1
|
Blatch-Jones AJ, Lakin K, Thomas S. A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture. F1000Res 2024; 13:324. [PMID: 38826614 PMCID: PMC11140362 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.147599.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/18/2024] [Indexed: 06/04/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ' What does the evidence say about the 'problem' with 'poor' research culture, what are the benefits of 'good' research culture, and what does 'good' look like?' Aims To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution. Methods A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals' well-being, career progression and performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones
- School of Healthcare Enterprise and Innovation, University of Southampton, Southampton, England, SO16 7NS, UK
| | - Kay Lakin
- Hatch, School of Healthcare Enterprise and Innovation, University of Southampton, Southampton, England, SO16 7NS, UK
| | - Sarah Thomas
- Hatch, School of Healthcare Enterprise and Innovation, University of Southampton, Southampton, England, SO16 7NS, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang Z, Chen T, Yang L, Chapman CA, Fan P. Effects of protected area coverage and research on conservation status of primates globally. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2024:e14311. [PMID: 38853694 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.14311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/28/2023] [Revised: 03/10/2024] [Accepted: 04/22/2024] [Indexed: 06/11/2024]
Abstract
Conducting conservation research and establishing protected areas (PAs) based on research results are critical to biodiversity conservation. However, the effect of research and PAs on conservation of threatened species has rarely been evaluated simultaneously. We collected data on PAs from 2000 for 2021 and determined the number of publications on global primates (published from 1950 to 2021) to assess the effect of PAs, research, and biological and socioeconomic factors on the current International Union for Conservation of Nature endangered status and change in status. We used the MCMCglmm package to conduct a phylogenetic comparative analysis to control the phylogenetic relationship of primate species. The status of 24.6% (82 of 333) of species assessed at least twice declined. Only the black lion tamarin (Leontopithecus chrysopygus) had an improved status. Species with status declines mostly occurred on the south coast of West Africa and in Madagascar. PAs covered 22.1% of each species' range. Forest loss in PAs (5.5%) was significantly lower than forest loss within 5 km outside PAs (13.8%), suggesting PAs effectively mitigated forest loss. Both the median number of total publications and conservation publications on critically endangered species were higher than those of other categories. Models showed that PA coverage and number of publications or conservation-focused publications were not related to current status or change in status over time. A decline in status was not related to creation of PAs or increase of research since the last assessment. Our results suggest that current PAs and research are not reversing the extinction crisis of global primates. Doing more conservation-oriented research, strengthening management of current PAs, and expanding PAs will be needed to protect primates globally.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhining Wang
- School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Tao Chen
- School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Li Yang
- School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Colin A Chapman
- Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
- Biology Department, Vancouver Island University, Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
- School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
- The College of Life Sciences, Northwest University, Xi'an, China
| | - Pengfei Fan
- School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Schoonemann J, Nagelkerke J, Seuntjens TG, Osinga N, van Liere D. Applying XGBoost and SHAP to Open Source Data to Identify Key Drivers and Predict Likelihood of Wolf Pair Presence. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 2024; 73:1072-1087. [PMID: 38372749 DOI: 10.1007/s00267-024-01941-1] [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: 09/05/2023] [Accepted: 01/20/2024] [Indexed: 02/20/2024]
Abstract
Wolves have returned to Germany since 2000. Numbers have grown to 209 territorial pairs in 2021. XGBoost machine learning, combined with SHAP analysis is applied to predict German wolf pair presence in 2022 for 10 × 10 km grid cells. Model input consisted of 38 variables from open sources, covering the period 2000 to 2021. The XGBoost model predicted well, with 0.91 as the AUC. SHAP analysis ranked the variables: distance to the closest neighboring wolf pair was the main driver for a grid cell to become occupied by a wolf pair. The clustering tendency of related wolves seems to be an important explanatory factor here. Second was the percentage of wooded area. The next eight variables related to wolf presence in the preceding year, except at fifth, eighth and tenth position in the total order: human density (square root) in the grid, percentage arable land and road density respectively. Other variables including the occurrence of wild prey were the weakest predictors. The SHAP analysis also provided crucial added value in identifying a variable that had threshold values where its contribution to the prediction changed from positive to negative or vice versa. For instance, low density of people increased the probability of wolf pair presence, whereas a high density decreased this probability. Cumulative lift techniques showed that the model performed almost four times better than random prediction. The combination of XGBoost, SHAP and cumulative lift techniques is new in wolf management and conservation, allowing for the focusing of educational and financial resources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Nynke Osinga
