Practical guide to coproduction in conservation science

Abstract

We considered a series of conservation-related research projects on the island of Pemba, Tanzania, to reflect on the broad significance of Beier et al.'s recommendations for linking conservation science with practical conservation outcomes. The implementation of just some of their suggestions can advance a successful coproduction of actionable science by small research teams. Key elements include, first, scientists and managers working together in the field to ensure feedback in real time; second, questions jointly identified by managers and researchers to facilitate engaged collaboration; third, conducting research at multiple sites, thereby broadening managers' abilities to reach multiple stakeholders; and fourth, establishing a multidisciplinary team because most of the concerns of local managers require input from multiple disciplines.

A practical guide to cross-cultural and multi-sited data collection in the biological and behavioural sciences

“…Meaningful engagement with stakeholders that results in co-production of scientific knowledge (e.g. [ 32 , 33 ]) is the ideal form of community-engaged research; however, we should also recognize that some communities may find co-production burdensome and prefer to simply participate instead. Not every project must be community-based participatory research, but all projects should strive to make themselves more community-engaged.…”

Research to Confront Climate Change Complexity: Intersectionality, Integration, and Innovative Governance

“…Coproduction is part of a loosely linked and evolving set of valuable collaborative approaches that include participatory research, citizen sciences, transdisciplinarity, action research, and engaged research (Mach et al, 2020;Norström et al, 2020;Wyborn et al, 2019). There are burgeoning resources that provide practical guidance and operational recommendations for researchers and practitioners interested in undertaking collaborative research incorporating climate change complexity, such as how-to guides (Beier et al, 2017;Caro et al, 2023), key principles of collaborative work (Norström et al, 2020;Wilmer et al, 2021), toolkits and trainings (Selby et al, 2023), and case examples (Akerlof et al, 2023;Bremer & Meisch, 2017). For instance, the Consortium for Climate Risk in the Urban Northeast, funded by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration Climate Adaptation Partnerships, has supported a co-production effort that brings together scientists, educators, community leaders, and residents in coastal New York City to collectively understand current and future flood risks, identify possible adaptive actions, and examine the costs and benefits of those actions (Akerlof et al, 2023;Columbia University, 2022).…”

Building spaces of interactions between researchers and managers: Case studies with wildlife monitoring and conservation in France

“…The co‐construction or co‐production (sensu Caro et al, 2022; Hyman et al, 2022) of research agendas here mainly refers to the co‐definition of appropriate research questions to address the problems determined by managers (Merkle et al, 2019) while being scientifically relevant. They are therefore based on a solid understanding of management issues, the extant literature and scientific methodology.…”

“…With time, trust becomes stronger and each partner better learns the different skills and expectations of the others, making the design and achievement of subsequent projects more efficient. Second, projects should be co‐constructed (Caro et al, 2022; Merkle et al, 2019). Projects should not be managed by one instance with the other one being a service provider.…”

“…Second, projects should be co-constructed (Caro et al, 2022;Merkle et al, 2019). Projects should not be managed by one instance with the other one being a service provider.…”