nach oben

Environmental Management

Erschienen in:

20.11.2021

Natural Resource Managers Use and Value Western-Based Science, but Barriers to Access Persist

verfasst von: Morgan L. Piczak, Andrew N. Kadykalo, Steven J. Cooke, Nathan Young

Erschienen in: Environmental Management | Ausgabe 1/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Natural resources management (NRM) is complex and relies on decisions supported by evidence, including Western-based science (WBS) and Indigenous and local knowledge. However, it has been shown that there is a disconnect between WBS and its application, whereby managers often draw on non-empirical sources of information (i.e., intuition or advice from colleagues). This article focuses on the role of WBS in decisions made in management of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the province of British Columbia, Canada. We conducted open-ended interviews with NRM branches of Indigenous and parliamentary governments, as well as with nongovernmental stakeholder groups, to examine (a) sources of WBS consulted in decision-making and (b) barriers to accessing WBS by managers. We found that respondents involved with NRM relied on a diverse set of sources for WBS, seldom relying exclusively on one source. However, respondents relied more on internal sources (government databases) compared to external ones (peer-reviewed journal articles). We also found that respondents described WBS as valuable and generally accessible, yet barriers were identified with respect to the interface and organization of government grey data and literature, paywalls associated with peer-reviewed journals and articles, and institutional capacity, time, and support. We recommend strategies and tools to facilitate accessibility of WBS in support of bridging the knowledge-action divide, including increased publishing of open access data/articles, systematic reviews, use of knowledge brokers, specialized WBS training, and knowledge co-production. It is our hope that identification of barriers and the implementation of improved access to WBS will result in more effective NRM by giving managers access to the tools and knowledge they need for evidence-based decision-making.

Vorheriger Artikel The Changes in Climate Change Concern, Responsibility Assumption and Impact on Climate-friendly Behaviour in EU from the Paris Agreement Until 2019

Nächster Artikel Have farmers had enough of experts?

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Addison PFE, Cook CN, de Bie K (2016) Conservation practitioners’ perspectives on decision triggers for evidence-based management. J Appl Ecol 53:1351–1357. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12734CrossRef

Andrachuk M, Kadykalo AN, Cooke SJ, Young N, Nguyen VM (2021) Fisheries knowledge exchange and mobilization through a network of policy and practice actors. Environ Sci Policy 125:157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.08.023CrossRef

Arlettaz R, Schaub M, Fournier J, Reichlin TS, Sierro A, Watson JEM, Braunish V (2010) From publications to public actions: when conservation biologists bridge the gap between research and implementation. BioScience 60:835–842. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2010.60.10.10CrossRef

Artelle KA, Reynolds JD, Treves A, Walsh JC, Paquet PC, Darimont CT (2018) Hallmarks of science missing from North American wildlife management. Sci Adv 4:eaao0167. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao0167CrossRef

Axinn W, Pearce L (2006) Mixed method data collection strategies. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRef

Bayless HR, Wilcox A, Stewart GB, Randall NP (2012) Does research infromation meet the needs of stakeholders? Exploring evidence selection in the global management of invasive species. Evid Policy 8:37–56. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426412X620128CrossRef

Brugnach M, Dewulf ARPJ, Henriksen HJ, Van der Keur P (2011) More is not always better: coping with ambiguity in natural resources management. J Environ Manag 92:78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.08.029CrossRef

Cook CN, Carter RW, Fuller RA, Hockings M (2013) Managers consider multiple lines of evidence important for biodiversity management decisions. J Environ Manag 113:341–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.09.002CrossRef

Cook CN, Hockings M, Carter RW (2010) Conservation in the dark? The information used to support management decisions. Front Ecol Environ 8:181–186. https://doi.org/10.1890/090020CrossRef

Cook CN, Mascia MB, Schwartz MW, Possingham HP, Fuller RA (2012) Achieving conservation sciencce that bridges the knowledge-action boundary. Conserv Biol 27:669CrossRef

Cooke SJ, Nguyen VM, Chapman JM, Reid AJ, Landsman SJ, Young N, Hinch SG et al. (2020a) Knowledge co-production: a pathway to effective fisheries management, conservation, and governance. Fisheries 46:89–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsh.10512CrossRef

Cooke SJ, Rytwinski T, Taylor JJ, Nyboer EA, Nguyen VM, Bennett JR, Young N, Aitken S, Auld G, Lane JF et al. (2020b) On “success” in applied environmental research—What is it, how can it be achieved, and how does one know when it has been achieved? Env Rev 28(4):357–72CrossRef

Cooke SJ, Jeanson AL, Bishop I, Bryan BA, Chen C, Cvitanovic C, Fen Y et al. (2021) On the theory-practice gap in the environmental realm: Perspectives from and for diverse environmental professionals. Socio-Ecol Pract Res 3:243–255CrossRef