- Institute for Coexistence with Wildlife, Heuvelweg 7, 7218 BD, Almen, Nederland
| | - Diederik van Liere
- Institute for Coexistence with Wildlife, Heuvelweg 7, 7218 BD, Almen, Nederland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Matley JK, Klinard NV, Martins AB, Oakley-Cogan A, Huveneers C, Vandergoot CS, Fisk AT. TrackdAT, an acoustic telemetry metadata dataset to support aquatic animal tracking research. Sci Data 2024; 11:143. [PMID: 38291027 PMCID: PMC10828395 DOI: 10.1038/s41597-024-02969-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 02/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Data on the movement and space use of aquatic animals are crucial to understand complex interactions among biotic and abiotic components of ecosystems and facilitate effective conservation and management. Acoustic telemetry (AT) is a leading method for studying the movement ecology of aquatic animals worldwide, yet the ability to efficiently access study information from AT research is currently lacking, limiting advancements in its application. Here, we describe TrackdAT, an open-source metadata dataset where AT research parameters are catalogued to provide scientists, managers, and other stakeholders with the ability to efficiently identify and evaluate existing peer-reviewed research. Extracted metadata encompasses key information about biological and technical aspects of research, providing a comprehensive summary of existing AT research. TrackdAT currently hosts information from 2,412 journal articles published from 1969 to 2022 spanning 614 species and 380,289 tagged animals. TrackdAT has the potential to enable regional and global mobilization of knowledge, increased opportunities for collaboration, greater stakeholder engagement, and optimization of future ecological research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jordan K Matley
- College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, 5042, Australia.
| | - Natalie V Klinard
- Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada
| | | | - Arun Oakley-Cogan
- Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada
| | - Charlie Huveneers
- College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, 5042, Australia
| | | | - Aaron T Fisk
- Great Lakes Institute for Environment Research, University of Windsor, Windsor, ON, N9B 3P4, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fredston AL, Lowndes JSS. Welcoming More Participation in Open Data Science for the Oceans. ANNUAL REVIEW OF MARINE SCIENCE 2024; 16:537-549. [PMID: 37418835 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-marine-041723-094741] [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: 07/09/2023]
Abstract
Open science is a global movement happening across all research fields. Enabled by technology and the open web, it builds on years of efforts by individuals, grassroots organizations, institutions, and agencies. The goal is to share knowledge and broaden participation in science, from early ideation to making research outputs openly accessible to all (open access). With an emphasis on transparency and collaboration, the open science movement dovetails with efforts to increase diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in science and society. The US Biden-Harris Administration and many other US government agencies have declared 2023 the Year of Open Science, providing a great opportunity to boost participation in open science for the oceans. For researchers day-to-day, open science is a critical piece of modern analytical workflows with increasing amounts of data. Therefore, we focus this article on open data science-the tooling and people enabling reproducible, transparent, inclusive practices for data-intensive research-and its intersection with the marine sciences. We discuss the state of various dimensions of open science and argue that technical advancements have outpaced our field's culture change to incorporate them. Increasing inclusivity and technical skill building are interlinked and must be prioritized within the marine science community to find collaborative solutions for responding to climate change and other threats to marine biodiversity and society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexa L Fredston
- Department of Ocean Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, California, USA;
| | - Julia S Stewart Lowndes
- National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Buschke FT, Capitani C, Sow EH, Khaemba Y, Kaplin BA, Skowno A, Chiawo D, Hirsch T, Ellwood ER, Clements H, Child MF, Huber PR, von Staden L, Hagenimana T, Killion AK, Mindje M, Mpakairi KS, Raymond M, Matlombe D, Mbeya D, von Hase A. Make global biodiversity information useful to national decision-makers. Nat Ecol Evol 2023; 7:1953-1956. [PMID: 37803167 DOI: 10.1038/s41559-023-02226-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - El Hadji Sow
