Integrating knowledge from across the natural and social sciences is necessary to effectively address societal tradeoffs between human use of biological diversity and its preservation. Collaborative processes can change the ways decision makers think about scientific evidence, enhance levels of mutual trust and credibility, and advance the conservation policy discourse. Canada has responsibility for a large fraction of some major ecosystems, such as boreal forests, Arctic tundra, wetlands, and temperate and Arctic oceans. Stressors to biological diversity within these ecosystems arise from activities of the country's resource-based economy, as well as external drivers of environmental change. Effective management is complicated by incongruence between ecological and political boundaries and conflicting perspectives on social and economic goals. Many knowledge gaps about stressors and their management might be reduced through targeted, timely research. We identify 40 questions that, if addressed or answered, would advance research that has a high probability of supporting development of effective policies and management strategies for species, ecosystems, and ecological processes in Canada. A total of 396 candidate questions drawn from natural and social science disciplines were contributed by individuals with diverse organizational affiliations. These were collaboratively winnowed to 40 by our team of collaborators. The questions emphasize understanding ecosystems, the effects and mitigation of climate change, coordinating governance and management efforts across multiple jurisdictions, and examining relations between conservation policy and the social and economic well-being of Aboriginal peoples. The questions we identified provide potential links between evidence from the conservation sciences and formulation of policies for conservation and resource management. Our collaborative process of communication and engagement between scientists and decision makers for generating and prioritizing research questions at a national level could be a model for similar efforts beyond Canada.Generación de Preguntas de Investigación Prioritarias para Informar a las Políticas y Gestión de la Conservación a Nivel Nacional

This review surveys experience with evaluation practices in the Government of Canada since the mid-1960s, particularly with respect to spending reviews, concluding that there is little reason to expect any direct link from ongoing evaluation practices to Cabinet decisions.  The renewed commitment to evidence-based decision-making announced by the new Liberal government is unlikely to change this conclusion.  The introduction of Deliverology as a support function centered in the Privy Council Office shifts attention from policy formation to implementation and program delivery, with important emphasis on innovation and adaptation.  But the crucial challenge still rests in achieving greater public access to information, and greater inclusiveness in decision processes.   Résumé:Cet article fait état du rôle de l’évaluation au niveau du Gouvernement du Canada depuis le milieu des années 1960. En particulier, il analyse le lien entre l’évaluation et les exercices de révision budgétaire, concluant qu’il a peu de raison d’attendre de l’évaluation qu’elle ait une influence directe sur les décisions du Cabinet. L’engagement renouvelé du nouveau gouvernement libéral à ce que les décisions soient fondées sur les connaissances ne changera probablement cette conclusion. L’introduction de la résultologie, comme une fonction en support au Bureau du Conseil Privé, détourne l’attention de la conception des politiques vers l’implantation et l’exécution des programmes, en mettant l’accent sur l’innovation et l’adaptation. L’enjeu principal reste toutefois le même, de réussir à améliorer l’accès public à l’information, et à être plus inclusif dans les processus décisionnels.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract