of transport, containers, interim storage and ultimate disposition decisions, or the availability of trained personnel. Delaying remediation may have consequences for people (e.g. workers, site neighbors), plants, animals, ecosystems, and eco-cultural resources (i.e. those cultural values that depend upon ecological resources). The risks, benefits, and uncertainties for evaluating the consequences of delaying remediation are described and discussed. Assessing the advantages and disadvantages of delaying remediation is important for health professionals, ecologists, resource trustees, regulators, Tribal members, recreationists, fishermen, hunters, conservationists, and a wide range of other stakeholders.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna Burger
- Division of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854-8082, USA; Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA.
| | - Michael Gochfeld
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA; Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA
| | - David S Kosson
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
| | - Kevin G Brown
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
| | - Lisa S Bliss
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
| | - Amoret Bunn
- Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, USA
| | - James H Clarke
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA; Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
| | - Henry J Mayer
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA
| | - Jennifer A Salisbury
- Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP), Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37325, USA
| |
Collapse
|
71
|
Lemieux CJ, Groulx MW, Bocking S, Beechey TJ. Evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations: Implications for management effectiveness. Facets (Ott) 2018. [DOI: 10.1139/facets-2017-0107] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Aichi Biodiversity Target 19 calls on Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to improve, share, transfer, and apply knowledge. In this study, we provide an initial assessment of the state of evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations by examining (1) the value and use of various forms of evidence by managers and (2) the extent to which institutional conditions enable or inhibit the use of evidence in decision-making. Results revealed that although managers value and use many forms of evidence in their decision-making, information produced by staff and their organizations are given priority. Other forms of evidence, such as Indigenous knowledge and peer-reviewed information, are valued and used less. The most significant barriers to evidence-based decision-making were limited financial resources, lack of staff, inadequate timeframes for decision-making, a lack of monitoring programs, and a disconnect between researchers and decision-makers. Overall, our results suggest that the potential benefits of evidence-based approaches are not being maximized in Canada’s protected areas organizations. We propose several recommendations to introduce or improve the use of diverse forms of evidence to enhance management effectiveness of Canada’s protected areas and by extension conservation outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher J. Lemieux
- Department of Geography & Environmental Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON N2L 3C5, Canada
- Canadian Council on Ecological Areas, 91 Cooper Street, Cambridge, ON N3C 2N5, Canada
| | - Mark W. Groulx
- School of Environmental Planning, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC V2N 4Z9, Canada
| | - Stephen Bocking
- Trent School of the Environment, Trent University, Peterborough, ON K9J 0G2, Canada
| | - Tom J. Beechey
- Canadian Council on Ecological Areas, 91 Cooper Street, Cambridge, ON N3C 2N5, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
72
|
Cvitanovic C, Löf MF, Norström AV, Reed MS. Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0203752. [PMID: 30212515 PMCID: PMC6136716 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203752] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2018] [Accepted: 08/06/2018] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Responding to modern day environmental challenges for societal well-being and prosperity necessitates the integration of science into policy and practice. This has spurred the development of novel institutional structures among research organisations aimed at enhancing the impact of environmental science on policy and practice. However, such initiatives are seldom evaluated and even in cases where evaluations are undertaken, the results are rarely made publicly available. As such there is very little empirically grounded guidance available to inform other organisations in this regard. To help address this, the aim of this study is to evaluate the Baltic Eye Project at Stockholm University–a unique team consisting of researchers from different fields, science communicators, journalists and policy analysts–working collectively to support evidence-informed decision-making relating to the sustainable management of the Baltic Sea environment. Specifically, through qualitative interviews, we (1) identify the impacts achieved by the Baltic Eye Project; (2) understand the challenges and barriers experienced throughout the Baltic Eye Project; and (3) highlight the key features that are needed within research organisations to enhance the impact of science on policy and practice. Results show that despite only operating for three years, the Baltic Eye Project has achieved demonstrable impacts on a range of levels: impacts on policy and practice, impacts to individuals working within the organisation and impacts to the broader University. We also identify a range of barriers that have limited impacts to date, such as a lack of clear goals at the establishment of the Baltic Eye Project and existing metrics of academic impact (e.g. number of publications). Finally, based on the experiences of employees at the Baltic Eye Project, we identify the key organisational, individual, financial, material, practical, political, and social features of university-based boundary organisations that have impact on policy and practice. In doing so this paper provides empirically-derived guidance to help other research organisations increase their capacity to achieve tangible impacts on environmental policy and practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Cvitanovic
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
- CSIRO Oceans & Atmosphere, Hobart, Australia
- * E-mail:
| | - Marie F. Löf
- Baltic Sea Centre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Mark S. Reed
- Centre for Rural Economy and Institute for Agri-Food Research and Innovation, School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
73
|
Cvitanovic C, Hobday AJ. Building optimism at the environmental science-policy-practice interface through the study of bright spots. Nat Commun 2018; 9:3466. [PMID: 30154434 PMCID: PMC6113225 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05977-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2018] [Accepted: 08/07/2018] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Effectively translating scientific knowledge into policy and practice is essential for helping humanity navigate contemporary environmental challenges. The likelihood of achieving this can be increased through the study of bright spots—instances where science has successfully influenced policy and practice—and the sense of optimism that this can inspire.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Cvitanovic
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS, Australia. .,Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia.