- Centre de Suivi Ecologique (CSE), Observatoire pour la Biodiversité et les Aires Protégées d'Afrique de l'Ouest (OBAPAO), Dakar, Senegal
- Departement de Géographie, l'Université Gaston Berger de Saint-Louis, Saint-Louis, Senegal
| | - Yvonne Khaemba
- Eastern and Southern African Regional Office, International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Beth A Kaplin
- Center of Excellence in Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Andrew Skowno
- South African National Biodiversity Institute, Cape Town, South Africa
- Department of Biological Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - David Chiawo
- Centre for Biodiversity Information Development, Strathmore University, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Tim Hirsch
- Global Biodiversity Information Facility, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | - Hayley Clements
- Centre for Sustainability Transitions, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
- Helsinki Lab of Interdisciplinary Conservation Science, Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Matthew F Child
- South African National Biodiversity Institute, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Patrick R Huber
- Institute of the Environment, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA
| | - Lize von Staden
- South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria, South Africa
| | - Thacien Hagenimana
- Center of Excellence in Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda
| | - Alexander K Killion
- Center for Biodiversity and Global Change, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Mapendo Mindje
- Center of Excellence in Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda
| | | | | | | | - Dickson Mbeya
- Malawi University of Science and Technology, Thyolo, Malawi
| | - Amrei von Hase
- Wildlife Conservation Society COMBO+, Cape Town, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Lewis RJ, Marstein KE, Grytnes JA. Incentivising open ecological data using blockchain technology. Sci Data 2023; 10:591. [PMID: 37679374 PMCID: PMC10485047 DOI: 10.1038/s41597-023-02496-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2023] [Accepted: 08/21/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Robert John Lewis
- Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Bergen, Norway.
- Norwegian Institute for Bio-economy Research, Bergen, Norway.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
The term 'open science' refers to a range of methods, tools, platforms and practices that aim to make scientific research more accessible, transparent, reproducible and reliable. This includes, for example, sharing code, data and research materials, embracing new publishing formats such as registered reports and preprints, pursuing replication studies and reanalyses, optimising statistical approaches to improve evidence assessment and re-evaluating institutional incentives. The ongoing shift towards open science practices is partly due to mounting evidence that studies across disciplines suffer from biases, underpowered designs and irreproducible or non-replicable results. It also stems from a general desire amongst many researchers to reduce hyper-competitivity in science and instead promote collaborative research that benefits science and society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael G Bertram
- Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Zoology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden; School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
| | - Josefin Sundin
- Department of Aquatic Resources, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Drottningholm, Sweden
| | - Dominique G Roche
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada; Institut de Biologie, Université de Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel, Switzerland
| | | | - Eli S J Thoré
- Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden; Laboratory of Animal Ecology, Global Change and Sustainable Development, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; TRANSfarm - Science, Engineering & Technology Group, KU Leuven, Lovenjoel, Belgium
| | - Tomas Brodin
- Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental Studies, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Carr Kelman C, Barton CJ, Whitman K, Lhoest S, Anderson DM, Gerber LR. Five approaches to producing actionable science in conservation. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2023; 37:e14039. [PMID: 36511152 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.14039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2022] [Revised: 07/26/2022] [Accepted: 09/06/2022] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
The knowledge produced by conservation scientists must be actionable in order to address urgent conservation challenges. To understand the process of creating actionable science, we interviewed 71 conservation scientists who had participated in 1 of 3 fellowship programs focused on training scientists to become agents of change. Using a grounded theory approach, we identified 16 activities that these researchers employed to make their scientific products more actionable. Some activities were more common than others and, arguably, more foundational. We organized these activities into 3 nested categories (motivations, strategies, and tactics). Using a co-occurrence matrix, we found that most activities were positively correlated. These correlations allowed us to identify 5 approaches, framed as profiles, to actionable science: the discloser, focused on open access; the educator, focused on science communication; the networker, focused on user needs and building relationships; the collaborator, focused on boundary spanning; and the pluralist, focused on knowledge coproduction resulting in valuable outcomes for all parties. These profiles build on one another in a hierarchy determined by their complexity and level of engagement, their potential to support actionable science, and their proximity to ideal coproduction with knowledge users. Our results provide clear guidance for conservation scientists to generate actionable science to address the global biodiversity conservation challenge.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Candice Carr Kelman
- Center for Biodiversity Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
- School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
| | - Chris J Barton
- Center for Biodiversity Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
- School for the Future of Innovation in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
| | - Kyle Whitman
- Office of University Affairs, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
| | - Simon Lhoest
- Center for Biodiversity Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
- Forest is Life, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liège, Gembloux, Belgium
| | - Derrick M Anderson
- Center for Biodiversity Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
- ASU School of Public Affairs, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Leah R Gerber
- Center for Biodiversity Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
- School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Nuijten RJM, Katzner TE, Allen AM, Bijleveld AI, Boorsma T, Börger L, Cagnacci F, Hart T, Henley MA, Herren RM, Kok EMA, Maree B, Nebe B, Shohami D, Vogel SM, Walker P, Heitkönig IMA, Milner‐Gulland EJ. Priorities for translating goodwill between movement ecologists and conservation practitioners into effective collaboration. CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE 2022. [DOI: 10.1111/csp2.12870] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Rascha J. M. Nuijten
- Interdisciplinary Centre for Conservation Science, Department of Biology University of Oxford Oxford United Kingdom
- Wildlife Ecology and Conservation Wageningen University and Research Wageningen The Netherlands
| | - Todd E. Katzner
- U.S. Geological Survey Forest and Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center Boise Idaho USA
| | - Andrew M. Allen
- Department of Animal Ecology Netherlands Institute of Ecology (NIOO‐KNAW) Wageningen The Netherlands
- Department of Animal Ecology and Physiology Radboud University Nijmegen The Netherlands
| | - Allert I. Bijleveld
- Department of Coastal Systems NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Den Burg The Netherlands
| | - Tjalle Boorsma
- Asociación Civil Armonía Santa Cruz de la Sierra Bolivia
| | - Luca Börger
- Department of Biosciences Swansea University Swansea UK
| | - Francesca Cagnacci
- Animal Ecology Unit, Research and Innovation Centre Fondazione Edmund Mach San Michele all'Adige Italy
| | - Tom Hart
- Department of Zoology University of Oxford Oxford UK
| | - Michelle A. Henley
- Applied Behavioural Ecology and Environmental Research Unit University of South Africa Pretoria South Africa
- Elephants Alive Limpopo South Africa
| | | | - Eva M. A. Kok
- Department of Coastal Systems NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Den Burg The Netherlands
| | | | | | - David Shohami
- Movement Ecology Lab, Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, Faculty of Science The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jerusalem Israel
| | - Susanne Marieke Vogel
- Center for Biodiversity Dynamics in a Changing World (BIOCHANGE), Department of Biology Aarhus University Aarhus C Denmark
- Section for Ecoinformatics and Biodiversity, Department of Biology Aarhus University Aarhus C Denmark
| | | | - Ignas M. A. Heitkönig
- Wildlife Ecology and Conservation Wageningen University and Research Wageningen The Netherlands
| | - E. J. Milner‐Gulland
- Interdisciplinary Centre for Conservation Science, Department of Biology University of Oxford Oxford United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Galla SJ, Mittan-Moreau CS, Barbosa S. Capturing conservation in the post-genomics era: a book review of “Conservation and Genomics of Populations.”. CONSERV GENET 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s10592-022-01481-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
|
12
|
Chown SL. Macrophysiology for decision‐making. J Zool (1987) 2022. [DOI: 10.1111/jzo.13029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- S. L. Chown
- Securing Antarctica's Environmental Future, School of Biological Sciences Monash University Melbourne Victoria Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Piczak ML, Brooks JL, Bard B, Bihun CJ, Howarth A, Jeanson AL, LaRochelle L, Bennett JR, Lapointe NWR, Mandrak NE, Cooke SJ. Revisiting the challenge: perspectives on Canada’s freshwater fisheries policies three decades after the Pearse Report. Facets (Ott) 2022. [DOI: 10.1139/facets-2021-0145] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2022] Open