Creswell JW (2014) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 4th ed. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles

Cvitanovic C, Fulton CJ, Wilson SK, van Kerkhoff L, Cripps IL, Muthiga N (2014) Utility of primary scientific literature to environmental managers: an international case study on coral-dominated marine protected areas. Ocean Coast Manag 102:72–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.09.003CrossRef

Cvitanovic C, Hobday AJ, van Kerkhoff L, Wilson SK, Dobbs K, Marshall NA (2015) Improving knowledge exchange among scientists and decisionmakers to facilitate the adaptive governance of marine resources: a review of knowledge and research needs. Ocean Coast Manag 112:25–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.05.002CrossRef

Decker DJ, Enck JW (1996) Human dimensions of wildlife management: knowledge for agency survival in the 21st century. Hum Dimens Wildl 1:60–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209609359062CrossRef

Decker DJ, Riley SJ, Siemer WF (2012) Human dimensions of wildlife management. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

Downey H, Amano T, Cadotte CN, Cooke SJ, Haddaway NR, Jones JPG et al. (2021) Training future generations to deliver evidence-based conservation and ecosystem management. Ecol Solut Evid 2:e12032. https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12032CrossRef

Fabian Y, Bollman K, Brand K, Heiri C, Olschewski R, Rigling A, Stofer S, Holderegger R (2019) How to close the science-practice gap in nature conservation? Information sources used by practitioners. Biol Con 235:93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.011CrossRef

Ford AT, Ali AH, Colla SR, Cooke SJ, Lamb CT, Pittman J, Shiffman DS, Singh NJ (2021) Understanding and avoiding misplaced efforts in conservation. FACETS 6:252–271. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2020-0058CrossRef

Girling K, Gibbs K (2019) Evidence in action: An analysis of information gathering and use by canadian parliamentarians. Evidence for Democracy. https://www.springer.com/journal/26 or https://evidencefordemocracy.ca/en/research/reports/evidence-action7/submission-guidelines. Accessed July 15 2021

Gossa C, Fisher M, Milner-Gulland EJ (2014) The research–implementation gap: how practitioners and researchers from developing countries perceive the role of peer-reviewed literature in conservation science. Oryx 49:80–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605313001634CrossRef

Government of British Columbia (2017) Statutory decision-makers. BC Environment and Climate Change Strategy. https://news.gov.bc.ca/factsheets/statutory-decision-makers. Accessed July 6 2021

Guan J, Zhao Q (2013) The impact of university–industry collaboration networks on innovation in nanobiopharmaceuticals. Technol Forecast Soc Change 80:1271–1286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.11.013CrossRef

Harris DC (2008) Landing native fisheries: Indian reserves and fishing rights in British Columbia, 1849-1925. UBC Press.

Heer T, Girling K (2020) Eyes on Evidence: A framework for evaluating evidence use in Canada. Evidence for Democracy. https://evidencefordemocracy.ca/en/research/reports/eyes-evidence. Accessed October 20 2021

Jarvis RM, Borelle SB, Forsdick NJ, Perez-Hammerle K, Dubois NS, Griffin SR et al. (2020) Navigating spaces between conservation research and practice: Are we making progress? Ecol Solut Evid 1:e12028. https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12028CrossRef

Kadykalo AN, Cooke SJ, Young N (2020) Conservation genomics from a practitioner lens: evaluating the research-implementation gap in a managed freshwater fishery. Biol Con 241:108350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108350CrossRef

Kadykalo AN, Cooke SJ, Young N (2021a) The role of western-based scientific, Indigenous and local knowledge in wildlife management and conservation. People Nat 3:610–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10194CrossRef

Kadykalo AN, Buxton RT, Morrison P, Anderson CM, Bickerton H, Francis CM, Smith AC, Fahrig L (2021b) Bridging research and practice in conservation. Conser. Biol. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13732

Kadykalo AN, Haddaway NR, Rytwinski T, Cooke SJ (2021c) Ten principles for generating accessible and useable COVID-19 environmental science and a fit-for-purpose evidence base. Ecol Solut Evid 2:e12041. https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12041CrossRef

Karieva P, Marvier M (2012) What is Conservation Science? BioScience 62:962–969. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.11.5CrossRef

Koontz TM, Thomas C (2018) Use of science in collaborative environmental management: evidence from local watershed partnerships in the Puget Sound. Environ Sci Policy 88:17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.007CrossRef

Krausman P, Cain JW (2013) Wildlife management and conservation: contemporary principles and practices. John Hopkins Unviersity Press, Baltimore

Latulippe N, Klenk N (2020) Making room and moving over: knowledge co-production, Indigenous knowledge sovereignty and the politics of global environmental change decision-making. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 42:7–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.10.010CrossRef

Lemieux CJ, Groulx MW, Bocking S, Beechey TJ, Hutchings J (2018) Evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations: Implications for management effectiveness. Facets 3:392–414. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2017-0107CrossRef

Mach KJ, Lemos MC, Meadow AM, Wyborn C, Klenk N, Arnott JC et al. (2020) Actionable knowledge and the art of engagement. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 42:30–37CrossRef

McAuley L, Pham B, Tugwell P, Moher D (2000) Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimtes of itnervation effectivness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet 356:1228–1231. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02786-0CrossRef

Nguyen VM, Young N, Cooke SJ (2017) A roadmap for knowledge exchange and mobilization research in conservation and natural resource management. Conserv Biol 31:789–798. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12857CrossRef

Nguyen VM, Young N, Corriveau M, Hinch SG, Cooke SJ (2018) What is “usable” knowledge? Perceived barriers for integrating new knowledge into management of an iconic Canadian fishery. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 76:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2017-0305CrossRef

Norström AV, Cvitanovic C, Löf MF, West S, Wyborn C, Balvanera P, Bednarek AT, Bennett EM, Biggs R, de Bremond A et al. (2020) Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nat Sust 3:182–90CrossRef

Organ JF, Geist V, Mahoney SP, Williams S, Krausman PR, Batcheller GR et al. (2012) The North American model of wildlife conservation. The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12(04). The Wildlife Society, Bethesda

Pahl-Wostl C (2007) Transition towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change. Water Resour Manag 21:49–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-006-9040-4CrossRef

Pielke JRA (2007) The honest broker: making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRef

Powell L (2020) Principles for management of fisheries and wildlife: The manager as decision-maker. Cognella Academic Publishing, San Diego

Pullin AS, Knight TM (2001) Effectiveness in conservation practice: pointers from medicine and public health. Biol Conserv 15:50–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2001.99499.xCrossRef

Pullin AS, Knight TM (2003) Support for decision making in conservation practice: an evidence-based approach. J Nat Conserv 11:83–90. https://doi.org/10.1078/1617-1381-0004CrossRef

Pullin AS, Knight TM, Stone DA, Charman K (2004) Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making? Biol Conserv 119:245–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2003.11.007CrossRef

Pullin AS, Knight TM (2005) Assessing conservation management’s evidence base: a survey of management-plan compilers in the United Kingdom and Australia. Conserv Biol 19:1989–1996. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00287.xCrossRef

Reed MG, Abernethy P (2018) Facilitating co-production of transdisciplinary knowledge for sustainability: working with Canadian Biosphere Reserve practitioners. Soc Nat Resour 31:39–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1383545CrossRef

Riley SJ, Decker DJ, Carpenter LH, Organ JF, Siemer WF, Mattfeld GF, Parsons G (2002) The essence of wildlife management. Wildl Soc 30:585–593. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3784519

Rose D (2017) The use of research in the UK parliament: lessons for conservation scientists. BES Bull 48:32–35

Roux DJ, Kingsford RT, Cook CN, Carruthers J, Dickson K, Hockings M (2019) The case for embedding researchers in conservation agencies. Conserv Biol 33:1266–1274. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13324CrossRef

Roux DJ, Rogers KH, Biggs HC, Ashton PJ, Sergeant, A (2006) Bridging the science-management divide: Moving from unidirectional knowledge transfer to knowledge interfacing and sharing. Ecol. Soc. 11:4 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art4/

Rytwinski T, Taylor JJ, Donaldson LA, Britton JR, Browne DR, Gresswell RE et al. (2019) The effectiveness of non-native fish removal techniques in freshwater ecosystems: a systematic review. Environ Rev 27:71–94. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2018-0049CrossRef

Rytwinski T, Cooke SJ, Taylor JJ, Roche DG, Smith PA, Mitchell GW et al. (2021) Acting in the face of evidentiary ambiguity, bias, and absence arising from systematic reviews in applied environmental science. Sci Total Environ 775:145122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145122CrossRef

Salafsky N, Boshoven J, Burivalova Z, Dubois NS, Gomez A, Johnson A et al. (2019) Defining and using evidence in conservation practice. Conserv Sci Pract 1:e27. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.27CrossRef

Singh GG, Tam J, Sisk TD, Klain SC, Mach ME, Martone RG, Chan KMA (2014) A more social science: barriers and incentives for scientists engaging in policy. Front Ecol Environ 12:161–166. https://doi.org/10.1890/130011CrossRef

