Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making?

Pullin, Andrew S.; Knight, Thomas Andrew; Stone, David A.; Charman, Kevin

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2003.11.007

Cited by 555 publications

(389 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

375

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Part of this appears to be due to the timely availability of research findings to conservation practitioners and land managers, and that many of the conclusions of the papers are not sufficiently clear regarding their influence on policy or management (Fazey et al 2005). For example, Pullin et al (2004) found that only 23% of practitioners 'always' or 'usually' used scientific publications when developing management plans. Fazey et al (2005) emphasised that a key issue is likely to be the ready accessibility of research to practitioners.…”

Section: The Science-operational Continuummentioning

confidence: 99%

Current perspectives in plant conservation biology

Coates¹,

Dixon

2007

Aust. J. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Science-operational Continuummentioning

confidence: 99%

Current perspectives in plant conservation biology

Coates¹,

Dixon

2007

Aust. J. Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Nevertheless, it is essential that there are strong linkages between the worlds of academics and practitioners (Hughes et al, 2008;Moats and McLean, 2009), to ensure that (i) academic research is of pragmatic relevance, and (ii) policy development is informed by robust academic work and rigour (Fazey et al, 2004;Haggerty, 2004;Pullin, 2004). For this to occur, there is a need for policy and research to co-evolve, with developments in one reflected in the other (Barzelay, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is research keeping up with changes in landscape policy? A review of the literature

Conrad

Christie

Fazey

2011

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tSeveral innovative directions for landscape policy development and implementation have emerged over recent years. These include: (i) an expansion of scope to include all landscape aspects and landscape types, (ii) an increased emphasis on public participation, (iii) a focus on designing measures appropriate for different contexts and scales, and (iv) encouraging support for capacity-building. In this paper, we evaluate the extent to which these policy directions are reflected in the practice of academic landscape research. We evaluate all research papers published in three leading landscape journals over six years, as well as published research papers relating directly to the European Landscape Convention. The latter, which was adopted in 2000, establishes a framework for landscape protection, planning and management in Europe and is to date the only international legal instrument of its kind. Results indicate that whilst policy innovations do not appear to be a major stimulus for academic research, studies nevertheless address a range of landscape aspects, types and scales (albeit with a slight bias towards bio-physical landscape aspects). However, geographical representativeness of research is weak and dominated by the United States and northern/western Europe, and research capacity likewise appears to be unevenly distributed. Landscape research is also limited in the extent to which it involves stakeholders or develops innovative methods for doing so, notwithstanding that this remains a key challenge for policy-makers. Results point to the potential for landscape research to address areas (topical and geographical) which have received little attention to date, as well as suggesting mutual benefits of stronger links between policy and academia.

show abstract

“…(2) What type of management decision or outcome is most informed by genetic data? A quantitative evaluation of this sort will undoubtedly be a worthwhile yet formidable task primarily because conservation consequences are rarely documented (Pullin et al 2004). In the meantime, our proposed decision key process acts as an effective guide to aid practitioners in evaluating the merit of a genetics research question (or any research question in general) on a case-by-case basis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conservation implications should guide the application of conservation genetics research

Howes¹,

Pither²,

Prior³

2009

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetics research can reveal important insights into the effective management of species at risk, yet research does not often translate into meaningful management outcomes. Before engaging in genetics research, conservation practitioners should carefully consider the resulting management outcomes by identifying the potential results of the proposed research, the conservation implications of the results, whether these implications call for a change in management practices, and whether such a change is possible. We provide a decision key to aid practitioners in evaluating the merit of a particular genetics research question, and we demonstrate the use of this key with 2 example research questions.

show abstract

Do conservation managers use scientific evidence to support their decision-making?

Cited by 555 publications

References 6 publications

Current perspectives in plant conservation biology

Current perspectives in plant conservation biology

Is research keeping up with changes in landscape policy? A review of the literature

Conservation implications should guide the application of conservation genetics research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About