Abstract
A seminal report by Peter H. Pearse (1988; Rising to the Challenge: A New Policy for Canada’s Freshwater Fisheries, Canadian Wildlife Federation, Ottawa) outlined 62 policy recommendations focused on the management of Canada’s inland fisheries. Over three decades later, freshwater ecosystems and inland fisheries in Canada are still facing similar challenges with many emerging ones that could not have been foreseen. Here, we reflect on the contemporary relevance of the Pearse Report and propose recommendations that policy makers should consider. Broadly, our recommendations are: (1) manage fishes, fisheries, and habitat using a holistic co-management framework, with clearly defined fishery jurisdictions and partnerships with Indigenous governments; (2) engage in transparent, inclusive, and agile research to support decision-making; (3) facilitate knowledge co-production, involving interdisciplinary projects with diverse groups of actors and sectors including Indigenous Peoples, anglers, policy makers, scientists/researchers, governments, and the public; (4) embrace technological advances to support freshwater fisheries stock assessment and management; and (5) align policy and management activities in Canada with global initiatives related to increasing the sustainability of inland fisheries. We advocate for an updated comprehensive report such as the Pearse Report to ensure that we embrace robust, inclusive, and sustainable management strategies and policies for Canada’s inland fisheries for the next 30 years. It is time to again rise to the challenge.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan L. Piczak
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Jill L. Brooks
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Brittany Bard
- Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
| | | | - Andrew Howarth
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Amanda L. Jeanson
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa, ON K1A 0E6, Canada
| | - Luc LaRochelle
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Joseph R. Bennett
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Institute of Environmental and Interdisciplinary Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
| | - Nicolas W. R. Lapointe
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Canadian Wildlife Federation, Ottawa, ON K2M 2W1, Canada
| | - Nicholas E. Mandrak
- Department of Biological Science, University of Toronto Scarborough, Toronto, ON M1C 1A4, Canada
| | - Steven J. Cooke
- Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada
- Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa, ON K1A 0E6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Mekonnen A, Downs C, Effiom EO, Kibaja M, Lawes MJ, Omeja P, Ratsoavina FM, Razafindratsima O, Sarkar D, Stenseth NC, Chapman CA. Can I afford to publish? A dilemma for African scholars. Ecol Lett 2021; 25:711-715. [PMID: 34957647 DOI: 10.1111/ele.13949] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/31/2021] [Revised: 11/17/2021] [Accepted: 11/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
With open-access publishing authors often pay an article processing charge and subsequently their article is freely available online. These charges are beyond the reach of most African academics. Thus, the trend towards open-access publishing will shift the business model from a pay-wall model, where access to literature is limited, to a pay-to-publish one, where African scholars cannot afford to publish. We explore the costs of publishing and the ability of African scholars to afford to publish via open access in top journals. Three-quarters of the 40 top ecology journals required payment for open-access publishing (average cost $3150). Paying such fees is a hardship for African scholars as grant funding is not available and it is not feasible to pay the fees themselves as salaries are low. We encourage funders and publishers to facilitate an equitable publishing model that allows African scholars to make their research available through open-access publishing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Addisu Mekonnen
- Department of Wildlife and Ecotourism Management, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia.,Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.,Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Colleen Downs
- School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
| | - Edu O Effiom
- Cross River State Forestry Commission, Calabar, Nigeria
| | - Mohamed Kibaja
- Department of Zoology and Wildlife Conservation, University of Dar Essalam, Dar Essalam, Tanzania
| | - Michael J Lawes
- School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
| | - Patrick Omeja
- Makerere University Biological Field Station, Fort Portal, Uganda
| | | | - Onja Razafindratsima
- Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA
| | - Dipto Sarkar
- Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nils Chr Stenseth
- Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.,Department of Zoological Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
| | - Colin A Chapman
- School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.,Wilson Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.,Department of Anthropology, The George Washington University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA.,Shaanxi Key Laboratory for Animal Conservation, Northwest University, Xi'an, China
| |
Collapse
|