Smith T, Gibbs K, Westwood A, Taylor S, Walsh K (2017) Oversight at risk: The state of government science in british columbia, an assessment of research capacity, communication and independece in British Columbia provincial ministries and departments. Evidence for Democracy. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35901.97769

Steffen W, Broadgate W, Deutsch L, Gaffney O, Ludwig C (2015) The trajectory of the Anthropocene: The Great Acceleration. Anthropocene Rev 2:81–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053019614564785CrossRef

Stephenson PJ, Bowles-Newark N, Regan E, Stanwell-Smith D, Diagana M, Höft R et al. (2017) Unblocking the flow of biodiversity data for decision-making in Africa. Biol Conserv 213:335–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.09.003CrossRef

Sutherland WJ, Pullin AS, Dolman PM, Knight TM (2004) The need for evidence based conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 19:305–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.018CrossRef

Sutherland WJ, Taylor NG, MacFarlane D, Amano T, Christie AP, Dicks LV et al. (2019) Building a tool to overcome barriers in research-implementation spaces: The conservation evidence database. Biol Conserv 238:108199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108199CrossRef

Sutherland WJ, Wordley CFR (2018) A fresh approach to evidence synthesis. Nature 558:364–366. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05472-8CrossRef

Thomas DR (2006) A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. Am J Eval 27:237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748CrossRef

Thomas‐Walters L, Nyboer EA, Taylor JJ, Rytwinski T, Lane JF, Young N, Bennett JR, Nguyen VM, Harron N, et al (2021) An optimistic outlook on the use of evidence syntheses to inform environmental decision‐making. Conserv. Sci. Practice. e426.

Toomey AH, Knight AT, Barlow J (2017) Navigating the space between research and implementation in conservation. Conserv Lett 10:619–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12315CrossRef

Walsh JC, Dicks LV, Raymond CM, Sutherland WJ (2019) A typology of barriers and enablers of scientific evidence use in conservation practice. J Environ Manag 250:109481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109481CrossRef

Walsh JC, Dicks LV, Sutherland WJ (2015) The effect of scientific evidence on conservation practitioners’ management decisions. Conserv Biol 29:88–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12370CrossRef

Westgate MJ, Haddaway NR, Cheng SH, McIntosh EJ, Marshall C, Lindenmayer DB (2018) Software support for environmental evidence synthesis. Nat Ecol Evol 2:588–590. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0502-xCrossRef

Whitten T, Holmes D, MacKinnon K (2001) Conservation biology: a displacement behavior for academia? Conserv Biol 15:1e3CrossRef

Whyte K (2017) Indigenous climate change studies: indigenizing futures, decolonizing the Anthropocene. Engl Lang Notes 55:153–162. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2925514

Young JC, Rose DC, Mumby HS, Benitez-Capistros F, Derrick CJ, Finch T, Garcia C et al. (2018) A methodological guide to using and reporting on interviews in conservation science research. Methods Ecol Evol 9:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12828CrossRef

Young KD, Van Aarde RJ (2011) Science and elephant management decisions in South Africa. Biol Conserv 144:876–885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.11.023CrossRef

Young N, Corriveau M, Nguyen VM, Cooke SJ, Hinch SG (2016a) How do potential knowledge users evaluate new claims about a contested resource? Problems of power and politics in knowledge exchange and mobilization. J Environ Manag 184:380–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.006CrossRef

Young N, Gingras I, Nguyen VM, Cooke SJ, Hinch SG (2013) Mobilizing new science into management practice: the challenge of biotelemetry for fisheries management, a case study of Canada’s Fraser River. J Int Wildl Law Policy 16:328–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13880292.2013.805074CrossRef

Titel: Natural Resource Managers Use and Value Western-Based Science, but Barriers to Access Persist
verfasst von: Morgan L. Piczak
Andrew N. Kadykalo
Steven J. Cooke
Nathan Young
Publikationsdatum: 20.11.2021
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Environmental Management / Ausgabe 1/2022
Print ISSN: 0364-152X
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1009
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01558-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2022

Wealth and Education Influences on Spatial Pattern of Tree Planting in a Tropical Metropolis in Brazil

Biosolids in Western Canada: A Case Study on Public Risk Perception and Factors Influencing Public Attitudes

Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants: Gap, Challenges, and Opportunities in Environmental Management

The Possibility of Consensus Regarding Climate Change Adaptation Policies in Agriculture and Forestry among Stakeholder Groups in the Czech Republic

The Changes in Climate Change Concern, Responsibility Assumption and Impact on Climate-friendly Behaviour in EU from the Paris Agreement Until 2019

Phytoattenuation of Cd, Pb, and Zn in a Slag-contaminated Soil Amended with Rice Straw Biochar and Grown with Energy Maize