EDITORIAL: Bridging the knowing–doing gap: know‐who, know‐what, know‐why, know‐how and know‐when

Abstract

Summary 1.A widely recognized challenge in applied ecology is the gap between the knowledge generated by scientists and uptake by practitioners. Bridging this gap requires reciprocal and iterative flows of information from both scientists and practitioners prior to research initiation and beyond its completion. Yet current approaches to knowledge exchange ignore the complexity of translating different types of knowledge and the constraints that might limit effective knowledge exchange. 2. Knowing who might use a particular piece of research is the first step when developing projects that might be of value to practitioners, but different types of research often can have quite different audiences. Identifying the precise target for research outputs, whether practitioners, stakeholders or end-users, is essential for successful knowledge exchange, and outputs must be tailored to the knowledge needs of the intended recipients. 3. The scope of many leading applied ecology journals targets use-inspired basic research that aims to develop a theoretical or fundamental basis to support interventions, technologies and policies that lead to improved applied outcomes. This more conceptual approach, while essential to the development of future management applications, is probably not what most practitioners require. 4. In contrast to the explicit knowledge generated by scientists, many practitioners apply their own tacit knowledge when making decisions regarding their conservation goals and interventions. Such knowledge is intuitive, largely experience based and hard to define. As a result is often context dependent and personal in nature. The failure of scientists to translate and consider tacit knowledge may be behind the lack of implementation of their research. 5. Additional challenges to implementation include the continuing interest and relevance of use-inspired basic research, lack of consensus among researchers regarding management options and the need for scientists to remain independent brokers of intervention options rather than conservation advocates. 6. Synthesis and applications. Publishing research in peer-reviewed journals will only ever be a small part of closing the knowing-doing gap. Increasingly, conservation organizations, such as NGOs and charities that employ their own scientists, steward their own protected areas, and build long-term partnerships with stakeholders will be central to implementing applied ecological science.

Evaluating the process of ecological restoration

“…Most of the investigated projects included components of informal evaluation and these were rarely documented or reported, which means that Ecology and Society 21(1): 41 http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol21/iss1/art41/ lessons learned cannot fully benefit future projects unless they are properly communicated between the respective groups of restoration actors. Such communication between for example scientists who have generated knowledge and practitioners who are expected to apply it is an intricate task (Hulme 2014). In our analysis, however, we were able to uncover much informal evaluation simply because we had personal knowledge about the projects and expanded our knowledge by collecting more information from restoration actors involved.…”

The need for speed in a crisis discipline: perspectives on peer-review duration and implications for conservation science

“…For better or worse, peer-reviewed journals are the primary means by which conservation scientists disseminate their work (Arlettaz et al 2010, McKinley et al 2012, Cook et al 2013, Habel et al 2013, Hulme 2014. Science clearly has a critical role in conservation (Tracy & Brussard 1996, Gibbons et al 2011, Habel et al 2013, and peer-reviewed literature is an important but flawed tool for closing the knowledge−action gap (Knight et al 2008, Hulme 2014.…”

“…Science clearly has a critical role in conservation (Tracy & Brussard 1996, Gibbons et al 2011, Habel et al 2013, and peer-reviewed literature is an important but flawed tool for closing the knowledge−action gap (Knight et al 2008, Hulme 2014. In the realm of conservation science, available research is often limited because of the conservation status of a species (e.g.…”

Addressing Challenges in the Application of Animal Movement Ecology to Aquatic Conservation and Management

“…To achieve greater conservation impact, review and employ recommendations from the extensive literature on bridging the "knowing-doing" gap in fields as diverse as business management and healthcare (Pfeffer and Sutton, 2000), and targeted conservation recommendations (Habel et al, 2013;Hulme, 2014;Thornhill, 2014).…”