| | - Alistair J Hobday
- CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart, TAS, Australia.,Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
74
|
Djenontin INS, Meadow AM. The art of co-production of knowledge in environmental sciences and management: lessons from international practice. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2018; 61:885-903. [PMID: 29623401 DOI: 10.1007/s00267-018-1028-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2017] [Accepted: 03/13/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
This review paper addresses the challenging question of "how to" design and implement co-production of knowledge in climate science and other environmental and agricultural sciences. Based on a grounded theory review of nine (9) published case studies of transdisciplinary and collaborative research projects, the paper offers a set of common themes regarding specific components and processes for the design, implementation, and achievement of co-production of knowledge work, which represent the "Modus Operandi" of knowledge co-production. The analysis focuses on practical methodological guidance based on lessons from how different research teams have approached the challenges of complex collaborative research. We begin by identifying broad factors or actions that inhibit or facilitate the process, then highlight specific practices associated with co-production of knowledge and necessary competencies for undertaking co-production. We provide insights on issues such as the integration of social and professional cultures, gender and social equity, and power dynamics, and illustrate the different ways in which researchers have addressed these issues. By exploring the specific practices involved in knowledge co-production, this paper provides guidance to researchers on how to navigate different possibilities of the process of conducting transdisciplinary and co-production of knowledge research projects that best fit their research context, stakeholder needs, and research team capacities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ida Nadia S Djenontin
- School of Geography and Development, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
- Institute of the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
- Department of Geography, Environment, and Spatial Sciences (GESS), Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA.
| | - Alison M Meadow
- Institute of the Environment, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
75
|
Hering JG. Implementation Science for the Environment. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY 2018; 52:5555-5560. [PMID: 29693368 DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b00874] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
The establishment of the field of implementation science was motivated by the understanding that medical and health research alone is insufficient to generate better health outcomes. With strong support from funding agencies for medical research, implementation science promotes the application of a structured framework or model in the implementation of research-based results, specifically evidence-based practices (EBPs). Furthermore, explicit consideration is given to the context of EBP implementation (i.e., socio-economic, political, cultural, and institutional factors that could affect the implementation process). Finally, implementation is monitored in a robust and rigorous way. Today, the field of implementation science supports conferences and professional societies as well as one dedicated journal and numerous others with related content. The goal of these various activities is to reduce the estimated, average "bench to bedside" time lag of 17 years for uptake of EBPs from health research into routine practice. Despite similar time lags and impediments to uptake in the environmental domain, a parallel field of implementation science for the environment has not (yet) emerged. Although some parallels in needs and opportunities can easily be drawn between the health and environmental domains, a detailed mapping exercise is needed to understand which aspects of implementation science could be applied in the environmental domain either directly or in a modified form. This would allow an accelerated development of implementation science for the environment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Janet G Hering
- Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute for Aquatic Science and Technology , CH-8600 Dübendorf , Switzerland
- Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zürich, IBP , CH-8092 Zürich , Switzerland
- Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), ENAC , CH-1015 Lausanne , Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
76
|
Bednarek AT, Wyborn C, Cvitanovic C, Meyer R, Colvin RM, Addison PFE, Close SL, Curran K, Farooque M, Goldman E, Hart D, Mannix H, McGreavy B, Parris A, Posner S, Robinson C, Ryan M, Leith P. Boundary spanning at the science-policy interface: the practitioners' perspectives. SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE 2018; 13:1175-1183. [PMID: 30147800 PMCID: PMC6086300 DOI: 10.1007/s11625-018-0550-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2017] [Accepted: 03/08/2018] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
Cultivating a more dynamic relationship between science and policy is essential for responding to complex social challenges such as sustainability. One approach to doing so is to "span the boundaries" between science and decision making and create a more comprehensive and inclusive knowledge exchange process. The exact definition and role of boundary spanning, however, can be nebulous. Indeed, boundary spanning often gets conflated and confused with other approaches to connecting science and policy, such as science communication, applied science, and advocacy, which can hinder progress in the field of boundary spanning. To help overcome this, in this perspective, we present the outcomes from a recent workshop of boundary-spanning practitioners gathered to (1) articulate a definition of what it means to work at this interface ("boundary spanning") and the types of activities it encompasses; (2) present a value proposition of these efforts to build better relationships between science and policy; and (3) identify opportunities to more effectively mainstream boundary-spanning activities. Drawing on our collective experiences, we suggest that boundary spanning has the potential to increase the efficiency by which useful research is produced, foster the capacity to absorb new evidence and perspectives into sustainability decision-making, enhance research relevance for societal challenges, and open new policy windows. We provide examples from our work that illustrate this potential. By offering these propositions for the value of boundary spanning, we hope to encourage a more robust discussion of how to achieve evidence-informed decision-making for sustainability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - C. Wyborn
- Luc Hoffmann Institute, WWF International, Gland, Switzerland
- College of Forestry and Conservation, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana USA
| | - C. Cvitanovic
- Centre for Marine Socioecology, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania Australia
| | - R. Meyer
- Center for Community and Citizen Science, University of California, Davis, California USA
| | - R. M. Colvin
- Climate Change Institute, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| | | | - S. L. Close
- The Pew Charitable Trusts, Washington, DC, USA
| | - K. Curran
- The Pew Charitable Trusts, Washington, DC, USA
| | - M. Farooque
- Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona USA
| | - E. Goldman
- COMPASS Science Communication, Portland, Oregon USA
| | - D. Hart
- Senator George J. Mitchell Center for Sustainability Solutions, School of Biology and Ecology, University of Maine, Orono, Maine USA
| | - H. Mannix
- COMPASS Science Communication, Portland, Oregon USA
| | - B. McGreavy
- Department of Communication and Journalism, Senator George J. Mitchell Center for Sustainability Solutions, University of Maine, Orono, Maine USA
| | - A. Parris
- Science and Resilience Institute at Jamaica Bay, City University of New York, Brooklyn College, New York, New York USA
| | - S. Posner
- COMPASS Science Communication, Portland, Oregon USA
- Gund Institute for Environment, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont USA
| | - C. Robinson
- Engaging Scientists and Engineers in Policy, Washington, DC, USA
| | - M. Ryan
- Luc Hoffmann Institute, WWF International, Gland, Switzerland
- University of Cambridge Conservation Research Institute, Cambridge, UK
| | - P. Leith
- Tasmanian Institute of Agriculture, School of Land and Food, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania Australia
| |
Collapse
|
77
|
A stakeholder visioning exercise to enhance chronic care and the integration of community pharmacy services. Res Social Adm Pharm 2018; 15:31-44. [PMID: 29496521 DOI: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.02.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2017] [Revised: 12/22/2017] [Accepted: 02/15/2018] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Collaboration between relevant stakeholders in health service planning enables service contextualization and facilitates its success and integration into practice. Although community pharmacy services (CPSs) aim to improve patients' health and quality of life, their integration in primary care is far from ideal. Key stakeholders for the development of a CPS intended at preventing cardiovascular disease were identified in a previous stakeholder analysis. Engaging these stakeholders to create a shared vision is the subsequent step to focus planning directions and lay sound foundations for future work. OBJECTIVES This study aims to develop a stakeholder-shared vision of a cardiovascular care model which integrates community pharmacists and to identify initiatives to achieve this vision. METHODS A participatory visioning exercise involving 13 stakeholders across the healthcare system was performed. A facilitated workshop, structured in three parts (i.e., introduction; developing the vision; defining the initiatives towards the vision), was designed. The Chronic Care Model inspired the questions that guided the development of the vision. Workshop transcripts, researchers' notes and materials produced by participants were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS Stakeholders broadened the objective of the vision to focus on the management of chronic diseases. Their vision yielded 7 principles for advanced chronic care: patient-centered care; multidisciplinary team approach; shared goals; long-term care relationships; evidence-based practice; ease of access to healthcare settings and services by patients; and good communication and coordination. Stakeholders also delineated six environmental factors that can influence their implementation. Twenty-four initiatives to achieve the developed vision were defined. CONCLUSIONS The principles and factors identified as part of the stakeholder shared-vision were combined in a preliminary model for chronic care. This model and initiatives can guide policy makers as well as healthcare planners and researchers to develop and integrate chronic disease services, namely CPSs, in real-world settings.
Collapse
|
78
|
Bridging science and practice in conservation: Deficits and challenges from a research perspective. Basic Appl Ecol 2017. [DOI: 10.1016/j.baae.2017.08.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
|
79
|
Allen W, Cruz J, Warburton B. How Decision Support Systems Can Benefit from a Theory of Change Approach. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2017; 59:956-965. [PMID: 28280913 DOI: 10.1007/s00267-017-0839-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2016] [Accepted: 02/17/2017] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
Decision support systems are now mostly computer and internet-based information systems designed to support land managers with complex decision-making. However, there is concern that many environmental and agricultural decision support systems remain underutilized and ineffective. Recent efforts to improve decision support systems use have focused on enhancing stakeholder participation in their development, but a mismatch between stakeholders' expectations and the reality of decision support systems outputs continues to limit uptake. Additional challenges remain in problem-framing and evaluation. We propose using an outcomes-based approach called theory of change in conjunction with decision support systems development to support both wider problem-framing and outcomes-based monitoring and evaluation. The theory of change helps framing by placing the decision support systems within a wider context. It highlights how decision support systems use can "contribute" to long-term outcomes, and helps align decision support systems outputs with these larger goals. We illustrate the benefits of linking decision support systems development and application with a theory of change approach using an example of pest rabbit management in Australia. We develop a theory of change that outlines the activities required to achieve the outcomes desired from an effective rabbit management program, and two decision support systems that contribute to specific aspects of decision making in this wider problem context. Using a theory of change in this way should increase acceptance of the role of decision support systems by end-users, clarify their limitations and, importantly, increase effectiveness of rabbit management. The use of a theory of change should benefit those seeking to improve decision support systems design, use and, evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Will Allen
- Learning for Sustainability, PO Box 3018, Christchurch, 8244, New Zealand.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
80
|
Illing B, Rummer JL. Physiology can contribute to better understanding, management, and conservation of coral reef fishes. CONSERVATION PHYSIOLOGY 2017; 5:cox005. [PMID: 28852508 PMCID: PMC5570121 DOI: 10.1093/conphys/cox005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2016] [Revised: 12/27/2016] [Accepted: 01/31/2017] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Abstract
Coral reef fishes, like many other marine organisms, are affected by anthropogenic stressors such as fishing and pollution and, owing to climate change, are experiencing increasing water temperatures and ocean acidification. Against the backdrop of these various stressors, a mechanistic understanding of processes governing individual organismal performance is the first step for identifying drivers of coral reef fish population dynamics. In fact, physiological measurements can help to reveal potential cause-and-effect relationships and enable physiologists to advise conservation management by upscaling results from cellular and individual organismal levels to population levels. Here, we highlight studies that include physiological measurements of coral reef fishes and those that give advice for their conservation. A literature search using combined physiological, conservation and coral reef fish key words resulted in ~1900 studies, of which only 99 matched predefined requirements. We observed that, over the last 20 years, the combination of physiological and conservation aspects in studies on coral reef fishes has received increased attention. Most of the selected studies made their physiological observations at the whole organism level and used their findings to give conservation advice on population dynamics, habitat use or the potential effects of climate change. The precision of the recommendations differed greatly and, not surprisingly, was least concrete when studies examined the effects of projected climate change scenarios. Although more and more physiological studies on coral reef fishes include conservation aspects, there is still a lack of concrete advice for conservation managers, with only very few published examples of physiological findings leading to improved management practices. We conclude with a call to action to foster better knowledge exchange between natural scientists and conservation managers to translate physiological findings more effectively in order to obtain evidence-based and adaptive management strategies for the conservation of coral reef fishes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Björn Illing
- Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811, Australia
- Institute of Hydrobiology and Fisheries Science, University of Hamburg, Hamburg D-22767, Germany
| | - Jodie L. Rummer
- Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811, Australia
| |
Collapse
|